Jan, your examples are dramatic, enormous, obtrusive-intrusive.
Charles, your technology public-military/intelligence is very pertinent.
Reading now of the U-2 in use over Cuba and the pole, Anderson downed by two SAMs, the air-sampling straying over Soviet Union, pursued by six MiGs--yet the prototype was operative ten years earlier--and it was CIA.
Our friend reported his people reconnoitering a Washington DC church to protest LBJ in attendance, met by a suit on the stone stairs inquiring the time--who took the protestor-scout's photo with a watch camera.
Oswald's Minox (like Nagell's) too telling to leave in the DPD inventory.
Pitzer might've used something not publicly known, but the cameras which were publicy known were room-filling.
Our wiser brother the ad man reported some food stills taken with a room-sized bellows contraption for unparalleled clarity and appetite-inducing detail.
On similar track might involve any discussion of suppressors--with WerBell anywhere near I would not be bound by arguments of the limitations of the devices of the time.
The oft-repeated phrase is either need-to-know or I-could-tell-you-but-then-I'd-have-to-kill-you.
The body count is not insignificant already; we don't need to rush Pitzer onto the pyre.
Albert Doyle Wrote:So the basic facts stand despite the stubborn resistance. As Allan admits Pitzer most-likely had possession of a film of the pre-autopsy. Dennis David most-likely saw a frontal wound to the temple in this film. Since other photographic evidence from Bethesda was tampered with, and Pitzer's film was not, therefore this is reasonable proof that the plotters were not aware that Pitzer had possession of it. This also makes the unexpected juncture of Pitzer's leaving Bethesda with this film evidence more likely to cause a drastic response in CIA like the one Dan Marvin spoke of. The minor details of the film recording method are irrelevant to the basics of this.
If persons were less interested in bully sport and brow-beating and more interested in pursuit of the facts they would ask is it possible Pitzer filmed the pre-autopsy through the television camera in the autopsy room from the A/V facility? A very reasonable question that does not deserve this unreasonable response.
More classic agent provocateur dissembling from the "Albert Doyle" entity.
A. Reference to "basic facts" that have not been established ("Pitzer's film," the presence of a "television camera in the autopsy room").
B. Demonizing challenges to presentations of non-established basic facts as "stubborn resistance" and "bully sport".
C. Naivete and circular reasoning presented as expertise: Stating without any proof whatsoever that the chimerical "Pitzer's film" was not "tampered with" and then drawing conclusions from these "facts."
D. Attempting to deflect attention from the fatal flaw of "his" analysis by characterizing the most important element of this story -- the chimerical "film's recording method" as a "minor detail."
What makes the methods and agenda of "Albert Doyle" so difficult to recognize as the methods and agenda of an agent provocateur?
I agree about the methodology.
Because Alan mentioned Horne's book and its "pre autopsy" stuff, suddenly we are to forget the whole CCTV fiasco which he would never fess up to or give a source for.
The problem is this: What if you don't buy the Horne-Lifton "pre autopsy" autopsy stuff, with the musical caskets and Kellerman staging a medical examination in advance in record time, and Knudsen shooting a separate set of photos, and O'Donnell seeing those photos--gee whiz, I wonder if the O'Donnell photos from Knudsen are the same as the Pitzer/David ones? Etc etc.
So for anyone to go ahead and build from this base of sand, and then say "Well, the Pitzer story is correct after all" and ignore what Alan said about Pitzer being there being single sourced to a 13 year old kid who is trying to make money off his father's death, I mean, give me a break.
St. John Hunt anyone?
Maybe Judy Baker is next.
The thing is this, who the heck needs Pitzer? What significant advance in the medical evidence does this whole pile of single sourced innudendo do for us? The medical evidence in this case has been taken about as far as it can go. Mantik has proven the x rays were altered. He has advanced a very good case that the x ray film is not an original but a copy. The ARRB and jeremy Gunn got Stringer to admit the photos of Kennedy's brain at NARA are not the photos he took.
The Clark panel raising of the rear skull wound has now given rise to a second Magic Bullet, the likes of which even Larry Sturdivan says is not possible. Through the work of John Nichols and Mantik we know that the back wound did not penetrate all the way through. Gary Aguilar has shown that the HSCA lied about the rear skull wound, 42 people saw this baseball sizes hole in the rear skull. And Mantik's upcoming article will show that the Harper fragment was part of that disappearing hole.
Building on the testimony of Pierre Finck at the Shaw trial, I mean what else does one need to show the autopsy was a joke? You sure don't need the ledgerdemain about Pitzer, when in fact, no one recalls him there that night.
Oh I forgot, there is the 13 year old kind who wants to write a book.
07-02-2013, 07:37 AM (This post was last modified: 08-02-2013, 08:26 PM by Jim Hackett II.)
Quote Mr. Charles Drago:
"When discussing the available technology of a given period in the 19th, 20th, or 21st centuries -- at least -- we must differentiate between publicly available and privately held methods and machines.
An example: We have no way of knowing how long stealth technology has been available to the U.S. armed forces. Reports of mysterious, triangular-shaped flying objects that do not register on radar screens long predate the public unveiling of the stealth fighter and bomber."
A profound point if one thinks about the issue for a moment. And the example is pertinent.
In the mid 1980s when I was fishing a weekend I saw an F-117 flying in the vicinity of Camp Atterbury. (Southern Indiana at that time an INACTIVE base save for Job Corps and Indiana National Guard "exercises").
When I described what I saw about half of my friends wanted to convince me that I saw a UFO. Yes it was flying and was unidentified to me.
I knew better though I had no idea exactly what I saw, I knew it moved funny in the air unlike 'normal' aircraft. It was subsonic. It was black. It was silent. It was shaped like an arrowhead. That was my description at the time. 1986.
But I had to wait for the Gulf War exposure of the Skunk Work's latest.
Maybe this bears on the point of how far advanced past public knowledge black arts have become.
I found David Mantik's photodensitometry studies scientific proof of x-ray forgery--and our radiologist did as well, when I mentioned the matter to her on the fortieth anniversary.
The Mantik reconstruction in Murder in Dealey Plaza and elsewhere posits a placement of the Harper fragment as the doctorate of physics/radiological oncologist drew here
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4320[/ATTACH]
Sherry Fiester uses trajectory analysis, backspatter analysis, and head wound physics (all from current state of the art forensic practice) to indicate a frontal head wound.
This may very well track with the small hole observed by mortician Thom Robinson and others at the right hairline/temple--a small entry, following the observed behavior of entrance wounds, something the Parkland staff was eminently qualified upon which to pronounce.
Viz. Malcolm Perry and the throat wound. In no way a wound of exit; rather, a small neat punctillate wound transsected for the purpose of tracheotomy enabling the patient to breathe.
The Specter creation of a transiting shot accomplishing an impossible trajectory (Dale Myers' animania destroyed by Pat Speer to the contrary notwithstanding) with a CE 399 not identified by the four principal possessors and transmitters (per Robert Harris and Jim DiEugenio et al) while remaining in a perfectly intact state shown not possible by the Commission's own testing on goat carcasses represents the myth of the lone gunman.
The alleged shooter who did not receive, practice with, pose with, store, transport or fire the alleged weapon from a position he could not have occupied per Newtonian physics and the observation of retired chief Jesse Curry
"We don't have any proof that Oswald fired the rifle, and never did.
Nobody's yet been able to put him in that building with a gun in his hand."
The failure of the three autopsists to identify the alleged wound of entry in the region of the external occipital protuberance, its invisibilty in the alleged autopsy photos, the obscene arbitrary raising of that wound by the Clark Panel in 1968 four inches or ten centimeters, the forged 6.5 mm artifact on the anterior-posterior skull x-ray, the failure of such an entry to comport with the uniformly described and placed rear exit per forty Parkland, Bethesda and Dealey witnesses adds to the nature of the official propaganda as
What will you believe? Our lies or your lying eyes?
To the very last the three could not find the mythic entry, could not stipulate to the transiting of the alleged entry five and three-eighths down from the coat collar, five and three-quarters down from the shirt collar, could not explain how it could exit above the tie (as the tie nicks were nurse-made), could not explain the fragments remaining in Connally--even as Myers could not align Connally, though he misrepresented reality in all the ways revealed by Pat Speer
The Commission Hoover attachment who lied the back wound ending at the first joint of the finger rose from T-3 per Burkley to "the base of the back of the neck" and did not stop but went on through two men seven wounds hard bones into the history books rather than the comic books while its author became the first unelected president and so-gratefully brought in Rockefeller to sanitize CIA's reputation and GHWB as DCI to sanitize the HSCA witness list
So the ballistics, the wound, the trajectory, the "case" against Oswald all fail, the trial denied, the evidence inadmissable, misrepresented, destroyed, distorted, forged, fabricated and repeated ten thousand times by the belfries of Langley and Rockefeller Center
The personages of note, so valuable the CIA sent half a score of moles, provided the defense, orchestrated the mockingbirds, established the teletype at the NOLA end for the deep and constant concern of the DCI at the Langley end--all for the meritless fishing expedition of the ambitious and unscrupulous Uriah Heep
The war which was fought and fought for a decade and fought to build a black scar on the capitol on the corpses of sixty thousand countrymen and millions of expendable races on the other side of the globe for the great profit of Johnson donors Brown & Root, and Paine-connected Bell Helicopter, and on and on, all against the expressed policy of the murdered president just the month before the Senate knives went in
And the accessories mock "what does it matter now" as they persist on the back of a double-war spanning a decade and a subcontinent
while insisting we busy ourselves with nothing of greater moment than lipsyncing and fake girlfriends
Mantik could lead the ballistic vanguard
Jim DiEugenio could show the intelligence agencies themselves identified the critical human links
Prouty, Evica, Scott, Gibson, Colby & Dennett have shown the continuation of regime-change as preparation for the economic exploitation which has driven U.S. policy and did most assuredly in killing the author of NSAM 263
Douglass can provide the context of the immediate miasma of military-intelligence-diplomatic arrogance which attacked the constitutional power of the executive of Article II by disobedience, betrayal and murder
For the lesson of Iran-Contra, Fast & Furious, Benghazi and the Emperor's Golden Drone is
>Because Alan mentioned Horne's book and its "pre autopsy" stuff, suddenly we are to forget the whole CCTV fiasco which he would never fess up to or give a source for.<
Jim:
I am not sure what you mean by this, but I want to say a couple of things.
>If William Pitzer had possession of a movie of the autopsy on President Kennedy's body, how was it generated? In a 1998 interview, X-ray technician Jerrol Custer stated that "Chief Pitzer" -- whom he seemed to know well -- was in the autopsy room "taking movies" [8]. However, shortly before this interview, Mr. Custer revealed to the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB), "No. I didn't know that name [Pitzer] at that time" [cf. 8]. And shortly before that, he told Walt Brown that Pitzer was present, taking photographs, with no mention of a movie camera [9].
No other eyewitness to the autopsy on President Kennedy's body on the evening of 11/22/63 has reported the presence of anyone with a movie camera.
An alternative means of generating a film of the Kennedy autopsy may be inferred from the statement by Commander James J. Humes (the leader of the Kennedy-autopsy team) to the ARRB that "there was a closed-circuit television," in the BNH autopsy room, albeit that he stated that the CCTV system was not in operation that evening [10].
In the same way that no eyewitness (other than Mr. Custer) saw a movie camera, neither was a television camera reported; was a non-obvious CCTV system permanently installed in the autopsy room with lens-access in the ceiling and/or wall(s)? It is noteworthy that one of William Pitzer's areas of professional specialization was the use of CCTV for instructional purposes. In an October 1998 telephone conversation, CDR Humes told me that he had worked closely with Bill Pitzer on films on tropical medicine for use in Vietnam. These films were made on video and transferred to film; Pitzer was in charge of the television part. Therefore, it seemed possible -- if not plausible -- that Pitzer recorded the Kennedy autopsy on videotape via a CCTV system, unbeknownst to those present in the autopsy room, from which he generated the movie film seen by Dennis David. However, if a CCTV system was permanently installed in the autopsy room, few knew of it. Harold Rydberg -- director of the Medical Illustration School and of the Department of Medical Illustration at the Naval Medical School -- who had been in the autopsy room on many occasions, assured me in the strongest possible terms that it was not permanently equipped with CCTV.<
As I mentioned elsewhere in this thread, I later made contact with two new witnesses who had worked with Bill Pitzer and who talked of wheeling a TV camera into the autopsy room for weekly reviews of autopsy results. This information was strong evidence, in my opinion, that Rydberg was right -- the autopsy room was not permanently wired with (a) CCTV camera(s).
At the foot of the "Putative Pitzer Movie" article, later I added:
"The Possible "Where" and "When" of the Pitzer Movie
In an article titled JFK 11/22/63: Body/Casket Chicanery at the Bethesda Morgue, published elsewhere on this Website (here), James Rinnovatore makes a persuasive case for the president's body being taken into the Bethesda morgue twice on the evening of 11/22/63 and for alteration of the wounds to have occurred in the interim (see also his article JFK-11/22/63 The Throat Wound: Where Was It Altered?, here). This raises the possibility that the putative Pitzer movie was generated in the autopsy room of the Bethesda morgue while the body was being altered."
The "Putative Pitzer Movie" article includes a sketch of the president's wounds that Dennis David claims to have seen in the Pitzer movie. Therein lies the importance of this movie; it is based on the account of a career navy man that has not wavered over a period of 30+ years (not on the account of the then 13-year-old son).
07-02-2013, 06:53 PM (This post was last modified: 07-02-2013, 07:15 PM by Albert Doyle.)
Let me first state that my questions are sincere and made from a sincere Deep Politics perspective. That provocateur stuff is garbage. Also let me disclaim that I respect and admire Jim DiEugenio as a monster and mind-like-a-steel-trap crusher of Lone Nutters just in case the context wasn't understood. I personally think Jim is spearheading the movement right now and carries the mantle.
However I think some basic things were avoided here. As was the original purpose of this thread, Jim wrote on EF that the Pitzer stuff wasn't credible. The reason I brought this subject up was the basic fact that although getting details wrong might be bad for assassination research there's no doubt that denying serious conspiracy evidence as assassination researchers would be a horrible offense equal to convicting an innocent person. Forgive me if I find Jim a little less than forthcoming on this. The basic point is that Allan has finally come around and admitted that yes, indeed, he believes that Pitzer had possession of films showing frontal wounds that were taken during the pre-autopsy. That's what I was saying and what Jim was denying. This is the issue here and, with all due respect, I don't think Jim has answered it.
I'd also like to point-out that CTKA writer Martin Hay is in the comments section in Horne's book attacking people who suggest what Allan admits. So while Jim and Allan have a nice chat together the objective record shows that there's some serious things that don't connect there that require better answers than the present ignoring that's being done. It's kind of frustrating because Jim himself would never let anyone get away with this stuff. Also, I don't think persons like James Douglass, who wrote about the Dan Marvin story, would receive this kind of crass abuse. Forgive me, but the hypocrisy in that can't go unmentioned.
The basic point here is there's reasonable evidence that Pitzer either filmed or received film from the pre-autopsy and was collecting individual frames to show that the official autopsy did not accurately represent the true wounds. Also, Dennis David allegedly said Pitzer was in the process of using equipment to isolate individual frames from a reel of film, which would suggest Pitzer had either filmed the pre-autopsy or gotten access to a motion picture film of that pre-autopsy. The reason I bring this up is because, as Douglass notes, the Pitzer incident is a quick way to show the public the depth of corruption in the investigation. It's a good one-touch example that shows the nature of the autopsy evidence that should be promoted instead of denied.
Also, what should have been done is a Stone-type movie should have been made of 'The Unspeakable' with an extra updated enhancement of Oswald and his true background - as well as Bernard Haire seeing the CIA double exiting the back of the theater - for the 50th Anniversary. This would be like an update of Stone's 'JFK' just like DiEugenio's update of 'Destiny Betrayed'. While researchers might dwell at the level of high standards this kind of post-ARRB visceral production could be the final straw that pushes the public over the hump.
>Also, I don't think persons like James Douglass, who wrote about the Dan Marvin story, would receive this kind of crass abuse. Forgive me, but the hypocrisy in that can't go unmentioned.<
I am unsure as to who is being accused of hypocrisy, but, in case Mr. Doyle has me in mind, let me say this. A couple of years ago, James Douglass gave a lecture at Cornell on "Unspeakable." I live in Ithaca, and was happy to be able to attend. It was an excellent presentation, and, after he spoke, people lined up to speak to him, as did I. I must have queued for about 20 minutes and then told him in no uncertain terms why the Marvin/Pitzer coverage is the Achilles heel of his book, and urged him to find better balance if he ever writes a second edition. He accepted my comments graciously.
Albert Doyle Wrote:Let me first state that my questions are sincere and made from a sincere Deep Politics perspective.
There is not a "sincere" bone in the multiple personality, agent provocateur "Albert Doyle's" bodies.
Albert Doyle Wrote:Also, I don't think persons like James Douglass, who wrote about the Dan Marvin story, would receive this kind of crass abuse. Forgive me, but the hypocrisy in that can't go unmentioned.
How DARE this outed agent provocateur compare "himself" to James Douglass?
This is not a rhetorical question. "Doyle" makes the comparison to disguise and to conflate and thus ennoble "his" bleating attacks with the work of one of our community's most respected and even venerated members. This is PRECISELY the tactic used by the charlatan Philip Nelson to establish the non-existent bona fides of his massive LBJ-as-Mastermind work of disinformation.
How ... Fetzerian ...
The "Doyle" situation is getting out of hand. "He" must be banished from DPF. And we must be on constant guard for "his" next appearance under yet another alias.
