Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Kowalski

Deaths of JFK Witnesses

80 posts in this topic

Wow, I never heard that before! Here's what I was able to find:

Link: http://www.freerepub...t/1725590/posts

Thanks for looking for that. Being old as dirt, I clearly remember there was a tie to the timing of the shots and a bullet they couldn't remove. I'll go looking myself to see if I can come up with anything else. The point in question was that they had the bullets that hit Kennedy, the one in Connelly would have pretty well set aside the question that there was another gun involved. Funny one of the times that stick with you. I remember I where I was even driving the last time I heard mention of it and that was a radio discussion early 90's. That was after Warren Commission and all of the other investigations that went on. Why was it still being discussed then and nothing, not one mention when Connelly died??? First thought that came to me when I heard he had dies was, "well now they'll finally get the bullet" then nothing. Not even a , "Well they thought at one time the bullet was important but then that was dismissed..... Not even that. Not a word, not a peep LOL

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.nytimes.c...-fragments.html

I did come up with this. I knew they discussed a bullet left In Connally. Now, why on earth would they be getting permission to exhume the body. No one remembered something was there when they buried him except me ?

Thanks for finding that! :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

No, your not derailing the thread. Thanks for posting this! :tu:

I think Bush, Sr. Can't remember where he was the day of the assassination....

:rolls eyes:

Indeed he can't, but there's a photo which suggests he was outside the book repositiory.

Here it is

BushJfkBookDepo2.jpg

At this stage I will do everything I can to draw attention to the probability that Bush Snr was the CIA agent who commissioned the assassination of JFK - since the Bush murderers are still very much a force to be reconned with in American politics.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed he can't, but there's a photo which suggests he was outside the book repositiory.

Br Cornelius

Here's the website for the photos:

http://www.tomflocco.com/Docs/63/BushJfkBookDepo.htm

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

In no way am I proposing this in favor of the Bush(s) but I don't think the man in the picture is Bush. Look at the baldness pattern. If you look at the right side, all the way back to where the part begins. In the established pictures there of Bush, his baldness looks much wider than the man in the picture and forms almost a very straight line toward the left.

Edited by Duncansmom
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was Bush. He became director of the cia then president because of this. He is the only president to have full access to the cia. The cia keeps secrets from all presidents well unless you were once the director of the agency that is.

I fully believe that is Bush in the pics and the back story does not clear Bush of not being there.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize Bush was never cleared from being there and, believe me, I am no Bush lover but look at that baldness pattern. That man has a more common U shaped pattern. Bush's is actually angular at the point receded to the hair and his baldness actually appears to be wider. I wonder if the picture could be retrieved and blown up better so that you could actually see the features. I'll bet you $1 that's not Bush!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize Bush was never cleared from being there and, believe me, I am no Bush lover but look at that baldness pattern. That man has a more common U shaped pattern. Bush's is actually angular at the point receded to the hair and his baldness actually appears to be wider. I wonder if the picture could be retrieved and blown up better so that you could actually see the features. I'll bet you $1 that's not Bush!

His head is dropped forward meaning the hair is slumped.

Br Cornelius

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

His head is dropped forward meaning the hair is slumped.

Br Cornelius

No, Cornelius, that doesn't change the hair line.. I know you don't like the Bush(s) me either !! But really look at it. His head could drop off the body and it wouldn't change that U shaped receding line to an angular one that actually goes back further into where the head start..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am so new to this discussion. As I said earlier, the only advantage I have is being older than dirt. I wonder however in all of you travels have you ever found discussion regarding an autopsy of the President that was done in Dallas? Is it out there ???

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what to make of that photo....Half of me, suspects it might be Bush, Sr. Because it does bare a very close resemblance to him, but there's another half of me that thinks the photos to blurry to be sure for certain....

:hmm:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I am so new to this discussion. As I said earlier, the only advantage I have is being older than dirt. I wonder however in all of you travels have you ever found discussion regarding an autopsy of the President that was done in Dallas? Is it out there ???

That's another oddity...

The autopsy should have been performed in Dallas, not in Maryland at the Naval Hospital.

The would-be Dallas medical examiner who should have done President John F. Kennedy’s autopsy following his assassination, died Tuesday, adding to the long list of deceased who were tangentially involved in the fateful day.

Earl Rose tried to block the door to the Texas hospital so that the President’s aides couldn’t get into the body, but he was over-ridden and they were able to move the coffin and fly it back to Washington, D.C. for its official autopsy.

Even though protocol deems that Mr Rose should have been the one to carry out the autopsy since the shooting took place in Dallas, the president’s aides and First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy wanted it to be carried out at Bethesda Naval Hospital instead of Dallas’ Parkland Memorial Hospital.

Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz2YKCGLnX4

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Edited by Kowalski
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally know a then US Marine sniper/CIA detachment that examined the Oswald rifle for the Warren Commission.

He told me that his conclusion was that the rifle was not the one that killed JFK, based on caliber forensics. But that rifle WAS fired at JFK during the incident, just not the one that killed JFK.

His testimony was submitted to the Warren Commission and dismissed, for reasons unknown to him.

That's all I know. But that's his story.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Cornelius, that doesn't change the hair line.. I know you don't like the Bush(s) me either !! But really look at it. His head could drop off the body and it wouldn't change that U shaped receding line to an angular one that actually goes back further into where the head start..

I disagree with your assessment, I don't see a significant divergence in the hair line.

There are many other clues pointing to Bush Snr.been the CIA officer who commissioned the assassination = the photo is just the icing on the cake.

Br Cornelius

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think the clearest angle is the 'bay of pigs' fiasco ... there was a promise to the Cuban elite community and their strong social 'allies' that the ones 'truly' responsible will be taken to task ... who made that promise ? Who was ultimately responsible ?

Not in the bureaucratic sense but the ones actually putting the whole operation in place ? ....

Its a me first shot of before you come for me .... better you go than me ... an who has the resources ? who holds the key pieces ? it is someone right in middle and telling lies to both sides ... whichever side gets eliminated .. the one in middle wins ... no matter which way it ends up ... if JFK didn't end up killed that day ... there would be a national backlash playing into the hand of this master mind ... if JFK was eliminated successfully ... well we know what happened don't we ?

business as usual ....

`

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The strong case for Bush Snr;

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/bush.htm

CONCLUSIONS:

The plot to kill JFK originates from the very same forces that were working together on the Bay of Pigs and the plots to assassinate Fidel Castro: All these forces had their own reasons to recapture Cuba and to hate Kennedy, whom they also blamed for the failure of the Bay of Pigs.

These groups were 1) The CIA with the approval of some of the highest government officials (like Johnson, Hoover, Ford and Nixon) 2) The anti Castro Cuban exiles 3) Mafiabosses Sam Giancana , Carlos Marcello and Santos Trafficante and 4) wealthy industrialists and Texan oilmen like H.L. Hunt, Syd Richardson and Clint Murchison. George H.W. Bush has documented connections to all four groups.

Sam Giancana states in his biography that he knew Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon personally (to read the page click here), as well as the aforementioned oil millionaires and George Demohrenshildt (to read the page click here), , and that they planned the JFK assassination together. James Files, the confessed grassy knoll assassin who fired the fatal shot into JFK's head, did not only work for Sam Giancana, but was recruited in the CIA to train Cuban exiles for the Bay of Pigs, by none other than David Atlee Phillips. He claims that one of his later senior supervisors in covert operations was George H.W. Bush. Lyndon Johnson told his mistress Madeline Brown: "It was the CIA and the Oilboys". Bush was both ! In addition he was up to his neck in the Bay of Pigs and the anti Castro movement. What is the chance he could not have known about the plot?

David Atlee Phillips was also the CIA supervisor for Lee Harvey Oswald, a heroic man that was unwittingly chosen to take the blame as the patsy, while led to believe he was to penetrate the group of assassins in order to sabotage the plot and prevent JFK's assassination.

On November 22, 1963 a criminal power elite seized control through a coup d'etat and a subsequent cover up of the truth that lasts until today. This is because they strengthened their position ever since. The key to unlocking the truth lies in one of their most powerful assets: the mainstream media. That is why you were not aware of most of the above !

It is clear that Bush protected the cover-up, as well as individuals and CIA elements that were involved in the JFK assassination. Although the above may not be conclusive evidence for Bush's involvement or knowledge about JFK's murder, all together a bigger and more criminal picture than many of us dare to imagine, emerges, with a direct connection to the political situation of today.

Indeed the Bay of Pigs is the key to this and that is where the motive comes from.

For me these are the events which set in train America's slide into a Fascistic world dictatorship, and anyone who isn't concerned about finding the culprits deserves everything they get.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The strong case for Bush Snr;

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/bush.htm

Indeed the Bay of Pigs is the key to this and that is where the motive comes from.

For me these are the events which set in train America's slide into a Fascistic world dictatorship, and anyone who isn't concerned about finding the culprits deserves everything they get.

Br Cornelius

Thanks for posting this link! :tu:

According to the link, Bush made a phone call to the CIA from Tyler, Texas, on November 22, 1963, about someone in Houston, talking about assassinating President Kennedy....Tyler, Texas Is only two hours away from Dallas....

I have no doubt Bush was involved, just not sure if he is the man in the photo. But, the man in the photo does bare a strong resemblance to Bush, Sr.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strong case Rafterman for motive and been on the ground on the day. Strong strong case.

Br Cornelius

He is famous for his strong cases. :innocent:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

One of the strangest deaths, I've read about is that of Dorothy Kilgallen

Link: http://www.spartacus...FKkilgallen.htm

On 8th November, 1965, Kilgallen, was found dead in her New York apartment. She was fully dressed and sitting upright in her bed. The police reported that she had died from taking a cocktail of alcohol and barbiturates. The notes for the chapter she was writing on the case had disappeared. Her friend, Florence Smith, died two days later. The copy of Kilgallen's article were never found.

Some of her friends believed Kilgallen had been murdered. Marc Sinclaire was Kilgallen's personal hairdresser. He often woke Kilgallen in the morning. Kilgallen was usually out to the early hours of the morning and like her husband always slept late. When he found her body he immediately concluded she had been murdered.

(1) Kilgallen was not sleeping in her normal bedroom. Instead she was in the master bedroom, a room she had not occupied for several years.

(2) Kilgallen was wearing false eyelashes. According to Sinclaire she always took her eyelashes off before she went to bed.

(3) She was found sitting up with the book, The Honey Badger, by Robert Ruark, on her lap. Sinclaire claims that she had finished reading the book several weeks earlier (she had discussed the book with Sinclaire at the time).

(4) Kilgallen had poor eyesight and could only read with the aid of glasses. Her glasses were not found in the bedroom where she died.

(5) Kilgallen was found wearing a bolero-type blouse over a nightgown. Sinclaire claimed that this was the kind of thing "she would never wear to go to bed".

Another great link that talks about her autopsy results is: http://kilgallenfile...autopsy-report/

Here is what I find interesting:

Dorothy died of “acute ethanol and barbiturate intoxication, circumstances undetermined.” Simply put, she died of an overdose and the Medical Examiner’s office was unable to determine the exact cause.

It is not known whether the approximately 15-2O pills in Dorothy’s system were ingested with suicidal intent, as a result of murder or by accident.

It is interesting to see that the approximation of the amount of pills in Dorothy’s system at the time she died is in line with the relatively precise amount needed to cause death.

The amount of pills estimated in her system do not lean toward incredibly more pills than the MLD, as most suicides by pills do. [For instance her husband Richard -- when he killed himself, he practically swallowed everything in reach.]

Also, it appears as if it would be more difficult to ingest 15 to 2O pills accidentally. Since Dorothy was seen in the 1 AM hour – and appeared to be in control of herself but “a little high” – and her time of death was estimated at around 2 AM, it would not seem feasible for her to have been so stoned out of her gourd to have accidentally taken 5 pills three times.

In short, Dorothy overdosed – but the number of pills that were approximated in her system fall within a window of suspicion. It is just about a perfect amount. Seemingly too many for accident but far too few for intentional suicide.
Edited by Kowalski
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's another oddity...

The autopsy should have been performed in Dallas, not in Maryland at the Naval Hospital.

Actually, I just threw that question re. the autopsy out there because way back the thought crossed my mind there something wrong with statements in regard to a Dallas autopsy.

When I came across came across it, my kids were little, it was then the 70s and I just filed it away with no time to research. I have never posted anything I couldn't prove but there was an autopsy done in Dallas. I had a copy of it which I think it might have even been a certified copy. In the 70's I worked for a County Treasurer, a long standing Democrat. One of my duties ended up being helping him clean out a back storage room. There I found an invitation to the Inaugural Ball, signed by Jackie, and a copy of the autopsy. He kept the invitation but he gave the autopsy report to me. He was elderly at the time and really had no interest in either things. He told be that he had obtained the autopsy by coincidence not through the Democratic party. His daughter in college had dated the son of the Medical Examiner in Dallas who had performed the autopsy before the body left Dallas and the kid gave his daughter the copy.

At the time, I was just too busy but I did file it away. Sadly enough when I was divorced my ex- went through my files and took it. However, without question he is the type that would still have it and although I haven't had any contact with him in years, I have often thought about asking him to return it. He might at least give me a copy. Do you guys think it would be of any importance now?

LOL I have always wanted to kick myself had for giving him the invitation. It didn't go anywhere but to another place where it was lost again forever. Just one of life's experiences where you realize you did a stupid thing!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I just threw that question re. the autopsy out there because way back the thought crossed my mind there something wrong with statements in regard to a Dallas autopsy.

When I came across came across it, my kids were little, it was then the 70s and I just filed it away with no time to research. I have never posted anything I couldn't prove but there was an autopsy done in Dallas. I had a copy of it which I think it might have even been a certified copy. In the 70's I worked for a County Treasurer, a long standing Democrat. One of my duties ended up being helping him clean out a back storage room. There I found an invitation to the Inaugural Ball, signed by Jackie, and a copy of the autopsy. He kept the invitation but he gave the autopsy report to me. He was elderly at the time and really had no interest in either things. He told be that he had obtained the autopsy by coincidence not through the Democratic party. His daughter in college had dated the son of the Medical Examiner in Dallas who had performed the autopsy before the body left Dallas and the kid gave his daughter the copy.

At the time, I was just too busy but I did file it away. Sadly enough when I was divorced my ex- went through my files and took it. However, without question he is the type that would still have it and although I haven't had any contact with him in years, I have often thought about asking him to return it. He might at least give me a copy. Do you guys think it would be of any importance now?

LOL I have always wanted to kick myself had for giving him the invitation. It didn't go anywhere but to another place where it was lost again forever. Just one of life's experiences where you realize you did a stupid thing!

Wow! I've never heard that there was an autopsy performed in Dallas! Everything I've read said that he was taken to a Naval Hospital in Maryland. I definitely think it would be important, as it might shed some new light on this....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say is that I am being totally honest. At the time it rang in my head that a Dallas autopsy wasn't mentioned in the investigation but we didn't have computers to look back at what was said was a little more difficult then. It did of course describe the bullet wounds and their location and I remember there was talk at the time about an initial examination or autopsy that had reversed the entrance and exit wound positions in the neck as to where the Warren Commission said they were. I think I did try to see if that description was in that autopsy and couldn't identify it.

Maybe it's there somewhere and just not mentioned because the one at Bethesda was of more importance but I will see if I can think of a way to approach getting a copy.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say is that I am being totally honest. At the time it rang in my head that a Dallas autopsy wasn't mentioned in the investigation but we didn't have computers to look back at what was said was a little more difficult then. It did of course describe the bullet wounds and their location and I remember there was talk at the time about an initial examination or autopsy that had reversed the entrance and exit wound positions in the neck as to where the Warren Commission said they were. I think I did try to see if that description was in that autopsy and couldn't identify it.

Maybe it's there somewhere and just not mentioned because the one at Bethesda was of more importance but I will see if I can think of a way to approach getting a copy.

That's really interesting, thanks for sharing! It's possible they did perform an autopsy in Dallas, and just never mentioned it in the Warren Ommission like everything else....

I don't know, that's definitely intriguing though! :)

Here's a short video, only 6 minutes, called:

"JFK Assassination: was witness Lee Bowers murdered?"

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=mcXJJsZs7LE&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DmcXJJsZs7LE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember briefly that they attempted and was beginning the autopsy in Dallas but was 'interrupted' and JFK's remains were confiscated by the 'authorities' and transferred presumably to the Naval Base ... perhaps that is why there were two Autopsy reports ?

And his brain is still presumably 'missing ... ' which means presumably he wasn't buried with it ... how is that more adding insult to criminal injury ?

The doctors who treated Kennedy at Parkland Hospital in Dallas added more support to the theory of a frontal shot. They believed the hole in Kennedy’s throat was an entrance wound and that damage to the back of Kennedy’s skull marked an obvious exit wound.

But federal authorities prevented a state autopsy by seizing Kennedy's body after he was pronounced dead. The body was rushed to Air Force One and returned to Washington. There, a chaotic nighttime autopsy was performed at Bethesda Naval Hospital.

Experts would later bemoan the sloppiness of the crowded examination. “Where bungled autopsies are concerned, President Kennedy’s is an exemplar,” commented New York coroner Michael Baden when he reviewed the work for the House Select Committee on Assassinations in the 1970s.

link

The Dallas Doctors

oball.gif At a news conference on the afternoon of the assassination, the doctors who attended to Kennedy in the Parkland Emergency Room discussed the President’s wounds (photo at right). Although the Parkland staff did a highly competent job of treating Kennedy and Connally, their statements about the nature of the wounds were confused, contradictory, and often mistaken. Of course, conspiracy authors have had a field day with them, claiming that the back of Kennedy’s head was blasted out, and that the bullet wound in Kennedy’s neck was one of entrance.

oball.gif And example of how conspiracy books use evidence selectively can be found in an account written on the day of the assassination by Dr. Marion "Pepper" Jenkins. The account says the wound was "occipital" and that "cerebellum" protruded from the wound. Both of these statements imply that the back of the head was blown out. Yet the account says the wound was to the "right side of the head" and that it was "temporal" (which means the side of the head). Guess which statements conspiracy books tell their readers about, and which they withhold?

oball.gif Dr. Robert Grossman has testified to being in Trauma Room One at Parkland Hospital during the futile attempt to save John Kennedy. A respected neurosurgeon, he certainly seems like the sort of witness one could rely on. Unfortunately, his testimony is problematic in many ways, as David Lifton argues in "Dr. Robert Grossman—Phantom of Trauma Room One."

link

I like this site but I wouldn't vouch for the accuracy but I can say it has many many interesting links and an autopsy X ray of JFK

The Death Of John Kennedy

There have been two official investigations. One concluded Oswald acted alone, the other that there was a conspiracy. After half a century, many of the key documents which could tell the whole story remain classified. John F. Kennedy's brain is still missing from the National Archives. Why, if it is an open and shut case? Why the secrecy, if Oswald was just a "crazed lone gunman"?

link to " What really happened ? "

~

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.