Frequently Asked Questions on the JFK Assassination (Pt. 5):The Bullets, Wounds

What is the single bullet  theory'?

The single bullet theory, of which the 'magic bullet' is the centerpiece, was the brainchild of (then) Warren Commission Assistant Counsel Arlen Specter. It is the  logical outcome if one has constrained the number of bullets to  three, and only three, as the Warren Commission did.

Thus, by process of elimination:

 - The bullet that sprayed bystander James Tague is eliminated forthwith

  - The fatal head shot, is eliminated

That leaves one bullet to make the remaining wounds in both Kennedy and John Connally, to wit[1]

"this one bullet  hit the President in the back, exited through his throat, passed through  Connally's body, breaking a rib, then shattered a bone in his wrist, and finally entered his left thigh".

The problem is that it doesn't add up, and any critical thinker examining the placement and geometry can see that. Let's begin by examining the sleight of hand by which the  back wound bullet was altered to a base of neck wound, thereby also creating the basis for the "magic bullet" fiction. The Warren Commission diagram is shown below:

The upper inclined blue arrow shows the trajectory of the bullet that would be needed in order to account for BOTH the JFK neck wound AND the back wound. The problem here is twofold: first, the throat wound was described by Parkland surgeon Malcolm Perry (who should know his business given having to deal with multiple Dallasites' gunshot wounds at Parkland) as an ENTRY wound..

The neck wound placement (from Perry) is shown in the collage below along with the JFK back wound.  Also included is the Zapruder film frame showing the instant JFK grabs at his neck, signifying the bullet impact.



                        

Second, the Warrenites realized that the placement wouldn't work to account for all 7 wounds in JFK  and John Connally (the angle wasn't right- shooter would've had to have been firing from street level) so had to reset the placement higher - changing it to the light yellow trajectory. This was compliments of Gerald Ford as indicated in the notes below, 

wherein he altered the wording from the original autopsy report.  The initial draft of the report had  stated:

"A bullet had entered his back at a point slightly above the shoulder to the right of the spine."

Ford altered it to read:

"A bullet had entered the back of his neck slightly to the right of the spine."
 
The underhanded alteration and its impact was also noted in a later NY Times blurb:

Clearly, Ford wanted the document to conform with the single bullet myth and would stoop to altering an official document on record to attain the goal.  

The problem for Ford and the Warrenites is one of basic anatomy. The original autopsy sheet, including the placement and description of the back wound, was signed and verified by Admiral George Gregory Burkley, personal physician to the president who directed the autopsy at Bethesda. He verified the back wound placement on November 24th (as shown on the right side of Fig.2). That death certificate revealed the back wound to be, in the Admiral's own words, at the president's "third thoracic vertebra.”  The neck has seven CERVICAL vertebrae, and this observed and verified wound was described as three THORACIC vertebrae lower than the neck itself.

The final report then read: "A bullet had entered the base of the back of his neck slightly to the right of his spine." Ford insisted this was “a small change, …intended to clarify meaning, not alter history”. But alter history is exactly what it did! For by altering the original autopsy report, Ford and his cohorts succeeded in conferring a measure of validity on Specter’s single bullet theory. This is despite the fact that analysis of the resulting trajectory doesn’t even conform to basic laws of Newtonian dynamics!

Anyway, after negotiating this tortuous passage as described earlier - including hitting a number of bones, the bullet (designated Commission Exhibit 399, or 'CE399' for short) is alleged to have emerged on John Connally's stretcher (ibid.).  The key to the success of the "theory",  has been the 'success' in explaining away the near pristine condition of the bullet. (And incidentally, it did not even have microscopic traces of blood on it, though it was very slightly deformed.) The array of images shown below of several bullets will help to fix ideas:

WC Exhibit CE 399, or "the magic bullet" is shown as Entry (A)  which purportedly did all this damage.  (B) is a test bullet, one of several fired by Joseph Dolce into the wrists of cadavers to compare the degree of damage sustained with that of the WC Exhibit. The bullet (C) is the one actually taken off the floor at Parkland. What gives here? Answer: too many bullets for too many wounds!

Dolce, consultant in wound ballistics to the Army, has stated he was given one hundred,  6.5mm bullets, by the Warren Commission, to fire at cadavers. (Documentary, 'The Single Bullet Theory' video). In no case,  he went on, did any of the bullets come out pristine. In fact, all showed  significant deformity. In his own words (ibid.):


"No, it (CE399) could NOT have caused all the wounds. Our experiments here show beyond any doubt that merely shooting a wrist deforms the  bullet drastically. In every instance, the front or tip of the bullet was smashed. It's impossible for a bullet to strike a bone, even at low  velocity and still come out with a perfectly normal tip."


So, in fraudulently altering the bullet placement in the record, neither Ford or Specter gained a thing, though they did manage to hoodwink millions of Americans for decades because few people actually looked into the matter, and next, Ford's chicanery wasn't exposed until decades later after the JFK Records Act was passed in 1992. (The Ford editing documents, on which the Times snippet was based, were made public by the Assassination Records Review Board.)

So why is the "magic bullet" still accepted despite its obvious fallacious basis? Probably because it's the only meager thread the Warrenites have to hang their BS  on, and they still hope most Americans will just accept their word (argument from authority - a major fallacy) as opposed to investigating it themselves. (They're betting most people don't have the energy or skill to independently investigate)


What about the kill shot?

The Warrenite version of the head shot - the kill shot - is that it entered from the rear, because, of course, they have the assassin to the rear (in the Texas School Book Depository).  The image is shown below along with the frame from the Zapruder film showing the head shot (Z-313):

The noticeable backward motion of JFK's head in the film is attributed to the reaction of a forward spray out - in what has been called the 'jet effect". (Similar to the well known rocket effect, where fuel leaves the exhaust under pressure and the rocket moves in the opposite direction).

The problem, of course, is that this doesn't comport with Jackie's motion over the limo trunk - as shown in the lower left graphic. The fact she is moving over the limo trunk to the REAR, and her WC testimony (supported by recently released audiotape testimony from 1964) was she was attempting to retrieve a skull fragment (likely the missing occipital bone reported by the Parkland drs.) means that  the shot had to have come from the FRONT. This would be in the grassy knoll area.  This is further supported by the actual autopsy photos which belie the corrupted Warren versions, e.g.

Photo specialist Robert Groden ('The Killing of a President') has indicated that the fake photo image was likely taken after the rear of the head was reconstructed using mortician' plaster.

Again, we are confronted by blatant efforts to conceal the actual wound so as not to diverge from the dogma and presumption that Oswald did it, firing from the rear. Under no circumstances could the c-word be allowed to rear its head. The American people had to be mollified and quieted that it was just a lone deranged nut, and god forbid they know their own government had a hand in it!

Can all bullets and fragments be linked to the Mannlicher-Carcano?

Clearly, they cannot - and even CE399 is in doubt, and as shown above, the 'heritage' of that bullet is very much in doubt. On the assumption that CE399 is from the alleged Oswald rifle, the key is whether the fragments recovered (e.g. in the limo) could be matched to CE399 by composition.  By incredibly favorable happenstance, a test NAA  (Neutron Activation Analysis) was performed which has the capacity to make such distinctions in chemical composition to within 2 or 3 parts per billion.

But in NAA, any deviation, no matter how minute – confirms a difference in composition. That’s because the Neutron Activation Analysis results is an 'all or nothing' test result proposition. Thus, Hoover's reference to 'minor variations' was in an unwitting declaration that there were conclusive variations hence fragments found and tested disclosed different bullets, by composition. This may have been one reason why the NAA test results were suppressed so long.

So how many bullets were fired in all, or can be accounted for?

What we've already exposed is that there had to have been at least four different shots and putatively from 3 different locations (The Dal-Tex building provides a better angle for the back shot than the TSBD). Let's enumerate them thus far:

1) The upper back wound - fired from the Dal-Tex bldg.?

2) Throat wound - fired from the front (GK)

3) Head wound - fired from the GK.

4) Connally wounds (rib, wrist)  - fired from the TSBD

In fact, if we add the shot that chipped off a piece of pavement, and sprayed James Tague - we reach five bullets. If we also add the bullet that left a dent in the frame of the limo we get to six. See e.g.

Of course, the pavement that had been pock marked was painted over, then removed and taken to FBI HQ while the limo itself was ordered dispatched to Ohio and disassembled.

Anyone smell any rats here?  And yet the Warren Commission poppycock is all you can be expected to hear for the next week - as we approach the 50th anniversary of this sad and tragic event.

Go to any media presentation, say like CBS' "As It Happened" tomorrow night, as well as their 60 Minutes special Sunday, and all you will see and hear is Bob Schieffer or other tools-fools  trotting out the "Oswald did it" , pro-Warren bunkum. Ditto for ABC, NBC and the other corporate mouthpieces of propaganda.

But savvy, critical thinking Americans know better, and after fifty years of this BS they aren't buying any more.

Next: The Warren Commission Rifle Tests and Oswald's Marksmanship.

---

[1] J.P. Duffy and V.L. Ricci: 1992, ' The Assassination of John F. Kennedy', Thunder's Mouth Press, p. 434.

Frequently Asked Questions on the JFK Assassination (4b): The Warren Commission (Cont'd)

What sort of questions did the Commission ask?

Questions for which the Commission was present include the following categories (Brown,  op. cit,, p281):

Preliminaries -         805   (2.1%)
To the point  -        1,537  (4.1%)
Not vital     -       16,073  (43.3%)
Clarification -        7,354  (19.8%)
Leading/hearsay        9,676  (26.0%)
Conclusionary -          922   (2.4%)
Foregone conclusion      323   (0.80%)
Nonsense      -          407   (1.09%)

The category basic definitions are (op. cit, p279):

'Preliminaries' - introductory questions re: background, education, job, family life, etc

'To the point' - Questions materially contributing to investigation

'Not vital' - Questions that "add nothing to the record"

'Clarification' - Questions clarifying earlier answers.

'Leading/hearsay' - 'Questions' in which witnesses were told the 'answers' in advance - then merely asked a series of yes/no questions about them

'Conclusionary' - Questions calling on witness to draw a conclusion.


'Forgone conclusion' - questions that "reflected the official version yet could not be substantiated by the witness" .

'Nonsense' - self-explanatory (i.e. Do you believe in UFOs?)

Most appalling is that the 'to the point' category comprised an insignificant 4.1 % of the total for which the Commissioners were present. For the percentage of all the questions asked - with or without the Commissioners present, that went up a 'mighty' three tenths of a point, to 4.4% (op.cit., p281). Thus, despite the motif of ponderous research, it is doubtful that this 'Report' - couched in its magnificent and portentous 26 volumes of body, approaches the investigative level of those books blithely dismissed as 'buff'.


Who were not asked questions?


200 witnesses- "each with knowledge at least as valuable as that given by the 488 commission witnesses" were not asked questions. These included:

Tom Alyea (who allegedly first filmed the sniper's 'nest'),

Charles A. Crenshaw (Parkland surgical resident at the time - who observed the massive rear head wound)

 Julia Ann Mercer, (who observed Jack Ruby driving a pickup with a rifle near the Triple Underpass)

William Harper (who found the occipital bone fragment behind the limo, on Elm St.);

 Guy Banister (who ran the 544 Camp St. office in New Orleans from which Oswald distributed leaflets);

Joseph Milteer (the right wing zealot who had been taped by an FBI informant in Miami predicting a  sniper shooting from an office bldg. - given "clean bill of health"  by FBI' (Brown, op. cit.,p383);

Sergio Archacha Smith,  likely suspect in the Walker shooting, in Dallas

Mary Moorman, took a number of photos at the instant of the head shot, and confronted by the FBI which confiscated them.

Aquilla Clemons (who observed the Tippitt shooting, and saw another man - not Oswald, doing it);

Pvt. Gordon Arnold (who was standing on the grass in front of the knoll's picket fence when a percussion from a shot made him hit the dirt - he was later sent to Alaska by the Army);

 Orville Nix - who took the Nix film, from the opposite side of Elm Street

Mary Muchmore, whose original film was cut/mutilated on return, at the instant of the head shot ( 'The Killing of a President', 1994: Groden, R.J., Viking Penguin. p. 37)

Richard Case Nagell-   Double agent, "so concerned with having an alibi for November 22, that he fired a pistol at a ceiling in a bank so as to be in jail" (Brown , p387).


The full list of all 200 witnesses not asked questions by the Warren Commission is given in Brown, 'Treachery In Dallas',  (pp381-89)


What was the Katzenbach Memo, and what has it to do with the Warren Commission?

This was a memo written to Bill Moyers, dated 25 November, 1963. Many conspiracy researchers  believe that it set the tone and the 'primary directive' for the Warren Commission's agenda - to find for the 'lone nut' at all costs. The most germane part to this discussion is:

"It is important that all facts surrounding President Kennedy's assassination be made public in a way which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told and that a statement to this effect be made now.

1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin, that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial. "

To the conspiracy thinker, the above enumerated first part of the memo provides enough evidence to disclose what the true purpose of any 'formal' or 'official' investigation would be: to arrive at a
preconceived and pre-accepted conclusion that was politically and socially expedient, rather than an outcome of an open-ended, genuine investigation. This also goes under the rubric of a fundamental logical no-no called 'Affirming the consequent' - i.e. affirming ab initio that which you need to prove. Taking the shortcut - avoiding the process, more: ensuring the outcome of the process blends with one's own 'truth'.  A much more acceptable version for public consumption. Expediency.

A multitude of Commission actions confirm their adherence to this misbegotten directive, including (but not limited to) their over-weaning reliance on a highly dubious 'witnesses' (e. g. Howard
Brennan) to the exclusion of others (e.g. Arnold Rowland) - not to mention those with direct knowledge of events who were not called (see partial list given earlier). The very list of those not called totally exposes all pretense toward objectivity claimed by either the Commission, or its apologists. Indeed, it discloses that a 'rubber stamping' expedition was under way, probably from the time of the Katzenbach memo (at least the planning of how the charade would
progress).

The Memo goes on:

"2-Speculation about Oswald's motivation ought to be cut off, and we should have some basis for rebutting any thought this  was a Communist conspiracy or (as the Iron Curtain press is saying) a right wing conspiracy to blame it on the Communists. Unfortunately, the facts on Oswald seem too pat - too obvious (Marxist, Cuba, Russian wife, etc). The Dallas police have put out statements on the Communist conspiracy theory, and it was they who were in charge when he was shot and thus
silenced.

3- The matter has been handled thus far with neither dignity nor conviction. Facts have been mixed with rumor and speculation. We can scarcely let the world see us totally in the image of the Dallas police when our President is murdered."


This section of the memo is likely referencing the Commission's fears (pushed by right wing sources, mainly) that a Castro-Soviet backed communist conspiracy was afoot.  The fear was reinforced after the Commission was informed  by CIA head Richard Helms  of the Kostikov -Department Thirteen connection ("Department Thirteen" was that KGB Section assigned to assassinations) . Earl Warren evidently became so spooked that he felt the only alternative to a possible nuclear  confrontation  was to find for the lone assassin theory. From then, all evidence, documents and tests became devoted to nailing Oswald as the lone perp, which accounts for (1) of the Katzenbach memo.. It was either that or find him a KGB- hired contract killer, which many (including LBJ) felt would have led to war.

Clearly, Katzenbach himself is skeptical of the Russian conspiracy theory, as noted in the Memo, Section 2.("the facts on Oswald seem too pat", etc.) Careful reading of his words indicates he is decidedly more aggrieved at the Dallas Police Dept., as it was they that began circulating the communist conspiracy theory, but also in their custody Oswald was killed, and by a character - Jack Ruby - well known to the DPD and who often treated them to drinks and 'winks' (of the Strippers) at his bar, The Carousel Club.. Thus, even Katzenbach realizes that the facts -as given, do not add up.

Yet, despite this clear recognition, and rightful skepticism, this second highest prosecutor of the land, is prepared to commit himself to paper saying "the public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin" etc.  In other words to flout the essence of justice in this country, by finding a man guilty even before being brought to trial

Why not dissent more boldly and declare the need for a truly objective Commission process, as opposed to a Kangaroo court sideshow and whitewash? Probably because the threat of LBJ blackmail hung over him, to coerce him to conform, as it hung over Earl Warren and god knows how many others.


The Memo is used by some as a proof that Oswald didn't do it. No?

It cannot be used as 'proof' one way or the other. However, it shows an implicit directive to overlook any evidence pointing to suspicious others named by witnesses, apart from Oswald.  In other words, it is a revelation of an ideal cover for those who might actually have been involved, whether Katzenbach intended it to be such or not. It is a sordid revelation, in other words, of blatant prejudice - as opposed to the appearance of a full and open inquiry which the Warren Commission sought to portray.

At worst, this memo indicates a conspiracy to convict Oswald, which is not the same as a conspiracy to kill Kennedy.  If the existence of the memo is indicative of a conspiracy to frame Oswald (he couldn't be 'convicted' because this wasn't an actual trial) then it is ipso facto also indicative of a conspiracy to protect those who actually did kill Kennedy. Else, why try to set up Oswald by so consistently by selectively refuting anything that might point the other way? This is the $64,000 question any serious dissenter must address and answer honestly without obfuscation, spin or the usual distractive tactics ('change the topic if the going gets too hot'). I have yet to see a single coherent statement or response in which dissenters deal with the Katzenbach memo in a forthright and honest  manner.

Did J. Edgar Hoover play any role in the Warren Commission?

It appears that he supported the propaganda circulated in the Katzenbach Memo, as Mark North notes ('Act of Treason', p392):

"Before JFK's casket reached Andrews Air Force Base and Oswald is charged with anything, Hoover is asserting in writing that Oswald is guilty."

Hoover also conveyed instructions to Dallas Attorney  Shanklin to 'sanitize' Oswald's files, thereby cleansing them of any FBI affiliations (ibid.).  (Researchers believe this was important since Oswald likely worked as a part time FBI asset, i.e. in trying to expose illegal gun purchases - and this explains why he ordered the 6.5 mm Mannlicher Carcano by mail. This was in relation to a law to exclude from importation or re-importation into the United States arms or ammunition originally manufactured for military purposes in foreign nations.)

As North also  puts it (ibid.)

"This amounts to wholesale destruction of evidence and nothing less than obstruction of justice."

Later, Hoover goes into action to force retractions of statements (i.e. by Police Chief Jesse Curry and others) that Oswald had FBI associations (op. cit, p. 393). In addition to the above, Hoover (according to North, ibid.):

- "attempted to prevent the Warren Commission from learning of the 9/62 contract by the Marcello organization" (New Orleans' Mafia) on JFK's life (op. cit, . p.394)

- "Launched a disinformation campaign to prevent the media from getting a clearer picture of the assassination" (op. cit. p. 395)

This includes suggestions that the paraffin test (which actually suggest his innocence) really implicated him. (ibid.)

- "Supplied a copy of his Report (to the Commission), after much prodding, only on condition that "members of the Commission publicly agree with his conclusions" (op. cit., p. 397)

- Attempts to recruit Johnson in deflecting the Commission's demand for 'raw' FBI files (op. cit., p. 398).

He is unsuccessful, only "managing to delay compliance for almost one month".

-"Attempts to inundate the Commission with irrelevant data" (op. cit. p. 399)

This apparently fails "as evidenced by 52 written interrogatories sent to him on March 26, 1964". (ibid.)

Clearly, from the preceding, Hoover had little interest in getting to the truth and greater interest in using Oswald as a convenient foil. As a pal of LBJ's this also makes total sense, to help cover LBJ's tracks.


As North also notes (in regard to the latter): op. cit., p. 392:

11/22-11/24:

"The aging icon is given control of the case, and immediately sets about  gaining control of the Dallas PD, no small task. In the ensuing chaos, Marcello functionary and Dallas P.D. liaison Jack Ruby murders Oswald. This is an incredible stroke of luck for Hoover, who wastes no time capitalizing on the new situation. Sunday afternoon the Director instructs Dallas SAC Shanklin to sanitize Oswald's file. The official quickly complies. This amounts to wholesale destruction of evidence and nothing less than obstruction of justice."

op. cit. p. 394:

"Hoover's next and near simultaneous objective is to attempt to prevent the public, and the Warren Commission, from learning of the Marcello contract, as well as his, Clyde's and Evans involvement in it. Fortunately for the Director, he has an ally in the Dallas P.D., which is not anxious for the American people to learn that Ruby was Carlos Marcello's liaison to the dept."

"The week of November 25, Hoover makes direct attempts to  prevent Bureau personnel from examining the Marcello organization, with only limited success. Ruby's ties to Civello and McWillie also  become apparent."

op. cit., p. 400:

"From 11/22/63 onward, the symbiotic nature of the Hoover/Johnson relationship becomes evermore apparent. From the beginning, Johnson is deeply indebted to the Director. Having contained the (Billy Sol) Estes scandal and blunted the initial investigation into the (Bobby) Baker/Johnson/ mafia connection, Hoover is now in a position to demand much. LBJ, with his ill-gotten power, is in a position to comply...... from the morning of November 23 onwards, Johnson gives Hoover complete control of the investigation. Justice Dept. access to Bureau files on Baker-Levinson etc, is cut off. The following day, Johnson meets with Texas A.G. Waggoner Carr, undoubtedly  suggesting the official give Hoover his full cooperation. By November 25, Johnson is telling everyone concerned that Hoover is in charge of the investigation."


op. cit., p. 402:

"With the assassination, Robert Kennedy is effectively removed from power. By November 30, his hotline to Hoover is disconnected."


op. cit,.p. 404:

"With the murder of Oswald, and the advent of Hoover's disinformation campaign, the overall quality of reporting suffers. Clearly the press becomes confused, not knowing whom to believe. The European press, viewing the events from a position of greater objectivity, is not fooled. By November 27, they openly accuse Hoover of complicity, and suggest the mafia is behind Ruby. Domestically, disinformation releases regarding Oswald intensify."


What was the actual purpose of the Warren Commission?

In all probability, given the highly incriminating memo of Katzenbach (above) in concert with the Johnson- Hoover hijinks (including Johnson's ordering evidence destroyed, such as JFK's suit coat as well as the limo disassembled,  the dual purpose was: a) to protect LBJ's ass from any suspicion of complicity and b)  to do 'damage control' on the U.S. International image, while scotching rumors that the country's leader was felled by an internal conspiracy. Perhaps this has been forcefully argued nowhere more compellingly that in an article written for The New Republic of June 13, 1964 by Murray Kempton. Some excerpts:


The Warren Commission has come to the moment of decision, and now the only voice we hear from it takes us back to Lord Jeffreys, so exacerbated by the mere sight of a defense, that he cannot endure the formal processes of its trial before shouting it down from the bench. "
            ---------------------------------
The Warren Commission began with the serious handicap of a conception that its duties included a cosmetic job on the American image. Its assignment was not just to find out the truth about a terrible tangle of events but also --- one fears even primarily --- to reassure and unite America and to reassure and quiet down Europe. This aspiration reflected itself in the composition of the commission. It cannot be said that every American trusts every member of the commission; but certainly every member happens to be trusted by someone or other whose good opinion is worth having."
                             ---------------
The commission may have been conceived as nothing more than a transient instrument to promote foreign relations and to insure domestic tranquility But, if it was politics that put them there, it is history which holds these men now, because they are all the servants it has. They sit under the claim of history and of all we owe the memory of John F. Kennedy and, let us not forget, the ghost of Lee Oswald.  If the burden of service to all these things does not demand from these men the conduct we expect from a court of law, then just where is the court of law whose functions are so much more consequential than theirs as to demand --- dignity, a decorum and a detachment that we do not expect
from them?
      ------------------------------------------------------
the Warren Commission has kept the direct physical evidence secret. It is hard to understand why this is necessary
       ----------------------------------------------------

The pattern has been to say what this evidence shows without ever showing the evidence. The commission spokesman tells Anthony Lewis, how many shots were fired and where two of them landed without offering the medical report upon which I certainly hope and would like to believe any
statement from an official source would be based.


-----

In conclusion, let's be aware that by way of his creation of  the Warren Commission on November 29, 1963, LBJ acquired the total power to block any House, Senate or Texas state investigations, while awarding himself the power (via underlings like Hoover, Dulles)  to control all evidence that might possibly surface, and either ignore it, suppress it or allow it to be distorted- thereby further distancing himself, all in the name of “seeking justice”.

The wary reader doesn't have to accept this at first blush, or exposure, but all one can ask is that reader put on his critical thinking cap and go through all of LBJ's documented actions. He in effect, devised the perfect vehicle to cover up the executive action carried out by the national security state and its cronies - and thereby benefited from the state once Kennedy was dead.


Despite Vince Bugliosi’s mythologizing,  or Bill Moyers being “appalled”, Johnson remains the key suspect in at least finalizing the plans for the assassination, probably in collusion with his “Texas Rangers” fund raisers: Mayor Earl Cabell of Dallas (brother of JFK-terminated CIA Deputy Chief Charles Cabell), and H.L. Hunt. The last two, in conjunction with the Dallas Police, were responsible for altering the motorcade route at the last minute, so instead of going directly along Main St. – which would have been the traditional motorcade route in Dallas-  they included a slow and fateful hairpin turn onto Houston Street, then onto Elm Street, directly into the pre-prepared kill zone.

As for Johnson, the ultimate  “smoking bullet” in the sad and sorry inventory of that era is none other than his own fraudulent “commission”.  For if LBJ truly wasn’t involved, then why on earth would he not want to go all out to penetrate every last nook and cranny in a no-holds barred investigation? But as the evidence shows, there were plenty of holds, set up not only by his pal Hoover, but also Dulles with the CIA.  That such a Commission could even come to be, with its veneer of gravitas – designed to cover –up the greatest crime of the 20th century is an unspeakable blight on this nation's honor and values that even a late turn toward truth may not remove.

Bottom line: Anyone, any author, any reporter,  any TV  or media person, who accepts the conclusions of this Commission accepts a fraud, and can therefore himself be deemed a fraud, a dupe or worse, part of the ongoing cover up.

Germans: Tom Hanks Wasting His Time With His HBO Kennedy Assassination Propaganda Series

One of thousands of 'Wanted for Treason' posters retrieved from Dallas streets on the day of John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Another topic of conversation at the Gipfel Restaurant on the Zugspitze was the Kennedy Assassination- given this November 22 is the 50th anniversary of the event. All the Germans, when I introduced the topic, summarily rejected the notion that Lee Harvey Oswald had anything to do with it. As Heinrich and Maria put it (almost in unison): "Er war eine Marionette!"  Since there is no explicit term for 'patsy' in German they used the term 'Marionette' for a puppet on a string or manipulated by (unseen) strings.

In fact, they were spot on, since as Military Science Professor John Newman observed in his book, 'Oswald and the CIA', Oswald had been "sheepdipped" - which is the code word for being manipulated. He also provides other documents to show how the CIA used this ploy on others, including Eldon Henson. According to Newman (pp. 362-63):

"What the CIA Station in Mexico City did to Eldon Hensen in July, 1963 was to 'step into' his reality and direct it in a way designed to achieve the Agency's objectives- in this instance to see what he was up to. This CIA capability, to surreptitiously enter into someone's life to control or manipulate it, was made possible in this case by the use of  telephone taps."

Henson isn’t the only example, and author James Douglass ('JFK and the Unspeakable')  also shows that Thomas Arthur Vallee, who was to have been the Chicago assassin for Kennedy’s proposed visit on Nov. 2, 1963,  was also sheep-dipped, and likely selected for patsy-hood using a false defector program that the ONI  (Office of Naval Intelligence) set up in 1959.  Had JFK traveled to Chicago, we’d likely only have heard of  Vallee and never known a Lee Harvey Oswald. Vallee and Oswald were simply interchangeable pawns on the CIA’s chess board for executive action, yet a self-proclaimed expert like Vince Bugliosi professes to not have a single clue about it in his  'Reclaiming History'!


Reinhart chimed in that most Germans didn't buy the Warren Commission Report and were astounded that so many Americans still accepted it. When I mentioned that actor Tom Hanks planned to do a 13-part series based on the massive pro-Warrenite book ('Reclaiming History')  by Vince Bugliosi, he laughed then rolled his eyes. Translated from the German his response was roughly:

'Shade! (Shame!) So this fool will waste people's time and money putting out even more lies? That is an indictment of the American media if that happens!"

All the Germans, when asked about the plausibility of Hanks' HBO extravaganza coming out with the real truth of the assassination, responded:

“Unmöglich !”

"Impossible!"

What flabbergasted me was how much knowledge they already had of the particulars, vastly more than the average American. (Which is insightful, given some recent polls now show 59% of Americans reject the Warren Commission's fiction, compared to 73% barely 10 years ago. It appears the revisionists may actually be succeeding, along with the National Archives' refusal to release all salient documents this year - see e.g. http://www.brane-space.blogspot.com/2012/06/national-archives-to-jfk-file-seekers.html

But, incredibly, Reinhart, Heinrich, Maria and Elli all knew about the bullet-marked limo whisked away to be taken apart, as well as the destruction of JFK's suit coat (with bullet holes in it) and the disappearance of the brain. They also had seen the actual autopsy photos and Reinhart repeatedly said "Shade!" on recalling their horror. 

Heinrich put it clearly: "How could a man like Oswald have removed the brain? How could he himself have taken the suit coat and had it destroyed? How could he have ordered the limousine taken apart? None of that makes any sense which is why no German believes he did it!"

When I noted that Tom Hanks' mission was to prevent the American people from being "snookered" they all laughed. "Was bedeutet das 'snookered'?" they asked  (What does snookered mean?) And I had to use terms like  “täuschen”   for deceive. At this Heinrich howled with laughter. "Ach, but he ...Hanks ...is the one who deceives! So how can they show this?"

I then had to explain how Hanks had formidable connections in the media and especially with HBO, having done previous series such as 'The Pacific' and 'Band of Brothers'  so he gained a certain prestige. Also, from having won multiple Academy Awards. At which point Elli interjected: "Ah, Ja! Forrest Gump!"

And we all laughed. But on the serious side they wondered how such deception could be displayed as truth and I then went into the fact Hanks planned to use Bugliosi's monstrosity original  (2,646 page) book  -  now interestingly pared down to 634 pages and renamed: 'Four Days In November: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy".  Bugliosi evidently doesn't grasp that 5 pounds of bullshit distilled to 1 pound still equals bullshit!

Reinhart - following this revelation- fairly yelled: "But if this is also based on deceptions it is still all deception! Schlimm!"

Near the end the Germans all agreed that they hoped Americans wouldn't fall for Hanks' propaganda or any films that sought to portray Oswald as the JFK killer.

At the end, Heinrich perhaps put it best:

"We may never find the actual killers, but sensible people can agree it wasn't Oswald."

As to whether any would view Hanks' effort, all heads indicated a strong 'No'. It wasn't worth any investment of time, mental energy or credulity.

To which I heartily agreed.