28-03-2013, 09:14 AM
John Armstrong, Harvey, Lee and Tippit, on ctka.net is fascinating and feeds into James Douglass' JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters account.
http://www.ctka.net/pr198-jfk.html
Clearly Tippit was anxious to find Oswald, whether to kill him or rescue him.
There was the unit in front of Beckley honking--just stunning, but the rodeo clowns of the Commission from Rankin to Liebeler to Specter had no interest.
Jim DiEugenio has the best defense brief for Oswald in this charge. Here's a thorough review of the evidence:
http://www.ctka.net/2009/ruby_mack_2.html
Section I above is 1768 words exonerating Oswald. Case Closed. Hahahahaha--and yet, there are some so blind they will not even use their real names.
Regarding the three casket Monte, BE 1980 was pretty mysterious, but there's something patently clear in the x-ray tech seeing the official party arrive with the bronze ceremonial casket when he's running x-ray prints up to the lab and the SS minder stops him at the mezzanine.
To say there wasn't a shuffle because some versions are outre or vaudevillian doesn't mean that Penn and Teller and David Copperfield and Chris Angel can't create illusions.
There is a telling variance between Perry, Crenshaw et al regarding a one and a half centimeter incision through an obvious entrance wound in the throat and the garish gash in the stare of death photo. The wound was preserved pristine, they said, not ripped open like some frantic search for the metal fragments Custer saw in the missing C-3/4 x-ray:
[a note on Horne: he will either do another edition which is edited and indexed and organized and not tediously repetitive or he will slide into oblivion]
[FONT=&]Douglas Horne, Inside the Assassinations Record Review Board, Volume II, Chapter Five: The Autopsy X-Rays, pages 530-2:[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer Examines the X-Rays of the Body[/FONT]
[FONT=&]The noteworthy highlights of Custer's review of the x-rays of the body was Jeremy's attempt to see whether Custer could identify metal fragments near any of the cervical vertebrae, which Custer had mentioned earlier in the deposition.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Jeremy showed Custer x-ray no. 9, a view of the chest prior to removal of the lungs, and the exchange went as follows:[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Previously, you referred to there being metal fragments in the cervical area. Are you able to identify any metal fragments in this x-ray?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Not in this film.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Does this film include a view or an exposure that would have included such metal fragments?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: No sir.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Where would the metal fragments be located?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Further up in there. This region.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Can youand you're pointing to?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Up into the, I'd say, C3/C4 region.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Jeremy asked Custer to review x-rays no. 8 and 10, of the right shoulder and chest, and left shoulder and chest, respectivelyboth are images following the removal of the heart and lungs. Custer could not identify metal fragments in either x-ray.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Later, Jeremy asked Custer the following questions:[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Now, you had raised, previously in the deposition. . .the possibility of some metal fragments in the C3/C4 range.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: I noticed I didn't see that.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: You didn't see any x-rays that would be inthat would include the C3/C4 area?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: No sir.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Are you certain that you took x-rays that included theincluded C3 and C4?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Yes, sir. Absolutely.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: How many x-rays did you take that would have included that?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Just one. And that was all that was necessary, because it showedright there.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: And what, as best you recall, did it show?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: A fragmentation of a shell in and around that circular exitthat area. Let me rephrase that. I don't want to say "exit," because I don't know whether it was exit or entrance. But all I can say, there was bullet fragmentations [sic] around that areathat opening.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Around C3/C4?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Right.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn" And do you recall how many fragments there were?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Not really. There was enough. It was very prevalent.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Did anyone make any observations about metal fragments in the C3/C4 area?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: I did. And I was told to mind my own business. That's where I was shut down again.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: You have, during the course of this deposition, identified three x-rays that you are quite certain that you took, but don't appear in this collection. Are there any others that you can identify as not being included?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: That's the only three that come to my mind right now; the two tangential views, and the A-P cervical spine.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Okay.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Can I add something to that?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Sure.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: In my own opinion, I do believe, basically, the reason why they are not here is because they showed massive amounts of bullet fragments.[/FONT]
http://www.ctka.net/pr198-jfk.html
Clearly Tippit was anxious to find Oswald, whether to kill him or rescue him.
There was the unit in front of Beckley honking--just stunning, but the rodeo clowns of the Commission from Rankin to Liebeler to Specter had no interest.
Jim DiEugenio has the best defense brief for Oswald in this charge. Here's a thorough review of the evidence:
http://www.ctka.net/2009/ruby_mack_2.html
Section I above is 1768 words exonerating Oswald. Case Closed. Hahahahaha--and yet, there are some so blind they will not even use their real names.
Regarding the three casket Monte, BE 1980 was pretty mysterious, but there's something patently clear in the x-ray tech seeing the official party arrive with the bronze ceremonial casket when he's running x-ray prints up to the lab and the SS minder stops him at the mezzanine.
To say there wasn't a shuffle because some versions are outre or vaudevillian doesn't mean that Penn and Teller and David Copperfield and Chris Angel can't create illusions.
There is a telling variance between Perry, Crenshaw et al regarding a one and a half centimeter incision through an obvious entrance wound in the throat and the garish gash in the stare of death photo. The wound was preserved pristine, they said, not ripped open like some frantic search for the metal fragments Custer saw in the missing C-3/4 x-ray:
[a note on Horne: he will either do another edition which is edited and indexed and organized and not tediously repetitive or he will slide into oblivion]
[FONT=&]Douglas Horne, Inside the Assassinations Record Review Board, Volume II, Chapter Five: The Autopsy X-Rays, pages 530-2:[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer Examines the X-Rays of the Body[/FONT]
[FONT=&]The noteworthy highlights of Custer's review of the x-rays of the body was Jeremy's attempt to see whether Custer could identify metal fragments near any of the cervical vertebrae, which Custer had mentioned earlier in the deposition.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Jeremy showed Custer x-ray no. 9, a view of the chest prior to removal of the lungs, and the exchange went as follows:[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Previously, you referred to there being metal fragments in the cervical area. Are you able to identify any metal fragments in this x-ray?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Not in this film.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Does this film include a view or an exposure that would have included such metal fragments?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: No sir.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Where would the metal fragments be located?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Further up in there. This region.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Can youand you're pointing to?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Up into the, I'd say, C3/C4 region.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Jeremy asked Custer to review x-rays no. 8 and 10, of the right shoulder and chest, and left shoulder and chest, respectivelyboth are images following the removal of the heart and lungs. Custer could not identify metal fragments in either x-ray.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Later, Jeremy asked Custer the following questions:[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Now, you had raised, previously in the deposition. . .the possibility of some metal fragments in the C3/C4 range.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: I noticed I didn't see that.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: You didn't see any x-rays that would be inthat would include the C3/C4 area?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: No sir.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Are you certain that you took x-rays that included theincluded C3 and C4?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Yes, sir. Absolutely.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: How many x-rays did you take that would have included that?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Just one. And that was all that was necessary, because it showedright there.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: And what, as best you recall, did it show?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: A fragmentation of a shell in and around that circular exitthat area. Let me rephrase that. I don't want to say "exit," because I don't know whether it was exit or entrance. But all I can say, there was bullet fragmentations [sic] around that areathat opening.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Around C3/C4?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Right.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn" And do you recall how many fragments there were?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Not really. There was enough. It was very prevalent.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Did anyone make any observations about metal fragments in the C3/C4 area?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: I did. And I was told to mind my own business. That's where I was shut down again.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: You have, during the course of this deposition, identified three x-rays that you are quite certain that you took, but don't appear in this collection. Are there any others that you can identify as not being included?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: That's the only three that come to my mind right now; the two tangential views, and the A-P cervical spine.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Okay.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: Can I add something to that?[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Gunn: Sure.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Custer: In my own opinion, I do believe, basically, the reason why they are not here is because they showed massive amounts of bullet fragments.[/FONT]