JFK Assassination Conspiracy

[ProfWag]

[Misha]

ProfWag,

Ok, look at this link. Specifically the top of the page where Joseph posts. Here's the Boyajian report and the Gawler's funeral home document. Now which casket did Kennedy arrive in and when? Horne goes to great lengths in his books analyzing the chain of custody regarding the body.

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/in ... pic=5275.0

[ProfWag]

[ProfWag]

[Misha]

Hi ProfWag,

Thank you for your fine analysis. However, there is a problem with the whole 2 casket scenario. One, Sibert and O'Neil were to never leave the casket at any point. They were impeded by the Secret Service from entering the autopsy room under the auspices of security. This was a blatant violation of the FBI's charter to remain with the coffin at all costs. As Horne and the ARRB found out JFK's body was already being illegally worked on by Humes and Boswell. Finck did not attend until an hour and a half later.

Meanwhile, the Joint Service Casket Team was trying to locate the ambulance with the body. Jackie and Robert were already up in the 17th floor of Bethesda believing the body came in with the casket that accompanied him; As pointed out by the Bethesda witnesses the body came in earlier inside a shipping casket. When Boswell and Humes finished working on the body before the official autopsy was to begin they spirited the body back into the bronze ornate casket, rushed it out the back, and put into a silver or grey Navy ambulance. In doing so the coffin was dented and the handle was damaged. The coffin had no such anomalies prior to being brought in the first time.

The Navy ambulance then proceeded to drive around whereby the Joint Service Casket Team finally finds their "lost" item. The casket was then brought in under military protocol whereby one general or admiral (service escapes me at this point) pushes out of the way one of the military pallbearers and tries to bring in the coffin but is unable to.

Please also consider Sibert's and O'Neill's FD-302 report upon the beginning of the "official autopsy" of JFK's body: Page 688, Volume III, second paragraph of "Inside the ARRB." This is Horne's contention based on Humes' declaration upon the unraveling of the sheet[s] from JFK's head:

It is my contention that at this point a highly agitated and nervous Dr. Humes, who had just been forced to participate in a medical coverup, and whose head was surely spinning form the implications of the charade he was participating in---a second casket opening performed for a different audience---tried to "cover his ass" by making a very unwise statement to casket-opening audience number 2: "It is apparant that in addition to a tracheostomy, there has been surgery of the head area, namely, in the top of the skull." (Bold italics by Misha).

ProfWag, I cannot go through the whole set of circumstances which affords so much detail in understanding the assassination. It is far easier for you to read Horne's book and see what very good questions you are asking which might be answered to your satisfaction.

Again, you can read the witnesses account to the musical casket scenario in detail in Horne's book. ProWag, again, there is far more detail than my penurious explanation here. When the official autopsy began Sibert and O'Neil heard and wrote down Humes' response at the head wound.

[ProfWag]

Once again, great submission Misha and thanks for furthering the debate.

Is it your contention then, that since Mr. Horne has cited what appears to be a heavy security breach in a chain of custody that the body was moved to allow time for it to be "fixed" to look like he was shot from behind instead of the front? Or, if not, just what is important about which casket was used to transport the body?

[Misha]

ProfWag, you wrote:

"Is it your contention then, that since Mr. Horne has cited what appears to be a heavy security breach in a chain of custody that the body was moved to allow time for it to be "fixed" to look like he was shot from behind instead of the front?"

Yes! Not just Horne, but also David Lifton's work which allowed the ARRB to focus its inquiry with the Bethesda Hospital doctors Humes, Boswell and FInck. It was Jeremy Gunn and Douglas Horne who interviewed the three and found the inconsistencies in their testimonies with the Warren Commission, Clark Panel, HSCA and the ARRB. Boswell's diagram of the surgery performed on the head illustrated the massive manipulation of the head wound which counters the claim of what the witnesses saw prior to surgery. Yes, this is a mouthful and not easy to understand.

Furthermore, I contend through my own research on the subject of the JFK assassination that the manipulation of the head wounds and the dissection of the brain were altered to hide the facts of where the bullet[s] truly struck. This manipulations then brings into question the true nature of Oswald's alleged participation.

[ProfWag]

[Misha]

Hi ProfWag,

First off I want to say I appreciate these last few days you digging into the JFK assassination. Thank you. However, I have to disagree with your thesis, or belief, a cover-up did not take place. It did and it was hidden in plain site for anyone willing to look. I think Jim Douglass coined it best when he used Orwell's term "Crime Stop" from the book 1984. I like to call it the "invisible barrier" which most bureaucracies tend to submit too when the "State" is at stake. Yes, this "stake" was sold to Chief Justice Earl Warren when LBJ told him to head the Commission to investigate the assassination. Warren knew better and it is why he was in tears over having to accept the position; That stake was a possible nuclear war with the Soviet Union. Anyone who had an inkling of what really transpired was also subject to the overwhelming power of the military, intelligence, corporate and media control (Henry Luce). I could go on with many details why I think this is so in American life. However, apart from my own research in other venues in which I have studied, most Americans intuitively know that the official version of what transpired that day somehow does not sit well with them. I like to call it good ole fashioned horse sense. What most Americans do not know is that "our government" as they understand it did not kill Jack Kennedy. What killed Kennedy was the National Security State at its zenith when time and persuasion could obfuscate and denude perception. A good example of this is the Parkland Hospital doctors who were unaware of Bethesda's findings; that being the autopsy and brain dissection. It wasn't until 1975 when the Zapruder video was released on Geraldo Rivera's show that the wounds in which they saw conflicted with their observations. Again, time is the daughter to all conspiracies which mitigates the impact. Remedy and recourse then becomes a casualty.

Anyhow, you and I could debate this until the cows come home. If you were in my neighborhood we would probably do just that. I would probably enjoy this since the limited time we have corresponded and I find you to be a gentleman. ProWag, I will say this, though. I have experienced the "State" in another subject all together. And yes, I have to keep my mouth shut to protect people. It sucks....

Misha

[ProfWag]

I, too, apreciate the mature and cordial conversation and discussion on the topic, Misha. Wish more would get involved though...

May I ask your opinion/thoughts on a couple things please? If there was a second gunman, I'm assuming that you believe he/she was in front of the vehicle rather than the side on the Knoll? If so, at what particular location was he/she? If you do believe it came from the Knoll, why didn't his head or body move slightly sideways when hit? Neither Zapruder nor Nix's video appear to show any movement side to side, yet if it came from the Knoll, the fatal head shot would have had to have come from the side when figuring in the road signs, bystanders, etc.

Also, if there was a second gunman, why would it really need to be covered up? I mean, the ultimate goal of the conspirators (assuming there were some) would have been to kill JFK. If they wanted to set up LHO as a patsy, fair enough, but wouldn't it have been easier to have two people set up as patsies than to go to all the trouble of involving so many people in a secret conspiracy?

[Misha]

I concur.

May I ask your opinion/thoughts on a couple things please? If there was a second gunman, I'm assuming that you believe he/she was in front of the vehicle rather than the side on the Knoll? If so, at what particular location was he/she? If you do believe it came from the Knoll, why didn't his head or body move slightly sideways when hit? Neither Zapruder nor Nix's video appear to show any movement side to side, yet if it came from the Knoll, the fatal head shot would have had to have come from the side when figuring in the road signs, bystanders, etc.

A very good question as to where the fatal frontal head shot came from. I'm not so sure that the fatal shot came from the knoll as most researchers have suspected. What we only have with regards to forensics (Blow out in the occipital and parietal areas) is the Parkland hospital staff, Secret Service and Bethesda witnesses account of Kennedy's head wound prior to the "official autopsy." Furthermore, it was established by Jeremy Gunn and Doug Horne upon interviewing Boswell that a bullet impact was determined to be at Kennedy's right anatomical frontal and parietal area. Moreover, the skull X-Rays examined by Philip Mantel (sic) bear out that the manipulation of of JFK's head X-Rays provides insight to a frontal impact. If there ever was a smoking gun to the cover-up it is the X-Rays. Horne's book goes to great length on this.

Also, if there was a second gunman, why would it really need to be covered up? I mean, the ultimate goal of the conspirators (assuming there were some) would have been to kill JFK. If they wanted to set up LHO as a patsy, fair enough, but wouldn't it have been easier to have two people set up as patsies than to go to all the trouble of involving so many people in a secret conspiracy?

By having two gunman means that it would be much harder to control public perception on the assassination. This only foments "conspiracy" and thus energizes in the public's mind that there would have to be others involved. Also, it is harder to clean up if you have two bodies that have to be silenced. History is replete with lone assassins for this very same reason.

[ProfWag]

Based on the Zapruder film, Nix film, et.al., I simply have not been able to see where a second gunman from the front could have come from and the evidence simply supports all shots coming from the 6th Floor. The only place I could see for a front shot would have been over or under the overpass (in the middle of the road) and witnesses have not described a gunman from that area. Teague (I think his name was--the dude that got chipped on the cheek) would have seen someone from the front and he didn't--though he thinks the shooter could have come from the grassy knoll. I understand that to really support Horne's hypothesis, one would also have to believe that Zapruder's film was "touched up," yet Nix's tape and others all show exactly the same thing, hence, they all would have had to have been "touched up." I also understand that for Horne's idea to be correct in that the shot had to have come from the front (or even side), the exit wound would have been on the left side of his head but that does not appear to be the case in all the evidence I have seen. Also, for Horne's contention to be correct, there would have to be an entrance wound around the left side. I'm not aware of anything, anywhere, that describes this. Do you know of any?

Again, there are just far too many pieces of the puzzle that would have had to have fit PERFECTLY for there to have been more than one gunman that day. If someone wanted Kennedy dead, all they would have had to do was ask Lee to do it.

It's my contention that people just don't want to believe that our country could be shaken to the degree it was by a virtual nobody. Occam's Razor.

[NinjaPuppy]

[ProfWag]

[NinjaPuppy]