Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Who's telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?

Who’s telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?
Agent’s reports contradict JFK film, autopsy X-rays and other crucial photographs

Jim Fetzer

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

“In the midst of the mayhem the agents were calm, but ready to react in a millisecond if anything got out of hand.”
Jerry Blaine, THE KENNEDY DETAIL


According to Jerry Blaine, the author of THE KENNEDY DETAIL (2010), his purpose in writing this book was “to set history straight, to leave a book for [his] grandchildren that they could read and know the truth beyond any measure of doubt.” What Blaine has actually done, however, moves us further toward the truth by revealing that the words of Clint Hill, the only agent to respond during the assassination, contradict his actions as shown in the Zapruder film, in which his efforts to protect Jackie Kennedy are among its most indelible features.  They also impeach autopsy X-rays and other photographs. We therefore have in Clint Hill’s own words stunning new proof that the extant film has been faked. The book—and presentations to promote it—thus contributes to “setting history straight”, but not in the sense its author intended.  

Clint Hill was not the only agent to attempt to respond after shots rang out. Secret Service agent John Ready, who was on the right running board whereas Clint was on the left, began to respond but was called back by Emory Roberts, Agent in Charge of the Presidential Protection Detail.  This is stunning in itself, but is only one of more than fifteen indications that the Secret Service set up JFK for the hit, which include that two agents were left behind at Love Field, that the vehicles were in the wrong order, that the 112th Military Intelligence Unit was ordered to “stand down” rather than provide protection throughout the city, and that the motorcycle escort was reduced to four, who were instructed not to ride forward the rear wheels. Open windows were not covered and the crowd was allowed to spill out into the street.

When I discovered that Jerry and Clint had made presentations at book signings, I sent out a notice to several of my closest collaborators, all of whom contributed to the three JFK books I edited, ASSASSINATION SCIENCE (1998), MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000), and THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX (2003).  I had reported there that we had found multiple indications the film had been reconstructed, where rather important events, such as the driver, William Greer, bringing the limo to a halt, had been removed and the film redone.  An expert on special effects, Roderick Ryan, had told Noel Twyman, BLOODY TREASON (1997), that the “blob” of brains exploding to the right/front had been painted in, while, as Doug Horne, INSIDE THE ARRB (2009), has explained, a new group of Hollywood experts has found that a massive defect to the back of JFK’s head had been concealed by being (crudely) painted over in black.

The Costella Response

John Costella, Ph.D., the leading expert on the film in the world today, who earned his doctorate in physics with a specialization in electromagnetism, the properties of light and images of moving objects, responded almost immediately.  “Forget about the book”, he wrote. “That YouTube video [of Blaine and Hill at a book signing, which can be found here: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYpY8zI_wwA ] 


is worth its weight in gold!”  A few years ago, after he did a compilation of eyewitness reports from Dealey Plaza 


http://assassinationresearch.com/v5n1/v5n1costella.pdf  


and created a stabilized version of the Zapruder film, in which the limousine does not move vertically within frames 


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aBqRB-DsFQ ,


John recognized that what Clint has described from the days after the assassination, to his testimony to the Warren Commission and right up to his last public interviews in the 1970s or 1980s, was consistent but contradicts the film.  At the book signing,

24:30: "As I approached the vehicle there was a third shot. It hit the President in the head, upper right rear of the right ear, caused a gaping hole in his head, which caused brain matter, blood, and bone fragments to spew forth out over the car, over myself. At that point Mrs. Kennedy came up out of the back seat onto the trunk of the car. She was trying to retrieve something that had gone off to the right rear. She did not know I was there. At that point I grabbed Mrs. Kennedy, put her in the back seat. The President fell over into her lap, to his left.

His right side of his head was exposed. I could see his eyes were fixed. There was a hole in the upper right rear portion of his head about the size of my palm. Most of the gray matter in that area had been removed, and was scattered throughout the entire car, including on Mrs. Kennedy. I turned and gave the follow-up car crew the thumbs-down, indicating that we were in a very dire situation. The driver accelerated; he got up to the lead car which was driven by Chief Curry, the Dallas Chief of Police . . .”.

This is completely consistent with every account Clint has ever given. He insists that he reached Mrs. Kennedy, pushed her down into the back seat, and was lying over the President, close enough to view the exact wounds, before the driver accelerated away—and certainly before they got to the lead car. The problem is that the extant Zapruder film—together with the less familiar Nix and Muchmore films—has Clint never actually touching Mrs. Kennedy; indeed, the extant Zapruder shows that he never got further than the rear foothold until the time that the limo passed the lead car and went under the Triple Underpass. Instead, it shows him stuck there on the rear foothold. (See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aBqRB-DsFQ )

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

According to Clint Hill (shown here on the rear foothold of the limousine as the vehicle is about to enter the Triple Underpass), he had already reached Mrs. Kennedy and pushed her down in the back seat. JFK had fallen to the left into her lap, where the right side of his head was exposed to Clint, who was lying over them. This photo is supposed to have been taken by Ike Altgens and corresponds with late Zapruder frames. Clint’s testimony not only falsifies the Zapruder film, but also shows that this photograph was faked to agree with it. 

Lest there be any doubt on this crucial point, in Clint Hill’s written statement dated 30 November 1963, which was published as Commission Exhibit CE 1024, he wrote: “As I lay over the top of the back seat I noticed a portion of the President’s head on the right rear side was missing and he was bleeding profusely.  Part of his brain was gone.  I saw a part of his skull with hair on it lying on the seat” [18H742].  And in his testimony to the commission on 9 March 1964, “The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the middle of the car.  His brain was exposed.” [2H141]. Since he has told us he made these observations before the limousine had reached the pilot car drive by Chief Curry (shown above), this photo has to have been faked.  Clint could not have made these observations from the rear foothold as it represents. (His descriptions of the wound to the right rear of JFK’s head are discussed below.)

The Limo Stop

Not the least fascinating aspect of Clint Hill’s latest remarks is his observation that he was covered with brains and gore as he ran forward from the left running board of the Secret Service Cadillac—called “The Queen Mary”—which, according to Emory Roberts (THE KENNEDY DETAIL, page 215), was 15 feet back. This is consistent with the report of Officer Bobby Hargis riding to the left/rear of the limousine, who was hit so hard by the brains and debris that he thought he himself might have been shot. Agents who saw JFK’s brains splattered across the trunk in Washington, D.C. would be nauseated by the sight, as I explained in HOAX, page 27. But it is not in the film. So John wrote to Clint—and he got it, because John has the signed Registered Mail receipt card—urging him to be certain to record his version of events for posterity. Now he is on the road, participating in book signings and talking publicly again, for the first time in decades.  His story is still exactly the same and, most important, still does not agree with his actions as seen in the film.  Here is a clip featuring what is represented as Clint Hill's actions in the film: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aBqRB-DsFQ The film itself thus demonstrates that the Zapruder version of Clint Hill’s actions up to the Triple Underpass contradict Clint Hill’s words describing what he actually did.

John’s collation of eyewitness reports about the assassination includes dozens and dozens about the limo stop.  Some reported seeing it slow dramatically and others that it came to a complete stop, which makes sense since, from different positions, different witnesses would have seen it slow dramatically as it came to a complete stop.  Among them is Toni Foster, who was interviewed by Debra Conway in 2000. As Daniel Gallup has observed, Foster seems to have no idea that her recollections contradict the official record. Toni told Debra, "For some reason, the car stopped. It did stop for seconds. I don't even know why it stopped and all of a sudden it sped up and they went under the underpass. I could never figure out why the car stopped." “The way she delivers these lines,” Gallup observed, “I doubt Toni had ever seen the extant Z-film, and had no idea her recollections contradicted that film.” He said he was reminded of David Lifton's early (1971) interviews with the Newmans who also said the limo had stopped. “They had no way of knowing at the time that the Z-film showed no such stop. All of this is to say, the earliest recollections of individuals are likely to be the most significant,” he added,  “especially if there is evidence of a lack of exposure to contrary viewpoints that might influence memory”. For a few more:

Billy Lovelady (on the steps of the Texas School Book Depository), 19 March 1964:  “I recall that following the shooting I ran toward the spot where President Kennedy’s car had stopped.” [FBI statement: 22H662]

Roy Truly (on the north side of Elm Street in front of the building), 24 March 1964: “The car—I saw the President’s car swerve to the left and stop somewhere down in this area” [Later:] (Mr. Belin:  “When you saw the President’s car seem to stop, how long did it appear to stop?) Mr. Truly:  It would be hard to say, over a second or two, something like that. I didn’t see—I just saw it stop.  I don’t know. I didn’t see it start up.” [Warren Commission testimony: 3H221]  

Mrs. Earle Cabell (four cars behind the Presidential limousine, at the top of Elm Street at the time of the shots), 13 July 1964:  “I was aware that the motorcade stopped dead still. There was no question about that.” [Later:] “As I told you, the motorcade was stopped.” [Later:] (Mr. Hubert: “That was when your car at least had come to a standstill?”) Mrs. Cabell: “Every car in the motorcade had come to a standstill.” [Later:] “… we were dead still for a matter of some seconds—“ [Warren Commission Testimony” 7H486-7]

These reports are significant from multiple points of view. Roy Truly was Oswald’s supervisor in the Book Depository and would reassure Officer Marrion Baker, when he confronted Oswald in the 2nd floor lunch room 90 seconds after the assassination, that he was an employee and belonged there.  Billy Lovelady was another employee who looked enough like Oswald to be mistaken for him.  And Earle Cabell, the Mayor of Dallas at the time, was the brother of Lt. Gen. Charles Cabell, USAF (ret.), whom JFK removed as a deputy director of the CIA after the disastrous Bay of Pigs fiasco.

The limo stop—during which JFK was hit twice in the head, once from behind and once from in front—was such an obvious indication of Secret Service complicity that it had to be taken out, which is undoubtedly the principal reason for fixing the film. But it had other ramifications. What Clint Hill has consistently described is not in the Zapruder film: he describes several actions in those seconds around the limo stop that were deleted from the extant film. In editing the timeline of the extant film, it was necessary to delete his pushing of Mrs. Kennedy back into the seat—there just wasn't enough time left in the film once the limo stop had been deleted. There is no possible way in which Clint could possibly have seen what he claims to have seen before the car accelerated away and passed the lead car when he was stuck on the back of the speeding limo as he is shown doing in the extant film. And from his initial reports right up to his latest “book signing” interview, he has insisted that that was when he saw those things, that he did reach Mrs. Kennedy and that he did push her down into the car, unlike what the film shows.  Which means that the film is a fake.

The Head Wound

Other proofs of the alteration of the film derive from his description of the wound itself and of the debris that was blown over the car. "As I approached the vehicle there was a third shot. It hit the President in the head, upper right rear of the right ear, caused a gaping hole in his head, which caused brain matter, blood, and bone fragments to spew forth out over the car, over myself. . . . His right side of his head was exposed. I could see his eyes were fixed. There was a hole in the upper right rear portion of his head about the size of my palm. Most of the gray matter in that area had been removed, and was scattered throughout the entire car, including on Mrs. Kennedy.” Clint’s description corresponds with the image of the blow out that can be seen in later frames of the film, such as 374:


Image and video hosting by TinyPic

In the belief that those who were altering the film around the head shot in frame 313 might have overlooked later frames, I began to study later frames and found that the blow-out could be seen in frame 374.  The bluish-gray image is brain matter, while the pinkish extension is the back of a skull flap that was blown open by the frangible (or exploding) bullet when it hit. But the blow-out is not seen in frames like 313-316, another proof of fakery.

Even if Clint actually touched Jackie, the films do not show him pushing her into the seat, which is what he has maintained for 47 years. In his formal report dated on 30 November 1963 about the events of 22 November 1963, a copy of which is archived at www.assassinationscience.com/ce-1024-clint-hill.pdf he reports, “As I lay over the top of the back seat I noticed a portion of the President’s head on the right rear side was missing and he was bleed profusel[y]. Part of his brain was gone. I saw a part of his skull with hair on it “, which is consistent with frame 374 but not with frames 313-316. Indeed, since this record was Warren Commission Exhibit CE-1024, at least some of its members and staff had to have been aware of observations of the first person to observe the head wound, apart from Jackie herself. But even THE KENNEDY DETAIL (2010) includes this sentence, "And slumped across the seat, President Kennedy lay unmoving, a bloody, gaping, fist-sized hole clearly visible in the back of his head" (THE KENNEDY DETAIL, p. 217), an observation of enormous significance in relation to the autopsy photographs and X-rays as well as  to the authenticity of the Zapruder film.

As I have observed, Doug Horne, INSIDE THE ARRB, Vol. IV (2009), has reported that a new group of Hollywood experts studying the film has found that, in frames 313-316, the blow-out to the back of the head was (crudely) painted over in black. Their finding complements the earlier report by Roderick Ryan, an expert in special effects, that the “blob” of brains and blood that bulges out to the right/front had also been painted in, as Noel Twyman, BLOODY TREASON (1997), explained. (Roderick Ryan would receive the Academy Award for his contributions to cinematography in 2000.) Since the blow-out is visible in frame 374 but not visible in frames 313-316, we have yet another proof of the film has been altered. But these observations also extend to the autopsy photographs and X-rays.  Here, for example, are drawings and photographs of the back of the head, which were assumed to be authentic by the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) when it reinvestigated the case in 1977-78:


Image and video hosting by TinyPic


There are several important features of these images. One of the most stunning is that when the two pathologists who had conducted the autopsy at Bethesda Naval Hospital testified to the HSCA about the location of the alleged entry wound to the back of his head, they raised its location by four inches from above and to the right of the EOP (external occipital protuberance) to the crown of the head (or “cowlick”), an astounding variation from their autopsy report. Notice, too, that while the alleged entry wound is visible in the diagram on the right, it is not visible in the photograph on the left.  Most important, however, is that, as in the case of the Zapruder frames 313-316, the blow out to the back of the head at the right rear, which Clint so vividly described, is missing.  The skull flap is present, but the defect is not. Based upon his observations—he has been consistent about all this for more than forty years—this diagram and photograph, even apart from the EOP entry wound, have been faked.

The Witnesses and the X-rays

Clint Hill, moreover, was hardly the only witness to have reported that the President had an enormous blow-out to the right rear of his head.  More than forty witnesses from Dealey Plaza, Parkland Hospital, and even Bethsda reported a blow out to the back of his head, including Beverly Oliver, Phillip Willis, Marilyn Willis, Ed Hoffman, Dr. Robert McClellan, Dr. Paul Peters, Dr. Kenneth Salyer, Dr. Charles Carrico, Dr. Richard Dulaney, Dr. Charles Crenshaw, Dr. Ronald Jones, Nurse Audrey Bell, Justice of the Peace Theran Ward, ambulance driver Aubrey Rike, FBI Agent Frank O’Neill, as well as Bethesda Naval medical technicians Jerrol Custer, Paul O’Connor and Floyd Reebe, as Robert Groden, THE KILLING OF A PRESIDENT (1994), pp. 86-88, has recorded, and as Gary Aguilar, M.D., has confirmed (MURDER 2000), pp. 175-217. 


Image and video hosting by TinyPic
The highly consistent and mutually reinforcing testimony of all these eyewitnesses— including the physicians who were present in Trauma Room #1 when JFK’s moribund body was brought to Parkland Hospital and even Special Agents of the FBI who were present to observe the conduct or the autopsy at Bethesda Naval Hospital—were all discounted on the basis of the claim that the autopsy X-rays did not show any such blow-out.  This inconsistency would not be resolved until late 1992, when David W. Mantik, M.D. Ph.D., would enter the National Archives to study the X-rays and in the process transform our understanding of the assassination and the cover-up.  An M.D. with board certification in radiation oncology, which is the treatment of cancer using radiation therapy because of which he is an expert in the interpretation of X-rays, he drew on his background as a Ph.D. in physics and applied a simple technique known as “optical densitometry”, which enabled him—by measuring the amount of light that passes through an X-ray to determine the relative density of objects whose exposure to radiation had created the image—to discover that lateral cranial X-ray (of the skull taken from the side) had been altered by imposing a kind of patch over the blow out. Here we can see the “official” X-ray on the left and the patch (“Area P”) on the right, which bears a striking correspondence in size and shape to the image in Frame 374:


Image and video hosting by TinyPic

David’s discoveries and those of Robert B. Livingston, M.D., a world authority on the human brain and an expert on wound ballistics, were the centerpiece of my first of three books on the death of JFK, ASSASSINATION SCIENCE (1998), where I brought together experts on different aspects of the case. Livingston compared the multiple, consistent reports of qualified and experienced physicians at Parkland Hospital with the diagrams and photographs of the brain in the National Archives. The physicians reported both cerebral and cerebellar tissue extruding from the blow out, while the diagrams and photographs—the brain itself is missing—show a virtually undamaged brain with a complete cerebellum.  You or I might have drawn the same conclusions, but it carries more weight when it’s the finding of a world authority on the brain. For those who may not have access to the book, a summary of our findings as well as of the shooting sequence is archived “Dealey Plaza Revisited: What Happened to JFK?”

“Ike” Altgens and Clint Hill

In his comprehensive study of the Zapruder film in HOAX (2003), Costella discusses the ambiguity that Altgens has displayed regarding the photos he allegedly took in Dealey Plaza on 22 November 1963.  The identity of the person who took them was important in part because an Oswald look-alike (allegedly Billy Lovelady) can be seen in the photo with which this article begins—published in The Saturday Evening Post following the assassination. So the name of the photographer was widely sought but difficult to come by. Even J. Edgar Hoover skirted the issue. It would not be until 24 May 1964 he was identified by name and then questions arose of why neither the FBI nor the Warren Commission had interviewed him.  While his office at the Associated Press was a short walk away from the FBI in Dallas, the FBI only interviewed him on 2 June 1964 and produced a rather garbled report of his actions that day. As Richard Trask, PICTURES OF THE PAIN (1994), reports, Altgens himself would subsequently deny that he had taken all of the photos that had been attributed to him.  And that, no doubt, is for a very good reason.  No one can have taken a photo that was faked.

Costella is certainly right about the importance of Clint Hill’s book-signing statement in comparison with the book itself, which is rather sketchy and vague relative to the sequence of events of greatest interest here. The video captures more detail and his demeanor in relating his extraordinary experiences. But even THE KENNEDY DETAIL (2010) includes this sentence, stunning in simplicity but pregnant in ramifications:

And slumped across the seat, President Kennedy lay unmoving, a bloody, gaping, fist-sized hole clearly visible in the back of his head. (THE KENNEDY DETAIL, p. 217)

After all, if JFK had a fist-sized hole clearly visible in the back of his head, it follows that (1) the eyewitnesses were right about its location, (2) the HSCA photograph and diagram are fake, (3) the autopsy X-rays were altered, and (4) Zapuder frames that don’t show it when they should were changed, precisely as we have found above.  In fact, Clint Hill was far from the only expert who described that wound as “fist-sized”.  When I edited ASSASSINATION SCIENCE (1998), I invited Charles Crenshaw, M.D., to contribute a chapter and asked him to diagram the wounds as he had witnessed them at Parkland Hospital, where he was the last physician to observe them before he closed JFK’s eyelids as he was being wrapped in sheets and placed in the casket:



Image and video hosting by TinyPic













Charles told me that this defect was the size of a baseball or else the size of your fist when you double it up. The best witnesses and the best studies thus converge on the conclusion that strenuous efforts were made to conceal the true causes of the death of JFK from the American people. For nearly fifty years, Clint has maintained that he pushed Jackie down into her seat and observed the blow out to the head in his report of 22 November 1963, 


in this 1975 interview, 


and in this 1995 interview, where he describes it all in detail, and not just once but twice:


He and Jerry Blaine have thereby contributed to the resolution of one of the most contentious questions in the history of assassination research with corroborating proof the Zapruder film was altered.

Disturbing Reflections

Charles gave more than one interview in which he explained that the bullet that had blown out the back of JFK’s head had entered at the right temple. He suggested that it had taken a tangential trajectory and blown out the back of his skull, whereas Bob Livingston believed that shock waves created by the explosion of the frangible bullet had caused his brains to be blown out the back of his skull, which had already been weakened by the shot that entered the back of his head near the EOP.  If Crenshaw was mistaken in detail about the trajectory, he was right that the autopsy photos he was being shown did not resemble the wounds that he had observed, which meant that there had been alteration of the evidence—either by faking photos and films or by the physical alteration of the wounds—both of which appear to have taken place.

Toward the end of this book, which is unintentionally revealing, Blaine relates the story of an exchange between Clint Hill and Mike Wallace for a planned “60 Minutes” segment.  Mike asked Clint if he had any doubt that Oswald was the lone gunman, to which Clint replied, “There were only three shots,” Clint shrugged. “And it was one gun. Three shots.” (THE KENNEDY DETAIL, p. 387)  What troubles me is that, given his consistent description of the blow-out to the back of the head, it ought to have been obvious that that shot had been fired from the right front.  While there was an entry wound in the vicinity of the EOP, as Mantik explains in his masterful synthesis of the medical evidence in MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000), the massive, gaping wound that Clint observed was clearly fired from another location by someone else.

And that is not the only anomaly in Clint’s testimony as it is reported in the pages of this book.  In the most puzzling passage of them all, Blaine reports’ “The Zapruder film was being used for Secret Service training and sometimes Clint was called on to comment” (THE KENNEDY DETAIL, p. 375).  Given Clint’s consistent depiction of the actions he took which are inconsistent with the extant film, I am taken aback by the ghoulish prospect that the Secret Service may be using the authentic film, while the public has only the fake. Surely Clint would have been unable to miss the difference between his actions as he lived them and those depicted in the fabricated film. But perhaps even this extraordinary possibility cannot be ruled out.  It might also help to explain Clint’s consistency in his depiction of the actions he took now nearly 50 years ago, if his memory has been periodically refreshed by seeing the original over again.

So Clint’s descriptions and observations both have significant ramifications for the autopsy X-rays, photos and the Zapruder film.  Notice, for example, that the Mafia could not have altered X-rays under the control of medical officers of the US Navy, agents of the Secret Service, or the president’s personal physician. Neither pro- nor anti-Castro Cubans could have substituted another brain for that of JFK. And even if the Soviets had the capacity to fabricate movies comparable to that of the CIA and Hollywood, it would have been unable to get its hands on the Zapruder film. JFK had antagonized many of the most powerful individuals and groups in the USA, as James Douglass, JFK and the Unspeakable (2008), and Phillip Nelson, LBJ: The Mastermind of JFK's Assassination (2010) have explained. We now have another piece of a puzzle that implicates officials at the highest levels of the American government as complicit in an elaborate cover-up that has to have been planned in detail and in advance of the commission of the crime.  It is long past time the truth be known to the public.

Special thanks to John Costella and to David Mantik for their comments and suggestions.


Jim Fetzer [send him mail], a former Marine Corps officer who earned his Ph.D. in the history and the philosophy of science, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the Duluth campus of the University of Minnesota. He co-edits assassinationresearch.com with John Costella. He is the editor of The Place of Probability in Science.

40 comments:

  1. Very good summary of the evidence. It makes me quite sad that every generation has to "prove" who killed Kennedy. French intelligence were the first to crack the case in 1965. They gave their evidence to New Orleans Jim Garrison, who corroborated it by interviewing every living witness he could subpoena, including one of the gunmen. Then in 1978 the House Committee on Assassinations ascertained Oswald COULDN'T have acted alone (and yet there are still people like Clint Hill out there claiming Oswald was the lone assassin!). Then Oliver Stone had to prove it all over again with his 1991 film JFK.

    In my recent memoir, THE MOST REVOLUTIONARY ACT: MEMOIR OF AN AMERICAN REFUGEE (www.stuartbramhall.com), I write about my own close encounter with US intelligence after making the acquaintance of a JFK assassination witness in 1984. I currently live in exile in New Zealand.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jim,

    It is with mixed feelings that I come away from your account. It is truly well written and impeccably reasoned, yet haunting--since even its most basic implication is highly disturbing. But, even though the emotional price paid for knowing the truth is sometimes costly, knowing the truth is nevertheless cheap at twice the price.

    The mountain of evidence now available to the public, and certainly available to the media, is more than sufficient to prove the case for conspiracy several hundred times over. Still, deception persists and the hood-winking of the American public remains the order of the day.

    The question is, of course, "Why?" - The motivation for such malfeasance can no longer be reasonably assumed to be due to the perpetrators of a 47 year old crime still attempting to "get away with it" -- as the vast majority of those directly involved in its commission DID get away with it long ago and many, if not most, of them are deceased! Therefore, the ongoing cover-up must be related to "getting away with something" currently. And what is that "thing" that is so important to keep hidden from the light? What is it that would be revealed to the American citizen and to citizens around the world by this truth coming out?

    To paraphrase L Fletcher Prouty as "Man X" in the movie JFK: "Why was Kennedy killed? Who benefitted? Who has the power to cover it up?"

    I think the answer to those questions are still of paramount importance today. I further believe the answers are not nearly as illusive as many people have been brain-washed into believing. Perhaps the main issue for those continuing to obstruct justice has more to do with controlling the collective consciousness of the population than it has to do with impunity for the commission of a past crime.

    If ever an admission is forthcoming as to the true nature of the events of November 22, 1963 in Dallas it is feared that a "revolution" of MIND will take place. Such a revolution in thinking will free the American people from the bonds of deception and restore to them a government of, by and for WE THE PEOPLE. Such knowledge is seen as dangerous not only for its catalytic effect, but also for the cathartic ramifications it would have on the establishment.

    We the people would very likely clean house...and THAT is something to be feared by those in power.

    Greg Burnham

    ReplyDelete
  3. Here's a nice, brief but important, interview with David Mantik on faking of the HSCA photograph and diagram related to "Who's telling the truth":

    JFK--Autopsy Photo Forgery
    http://vodpod.com/watch/167861-jfk-autopsy-photo-forgery

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's time to exhume JFK'S body. I am stunned that this procedure did not take place years ago. With today's forensics, etc etc, we would know how many shots, from which direction the bullets came, and if the skull was altered in any way. Obviously, there are still those in power that don't want the body exhumed. And don't tell me the Kennedy family is preventing it. If there is an order given to exhume, there is nothing the Kennedy family can do. I mean come on, they exhumed Oswald in 1981 ...this is the President for goodness sake. Somone has to have authority to order exhumation of JFK.

    ReplyDelete
  5. To solve the controversy one should first know
    at what exact time on Friday November 22, 1963 John F. Kennedy was shot through the head. According the wikipedia experts this was at 12:30h, half an hour past midday.

    next one should return to daily plaza, again on November 22, and at 12:30h create some
    footage from the location of the Zapruder film and also
    take some pictures at the places where Altgens had been taking his pictures. Make sure its a sunny day as was the case during the massacre, so that good visible shadows are recorded.

    Next compare your results with the Zapruder movie and the Altgens pictures, and you will find that there is something very very wrong. The shadows inside the Zapruder movie and the Altgens picture don't match with the shadows visible at 12:30, the time of the killing.

    It could very well have been the case that both the Zapruder and the Altgens picture have been created by secret service later on the day, as part of a well orchestrated white wash. Some have realized years later, and told in radio interviews that ALL people present that day at noon at Daily Plaza were part of the plot!

    ReplyDelete
  6. James,

    This was a very thoughtful and good read. But, respectfully, I believe Mr. Hill. I read the book and had him on my radio talk show for 45 minutes. I came away from the book and speaking with him - not to mention having visited and revisited numerous sites dismissing / discrediting him and those who fall with his view - that it is as he stated.

    Sincerely,
    Christopher

    ReplyDelete
  7. Of course! I believe him, too. This is only the latest proof we have that the home movies of the assassination were extensively revised while they were in the control of the government. See "US Government Official: JFK Cover-Up, Film Fabrication" for more. I would have hoped that it was obvious that Clint is right and the film faked.

    ReplyDelete
  8. At 41:20 of the video from the book store, Gerald Blaine seems to contradict the single bullet theory. He says that "...the driver of the follow up car...saw all three bullets find their mark, on the president, on governor Connelly, and the fatal shot..."

    ReplyDelete
  9. Clint Hill is a liar! Check out Charles Crenshaw's note's from Trauma Room 1 where he wast the first to try to save the President. He knew what the hell an entrance wound and an ext wound looked like. Under Texas law in 1963 any time there was a homicide there had to be an autopsy IN TEXAS. The body WAS altered before the autopsy photos were taken at Bethesda. The shot's came from the front and one of these days the truth will come out and show the world what liars everyone from Chris Matthews to Gerald Ford to LBJ were.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Egad! I knew Chuck. Clint Hill has been consistent for nearly 50 years about observing a fist-sized blow-out at the back of his head. I have no idea why you would impugn his integrity. It seems to me that his testimony, which also demonstrates that the Zapruder film has been massively revised, is quite powerful and important.

      Delete
  10. Professional hit team took him out from the grassy knoll and disappeared. But then why all the oswald and ruby cover bullsh*t?? as with all conspiracy theories I wonder why complicate a clean plan with shady and unreliable characters.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I have seen many programs in which a figure is discovered in grainy footage that I could see nothing of. Now why cannot we do this with the film of his assassination. There should be ways to enhance the hell out of it. Or is there a desire NOT TOO.

    This bothers me I know they can do better and show all the defects or actual wounds...Where is Hollywood on this? Or am I naive?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Been to the plaza myself. EZ shot from the the 6th floor of the TSBD. Every credible expert has supported the official version put forth in the Warren Report. To place blaim on innocent men of honor is a sin that will have to be answered to God.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a croc the,snipers nest is contamenated straight away no SS stops looks around whilst under fire ,mcCloy and dulles explain what that commision was about Jim Fetzer comes threw everytime ,Hill did a noble gesture that day but blane calling JFK wreckless is treasonous lies the SS protect him Blane was a lowly agent after making some judas silver JFK.was let down that day go do your rearch before you start pipeing on about men of honor

      Delete
  13. Mr Fetzer:

    I have come to believe that the slowing down of the Kennedy limo to a stop, or perhaps almost a stop, and the alteration of the Zapruder film in several ways at the instance of the head shot that blew out the back of his head is for a very good reason.
    It masks the actions of the driver Greer, who, when his movemments in time are overlayed with Muchmore and Nix, clearly implicate him as shooting JFK over his right shoulder into Jfk's temple, via his left hand resting on his right shoulder.
    The slowing down to perhaps a stop of the car made this much easier to pull off, it also squares with several people stating they thought the secret service was " firing back" at the killer.
    This evidence is so compelling i have come to believe that those who ignore it arent interested in actually getting at the truth, but are more interested in keeping the killing " open" to ideas.In short, i consider it as almost a litmus test. It proves govt complicity.
    People often forget that the "Oswald rifle" isnt actually a high powered rifle by definition, its more of a carbine and lower/medium powered.
    As Mantik has hinted at, perhaps the bullet used was a mercury or some other exotic round to do the damage to the back of the skull that it indeed did.
    I think Greer turning around several times kept track of the state of JFK from an "is he dead yet" perspective, and Greer merely himself made sure.
    The fabrication of the Zapruder film at 313ish is more to do with Greer than it is the blowout, but of course both are important.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is no end to those who believe that Greer shot JFK. But Greer was to his right/front and, if Greer had shot JFK, his brains would have bee blown out to the right/rear, when they were instead blown out to the left/rear (all viewing from the back of the limo forward).

      As a Marine Corps officer, I qualified with a .45 four years in a row. It is a massive bullet and there would have been no possible way that a bullet fired by Greer at JFK would not have blown his brains out the right/rear. It didn't have that effect; therefore, Greer did not shoot JFK.

      Delete
    2. Mr Fetzer, I too am very familiar with firearms, most of my life.However to put the blast of brain matter before other evidence against Greer such as his actions on the day as compared to what he should have done, his conduct after the crime and some of what he had to say;conduct at and after the hospital;his lies at Warren , but most importantly comaparison between the Z and Nix film, the latter of which clearly identify him as the assassin-if you dismiss all of this then sadly you must be demoted to the ranks of "gatekeeper".
      Remember ancient Rome and it's Emperors "Quis custodiest ipsos custodies"

      Delete
    3. Good. If you are familiar with firearms, then you should know that a bullet is going to continue in a straight line unless it is deflected by something more obdurate than it.

      He was to JFK's right/front; a shot from that location would have come out to the right/rear. There is nothing subjective about it. This is a matter of physics.

      In addition, we can account for all of the wounds without it. See "What happened to JFK--and why it matters today", for more on the shooters and the shot sequence.

      Greer was profoundly involved in the assassination. Once the limo turned the corner, he was the only person who could have saved him--by stepping on the accelerator!

      I have done so much to expose what happened to JFK that it never ceases to amaze me when someone like you implies that I am covering-up because I disagree with them!

      I suggest that you give the physics of the case just a little more thought. In my opinion, you are displaying incredibly weak powers of reasoning.

      Delete
    4. I' m glad you talk about physics.You mention bullet will be deflected by something more "obdurate"- I did read natural philosophy to a fairly high level and that statement you made is incorrect- high velocity light calibre rounds can be deflected by a piece of paper eg a target.Forensically we don't know the round used in his head.I don't know whether bullet deflected by his cranium, or whether wind deflected the spray.What really concerns me is your complete lack of acknowledgement of what is seen in Nix and the comparison with the Z film.Do you have anything to say in this regard ??

      Delete
    5. Mr Fetzer, have a look at the winds that day in Dealey Plaza.Marion Baker reported strong winds from the north-precisely the direction they would have to be to throw matter to the rear left.So much for your understanding of physics and your proclamation to be familiar with it. I don't care whether you print or not-just as long as you know that I now know you are indeed a gatekeeper-no more, no less.

      Delete
    6. I post this because it is a sterling example of the stupidity of some pseudo-students of the assassination of JFK. The idea that wind could make a difference to the trajectory of a shot from the front seat to the rear is mind-boggling.

      His brains were BLOWN OUT with SUCH FORCE that Officer Hargis THOUGHT HE HAD BEEN SHOT. This man is a moron. How much would I have to do to prove the government's complicity in the death of our 35th president?

      Delete
    7. I'm with you, Jim. I'm also from Kennedy-territory- Massachusetts. I was five when that happened, and because of that, being so close to where the Kennedys' lived, we were sent home from school for lunch that day, and had the rest of the day off. I remember my grandmother sobbing. I remember all the sadness on t. v. and throughout the neighborhood for a very long time afterward. I remember that day as if it were yesterday. My mother had a miscarriage when she heard and saw the news about her beloved President. On November 22, 1963, this world lost a great leader. I don't care what anyone says. He was MURDERED. And many people know the truth- the spevcifics- the details. Whenever a government is involved in something, anything, the details are always distorted to the public. that's to keep us where they want us- under their thumbs. Someday, the truth will be told.

      Delete
  14. You people must be sick and demented to even be discussing this almost 50 years after it happened. I was here, in Dallas, at the time of the assassination. I knew physicians at Parkland who worked on Kennedy and Connelly.

    There was no conspiracy. Lee Harvey Oswald shot Kennedy. Jack Ruby shot Oswald. End of discussion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. washingtondeathcultJune 4, 2013 at 5:44 PM

      Yeah, end YOUR participation in this discussion, as you obviously have nothing of ANY value to contribute.

      Delete
    2. Yeah and George W. Bush was a war hero

      Delete
    3. Says you...
      Can you prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt???

      Delete
  15. If there was no conspiracy, Ruby would not have shot Oswald. Get your head out of the sand you lone nutter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous above says: "If there was no conspiracy, Ruby would not have shot Oswald..." I would more-or-less agree. The official version requires that you believe that essentially two lone nuts are acting completely independently of one another in the same city (Dallas) & astonishingly within just 48 hrs. of each other. Theoretically this may be possible, but statistically it's very unlikely.

      I recall seeing Dallas TV news coverage of the police station in the two days following the assassination. The reporter had gotten to know a number of officers who were already well acquainted with Ruby (the police had raided his clubs). After Oswald's convenient shooting, not one of the police officers told the reporter that they had thought that Ruby had acted purely out of patriotism, but rather, that he had killed Oswald in order to silence him. Remember this is long before conspiracy books started to be published on the subject. Regards, George, Canada

      Delete
  16. In the Altgens pic have you noticed that agent Warren W Taylor seems to be holding an M34 grenade?-if so any idea of the significance?

    ReplyDelete
  17. In his WC testimony, Dr Shaw, CONNALLY'S OP SURGEON, STATES C's entry wound size is elliptical 5/8" NOT 1 1/4". THIS 1 1/4" LIE, STARTED BY JOHN LATIMER, AND OTHERS INCLUDING MYERS (GO TO HIS WEBSITE) IS NEEDED TO SUPPORT TUMBLING BULLET THEORY FOR THEIR BOOKS ANIMATION, ETC.

    Actually reading the WC was, to me, chilling.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Professor Fetzer, it was myself who made the previous commnent re the grenade above.I would refer you to motorcycle officer Starvis Ellis.
    Quote:-
    On August 5, 1978, the committee received information from former Dallas
    policeman Starvis Ellis that Ellis had also seen a missile hit the ground in the
    area of the motorcade at the time of the assassination. Ellis said he rode on a
    motorcycle alongside the first car in the motorcade, approximately 100 to 125
    feet in front of the car carrying President Kennedy.(351) Ellis said that just
    as he started down the hill of Elm Street, he looked back toward President
    Kennedy's car and saw debris come up from the ground at a nearby curb.(352)
    Ellis thought it was a fragment grenade.

    Professor Fetzer, this was indeed what I've been looking for and itt's why Warren W Taylor is seen with what is clearly a grenade.
    I have discovered this for myself-I don't think I'm mistaken.However, I don't expect to be taken seriously-but only because I'm probably correct.
    Look at Altgens yourself-Look at Taylor-what has he in his hand? -an M34 Grenade or similar!

    ReplyDelete
  19. I believe The Govt or SS are covering up but with Bobby Kennedy's association with The Govt wouldn't he or even Jackie have got wind of this and wanted it out in the open and revealed. Or... do you think the surviving Kennedy's agreed to keep the truth hidden from the public?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is a common question: "Why wouldn't Bobby Kennedy have investigated it--after all, he was Attorney General?" Two reasons, Bobby's power was derived to a large measure from his brother Jack when he was President, & now that he was dead, Bobby's power was reduced. Also, RFK's own son has stated that his father told him privately that he believed that there was a conspiracy, possibly involving rogue CIA agents, but that opening up that can of worms would distract from the civil rights debate going on at the time. Jackie, meanwhile, was beginning to believe that that the U.S. was becoming too dangerous a place to raise her kids--stating "They kill Kennedys there." I hope this clarifies some things. Thanks, George, Sudbury

      Delete
  20. Also do you really think Greer would have shot JFK in front of the crowd, and if so of all the witnesses I don't see any referral to them making statements to that effect.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Funny how JFK, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Bobby Kennedy were ALL murdered... Anyone ever think about why those three??? Why then??? Hmmm. let's see... maybe CIVIL RIGHTS????????? Maybe??????? The three men were connected.The three men were assassinated. Around the same time as the Civil Rights Movement was revving into full-swing. Anyone get what I'm saying here???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Regarding your query above: Why were JFK, RFK, & MLK murdered? One of the common threads which binds all three assassinations together is "Vietnam." JFK was planning to pull out all the U.S. advisers out of 'Nam by '65, MLK had started to break ranks with the Johnson Administration a year earlier & was voicing vehemently his opposition to the war, & of all the candidates in the '68 presidential election, Bobby Kennedy was planning on pulling out all U.S. troops the quickest.

      Just briefly I'd like to say that the evidence is overwhelming that the Z-film has been significantly altered, & Fetzer, Costella et al. should be commended for having done painstaking brilliant work. The best thing now is for the "authentic" film to be released to the public (WikiLeaks?).

      I've always felt that the eyewitness accounts were too quickly dismissed by supporters of the official version. Take the large # of witnesses in Dealy Plaza who reported smelling gun powder (which persisted even after the shooting was over). How would this be possible if Oswald were the lone shooter (& no one fired back) if Oswald were clearly situated in a downwind position relative to all the witnesses? Gunpowder smell does not travel upwind & I seriously doubt that witnesses (such as experienced policemen) would confuse limousine exhaust fumes for gun powder.. Regards, George, Canada

      Delete
  22. The above comment touches on something very important: it is what Lance de Haven Smith refers to in Conspiracy Theory in America that we need to look at the " bigger picture" as well as the details. There were multiple assassinations in a period of a few short years: JFK, RFK, MLK, Malcolm X and Fred Hampton. All off them served the same set of narrow but powerful interests.
    Subsequently there has been Iran-Contra and of course 9/11 again serving the same MIC and financial interests. It is through connecting theses dots that we truly understand what is going on.
    There is a continuity of purpose and personnel in the operations of the "deep state" that goes back to WWII and beyond-case in point, the family Bush!
    It is an operation whose sophistication makes Hitler seem, well Bush league.
    It is why I'm unabashedly a "conspiracy theorist."

    ReplyDelete
  23. "Clint Hill was not the only agent to attempt to respond after shots rang out. Secret Service agent John Ready, who was on the right running board whereas Clint was on the left, began to respond but was called back by Emory Roberts, Agent in Charge of the Presidential Protection Detail. This is stunning in itself, but is only one of more than fifteen indications that the Secret Service set up JFK for the hit, which include that two agents were left behind at Love Field, that the vehicles were in the wrong order, that the 112th Military Intelligence Unit was ordered to “stand down” rather than provide protection throughout the city, and that the motorcycle escort was reduced to four, who were instructed not to ride forward the rear wheels. Open windows were not covered and the crowd was allowed to spill out into the street."

    This is a good summary, Dr. Fetzer! Keep up the good work.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I just finished Mr. Hill's second book. Over the years I have read, re-read, read and re-read I think just about everything there is.
    I too am from Massachusetts and was 7 years old on that fateful day. I remember much because of watching how the adults acted, the black & white TV etc. Anyone from that day can remember, it was one of those unforgetable moments.
    Over the years I have gone back and forth but honestly, I think Jackie and others knew. I just can not figure out the reason that it would never be revealed to the American people.
    I remember reading somewhere that the Kennedy family has vaults, some that are not to be opened until a certain year. Like the outfit she was wearing can not be shown until 2000 something, I know I will not be around when it happens, forgot the exact date. I think when this whole complete generation is gone that is when the truth will be revealed. Until then this will go back and forth as it is now.

    ReplyDelete
  25. In my humble opinion it was friendly fire from SS Agent Hickey. Cover-up, certainly. Conspiracy, no. A tragic chain of events set off by Oswald.

    I've been reading and studying this horrible chapter in American history for years. It's the first theory that has ever made complete sense for me.

    For me, I can let it go. It seems there are more pressing matters at hand.

    In the grand scheme of things, assassination is as old as dirt. There is nothing new here except the hope that we can be better, and most days we fall woefully short of the mark.

    A fascinating discussion. Thanks for letting put my two cents worth in...

    Cheers



    ReplyDelete