General Category => Enemy of the Truth: Myths, Forensics, and the Kennedy Assassination => Topic started by: Mitch C. on August 22, 2013, 12:52:16 PM

Title: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Mitch C. on August 22, 2013, 12:52:16 PM
Just finished it. I agree with all of you that this is landmark work. Although I am sure at some point someone will attempt it; it's difficult to argue with the blood spatter analysis, and where that leads. As a fairly committed Grassy Knoll guy, I must admit I always wondered why the massive damage to Kennedy's head was limited almost exclusively to the the right side. Logically, from that angle, the trajectory would have had the bullet cause more cross damage, at least to the back of the President's left side. The author very methodically, logically, explains why: using simple (or for this layman, not so simple...but understandable) mathematics, the 35 degree "trajectory cone", eliminates any shot landing from the Grassy Knoll.

I do have some (very) minor criticisms. The author goes a long way to discount the reliability of Dealey Plaza "ear witnesses", at least to the extent of determining the direction of the shots. Due to different elevations, reverberation and shock waves, echoes, etc...she concludes: "basing the locations of possible shooters solely on the statements of ear witnesses is categorically unreliable." Yet, at the end of the chapter "The Grassy Knoll Headshot", after convincingly arguing that the kill shot likely came from the SOUTH knoll area, she still felt the need to buttress her argument with ear witness testimony of hearing shots from that area. A devils's advocate would say she is trying to have it both ways.

Finally, I do hope in any future editions correct errors such as: repeated sentences, two or three sentences incorrect grammar wise, due to a missing word, etc. These are minor in themselves, but tend to take away ever slightly from the scholarly nature of this work.

That being said, Feister has once and for all put the lie to the single shooter from the rear myth; using unemotional, unarguable science. Facts are stubborn things....

Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Cutty on August 23, 2013, 09:34:59 PM
Nice review, Mitch. I am in agreement with all of it.

As for the earwitness testimony, my interest and study in audio & acoustics have led me to post links to articles on the level of reliability in the past. The fact is, though, that I've always thought you have to sift through it all, consider the technical aspects that Sherry has brought up, then also consider the source, which could be a witness who worked in and around Dealey Plaza as opposed to a witness who never spent any time there and only came to view the motorcade.  This is a good discussion in itself, IMO, to continue in a thread on the board created for that chapter. I believe all previous acoustic trial results can't be relied upon today because, to name just a couple of factors, all possible shooter locations weren't covered and you would also need to be confident of an accurate placement in Dealey of the microphone on the motorcycle which transmitted the signal to the dictabelt recorder.

On the trajectory for the head shot and where the "blood spatter analysis leads" I will remind that there are 5 factors generally used to determine this. The collective recognition of these factors as evidence coroborates the back spatter analysis. This is another interesting discussion that we could continue in its own thread. ;)
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: TLR on August 25, 2013, 07:03:02 PM

I do have some (very) minor criticisms. The author goes a long way to discount the reliability of Dealey Plaza "ear witnesses", at least to the extent of determining the direction of the shots. Due to different elevations, reverberation and shock waves, echoes, etc...she concludes: "basing the locations of possible shooters solely on the statements of ear witnesses is categorically unreliable." Yet, at the end of the chapter "The Grassy Knoll Headshot", after convincingly arguing that the kill shot likely came from the SOUTH knoll area, she still felt the need to buttress her argument with ear witness testimony of hearing shots from that area. A devils's advocate would say she is trying to have it both ways.


Another reviewer on Amazon said the same thing.

And yes, editors and proof-readers are getting lazy these days (books, magazines, newspapers).
Title: Quick take
Post by: Phil Dragoo on October 01, 2013, 06:26:12 AM
Mitch

In the South Knoll section I put up two views of the South Knoll.  In the 'fifties both knolls had shrubbery down to the curb

Looking at the views you can imagine the echoes as visual returns absorbed by the grass, reflected by the facades

Anthony DeFiore cites on page 228 of his 297-page version the figure of eighty witnesses who heard firecrackers

He lists them, and their description, and goes on to refer to the 2004 attempt on the president and vice president of Taiwan when they were riding in a Jeep--the bullets coming through the windshield sounded like firecrackers

Sherry is very good at setting the testimony of directionality in context--because the wounds didn't come from the source(s) most frequently named

We will recall from repeated references in Waldron and Hartmann Ultimate Sacrifice Rolando Cubela asked Bill Harvey for a scoped, silenced FAL

Such a weapon on the South Knoll in the hands of a world-class shooter could've made the throat shot at Z-225 per DeFiore and the temple-to-occipitoparietal right-side shots without giving away location

Mitch WerBell would go on to found Sionics making the world's best suppressors; just as the U-2 and the F-117 were operational a dozen years before the public was aware, so, too, might we see in Dealey Plaza that day a similar black technological leap

Regarding proofing, I have thirty-four (34) carets in my copy, corrections which would enhance the flow--but I find I have so many more underlinings, brackets, exclamation points--for this is a break-through book

We have not had in fifty years a satori, enlightenment, epiphany, insight like this

You've got Johnson forecasting the luncheon in Dallas in the Fall on April 23 per Horne, and Connally insists on the Trade Mart which determines the Plaza

The Thomas dinner in Houston the 21st insures the party will stay over and fly to Love Field in the morning for the fateful, fatal motorcade

They had a long, long time to establish the best hide; to zero in the weapon; dry runs as needed

The blood spatter wasn't known until 1982, nothing in the literature to prompt the NPIC/Hawkeyeworks wizards to remove the backspatter which appears and disappears in milliseconds

It would be good to get a copy in the hands of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who told Charlie Rose how moved by Douglass' Unspeakable he was and wrote an endorsement for the publisher to that effect

Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: TLR on October 01, 2013, 09:09:45 PM
An interesting site that incorporates Sherry's work:

http://theshotsindealeyplaza.com/?page_id=12 (http://theshotsindealeyplaza.com/?page_id=12)
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Cutty on October 03, 2013, 11:34:33 AM
^ Well, this presentation posits an 8 shot scenario based on one scientific fact buried among the other 87.5% worth of circumstantial evidence and speculation. IMHO, it is counterproductive to do this and focus should be placed solely on what we do know, or shall I say "now know," so that a new perspective can be established for examining the rest of the case.

I find that researchers, in general, are reluctant to give up their long held theories & will do either of 2 things. Of the proponents, some will find that Sherry's work has merit and support it on its own and some find that it fits in with their theories and will embrace it, maybe thinking that it reinforces the rest of their theory. Again, I think this can be counterproductive. Yellowbirch1 has long theorized that the throat shot came from the south knoll and Sherry's work proves that a shooter was, indeed, at that location but, beyond that, the rest is still left to speculation based on cicumstantial evidence. Others (like a former forum admin that many of us supported for a few years) realize that it debunks their position and either ignore it or baselessly trash it. I honestly can say that the last example is the only one of that kind that I've seen and ..........

Erroneously, some have suggested that prominent researchers were not endorsing the revelation in "Enemy Of The Truth" and you have found yet another example of support, TLR. Sherry and I, in tandem, have confronted some of these statements by requesting a citing and have still received nothing but chirping crickets as a response. The book was released in November, 2012 and to date we know of no formidable dissension among her peers or otherwise.
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: echelon on October 03, 2013, 07:20:06 PM
The book was released in November, 2012 and to date we know of no formidable dissension among her peers or otherwise.

As you probably know, I am not really interested in the precise mechanics of what happened in DP and therefore I have not read Sherry's book.  Consequently, I will neither criticise it nor promote it.  But it is factually incorrect to claim that nobody who is qualified to criticise it has does so.  You need only to read David Mantik's review over at CTKA to see a very formidable dissension.

http://www.ctka.net/2013/eot_review.html

I believed that this board was supposed to be dedicated to a detailed reading of Sherry's book but it all seems to have gone very quiet.  I would have thought that a discussion and/or rebuttal of the points raised by Mantik would be very germane to our search for the truth.

Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Mitch C. on October 03, 2013, 08:36:33 PM
Quick review of above ^review. Thanks echelon, for posting the link. Required reading if you have read "Enemy of the Truth".

First of all, the review author, Mantik (as interesting as it is), spends way too much time refuting Feister's use of the word "myth". Yes, I already knew that "myth" in it's full (college literature type) meaning is actually a story that reveals a truth. Feister uses it in the more pedestrian understanding: a fallacy. But Mantik drones on a little too long about it, making a mountain out of a molehill. I agree, perhaps Feister should have used "fallacy", but a sentence or two would have sufficed, not a fifth of a very, very long review.

Mantik obviously is a big proponent of an altered Z-Film, so he will have none of Feister's dismissing of it. He makes some interesting arguments, but the two biggest areas of discussion that applies to Z-Film altered or not: Limo stopping (or not as Z-Film suggests), the bloody mist, as Z-Film shows (or not, if painted in: altered), in the end; I still feel that Feister has the best of that argument.

I agree with Mantik that the author needs a better copy editor (lots of errors), and that Feister, after poo-pooing ear witness accuracy, uses ear witness's to bolster her South Knoll shooter theory. Both of these points I made above, before Mantik published his review.

In the end, Mantik agrees with much more than he disagrees with in "Enemy of the Truth"; except for the altered Z-Film which seems to be near and dear in his belief system.
Title: Revisiting "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Phil Dragoo on October 04, 2013, 04:42:29 AM
I had corresponded with William Orchard a couple of years ago; I know his work was meticulous.  It isn't my focus, but he had the head shot coming from the railroad overpass toward the South Knoll, within Sherry Fiester's trajectory cone.  He referenced her book.

Patrick Schannes in his JFK Le Complot site states he finished his work and put it online 2009-2010 and found he was agreeing with Sherry Fiester's book which he cites.

Anthony Fiester has done a great deal of work on his 300-page pdf available free through his blog site.

I've seen some amazing versions of Zapruder frames which seem to show the zipper wound from the temple to the occipitoparietal leaving large flaps, appearing in agreement with Robert Groden's eighty-one (81) witnesses to that large rear exit wound.

I saw that Mantik was frantic over semantics, and used Nicholson the non-CSI, and of course Fetzer who, with Cinque, developed OCD with the TSBD doorway.

I am occasionally very weary of those who critique yet do not create, thinking of Harry Truman's, "Any jackass can kick a barn down, but it takes a carpenter to build one."

It has taken months and much back and forth, but in the not-too-distant future ctka.net will have up the LeBlanc-Dragoo review of Enemy of the Truth.

I am interested in the details to the degree that they lead to a unified comprehension.

I stipulate that removal of the 35th president was a brazen expression of the power of the cabal and its impatience with obstructionists, an object lesson for future temporary inhabitants of the White House.

To that end I find the throat shot and head/kill shot coming from the same secreted never-before-suspected professionally-competent mechanic very much in line with a sponsor-facilitator-mechanic model.

Sherry plugs in the keystone of the forensics into the overarching malignant magnificence of the Caesarian daggers.

The miasma of hatred described in Douglass' Unspeakable presents in all the assassinations, MX, MLK, RFK, and serves in the false flags from Reichstag to the Towers.

To be sure when I told our radiologist of Mantik's radiodensitometry analysis of the Archive lateral and AP skull x-rays she was instantly convinced, having known "there was more to it than we were told."

Of greater weight than myth/fallacy and Zapruder alteration/not are a) the best sourcing of the kill shot; b) the most thorough destruction-in-detail of the Single Bullet Theory; c) the description of backspatter in Zapruder; d) the much-needed, long-awaited criticism of Dallas Police Department dereliction vis-a-vis crime scene protocol.

The popularity of the CSI genre should've made the public more suspicious of the propaganda--but we must bear in mind they've had a fifty-year head start with a mass air force of media winged monkeys.

Mantik should have a book by now.  He's in six places of Horne and two in Fetzer compilations, and often on ctka.net, but he could do a book of his breakthrough work rather than review another's.

His placement of the Harper Fragment in Murder in Dealey Plaza for example.  Groden's eighty-one (81) saw the wound; Mantik put it back together--despite the FBI having lost it and Baden playing Mickey the Dope.

FBI has tried very hard to be Enemy of the Truth Number One.

We might have been suspicious at the Katzenbach memo the day the limo (crime scene) was getting sanitized.

Presumed guilty--another deviation from protocol.

I'd like to see a seminar of the South Knoll researchers availing themselves of such witnesses as Tosh Plumlee recreate the darkest two seconds of the latter half of the Twentieth Century.

In which we would have Dr. Mantik inside the tent.

Detente, entente, justice.
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Cutty on October 04, 2013, 10:44:18 AM
I believed that this board was supposed to be dedicated to a detailed reading of Sherry's book but it all seems to have gone very quiet.  I would have thought that a discussion and/or rebuttal of the points raised by Mantik would be very germane to our search for the truth.

Thank you echelon, you are correct, this is just the type of challenge needed but to have a proper discussion one would be best prepared after reading the book. It was Alan's intent that a group discussion would include folks who have done so. To understand that decades of lab trials replicating ballistic skull wounds have proven beyond hypothesis that a skull moves toward the entering bullet debunks the crux of Mantic's 2 headshot scenario.

I can't add much at the moment to the last 2 posts which I am in agreement with. One key word, however, from Phil"s post is semantics. Mantic (wow, his name is even in the word!) gets us mired in it on a long walk through the forrest, which I would love to view more clearly, but all of those damn trees are in the way. I'm looking forward to Sherry's take on the review ...... she always welcomes the challenge and is quite formidable.

Sorry, but I just can't get away from quoting Mitch here also because when you get down to the back and forth you just can't ignore that:

"facts are stubborn things"

Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: TLR on October 04, 2013, 05:16:55 PM
In some of Weisberg's late 1960s letters (in his archives), he speculated about a shooter being in a vehicle on Commerce St near the Underpass. That person would be at street level, though, and wouldn't have a clear view of JFK.

It's really a shame there were no photos or films taken of the area during the actual shooting.
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Cutty on October 04, 2013, 06:38:51 PM
In some of Weisberg's late 1960s letters (in his archives), he speculated about a shooter being in a vehicle on Commerce St near the Underpass. That person would be at street level, though, and wouldn't have a clear view of JFK.

It's really a shame there were no photos or films taken of the area during the actual shooting.

Agreed, I believe the elevation from the south end of the overpass and along over to the south knoll parking lot is essential to make that/those shot/shots. ??? It certainly makes sense that the limo, immediately after the hairpin turn onto Elm, was now already in the kill zone, directly facing the south knoll area and beginning a decent straight toward  the sniper. We can only speculate, for now, that the shooter may have had to get one off as early as possible to allow time for a second shot once the limo decended far enough so he could take his time and comfortably make the shot without the windshield in the way. I don't know whether a sniper would take a shot intentionally through a windshield but I'm thinking that the type of round might be a factor. We know that the fatal headshot was not a metal jacketed round.

TLR, I believe we were studying some photos together which were taken immediately after and spotting all kinds of men with rifles etc. weren't we?  :) I can't remember at the moment how far back but I'm thinkin' some thread over in our archives?
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: TLR on October 04, 2013, 08:40:29 PM
Karl, there's only the Cancellare photo, taken about 15-30 seconds after the assassination, that shows part of that area.
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Cutty on October 04, 2013, 10:19:19 PM
Yup, that one is eerie enough. Altgens has come over to the north side and the Newmans are still lying on the ground. You can see figures over there along the fence to the parking lot but they're not identifiable, to me anyway. James Tague is identified near the underpass. I remember our coversation including someone saying something to the effect, "well weren't any of those folks checked out over there? ::) That's the only photo, eh?

Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Alan Dale on October 04, 2013, 11:45:33 PM
(http://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/CANCELLARE.JPG)
From Robin Unger's JFK Assassination Research Photo Galleries
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: echelon on October 06, 2013, 06:18:46 AM
I believed that this board was supposed to be dedicated to a detailed reading of Sherry's book but it all seems to have gone very quiet.  I would have thought that a discussion and/or rebuttal of the points raised by Mantik would be very germane to our search for the truth.

Thank you echelon, you are correct, this is just the type of challenge needed but to have a proper discussion one would be best prepared after reading the book. It was Alan's intent that a group discussion would include folks who have done so.

Yes, I agree that to have a sensible discussion one would have to have read the book.  I believe that a quorum of members who have done just that already exists, and so surely a full discussion can now ensue.  What are you waiting for?

You (and others) keep encouraging me to read this book.  However, I have already made clear my acceptance of a South Knoll shooter, as on June 16 on the other forum (the middle one):

Quote
To my own way of thinking, the conspirators would have planned for a number of eventualities.  These would have included the possibilities (1) that the President sat on the LEFT side of the limousine and not on the right, and/or (2) that it had started to rain again and the bubbletop was being used.  I also feel that several sets of shooters/spotters would have been deployed and that each shooter would have taken only one shot.  After all, one presumes that the first shot would always be the best one.  With all these possibilities to be considered, I have always thought it most likely that there was a shooter on the opposite side of the cavalcade, i.e. in the South Knoll area, as well as in the more traditional locations.

I don't need to read this book to accept Sherry's main hypothesis.  I cannot spend hours on this case as I have other priorities in life.  I cannot read every book, website and blog and I prefer to focus on those that deal with more macro-level matters.  I prefer Simpich, Armstrong, Douglass, Scott ... and perhaps even Joseph McBride and Di Eugenio's latest.  Kelin, too ... oh.

However, I would be delighted to lurk around this board while you guys and gals discuss Sherry's book in detail.  You might even get a perceptive contribution out of me every now and then!

Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Cutty on October 06, 2013, 12:06:40 PM
^ Good post! I am in agreement with all of it and we are already fortunate to have your perceptive contributions on many subjects.

This is not exactly the same as my buddy Yellowbirch asking us to read the W.C. report because most of us have read a vast amount of it in other publications and at countless links over the years and "Enemy Of The Truth" breaks new ground. I do, however, understand his motivation to get folks he would like to exchange with gain a better understanding of the pattern of a questionable chain of evidence, priorities on who's testimony was used or NOT and generally evidence of obfuscation etc. After 50 years of kicking this around it can become tedious explaining your thoughts to newbies over and over. It's obviously easier between folks who have gotten up to speed together.

Alan has started up individual threads on this board for discussing each chapter. Sherry has been very busy and I know that it's always better coming from the horse's mouth but Alan & I have held our own so far in trying to represent her positions so all members please have at it and pick a chapter thread you are interested in having some questions about answered. Please remember that the chapter titles are not statements but subjects (myths) that are being debunked.
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Kelly on October 06, 2013, 06:24:11 PM
Hello Karl and thanks for a great discussion on Sherry`s great book, which I missed because I`ve been really sick. Thanks also for the explanation about kinetic energy. It`s clear as a bell to me now. Phil, I was especially impressed with your excellent post. You always make me laugh. I think this book should be discussed and understood how it completely changes history for us willing to see and understand. I agree with Karl that not researchers are going to embrace this with open arms. It`s human nature to argue and fight over ones` beliefs. Another thing, I don`t know much about David Mantik`s research. I don`t know what all he has done to help there be a truthful analysis of the Kennedy assassination. They say don`t throw the baby out with the bathwater, and perhaps he has done really good, but darn if I can take anybody seriously that believes the Zapruder film was faked! Where did that piece of crap come from to start with, James Fetzler? No wonder conspiracy theorists get such a bad rap. The good honest researchers doing an excellent job get put in the same category as the nuts!  Sometime soon, Karl I will be asking about the autopsy photo. 
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: TLR on October 07, 2013, 07:58:10 PM
Hope you're feeling better, Kelly.

Mantik is associated with Fetzer, though Mantik is a better researcher for the most part. People have questioned whether a few frames were deleted or altered since 1964, but I think the wholesale fabrication theory started with Fetzer and his associates in the 1990s. 
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Kelly on October 08, 2013, 07:38:59 AM
Thanks TLR. I feel a little better. I had outpatient surgery yesterday. Thanks for the explanation on James Fetzer and David Mantik. Mantik comes off as a nut in my opinion.
Title: We meet in the hologram, again
Post by: Phil Dragoo on October 09, 2013, 05:02:36 AM
I can appreciate that time is finite and the demands of existence reduce our panoply to tunnel vision.

I enjoyed Sherry's book and have found this Year of the South Knoll to be synchronizing.  I don't think it's accident that Anthony DeFiore's Z-225 throat shot analysis appears at this time.  I just posted an exerpt of Richard Dudman's November 30, 1963-datelined article published December 1, 1963 in the Saint Louis Post Dispatch describing the hole in the windshield he saw "with another man" at Parkland. (see footnote)

Talking to a shooter last night, a man with many guns, who had said Oswald was the only one in position to make the shot, I asked him, "Do you have a gun which can throw a bullet in a you-ee, make a U-turn and come back one-eighty, because there were two small holes in Kennedy, one in his right temple which exited his right occipito-parietal, a wound seen by eighty-one per Robert Groden, and one in his throat, in front, above the tie "(which had Elmer Moore on the phone to Perry all Friday night, and Specter and Dulles administering a proctological exam--all which made the doctor confide, "I was afraid they were going to kill me")

So is Mantik useful--when I told our radiologist in 2003 of his work at the Archives on the AP and lateral skull X-rays using radiodensitometry to prove forgery she said, "I knew there was more to it than we were told."

First we look at Alan's Cancellare from Robin Unger at 14 above with attention to the cars in the lot.  Then at the aerial photo below, and there's a car in the corner of the lot, showing where one could've been, as well as anywhere along the fence, all giving elevation, the azimuth gettting juicier toward the overpass:

(http://oi42.tinypic.com/ofd9o3.jpg)

And that day in Paris a representative of William K Harvey was giving Rolando Cubela a CIA technical services pen with poison to kill Castro; the Mongoose as plausible denial, pointing at Castro, when Helms set Harvey to have Maheu get Roselli who begot Giancana, Nicoletti, and so on and so forth--but to get Castro, you understand--and, of course, it's the Mob, you see

She's got the mass moving at no more than 11 mph toward the shooter; and perhaps a NATO round--for Cubela asked Harvey for a silenced scoped FAL, to get Castro, you understand, and even though this military weapon could easily fire at Z-225 and Z-313 (if we accept 18 fps), it was for Castro

A small hole in the right temple, and the head moves ITEK two inches forward (or maybe everybody did when the stop which didn't occur, occurred) due to kinetic transfer--and we see the backspatter appear and disappear in milliseconds which we wouldn't know it does until 1982

Everyone runs for fence and for the intersection of the fence and the overpass balustrade at the North because of the shots and the commotion and the smoke and the smell of gunpowder reported by Senator Yarborough and Dave Powers and Larry O'Donnell

Harvey had written on the ZR-RIFLE program.  Hunt had his son put Soutre (or someone using his name) on page 123 of Bond of Secrecy, the deathbed deflection from CIA to LBJ; WerBell was producing suppressors for CIA and military, later to become SIONICS, Inc. and between Harvey and WerBell the secret teams of CIA and military specialists were developed

Other shooter (teams) were synched up with perhaps a Collins cryptic radio communications net with (Gordon Novel per Richard Sprague to Louis Stokes in the Appendix of The Taking of America 1-2-3) Umbrella Man pumping and Walkie Talkie man holding up his fist in the military halt signal

And Greer, sitting in for the recently heart-attacked driver Thomas Shipman, dutifully halted (or dramatically slowed, or, simply braked--"I'm so sorry, Mrs. Kennedy," he explained lamely)

While attention was focused on the fake Secret Service agents behind the fence (one of whom Webermann and Canfield may have got Seymour Weitzman to identify as Bernard Barker) then on the carton fort in the sixth floor East, the precursor to the Beltway Snipers drove away in their Chevy with the trunk lid shooting port

This is not an ad hoc, impromptu, event; LBJ announced JFK would lunch in Dallas in the Fall on April 23.  The Thomas dinner in Houston Thursday the 21st insured the party would overnight in that city and fly to Love Field for a motorcade to the Trade Mart the next day

Ruth Paine put Oswald in the Depository, after he was handed off by DeMohrenschildt (wife former partner to Zapruder).  One researcher posits shots from the Dal-Tex, and surely that source explains the Tague ricochet better than any other

Was Braden in that building that day?  Was Ruby there that week?  Were others there--Roselli known at JM WAVE as a "colonel" and used for deniability (Blakey's obedient "mob did it" limited hangout) or was Nicoletti there--for Nicoletti and DeMohrenschildt were murdered March 29, 1977--just after Stansfield Turner replaced GHWBush as DCI

The trajectory might extend to David Rockefeller of Chase who was a major opponent of JFK's comptroller of currency William Saxon, not to mention the EO 11110, the refusal to open up Southeast Asia to resource exploitation (including heroin)

But the mechanic was there on the South Knoll; the sponsor is invisible (always) and the facilitators may chiefly include the Dulles and Angletons et al of the CIA: Sword and Shield of the Cabal, as well as Hoover and Johnson Guess Who Came To Dinner obfuscators

Mantik is also useful in having revealed the wound area appears flat when the back of head is viewed using stereo pairs at the National Archive at College Park

Do I care enough about semantics to expend hundreds of words to quibble--

In the middle of the Century of the Fed, between the conspiracy-clouded birth on Jekyll Island to the blowback to the CIA gunrunning through the Benghazi operation we are in the stranglehold of a dark elite of amoral powerborgs

You say tomato; I say tomato.

Sherry says it as it is, regarding the source of the shot heard round the Century.  A Thomas Noguchi for the murder of the 35th president.

Footnote:

Dudman article:

Richard Dudman's article in the Saint Louis Post Dispatch datelined November 30, 1963, published December 1, 1963, also notes the hole in the windshield, observed by the reporter and a colleague at Parkland:

Another unexplained circumstance is a small hole in the windshield of the presidential limousine. This correspondent and one other man saw the hole, which resembled a bullet hole, as the automobile stood at the hospital emergency entrance while the President was being treated inside the building.

The Secret Service kept possession of the automobile and flew it back to Washington. A spokesman for the agency rejected a request to inspect the vehicle here. He declined to discuss any hole there might be in the windshield.

I have a pdf of the clipping, and Word Document of the transcript for anyone wishing to obtain the source for the above quote.
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Alan Dale on October 09, 2013, 12:04:37 PM
^ Superb.

Your participation is a gift.

I would refer all who seek deeper understanding to the sticky thread dedicated to Phil Dragoo's commentaries and images.

http://www.jfkessentials.com/forum/index.php?topic=56.0
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: TLR on October 09, 2013, 07:53:25 PM
That's definitely another one to include in Phil's Greatest Hits.
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Sherry on October 10, 2013, 06:40:47 AM
Hi Mitch,
We must address and account for the contradictory statements of witnesses concerning the gunshots they heard. They are not all in agreement, and even persons in the same area disagree on shot origins. The chapter on ear witnesses is only presented to explain why there are differences, not to suggest they are completely unreliable. I admit I evidently did a poor job in explaining why I included that information.

However, it is important to say I am not using ear witnesses to support my trajectory findings. I make that determination based solely on the shooting reconstruction techniques listed in the book. What witnesses heard to totally irrelevant in that process.

Thanks for you interest, comments and for reading the book.

My very best to you,
Sherry
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Sherry on October 10, 2013, 06:51:02 AM
I appreciate that David Mantik read the book, however he definitely has made some major mistakes in the review and in his basic understanding of the forensic techniques I addressed. Moreover, I feel that rather than review my work, he used it as a platform to promote his personal agenda... which is his right of course.

At any rate, it is significant (in my opinion) that no one in my field has ever disagreed with my findings.

I am very appreciative of Mantik's interest, and that he took the time to read and address Enemy of the Truth.

Thank you for your comments.

Sherry
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Sherry on October 10, 2013, 06:56:45 AM
I see that this continues to be an issue with readers - evidence that I did not make myself clear in its importance in the trajectory analysis. I am not trying to "have it both ways" when addressing ear witnesses. I simply wanted to provide as much witness information in the book as possible. I certainly did not intend for witness testimony to buttress trajectory analysis for the head shot. In fact, witness testimony is not considered at all in my trajectory findings.

I apologize for the lack of clarity. Thanks for you interest, comments and for reading my book.

Sincerely,
Sherry


Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Mitch C. on October 12, 2013, 11:44:03 AM
Sherry^ Thank you for taking the time to check in on this forum. My concerns over possible contradictions in your work concerning the value of "ear witnesses" were minor, and I appreciate your clarification on the subject.

More important is the fact your research has shattered a long held belief of mine that the kill shot came from the Grassy Knoll. I had to swallow hard, but facts ARE stubborn things. You have presented them in a very straightforward, dispassionate manner that any intelligent layperson (I am definitely the latter; the former is arguable) could understand.

Echelon: I suggest you revisit your decision to not read the book. I understand you already believe Sherry's main premise, but I would value your on going input in this discussion; and a full reading of "Enemy..." would be instructive. As for time: I am very busy as well, but this is a relatively short read compared to other mammoth works. I was finished in three days, with many other of my usual activities interspersed.
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: D.K.Garretson on November 18, 2013, 10:25:52 PM
Sherry (or others),

Do you have a personal point of view on shots fired? Seems your conclusions may indeed support 2 (or 3) shots from the recovered Mann-Carc (per chapter 5 ballistics) and 2 shots from South Knoll per trajectory analysis?  If so, then "grassy knoll" is smoke and mirrors i.e.,  intentional misdirection?

Thanks for any feedback

Ken
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Cutty on November 19, 2013, 12:57:05 AM
^ I believe that at this point we have one proven headshot from the front (the north knoll was to the side) and all other shots are still left to speculation.

Personally, I have theorized that the north knoll was the scene of some shady activity. Maybe a missed shot or diversionary fireworks or something occurred there but since "Enemy Of The Truth" I now understand that the proven fact of the one and only head shot coming from the other side of the plaza causes all research of goings on behind the infamous fence to be viewed from a new perspective.

Thanks for your participation.

Karl
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Sherry on November 19, 2013, 08:04:41 PM
Mitch C. writes: Yet, at the end of the chapter "The Grassy Knoll Headshot", after convincingly arguing that the kill shot likely came from the SOUTH knoll area, she still felt the need to buttress her argument with ear witness testimony of hearing shots from that area. A devils's advocate would say she is trying to have it both ways.

Sherry responds: Witness testimony plays absolutely NO part in the analysis. The analysis is based on standard shooting reconstruction procedures, which can be verified through the many sources I cited in the book. (or you can google the procedures) I did not include the witness information as a buttress to my trajectory analysis. I simply included it to be through in presenting all available relevant information.

Echelon writes: But it is factually incorrect to claim that nobody who is qualified to criticize it has does so. You need only to read David Mantik's review over at CTKA to see a very formidable dissension.

Sherry responds: My work has been peer reviewed and found correct by court certified forensic professionals who are qualified to do so.

David Mantik is most certainly NOT qualified to comment on many of the issues he addresses. Therefore, the information he presents as “facts” are in error. For example, Mantik’s confusion concerning wound ballistics is apparent in his statement suggesting a correlation between wounding and bullet fragment patterns. Moreover, he apparently does not understand the mechanics of bullet fragment pattern creation. His comments concerning the blood on the inside of the limo windshield demonstrates his confusion regarding blood spatter. I could go on, but it really is not necessary. Mantik may be an expert in his field, but he is not a forensic expert in shooting event reconstructions, wound ballistics or blood spatter analysis.

Mitch, you are right -  “Mantik agrees with much more than he disagrees with in "Enemy of the Truth"; except for the altered Z-Film which seems to be near and dear in his belief system.”

Thank you Phil and Karl for your consistent encouragement and unfailing support in promoting forensics to determine the truth concerning this homicide.
Title: Directionality vis-a-vis Thomas Noguchi and Sherry Fiester
Post by: Phil Dragoo on December 02, 2013, 05:41:46 AM
We have in the event of November 22, 1963, the most important assassination of the Twentieth Century, and a radical reset from a quest for peace to a rush to war.

DiEugenio in Reclaiming Parkland states the two major lies of the event are 1) Oswald shot Kennedy; 2) LBJ merely continued JFK's Vietnam War.

Let us look at the first which was used to accomplish the war.

Dulles and McCloy with Ford the commissioner-informant actively framed Oswald, as does Bugliosi, without trial.

We have in Sherry Fiester's Enemy of the Truth the closest thing to an expert witness for the defense in the trial which was denied America

I stipulate it is comprehensive, credible and compelling, if not definitive and final.

The alternatives are examined and dismissed as they do not satisfy observed phenomena per present professional protocol.

The oft repeated lie that Oswald killed Kennedy is paralleled by the mischaracterization of Sirhan the hypnotized decoy as the assassin

Thomas Noguchi as presented in Turner and Christian as well as Klaber and Melanson (also O'Sullivan) demonstrates the four shots into the candidate or his clothing were right to left, down to up, back to front, point blank: a position never occupied by Sirhan but describing Ace Securtiy Guard Thane Eugene Cesar (whose H & R 922 satisfies the acoustic signature of five of the thirteen shots on the audio tape)

We have fifty to eighty witnesses to the avulsive occipitoparietal wound at the right, from the entry at the right temple/hairline, the hole seen by some of the physicians, described to Kilduff by Perry, described by Robinson the mortician, emanating fragments, causing radial and concentric fracturing, producing kinetic transfer and backspatter

at Z-313 when the president's head was twenty-five degrees left, plotted in the vehicle on the street aiming a cone of trajectory at the South Knoll

coincidentally the area determined by Anthony DeFiore for a throat shot at Z-225 in his 300-page analysis

Without Noguchi we have only a vague sense of the true trajectory

as with the head shot of the president absent the professional analysis of the certified expert

The Goebellsian Lie that Oswald killed Kennedy is a myth we must do away with

Recall that Robert Ruark in writing of the Mau Mau uprising against British Rule in Something of Value cites the Bantu proverb:

"If you do away with the traditions of the past, then you must first replace them with Something of Value"

We replace the Sirhan frame with the Noguchi professional analysis

and the Oswald frame with the Fiester professional analysis

It is not necessary to speculate in either case

Blaming and framing Sirhan and Oswald is entirely unsupportable

These are matters as devastating for the status quo as Copernicus' insight in his day

A nation stumbling along following a myth is in great danger of falling for the next one

(http://oi48.tinypic.com/feqark.jpg)
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: TLR on December 02, 2013, 05:39:29 PM
Same modus operandi used in the killings of Medgar Evers, JFK, MLK - unseen rifleman firing from a concealed position, rifle left at the scene. James Earl Ray was set up like Oswald. Firing from that bathroom window, jammed against the wall while standing in the bathtub is even worse than the Book Depository 6th floor. Byron de la Beckwith seems to have been the real shooter of Evers, though I'm open to the possibility that he wasn't.

Then, we see a change in M.O. - a disturbed young person appears madly firing (or attempting to fire) a handgun - Sirhan, Bremer, Fromme, Moore, Chapman, Hinckley, Mehmet Ali Agca, etc. In the case of RFK, and possibly Wallace, Lennon, Reagan and the Pope there appears to be a second shooter while attention is focused on the decoy standing there waiting to be caught. MK/ULTRA brainwashing program has finally bore fruit, at least as far as setting up a patsy.
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Fast Eddie on January 21, 2014, 09:42:15 PM
Same modus operandi used in the killings of Medgar Evers, JFK, MLK - unseen rifleman firing from a concealed position, rifle left at the scene. James Earl Ray was set up like Oswald. Firing from that bathroom window, jammed against the wall while standing in the bathtub is even worse than the Book Depository 6th floor. Byron de la Beckwith seems to have been the real shooter of Evers, though I'm open to the possibility that he wasn't.

Then, we see a change in M.O. - a disturbed young person appears madly firing (or attempting to fire) a handgun - Sirhan, Bremer, Fromme, Moore, Chapman, Hinckley, Mehmet Ali Agca, etc. In the case of RFK, and possibly Wallace, Lennon, Reagan and the Pope there appears to be a second shooter while attention is focused on the decoy standing there waiting to be caught. MK/ULTRA brainwashing program has finally bore fruit, at least as far as setting up a patsy.
Add in the notion that the disturbed person, prompted by whatever source, not knowing of the second shooter, himself/herself thinks he's the one that did it, that he's responsible.  This would explain, for instance, Ray's post-shooting behavior (albeit he's more criminal than disturbed, per se).
Title: Shadow government's recurring shadow play modus operandi
Post by: Phil Dragoo on January 22, 2014, 03:04:31 AM
Ray fired no shot.  I prefer William F Pepper, Orders to Kill.  Mark Lane and Dick Gregory did Code Name Zorro.  Melanson and Weisberg covered it.  There was no shot from the boarding house bathtub window—until Memphis Sanitation cleared the brush the next day.

Marrell McCullough a milint/later-CIA operative was in the Lorraine lot where King had been taunted by Hoover to move from the white hotel—then King was moved from an interior room to a balcony room.

Ray was patiently set up as an apprentice to Raoul for a hit on the leader who’d come out against the war one year to the day prior to his assassination.  There would be no mass demonstration in Washington.

The security stripping was done through Earl Holloman Memphis Police and Fire Commissioner who was a 25-year FBI veteran and member of Hoover’s personal detail.

The modern incarnation of the patsy is Adam Lanza who was visited by the FBI in 2004 in re his hacking double security on a government website 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2542974/FBI-officers-went-Adam-Lanzas-home-2004-ask-hacked-two-layers-government-security-mom-told-hes-computer-whiz-whos-just-testing-himself.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2542974/FBI-officers-went-Adam-Lanzas-home-2004-ask-hacked-two-layers-government-security-mom-told-hes-computer-whiz-whos-just-testing-himself.html)

Writings he did between hacking and mass shooting indicate self-awareness of programming of a type we’ve seen used on Sirhan and no doubt Chapman and Hinckley who presented as model psychoses.

previously undiscovered writing of Lanza's where he rails against 'the system' and talks about how he felt students were being brainwashed.
'It goes without saying that an AK-47 and enough ammunition could do more good than a thousand ‘teachers,‘ if one is truly interested in reforming the system,' Adam wrote a year before the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.
'In short time the children will be brainwashed, pumped full of Xanax and told to conform, until they have been turned into the oppressors.
'They (the children) are already dead.'

The pattern of assassinations has been to demonize the target then set up a deniable patsy

With James Holmes we have a patient of the Air Force chief medical officer.  With Lanza a person of interest to the FBI.  Added to the Columbine pattern we have societal anomalies medicated by Joly West equivalents and set loose to drive the sheep into the “protection” of SWAT’s Startroopers—who invariably wait outside while the perp runs up a score and self-terminates

With Noguchi and Fiester we break through the top story,  that Bobby and John shunned protection.

In truth Palamara shows JFK never said to remove the agents—that was all carefully done by the hidden hand, a common link that Bruno signed off on the route and Bruno’s employee led RFK into the pantry and away from his protection.

Was it Chapman or the Brigade veteran; was it Hinckley or a second gun above as then NBC reporter Judy Woodward reported, a Secret Service man firing what was likely the near-fatal shot.

Trajectory analysis is a vital aspect of forensics, Fiester’s forte.  Shadow government shills a la Dale Myers beat the dead horse of the single bullet theory roundly debunked in Sherry’s 67-page Chapter Eight and lampooned in Pat Speer’s Animania http://www.patspeer.com/chapter12c%3Aanimania (http://www.patspeer.com/chapter12c%3Aanimania)






Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Leslie Sharp on January 22, 2014, 10:22:30 PM
Phil, excellent.
"Trajectory analysis is a vital aspect of forensics,"  and I would add that this premise can be applied on the metaphysical plain relating to the assassinations/mass murders you have referenced.. 

You have laid out an example - a trajectory in a metaphorical sense - of blood spatters, bone fragments, etc.,  by identifying assassins, alleged assassins, accomplices, circumstances involved in a number of major incidents since the early '60's.  I'm sure you have a body of research that suggests this pattern (forensics) did not originate with the murder of John Kennedy in Dallas in 1963; but for now, the focus begins there.

Trajectory and context are essential in the study of these murders just as blood spatters, bone fragments, etc. apply to a crime scene.  For instance, before Lanza's psychiatrist's affiliation in San Antonio, there was Strughold's transfer from Nazi Germany via the  Paperclip route to Randolph.  There is then a relationship between Randolph AFB via Paperclip with the Manhattan Project and Los Alamos where James Holmes' father was involved at the time of Aurora.  I'm going to guess that if we study Timothy McVeigh in this context, we will identify "blood spatters."  I can offer one particular anecdote: the summer before 9/11, a military private contractor was engaged to stage the Oklahoma National Guard two week exercise - food, tents, latrines, the full set up -  just minutes from Elohim City which was McVeigh's alleged base prior to the OKC bombing in 1995.  This same military contractor was by pure coincidence  contracted only months later for the highly controversial and rapid removal of debris from the World Trade Center to Fresh Kills in the weeks following 9/11.  Was the OK National Guard involved?  Was the operation in Summer, 2001 in Eastern OK a dress rehearsal?  Watch for blood spatters.

Everything is about context and trajectory, and similarly the Kennedy assassination investigation is ultimately about the scene of the crime.
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Mitch C. on January 25, 2014, 12:39:07 PM
If you only had 4 hours in Dealey Plaza?? In June traveling from A to B, I have purposely scheduled extra time to stay a night in Dallas; and I will be choosing to stay in one of the hotels within easy walking distance to the plaza; yes this will be my first time, a bucket list thing. So assuming I only have 4 hours, where do I start? Should I take the official Gary Mack museum tour; I am going to assume this is a must, if only to actually get on the 6th floor, although I understand there is no access to the supposed sniper lair. Also, now that it has been all but proven that the kill shot came from the SOUTH (where few tourists will be snooping...sadly..), after the obligatory Grassy Knoll visit (I still believe there was mischief there), where across the street should I go?? I am open to suggestions from those of you that have been there. Also feel free to message me.
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Leslie Sharp on January 25, 2014, 08:23:30 PM
Mitch, I found the tour at the museum to be a distraction and very annoying, but if it is now the only way you can gain a perspective from the 6th floor, I would take the time.  The scale is disconcerting.

I would then walk the perimeters to gain the perspectives from the Dal-Tex Bldg., the overpass, and definitely that drain near the Knoll, etc.  But then I would walk around the depository building as many times as required to get the setting fixed in my mind.  I would do some homework to locate 1963 photos of the area north of the building, around the rail tracks, the vacant and or abandoned buildings in the area, and make a comparison.  Could (a team of) assassin(s) escape out the back of the building undetected; could they have hidden until nightfall, or been spirited out of Dallas via Stemmons or Harry Hines?

I would then walk the route that Oswald was alleged to have taken in the minutes after the assassination.  I've long been curious why anyone would head toward Lamar and Poydras rather than opting for a less exposed path.  I have a theory that he was en route to a location in downtown that he was familiar with, in a knee jerk reaction, then changed his mind.  From there, I would study certain buildings in downtown, including the Kirby and the Davis building, the former Texas Bank and Trust Bldg. and the Rio Grande National Life Bldg. 

And then I would find my way to Dick's Last Resort in the West End (the original location was Houston and Lamar) and have a fabulous plate of ribs or catfish, a beer, and reflect on the last 51 years.

Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: Sherry on January 26, 2014, 04:19:32 AM
Mitch, I would be interested in meeting you in Dealey Plaza. Let me know if you are interested.
Sherry
Title: Re: Quick take of Ms. Feister's "Enemy of the Truth"
Post by: David C on January 27, 2014, 09:59:32 PM
Phil,

I would offer that we have already bought the next great myth,

Its called the last "recession"

I purpose it was a going away present from Bush to his buddies, funny how it all came together right at the end of his term. Now lets look at where all that money went, that just vanished.

In the market, for every buyer, there's a seller, for every winner, theres a loseer.

And then of course theres all that govt bail out money, I didnt get any, did you.