Wednesday, December 17, 2014

Jim Fetzer / The New JFK Show #40

CIA torture, Fukushima (w/ John Stokes) / Roy Schaeffer w/ Larry Rivera

29 comments:

  1. Comments must be about the show.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey steve.t, you were deleted for name calling and foul language. Shoot us a better comment.

      Delete
    2. Just want to say- Jim Fetzer gets to go to heaven , even if he doesn't believe in it. And all you guys are angels of truth on this planet. I love ya and merry Christmas!

      Delete
  2. They talked about the Zapruder film on the show. Has any researcher looked into the man who seems to be filming close to the JFK limo? See for example frame 342 which shows the man filming with a camera: http://s27.postimg.org/b8ixo7h6b/z342.jpg

    And here is a slow motion sequence of the man filming: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-r0JojdpJoI&t=54s

    What happened to the film/photos? And who is the man filming the event opposite Zapruder (it can't be the Nix film which was taken from much further away).

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wow, extraordinary discussion on the Z-film, the gentleman affirms Doug Horne's hypothesis that Zapruder shot the film in slow motion (from one of his interviews with Dr. Fetzer from 2009), thus having double the amount of frames to work with during the alteration.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This whole Lambchop episode reeks of suspicion. Who gave Jackie the Lambchop puppet? Does anyone know for sure? I read somewhere that it was a little girl or a woman in the crowd. It is a sort of symbolism in my view. I firmly believe that there were people in Dallas that day who knew what was going to
    happen. Where do lamb chops come from? From lambs. And where do lambs go according to the old adage? To the slaughter. Who was the sacrificial lamb on November 22 1963? JFK. If you put the bunch of red roses given to Jackie and the Lambchop
    puppet together, it all looks very strange. Jackie herself remarked that Dallas was the only stage of the Texas trip where she was presented with a bouquet of red roses which,
    even at the time, she remarked was very odd. Nelly Connally got a bunch of yellow roses. Surely Jackie should have been given yellow
    roses. What was the idea of giving the Texan
    Nelly Connally yellow roses? The speech given by
    Very strange.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The speech given by  Raymond Buck
      was also very strange. The speech was more like a blessing with some odd references to a pair of boots which Buck presented to JFK and rattle snakes on LBJ's ranch. Buck also presented JFK with a Stetson hat
      for protection against the Texan rain.
      Maybe Buck had something other than protection against the rain in mind. In hindsight, Buck's speech sounded as if Buck knew what was in store for JFK in Dallas.

      Delete
    2. It wasn't the yellow roses that were abnormal but the red ones. Jackie and other visitors often were given yellow roses (for "The Yellow Rose of Texas"). Jackie was given red roses so the shooters knew her location and to make sure that she was not harmed.

      Delete
  5. Was the Zapruder film altered? Yes, I believe that's possible and I have a new theory. Instead of JFK actually being shot in the head he made a nodding forward movement. And later they ADDED the explosion of the head as a special effect into the Zapruder film.

    In order for JFK's head to bounce backwards Jackie needed to hold him in a very firm grip, and she did. And JFK needed to have his elbows raised in order for Jackie to make the grip, and he had. And JFK needed to wear a stiff corset so that his body acted as a spring, and he was indeed wearing a corset that day.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Good theory. This is my current theory as well. JFK played himself. There could be blind bullets involved. Not everyone around at the Plaza needed to know they were shooting a film.

    ReplyDelete
  7. THIS DOCUMENTARY PROVES WHAT DR. FETZER AND GARY KING HAVE BEEN SAYING ABOUT CLINT HILL AND THE ZAPRUDER FILM!!!
    COPY AND PASTE INTO YOU TUBE:
    "John F. Kennedy Slain" The Case of the Complete Exposure
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqWSi4vYPX8
    SLIDE THE BAR TO THE THE 1:18 MARK; YOU WILL SEE CLINT HILL STANDING ON THE LIMO. WHERE J.F.K. AND JACKIE WERE; THIS IS DEFINITELY ONE OF THE FRAMES CUT FROM THE ZAPRUDER FILM!!!
    THANKS FOR ALL YOU DO/HAVE DONE DR. FETZER AND MR. KING!!!
    CYBERFRUME10-4NMRK

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. Not cut: worked out; that is, the whole frames are redone so that will not be in it nor many other things. The crowd is not in that part of the road in the film but is higher up the street (in the photo). It's part of the proof.

      Delete
    2. @CYBERFRUME You mean the photo with the agent standing with one leg into the seat of the limo? Yes, but where was that photo taken? Could the photo have been taken some time later than the Zapruder film? There are buildings in the background that should be possible to identify.

      Delete
    3. NO, HE WAS SPRAWLED ON THE BACK OF THE LIMO., JUST AS DR. FETZER SAYS; I HAVE SEEN THE PICTURE YOU REFER TOO; ON THE ZAPRUDER FILM CLINT HILL NEVER GETS ONTO THE TRUNK, IN THESE PICTURES YOU SEE HIM LAYING ACROSS THE TRUCK, GIVING HIS HAND THE ABILITY TO "PUSH JACKIE DOWN, LOOK AT THE HOLE IN J.F.K.'S HEAD, THEN SIGNAL THE OTHER CARS", JUST AS HE TESTIFIES TOO AND FETZER HAS REPORTED FROM HIS INTERVIEWS WITH CLINT HILL; THE OTHER PERSON REFERENCED WAS TELLING WHAT HE SAW AS THE LIMO PASSED THE TRADE CENTER!!; WHAT IS SHOWN ON THIS DOCUMENTARY MATCHES THE AUDIO OF THE INCIDENT: I HAVE HEARD AUDIO WHERE THE REPORTER IS SAYING, "THE SECRET SERVICE AGENT IS SPRAWLED ON THE BACK OF THE CAR"; PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO CHECK IT OUT; LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK!!!
      HAPPY HOLIDAYS!!!
      CYBERFRUME10-4NMRK

      Delete
    4. CYBERFRUME, ok but the Nix film seems to show the same agent and the same action. I trust the films more than what people claim they saw (the Zapruder film may have been edited but to change the agent's action would be too difficult to fake in those days).

      Delete
    5. YOU MUST WATCH THE CLIPS; YOU WILL SEE CLINT HILL SPRAWLED ACROSS THE TRUNK, THIS IS NOT SHOWN ON EITHER FILM; YOU WILL SEE HIS TESTIMONY, WHICH CONCURS WITH WHAT DR. FETZER REPORTS, "THAT HE PUSHED JACKIE DOWN, SAW THE HOLE IN J.F.K.'S HEAD, BLOWN OUT THE BACK, INDICATING A "SHOT FROM THE FRONT, THEN HE SIGNALED TO THE CARS BEHIND HIM"; IF YOU TRUST THE FILMS MORE THAN EYE WITNESSES, WATCH THE FILM, THEN LET ME KNOW HOW YOU COMPARE THEM TO THE ZAPRUDER AND NIX FILMS!!!
      WAITING FOR YOUR REPLY!!!
      CYBERFRUME10-4NMRK

      Delete
  8. AT THE 51:28 MARK, YOU WILL SEE A MAN TELLING HIS STORY ABOUT THE LIMO. PASSING THE TRADE CENTER EXIT WHERE J.F.K. WAS SUPPOSED TO SPEAK; HIS TESTIMONY SAYS, "HE COULD SEE THE SECRET SERVICE AGENT SPRAWLED ACROSS THE BACK OF THE LIMO."; THERE IS A PICTURE OF THEM PASSING THE TRADE CENTER EXIT WITH THE AGENT STILL SPRAWLED ACROSS THE BACK OF THE LIMO.!!!
    CYBERFRUME10-4NMRK
    CORRECTION: CLINT HILL WAS SPRAWLED ACROSS THE LIMO., WHEN I SAID HE WAS STANDING IN THE PREVIOUS POST!!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Will Dr. Fetzer and associates comment on the ARRB findings by the chair, John R. Tunheim, who found Oswald was the lone assassin? How many know this is as bad as the Warren Commission? The cover-up continues.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    "The former chair of the Assassination Records Review Board, a federal judge in Minneapolis, has reached a verdict on the JFK evidence. He sees no ‘real evidence’ of a conspiracy, according to U.S. News.

    The investigation, by the Assassination Records Review Board, was aimed at piercing the persistent secrecy that surrounded the crime. The board unearthed tens of thousands of records on the killing that had never been released.
    Which makes its chairman, John R. Tunheim, among the most qualified people alive to talk about what happened Nov. 22, 1963. His conclusion: Lee Harvey Oswald did it — and no one else.

    “I look back to the hard evidence of the case, the real evidence, the evidence admissible in court, and all of that points to Oswald acting alone,” Tunheim, who is now a federal judge, said this week from his chambers in Minnesota.

    But no one has conclusively proved a conspiracy, Tunheim said.

    “People just don’t want to believe that a 24-year-old misfit that has had really an awful life, who has these pro-communist tendencies, difficulty navigating life, could publicly assassinate the leader of the free world,” he said.

    http://jfkfacts.org/tag/arrb/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is astonishing that the Execs of the ARRB are in total denial of the important depositions performed by the ARRB: the NPIC event, Medical evidence revelations & Autopsy alterations.

      Mr. Tunheim's talking-points sound right out of the media and he was rewarded with a Federal Judgeship, imagine that...

      Delete
    2. Many on the AARB were not knowledgeable or on side with conspiracy narrative (argument) enough to try on the idea fully.

      Delete
    3. While I like Judge Tunheim personally, he knows better than he can say. Check out "Dealey Plaza Revisited: What happened to JFK?", which you can download. Because he introduced me and took extensive notes while I was speaking. He knows that Lee was a patsy and there were multiple shooters.

      Delete
  10. Pakistan Shooting 12/16/12 Real or Staged?
    (I saw it "live" and there was no blood. I say it was staged. Check out the Masonic numbers: 13, and many sixes. There was a man in a wheelchair with what looked like pink Kool Aid sprayed on his shirt sleeve--no wound visible.)

    http://www.smh.com.au/world/pakistan-school-shooting-arrests-made-says-government-20141221-12bwal.html

    Seven Taliban gunmen wearing explosives belts stunned the world on Tuesday by storming into the military run school and slaughtering 148 people, including 132 students. Another 120 students were wounded in the ensuing eight-hour siege of the school.
    The Taliban say they attacked the school in revenge for an army operation against them in North Waziristan, launched in mid-June. The army says it has so far killed over 1200 militants in the operation.

    The government bombed the militants' hideouts in country's tribal area along the Afghan border in response, and also lifted a ban on the execution of convicted terrorists.

    Over the weekend, it executed six men convicted on terrorism charges. Two of the convicts were hanged on Friday, and another four on Sunday, according to two Pakistani government officials who spoke on condition of anonymity.

    All six belonged to local Pakistani militant groups and were convicted for involvement in two attempts to assassinate former president Pervez Musharraf. One was also convicted of leading a militant siege of Pakistani army headquarters in garrison city of Rawalpindi in 2009.

    Local militants have threatened attacks to avenge the hanged men.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Mistake: I think what we saw on TV was a drill. The people on stretshers were not bleeding nor did they look to be in pain. Some of the stretchers carried boxes and things other than people.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Walter Sheridan, NBC & Jim Garrison
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    http://www.ctka.net/nbc_cia.html

    NBC and Walter Sheridan Bribing and Intimdating Garrison's Witnesses
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Garrison's case was big news and predictably the news media swung into attack mode. None was more vicious or had more resources at their disposal than NBC. For the job as lead investigative reporter, NBC assigned Walter Sheridan. Shortly after Shaw's arrest Sheridan arrived in New Orleans and began questioning witnesses — perhaps bribing and intimidating would be a better choice of words.

    Sheridan questioned a former electronics expert and CIA asset Gordon Novel and immediately put him on a $500 a day retainer........
    Garrison's main witness at the time was Perry Russo, a young insurance agent who had claimed he overheard a conspiratorial conversation between Shaw, Ferrie and Oswald at Ferrie's home.

    Sheridan "interviewed" Russo and seriously distorted his statements during the broadcast. As the New Orleans States-Item reported, "Russo said Sheridan, WDSU-TV reporter Richard Townley and Saturday Evening Post writer James Phelan repeatedly visited his home in attempts to persuade him to cooperate with NBC and the defense."

    .....Russo said, "Sheridan offered to set me up in California, protect my job and guarantee that Garrison would never get me extradited back to Louisiana" if he cooperated. He accused Townley of threatening him with public humiliation unless he changed his story and cooperated with the NBC program.

    The 25-year-old witness said members of the trio told him both, "NBC and the Central Intelligence Agency are out to wreck Garrison's investigation." Of course, Russo's accusations were met with denials, but as we shall see Russo's claims seem to have been accurate.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Mopar21277: "It is astonishing that the Execs of the ARRB are in total denial of the important depositions performed by the ARRB: the NPIC event, Medical evidence revelations & Autopsy alterations.......

    Clare Kuehn: "Many on the AARB were not knowledgeable or on side with conspiracy narrative (argument) enough to try on the idea fully.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    I can't believe I was unaware of the function of the ARRB. I did not know it was an actual commission. Somehow, I thought it was just releasing documents to a panel led by Jim DiEugenio. I even had a subscription to CTKA and Probe. The material there was so detailed and hard to read that the issues just piled up. I had no idea that once again we'd been had by another government commission concluding LHO did it as lone gunman. Unbelieveable!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It wasn't a commission, exactly, Compass. But as Doug Horne mentioned in one of his interviews here, when interviewing witnesses & discussing declassification, etc., knowledge of the conspiracy material (particularly Jim's ultimately, & David Lifton's), made all the difference in identifying specifics to ask for: for example, noting the significance of the then-young hearse driver at the real autopsy, asking him if he realized that the doctors said the bullets had done what he'd described about the big wound to the head. He said, "No, the doctor did that!" Then realized he'd seen something indicating a conspiracy, plus the testimony was then more pointed for the conspiracy case.

      Delete
  14. Okay, the ARRB was a "panel." Why does the CIA ALWAYS have to nterfere with these groups--panels, commissions, investigations?

    http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/news/2009/10/21/minnesota-judge-cia-%E2%80%98probably-misled%E2%80%99-panel-he-led-jfk-assassination

    Minnesota judge: CIA ‘probably misled’ panel he led on JFK assassination
    By Chris Steller, Minnesota Independent
    October 22, 2009

    U.S. District Judge John R. Tunheim says the Central Intelligence Agency "probably misled" a panel he led in the 1990s seeking documents related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

    That's because the CIA didn't tell Tunheim that its liaison to a panel that preceded his Assassination Records Review Board had been involved with anti-Castro Cubans in Miami who tangled with Lee Harvey Oswald in 1963.

    The New York Times reported Tunheim's remarks in a front-page story Saturday on Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests by Minneapolis-born journalist Jefferson Morley, formerly an editor at the Washington Post and past national editorial director for the Center for Independent Media, the Minnesota Independent's nonprofit parent.

    After years of pressing the CIA to release its records, Morley got an appeals court earlier this year to force the agency to 'fess up to George Joannides' role as case officer in Miami at the time of Kennedy assassination. But the CIA still has nearly 300 documents about Joannides it won't reveal, citing "grave" national security concerns.

    Tunheim told the Times he may ask the CIA for redacted versions of the documents even if Morley is ultimately stymied by the Washington, D.C., federal court.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Wonder why they won't release income tax returns? :)

    Assassination Records Review Board

    The Act established, as an independent agency, the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) to consider and render decisions when a U.S. government office sought to postpone the disclosure of assassination records.

    The Board met for four years, from October 1, 1994 to September 30, 1998. When the Act was passed in 1992, 98 percent of all Warren Commission documents had been released to the public.

    By the time the Board disbanded, all Warren Commission documents, except income tax returns, had been released to the public, with only minor redactions.[2]

    ReplyDelete