Naomi Wolf explains why we have to take most big, “theatrical” news events with a grain of salt.
Naomi Wolf explains why we have to take most big, “theatrical” news events with a grain of salt.
Hmm, what a strange title for this post. What am I getting at here?
After 6 years of obsessive research on the topic, there still isn’t a whole lot about the JFK assassination that I’m 100% sure of. However, I feel about 99% sure of the shot sequence and it would take an awful lot at this point for anyone to convince me I’m wrong. Hence the title of this post.
The numbers refer to frames on the Zapruder film.
How many shots total do I think were fired that day?
The first shot hit Kennedy at about frame 225 of the Zapruder film. The second shot hit Connally at frame 295 (give or take). The third hit Kennedy at frame 313.
The fourth shot was the one that missed and hit the sidewalk, causing shrapnel to hit James Tague in the cheek.
The third and fourth shots were virtually simultaneous and sounded like just one retort to most witnesses, hence the reason that the majority of witnesses in the plaza testified to hearing three shots and not four.
Notice that witness S.M. Holland, interviewed in the video above, said that shots three and four were virtually simultaneous but that the third shot sounded different from the other three – it wasn’t as loud. This is the shot from the knoll that created the puff of smoke Holland saw – the shot that blew Kennedy’s head off.
One shooter was responsible for shots one, two and four. The knoll shooter was responsible for the third shot, which was the fatal head shot. Two shooters in total.
The guy shooting shots one, two, and four was behind Kennedy – the kill shot or shots were intended to come from behind in order to blame patsy Lee Oswald in the School Book Depository. The knoll shooter was just a failsafe in case the first guy missed. Unfortunately for the conspirators, the knoll shooter was the one who ended up delivering the fatal shot. In that sense I think it went down exactly as James Files said it did in his 1994 and 2003 interviews. Not that I don’t think there are some other problems with Files’ story.
A distance of only 18 frames (295-313) between shots two and three proves that Oswald couldn’t have been the lone gunman that day, since Zapruder’s camera filmed at 18.3 frames per second and Oswald’s Mannlicher Carcano rifle required at least 2.3 seconds between shots. So Oswald couldn’t have been responsible for shots 2 and 3 since they are only 18 frames apart. Either he had help, or he and his Carcano were not involved at all. Oswald acting alone is an impossibility.
The paraffin tests on Oswald’s cheek were negative, which is hard to explain if he had actually fired a rifle. From all accounts of his time in the Marines, he was a horrible marksman. For these and other reasons I tend to think Oswald was not one of the shooters.
BTW Lee Bowers, the “Man Who Saw Too Much“, also testified to two of the shots being right on top of each other, practically simultaneous, although he only testified to hearing three separate shots in total. Like Holland, he also saw a flash of light or smoke from behind the picket fence on the knoll.
Jean Hill, secret service agent Clint Hill (no relation to Jean), George Hickey, and Elizabeth Carolyn Walton, like Holland, also testified to one of the shots “sounding” different than the others. From my research, the closer the earwitness was to the far end of the plaza and the grassy knoll, the more likely they were to testify that one of the shots sounded different, or that two of the shots were practically simultaneous. This fits with a second shooter being on the knoll with a different type of weapon than the first shooter.
The three passengers closest to this historic event in Kennedy’s limo were of course Jackie Kennedy and John and Nellie Connally. Jackie Kennedy’s testimony before the Warren Commission was perfunctory and brief out of respect for her grief, I suppose. She seems to have been in shock during the event and doesn’t give all that much detail.
John and Nellie Connally, on the other hand, not only testified in great detail but their stories matched each other perfectly and remained remarkably consistent until their respective deaths decades later. If you match up their testimony with the Zapruder film, you’ll see that it matches 225-295-313 perfectly. Despite the best efforts of weasels like Arlen Specter to confuse him, John (and Nellie) insisted his entire life that he had not been hit by the same “magic bullet” that you can see Kennedy reacting to beginning at frame 225. The Zapruder film backs him up completely. You can see Connally turning to look behind him after Kennedy is hit, just as he says. You can see him get hit at frame 295 after he had begun to turn his body the other way, just as he says. You can see him react and fall back into Nellie’s lap. When you match John and Nellie’s testimony with the Zapruder film, you get bullets hitting the two men at 225-295-313.
The magic bullet and the Oswald lone nut theory are toast. Game. Set. Match.
“Does Spain count?” lol. What a colossally stupid, racist bitch. Yes, Spain is part of Europe, which makes you “white”, honey. Your ancestors were the conquistadors who murdered, raped, and enslaved millions of Amerindians in pursuit of money and gold. But the pampered racist daddy’s girl princess thinks white people like me suck and are uncool, so she’s mortified to learn that she’s 87% “European”.
Alba’s ancestors have major blood on their hands. Can’t say the same for my own Irish forebears, who were being kicked in the face by their English overlords the whole time Princess Jessica’s ancestors were genociding the Tainos, Aztecs, Incas and countless other indigenous nations throughout the western hemisphere. Learn your history, Jessica. And you can kiss my lilly-white Irish ass while you’re at it.
Trump adviser Roger Stone’s accusations against the Bushes are so over the top that it tends to leave bloggers like me completely speechless (or “blog-less”). I mean, where do I even start?
Stone, with his book “Jeb! and the Bush Crime Family” (co-authored with Saint John Hunt, son of E. Howard, the CIA officer and Watergate burglar who confessed on his deathbed to being part of an LBJ-inspired CIA assassination of John F. Kennedy), has introduced the “Bush Crime Family” meme with some success in the last year. The general idea, of course, is that the Bushes are really not much different from the fictional Corleones or Sopranos, they’re just hooked into legitimate avenues of power which validate and excuse their transgressions. Stone introduces an interesting phrase, “elite deviance”, to explain how the phenomenon works – if you’re at the top of the food chain of political and economic power in this country, you get away with just about anything, whether it’s securities and banking fraud, drug running, or even murder.
I hesitate to even try to list everything Stone is accusing the Bushes of. Here’s what I can recall:
1. Poppy Bush’s dad, Senator Prescott Bush, was “Adolf Hitler’s banker”, responsible for helping finance the Nazi war machine. According to Stone, Hitler was so grateful for the assistance that he gifted a German steel factory to the Senator, complete with a full complement of slave labor from the Auschwitz concentration camp.
2. Neil and Marvin Bush defrauded S&L shareholders, as well as taxpayers, to the tune of several million dollars while engaging in banking and securities fraud in the 1980s.
3. Poppy, Jeb, and George W. were all heavily involved in CIA drug-running in the 1980s as part of the effort to fund the Nicaraguan contras, an operation under the auspices of Poppy, who was Vice President at the time. Poppy’s personal phone number was on pilot Barry Seal’s person at the time of his arrest. Seal was soon murdered in a shootout that was blamed on the drug cartel, but which was in all probability arranged by Bush himself.
4. Poppy deliberately “ran for Vice President” five times during his career, finally succeeding in becoming Ronald Reagan’s VP in 1980. According to Stone, Bush was behind the assassination attempt on Reagan on March 30, 1981, which, obviously, would have made Bush president if it had succeeded.
Had enough? Oh BTW, completely apart from Stone, there is a documentary that has been floating around the cable access world for the last several years about election fraud. It was heavily implied that the Bushes may have stolen the 2004 Presidential election. One of the IT contractors responsible for tabulating the results in Ohio in that year had close ties to the Bush family and to Karl Rove. He had been depositioned in regard to some of his firm’s election activities and had been warned by Rove not to disclose anything. While legal proceedings were still ongoing he was killed in a crash of his small plane.
Exit polls on that Tuesday in November of 2004 in key states like Ohio and Florida had media outlets ready to call the election for Kerry. Exit polling had long been thought to be extremely reliable, since it consists of voters telling the pollster who they just voted for. However, the exit polls were all wrong that year. The meme was immediately floated by “experts” like Rove that “gee, this proves that you can’t really trust those darn exit polls after all, can you?” That was Rove’s Jedi Mind Trick on the American public.
It’s pretty well understood by most that Bush’s ties to the CIA go back a lot farther than his being named Director in 1976. In “Family of Secrets”, Russ Baker even connects him to the JFK assassination by putting him in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963. For my money, though, the photograph he uses to back this up is less than convincing.
Again, I’m not necessarily vouching for everything I hear because I have no real way of verifying it. I do know that America prides itself on it’s allegedly open and honest political system, so a certain cognitive dissonance is understandable when we begin to realize that it’s not really so. Our leaders tend to be corrupt, and we don’t always know how deep it goes, but I suppose it’s a lot safer and more comforting not to be aware of certain truths. Our belief in our American exceptionalism can’t really absorb a lot of reality.
A bunch of Saudis and other foreign nationals with terror ties are given visas by C.I.A. operatives working as U.S. State Department employees in Jeddah, Saudia Arabia. They are trained at American military bases and bear all the hallmarks of being “controlled” by U.S. Intelligence. They loudly call attention to themselves in public stunts designed to make themselves remembered as terrorists and troublemakers. In many cases, there seem to be multiple people claiming to be the same person, as in the case of Mohammed Atta. After being rendered conveniently dead, they all end up as named suspects in the biggest terror attack ever on U.S. soil on 9/11/2001.
In 1959 U.S. Marine Lee Harvey Oswald attempts to “defect” to the Soviet Union. He visits the American embassy in Moscow and tells the American diplomat in charge that he wants to give military secrets to the Russians. This is no idle threat since he had been a radar operator assigned to Atsugi, Japan, and had knowledge of America’s secret U2 flights over the Soviet Union. For his acts of treason, he is given $435 by the U.S. State Department so he can return to the States in 1962 where he faces no punishment and no court martial. As he calls attention to himself in numerous public stunts announcing himself to be a committed “Communist” controlled by Cuba and the Soviet Union, he bears all the hallmarks of being a puppet of American Intelligence. He becomes the accused assassin of President Kennedy in Dallas on 11/22/1963 and is soon rendered conveniently dead.
As you investigate recent American history certain ugly patterns begin to emerge. For my part, this documentary reminded me of some of the striking similarities between 9/11 and the JFK assassination. But even if you’re not a “truther” and you think I’m a kook you might want to give this video a try. It will raise some doubts in your mind about 9/11 even if you’re inclined to believe the official story.
A 63-story luxury hotel in Dubai was engulfed in flames for the better part of two days beginning on New Year’s Eve. This sort of thing happens quite frequently over there, apparently:
However, challenges remain as Dubai has faced a series of recent tower fires.
In November, a massive blaze engulfed three residential blocks in central Dubai and led to services on a metro line being suspended, although no one was hurt.
In February, a huge fire gutted one of the emirate’s tallest buildings, destroying luxury flats in the Torch tower and prompted an evacuation of nearby blocks in the Dubai Marina neighbourhood.
In 2012, a blaze destroyed the 34-storey Tamweel Tower in the nearby Jumeirah Lake Towers district. It was later revealed to have been caused by a cigarette butt thrown into a bin.
There were no serious casualties in that fire.
In October, a fire broke out in a high-rise residential tower in the neighbouring emirate of Sharjah.
Maybe someone from NIST should travel to Dubai to find out why none of their buildings are collapsing like they’re supposed to.
Lee Bowers, Jr. died on August 9, 1966 in a single-car accident occurring in broad daylight on a highway near Midlothian, Texas.
When the Boston Marathon bombings happened in April of 2013, the Conspiritard quadrant of the blogosphere immediately and predictably jumped to the knee-jerk conclusion that the event was a “false flag” operation carried out by the U.S. government. The “crisis actors” silliness was dusted off once again after being used ad-nauseum to explain Sandy Hook a few months prior. This time, according the the Conspiritards, they used amputee crisis actors to pretend that their limbs were being blown off by a fake bomb, with prop people waiting nearby ready to splash fake buckets of blood to enhance the realism.
If, like me, you possess a functioning brain, you may be saying to yourself, “Well isn’t it really just a handful of people who believe that crap?”.
WRONG. In the days after the bombing, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people were glomming on to these dopey sites, many of which had thousands of comments agreeing with the false flag hypothesis. Even people I used to think were smart, like Dmitry Orlov, were claiming the event was a false flag and that no one had really been injured or killed.
For all of you morons out there, did it ever occur to you to wonder why any Boston Bombing hoaxers would need to fake 264 non-fatal injuries (according to Wikipedia)? Wouldn’t a dozen or two have been just as effective and infinitely easier to pull off? That’s a lot of “crisis acting” eh?. Did they put out a nation-wide casting call, like when they needed little people for the Wizard of Oz?
The most obvious reason that the Boston bombing was not a U.S.-engineered false flag event should have been clear to anyone with any knowledge of geopolitics: the Tsarnaev brothers were Chechens. Why, praytell, would the CIA or the Defense Intelligence agency want to hand Vladmir Putin’s Russia a public relations and propaganda coup by using Putin’s Chechen enemies as the patsies for a terrorist attack on U.S. soil?
If you can’t understand what I’m getting at then please view the clip embedded above of an interview with Russian President Putin on Russian TV from just about two weeks after the bombing and let Vlad spell it out for you (use the CC button to get the translation). In Putin’s own words:
I have always felt outraged when our Western partners, as well as your colleagues from the Western media, referred to our terrorists who committed brutal, bloody, appalling crimes on the territory of our country, as “insurgents”. They were hardly ever referred to as terrorists. They provided assistance to them, information support, financial and political support — sometimes directly and sometimes indirectly, but it always accompanied their activities on the territory of the Russian Federation. While we always said that they shouldn’t make empty declarations that terrorism is a common threat, but make real efforts and cooperate with each other more closely. But now these two criminals have provided the best possible proof that we were right.
In other words, the bombing validated Russia’s assertions that the Chechens aren’t insurgents or freedom fighters but terrorists. Am I starting to make sense?
I’ve been watching the Files interview posted below and I found some more stuff that was bugging me. He claims that there were two guys in business suits on the steps, apparently posing as secret service, who turned away a motorcycle cop as he came up the knoll after the assassination. Files also claimed that Frank Sturgis was hanging out minutes before the motorcade arrived wearing a WWII bomber jacket and that he was situated to Files’ left at the top of the knoll (Files was behind the fence about 8 to 10 feet to the left of the “L” as you’re facing the knoll).
In my bloody-minded search for some kind of corroboration for these claims I went looking for evidence of Frank Sturgis and the two fake secret service guys. I couldn’t find any evidence of these people. Show me a photograph or a film of anyone resembling Sturgis where Files says he was – it doesn’t exist. Show me the fake secret service guys where Files says they were – ditto.
I’m sorry but this is more evidence of Files embellishing and making shit up as he goes along. He also claims a whole bunch of other people were hanging out in the Plaza that day. Most of them aren’t showing up in any photographs either.
And check out the Muchmore film embedded above. Who do you see on the steps of the knoll halfway between the fence and the street? I see three guys standing in a place that you would think would be directly in the line of fire of anyone shooting from where Files says he was. Unfortunately for Files’ story none of them looks like a fake secret service agent or Frank Sturgis in a bomber jacket.
And it occurred to me that I have no idea who these three guys are even though they had a perfect, unobstructed and close-up view of Kennedy getting his head blown off. I mean, seriously, who the fuck are these guys? What are their names? Were they ever interviewed? How come I’ve heard of Jean Hill and Mary Moorman (shown above in the film), Charles Brehm, Bill and Gayle Newman, and the Babushka lady (who was probably not Beverly Oliver), but I have no idea who these three guys are even though they were standing right on the knoll and had a birds’ eye view of the whole event?
If a shot came from the top of the knoll behind the fence, wouldn’t these guys be hugely relevant witnesses? They would seem to be right in the line of fire. A grassy knoll shooter would have had to have practically shot right through them. A bullet would have whizzed right by at least one of them, either to the right, to the left, or directly above.
Their behavior in the Muchmore film might even be taken as a refutation of any claim by Files or anyone else that the fatal shot came from the knoll. How come none of them ducked or fell to the ground? How come none of them looked behind to the fence?
I’ve decided to call them the Three Stooges. The one in front makes a kind of umpire gesture (“safe!”) right after the fatal shot. The one to the right makes an obvious start to run away to his left. The one in the middle just stands there like a statue. Their slapstick antics are the only clues as to how they felt about what they witnessed.
With all the ridiculous attention paid to the “Three Tramps” photos, how about a little attention for my Stooges? Three bums were picked up by the Dallas cops in a railroad car an hour and a half after the assassination and everyone thinks they know who those guys “really were”, even though there is absolutely zero evidence that they were anything but three harmless hobos.
But three guys are right in the line of fire on the knoll and nobody can tell me who they were? Did anyone interview them? Did any of them think that the fatal shot came from a few feet directly behind where they were standing? I find it bizarre that apparently they weren’t interviewed, they never came forward to tell their stories, and no one can tell me who any of them were.
If anyone knows anything about these three gentlemen, please enlighten me in the comments section.
For some reason, Wim Dankbaar has posted the full 2003 interview with confessed “grassy knoll shooter” James Files on his YouTube channel. In poring over both the 2003 interview and the portion of Files’ videotaped 1994 interview which I’ve posted earlier, as well as through reading the entire transcript of both Files interviews in Dankbaar’s book, “Files on JFK”, I managed to find some inconsistencies between Files’ 1994 and 2003 confessions which would seem to require an explanation.
Basically, the discrepancies center around one major theme – the involvement of the CIA and more specifically agent David Atlee Phillips. In the 2003 confession, Files stated that, upon arriving at a motel in Mesquite, TX, roughly one week before the assassination, he made two calls – one to Charles Nicoletti and one to Phillips, who he claims was his “controller”. In the 1994 confession, Files states that he made only one call to Nicoletti and never mentions a second call to Phillips.
In both the 1994 and 2003 interviews, Files stated that, on the morning of November 22nd, Nicoletti asked him to be his backup shooter. In the 1994 version Files accepted the offer while merely stating to Nicoletti how honored he would be to back him up. However, in the 2003 version, an entirely new dimension was added to the story. The latter version has Files exclaiming “What about Johnny?[Roselli – also in Dallas that day, according to Files]”, after which Nicoletti explains to him that Roselli had been instructed by the CIA to abort the assassination and was therefore reluctant to be a shooter.
In both 1994 and 2003 Files claims that another party other than himself or Oswald was responsible for killing police officer J.D. Tippit, and that this party was actually trying to kill Oswald when Tippit stopped him. However, in the 2003 version, he claims that it was he, Files, who was responsible for the man having been sent to kill Oswald in the first place.
In 1994, Files claimed that Nicoletti had sent Oswald to Files’ motel in Mesquite to show him the area and to give him any general assistance he might need. In 2003, on the other hand, Files claimed Nicoletti had no idea who Oswald was, and that it was Phillips who had sent Oswald to Files’ motel after Files made that second phone call to Phillips on the night he arrived in Dallas. Files claimed in the later interview that he had to explain to Nicoletti on November 22nd who Oswald was, and that the fact that Oswald was a link back to Files who was a link back to Nicoletti made Oswald a serious problem for both of them. It was after that conversation that Files claims Nicoletti in all probability contacted Sam Giancana, who probably contacted David Phillips, who sent the third party to kill Oswald. The third party then ended up “burning a cop” (J.D. Tippit) after he “missed” getting Oswald.
So why was all of this detailed in the latter confession but not in the 1994 confession? Is Files embellishing his story as time goes on? One huge difference I noticed between the two confessions is the demeanor of Files himself. In 1994, he is nervous, defensive, reticent. In 2003, he’s relaxed and at peace. Could it merely be that in 1994 Files was more inclined to minimize evidence of the CIA’s direct involvement in the assassination just to save his own skin? By 2003 he seemed to have figured out that if someone was going to ice him for what he was revealing, they would have done it already. Maybe that’s why he opened up with more specific details relating to David Phillips, the CIA, and their involvement in the hit on JFK.
It’s really up to each individual viewer to decide for himself whether Files is adding embellishments over the years to a tall tale or whether the differences in the two accounts is attributable to Files being less fearful of revealing secrets as time goes by. If you examine the more mundane details of his confessions, you’ll find that they are remarkably consistent, down to the 1963 burgundy Chevrolet he drove down to Dallas and the pancake house he had breakfast in. I haven’t seen any explanation from Dankbaar or from Files himself of the discrepancies I’ve pointed out in Files’ accounts. Perhaps someone can comment with relevant information.