What’s the most important piece of new JFK assassination evidence?

A previously unknown recording of radio communications to and from Air Force One on November 22,1963, is among the most important new pieces of JFK evidence to emerge in recent years,

The tape, an edited excerpt from a longer recording, captures some of the communications of the leaders of U.S. national security agencies as they learned about the assassination of a sitting president.

I wrote about the importance of the Air Force One tape last fall:

“Audio engineer on the trail of a long-lost JFK tape” (JFK Facts, Nov. 6, 2013)

“Enhanced Air Force One tape captures top general’s response to JFK’s murder”  (JFK Facts, Oct. 19, 2013)

You can listen to it here.

Where was the Air Force One tape found?

This old-fashioned reel of analog tape surfaced at Philadelphia auction house in 2011. The recording was found the estate of the family of Gen. Chester Clifton, a military aide to JFK. Clifton died in 1991. His children put the estate up for auction.

Bill Kelly, a JFK researcher, enlisted Primeau Forensics, a Michigan audio engineering firm, to produce a cleaned-up version of the tape.

When was the tape first made public?

Kelly’s presentation about the Air Force One tapes at the recent trailblazing JFK conference at Duquesne University convinced me of its importance.

I write about the significance of the Air Force One tapes in piece published in the Oct. 27, 2013, print edition of the Dallas Morning News.

The Detroit Free Press, USA Today, and CNN also covered the story of the tapes.

Why is the Air Force One tape important?

“The government created these recordings,” audio engineer Ed Primeau told JFK Facts. “The editing shows that somebody made decisions about what they wanted the public to know and hear and what they didn’t want the public to know and hear.”

The tapes capture a fascinating and tragic moment in  American history.

Listen to the tape (parts 1,2 3, and 4) as cleaned up and transcribed by Bill Kelly and Ed Primeau with a running transcript and visuals from Primeau Productions.

Read Kelly’s summary of what we know about the missing portions of Air Force One tapes.

 

 

40 comments

  1. Dan says:

    An article in the Washingtonian magazine linked below states that in 1963 Air Force One (SAM 26000) could handle three radio conversations simultaneously, and that the radio operator was kept busy every minute of the 2 hour 12 minute flight from Dallas to Andrews AFB. This would support Bill Kelly’s statement that a lot of the transmissions are missing from the tapes so far available.

    Link: http://www.washingtonian.com/projects/JFK-AF1/layout2.html#story

  2. Robert Harper says:

    The discovery, by Rex Bradford I think,that 14 minutes of a taped conversation between LBJ and Hoover, was manually erased, ranks near this discovery. Unique among the tapes compiled – unexplained eraser – a transcript survives,but, like the “misssing” tapes and transcripts of AF1, we don’t know the whole of what was said. Each was recorded during a 24 hour period starting the afternoon of November 22, 1963. Bravo to Bill Kelly for his excellent work.

  3. Jonathan says:

    For me, the single most important factual discovery in the JFK case is the discovery by the ARRB in the late 1990s and the subsequent discovery late in the last decade by Peter Janney that the NPIC photographic facility in Washington, D.C. produced two different sets of briefing boards using two different versions of the Z-film on the weekend of the assassination.

    And the the fact that the two teams who prepared the photographs for the briefing boards were completely unaware of each other’s work.

    The second team, headed by Homer McMahon, worked with an unslit, 16-mm wide film straight from Hawkeye Works in Rochester, New York. McMahon, a renowned trick shot artist, testified to the ARRB that as he viewed his version of the Z-film, he observed six to eight shots hitting their mark, coming from at least three different directions.

    McMahon’s ARRB testimony together with some very useful annotations can be found at the “Reopen Kennedy Case” site under Bill Kelly’s collection of research materials.

    It’s quite clear from the ARRB testimony and the annotations (relating to Peter Janney’s discovery) that the CIA, perhaps with help from the Secret Service, produced a false version of the Z-film at its Hawkeye Works facility, the version that exists today; but even the false version could not fool the trained eye and intuitive mind of Homer McMahon.

  4. TLR says:

    I’m sure there’s a non-sinister explanation for all of these missing tapes. I’m sure their motives are pure. ;-)

  5. Brad Milch says:

    Not to be overlooked in this still developing story are locating & interviewing the pilots & load crew of the C-130 cargo plane that waited to fly President Kennedy’s parade car out of Love Field while Parkland doctors feverishly tried to save his life that most likely heard some or all of the AF-1 radio traffic broadcast 22 Nov 1963. Contacting them & their commanders they belonged to can help answer questions about the AF-1 audio tapes along with the exact state of damage to JFK’s parade car (was there a bullet hole in the windshield). Both researchers, TV media & the public can assist in locating that crew while globally countries that were within range of the broadcasted AF-1 transmissions that had the capability to receive, record or transcribe those signals can help the US locate an unedited version of the tapes that will help us all understand what happened & why portions of the broadcasts were sanitized before the public could hear & study them.

    This topic is an example of what separates Jeff Morley from his peers who either believe the Dallas police & the Federal Government solved the JFK murder 50 years ago & no further investigative efforts are needed or they have solved the case independently & no attention should be given to researchers with alternative views of the JFK ambush in Dallas. For them, the case is over, with Jeff Morley new information is possible & sought. For me, this is why I stick with Jeff Morley. He’s like Captain Kirk boldly searching new frontiers. With McAdams, Meyers, Von Pein, Reitzes & the rest of their ‘Oswald Did it’ peers the journey has ended long ago. With them the reader is at a dead end IMO.

  6. Thomas Joseph says:

    In the aftershock following the Snowden NSA electronic eavesdropping & data mining disclosures it’s not unreasonable to wonder if NSA has the complete AF-1 radio transmissions somewhere in its data mines any more than it’s unreasonable to wonder if NSA has every phone call Lee Oswald or LBJ ever made. Our government & law enforcement agencies spies on us. The problem is living long enough for the anticipated release of the information. The home bases AF-1 & 2 plus the c-130 cargo plane that airlifted JFK’s death car should have had the capability to record transmissions made by aircraft the day of the assassination. There is hope someone ‘in the loop’ has the information the public was denied & will follow Snowden’s courageous example & share the wealth with a concerned public.

  7. Lanny says:

    Quoting from Jeff Morley’s October 26, 2013 article in the Dallas Morning News:

    “The available tapes capture 88 minutes of conversation. Kelly notes that the flight from Dallas to take JFK’s body back to Washington took almost four hours, or 240 minutes.

    “So it is virtually certain that there were other conversations to and from Air Force One that fateful day that were recorded but have never been heard. Even after 50 years, the real-time response of the Pentagon to the violent death of a commander in chief is not part of the public record.”

    ********************

    Air Force One departed Love Field for Washington, D. C. at 2:47 p.m. CST (3:47 EST) on November 22, 1963 and arrived Andrews Air Force Base 2 hours and 12 minutes later at 5:59 p.m. EST (4:59 CST).

    It appears from my own limited research that Bill Kelly enjoys a generally positive reputation among his research peers, but miscalculating the duration of a two hour flight with a single time zone change was most certainly NOT his finest hour.

    Anyone still searching for those “virtually certain” recorded but unheard conversations should be called home to dinner and given the bad news. “They aren’t out there.”

    • TLR says:

      Lanny, read Kelly’s own words, and maybe you’d like to retract your charge.

      http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2013/10/air-force-one-tapes-estimated-time.html

      “To estimate the amount of tape recordings that have not been released, the correct math is:

      Time from Love Field, Dallas to Andrews AFB, Maryland = Two hours, seventeen minutes.

      Number of radios “in continuous use” – according to AF1 radioman Master Sgt. Trimble = three.

      According to Doug Horne, the staff member of the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) assigned to review the Air Force One tapes (From his book “Inside the ARRB, Vol. V., p1662): Trimble’s After Action Report: “I…had three phone patches goig simultaneously most of the time.”). According to the Esquire article, Trimble is still alive.

      Horne: “As an ARRB staff member I was very concerned with determining whether or not a significant ortion of time had been excised from the original recordings. Anyone concerned with the excise must begin with the flight time from Love Field to Andrews AFB: 2 hours and 17 minutes…..it is wise to take a conservative…which yields two hours times three radios…six hours of unedited voice conversations as the length of the unedited Air Force One tapes from November 22, 1963. Since the tapes at the Archives are a maximum of two hours in length, approximately four hours have been excised. It appears safe to say, then, that the amount of time edited out of the existing tapes is twice as long as the length of the information released by the LBJ Library. This is extremely disturbing.”

      Four hours is 240 minutes of tape is estimated to be missing.”

    • Photon says:

      If you claim that a flight is twice as long as it has been proven to be, why believe any conclusion based on that false time line?
      The point is that nothing of real substance related to the assassination is on these tapes- and much of the conversation is ground talk not directly involving SAm 26000. While fascinating historically, taken out of context they really do not rise to the level of breakthrough claimed on this blog.The “Washingtonian” article is much more enlightening about the flight itself.

      • TLR says:

        And if someone consistently misrepresents another person’s views, why should their analysis be taken seriously?

  8. Pat Speer says:

    The most important piece of new evidence to emerge in recent years is still unrecognized by most everyone following the case.

    On 1-21-00, the government released a report on tests conducted on CE 567, the nose of a bullet found on the driver’s seat of Kennedy’s limousine. It had long been observed that there was foreign material on this bullet fragment, and the HSCA had asked that tests be conducted on this material. These tests were not conducted, however, until after the uproar surrounding Oliver Stone’s film JFK brought the ARRB into existence. The results of these tests, initially reported on 9-16-98, were that 3 of the 4 pieces of foreign material found on CE 567 were human SKIN, and that the fourth was human tissue.

    http://www.jfklancer.com/LNE/fragments/fragreport.html

    So where did this skin come from, you might ask? Well, the entrance wound on the back of Kennedy’s skull–whichever entrance location you prefer–was quite small in comparison to the large defect at the top of Kennedy’s skull.

    The autopsy protocol, we should remember, describes Kennedy’s large head wound as follows: “There is a large irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right involving chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the temporal and occipital regions. In this region there is an actual absence of scalp and bone producing a defect which measures approximately 13 cm in greatest diameter.”

    So it seems clear the skin derived from the large defect…

    Now, here’s where things get interesting. Medicolegal Investigation of Death, which is pretty much a Bible to Forensic Pathologists everywhere, addresses this issue of missing scalp as follows: “A point frequently ignored, or forgotten, in comparing entrance and exit wounds is that approximation of the edges of an entrance wound usually retains a small central defect, a missing area of skin. On the other hand, approximation of the edges of the exit re-establishes the skin’s integrity.”

    So, yep, that’s right. The “experts” tell us the large defect was an entrance wound. So why wasn’t this acknowledged by the HSCA Pathology Panel, you might ask?

    Well, actually, it was.

    The authors of Medicolegal Investigation of Death were Dr. Russell Fisher, of the Clark Panel, and Dr. Werner Spitz, of the HSCA Forensic Pathology Panel. The HSCA pathology panel’s report was most certainly accommodating Spitz, then, when it critiqued the autopsy protocol’s description of missing scalp as follows: “It is probably misleading in the sense that it describes “an actual absence of skin and bone. The scalp was probably virtually all present, but torn and displaced…”

    So, there it is. The HSCA Pathology Panel KNEW the missing skin at the large defect meant the large defect was an entrance wound (or more probably, a wound of both entrance and exit) but chose to pretend the autopsy doctors were just too stupid realize that, yep, that big gaping hole of scalp and skull wasn’t really a big gaping hole of scalp and skull, just skull.

    They totally ignored that Dr. William Kemp Clark, the one Parkland doctor to closely inspect Kennedy’s head wound, shared the observations of the autopsists, and independently observed “There was considerable loss of scalp and bone tissue” in an 11-22-63 report written before the commencement of the autopsy. (Wasn’t this required reading?)

    And they also ignored that on 11-30-63, Secret Service agent Clint Hill, who’d climbed onto the back of Kennedy’s limo just after the fatal shot was fired, wrote a report in which he claimed: “As I lay over the top of the back seat I noticed a portion of the President’s head on the right rear side was missing and he was bleeding profusely. Part of his brain was gone. I saw a part of his skull with hair on it lieing in the seat.”

    Yeah, that’s right. This bone fragment, which had obviously originated from the large defect on the right side of Kennedy’s head, had hair on it. Well, that means scalp was missing at the large defect…

    The HSCA Pathology Panel was clearly blowing smoke…

    So, now let’s go back to what we were told on 1-14-00, that no one was ready to hear…

    CE 567, the crumpled bullet nose found in the front section of the limo, had patches of skin within its crumples. This strongly suggests, if not proves, that this bullet impacted at the large defect on Kennedy’s head, which in turn strongly suggests, if not proves, that Kennedy was struck in the skull by two separate bullets, which in turn strongly suggests, if not proves, there were two shooters firing on Kennedy on 11-22-63.

    This is not a CT theory. It’s what the top experts tell us. It’s what science tells us.

    I mean, what are the alternative explanations for this skin? John Orr, whose research was featured on a Fox Special last fall, firmly believes CE 567 is a fragment from a bullet that entered Kennedy’s back and exited his throat. But that’s just nonsense. The entrance hole on Kennedy’s back was tiny. The hole on the throat was even tinier… And, to make matters worse, the bullet creating these holes was almost certainly un-deformed and unlikely to collect skin as it passed through the body.

    (Dr. Vincent J.M. DiMaio, in his standard text Gunshot Wounds, observes that, of all the tissues likely to be found on a bullet, “Skin was the least commonly encountered.”)

    So, what, are we to believe this bullet exited Kennedy’s throat with some skin draped over its nose, and that this skin stayed on this super-sonic bullet as it crashed into the windshield frame?

    Or are we ready to acknowledge that this skin got on the bullet when the bullet crumpled on Kennedy’s skull…at the large defect?

    • Bill Pierce says:

      Pat Speer writes:
      “They totally ignored that Dr. William Kemp Clark, the one Parkland doctor to closely inspect Kennedy’s head wound, shared the observations of the autopsists, and independently observed “There was considerable loss of scalp and bone tissue” in an 11-22-63 report written before the commencement of the autopsy. (Wasn’t this required reading?)”

      Why not cite Clark’s entire comment?

      “[t]here was a large wound in the right occipitoparietal region…(and) [t]here was considerable loss of scalp and bone tissue. Both cerebral and cerebellar tissue were extruding from the wound” (CE 392:17WCH 3). In his handwritten statement . . . “[t]here was a large wound beginning in the right occiput extending into the parietal region…(and) [m]uch of the posterior skull appeared gone at brief examination…” (CE392:17WCH 10)

      Here’s my theory.

      The Zapruder film is authentic. It shows a large wound on the right side of JFK’s skull. Mrs. Kennedy held this piece of skull and scalp in place and coagulants made it adhere by the time the limo reached Parkland. Blood-matted hair concealed the wound.

      Notwithstanding this large wound, the skull was extensively fractured and at least two sizeable pieces of skull bone were missing. During the frantic, jostling processes of transport and body removal at Parkland (and perhaps because of Mrs. Kennedy’s pressure to close the wound), the skull, in a sense, ‘collapsed’ along the fracture. This caused the posterior skull bones to “spring open”, as described by Dr. McClelland . . . and gave the appearance of missing posterior skull as described by Clark, above.

    • Gerry Simone says:

      YOu said this:

      <>

      Now, here’s where things get interesting. Medicolegal Investigation of Death, which is pretty much a Bible to Forensic Pathologists everywhere, addresses this issue of missing scalp as follows: “A point frequently ignored, or forgotten, in comparing entrance and exit wounds is that approximation of the edges of an entrance wound usually retains a small central defect, a missing area of skin. On the other hand, approximation of the edges of the exit re-establishes the skin’s integrity.”

      So, yep, that’s right. The “experts” tell us the large defect was an entrance wound.

      <>

      I don’t quite follow this line of reasoning. If you have a link that explains this rather than in here, I’d appreciate it.

      Thanks Pat.

  9. Jonathan says:

    I’ve seen autopsy photos that appear to show massive amounts of blood and brain matter mixed in with hair on the top of JFK’s head. Which perhaps lend credence to what you argue.

    Questions:

    1) How if at all do you account for the considerable amount of cerebellar tissue observed on JFK’s gurney by the Dallas docs?

    2) Do you dismiss an orange-sized blow-out to the back of JFK’s skull?

    3) Do you dismiss an entry wound near JFK’s right ear?

    4) Do you dismiss David Mantik’s writings in which he maintains official X-rays of JFKs skull are fake because they show far too dense a rear skull?

    • Pat Speer says:

      While I incorporate the skin on the bullet nose into my theories on the assassination, it seems clear to me, that, whether or not my theories are right or wrong, the missing skin at the large defect and the skin on the bullet nose is a key to unlocking the truth about what happened.

      The HSCA Pathology Panel tried to avoid the problem of the missing skin, and most every prominent theorist has tried to avoid the implications of the skin on the bullet nose since the test results were announced in 2000. I fully believe a discussion of this skin may open things up.

      As to your questions, about my theories… 1) The statements of the Parkland doctors regarding cerebellar tissue haven’t stood the test of time, IMO. Most of them later withdrew their statements and said they’d been mistaken, while the most notable exception, McClelland, lacks credibility. 2) The orange-sized hole, IMO, was the hole on the back of the head at the end of the skull re-construction performed by Ed Stroble. In keeping with the practice of his fellow morticians, he reconstructed the skull in such a manner as to hide the large defect in a pillow. 3) In my analysis, there was a keyhole wound of both entrance and exit above the right ear. 4) Mantik, with whom I shared the stage at the Wecht conference, believes the x-rays are real, but that certain features have been added onto the original x-ray. I believe he is mistaken. This is discussed in chapter 18 of my free online book at patspeer.com.

    • Photon says:

      David Mantik is a Radiation Oncologist, not a radiologist. He is no more an expert on density of the rear skull estimated from x-rays than is your average internist, ie he is not credible on the issue.
      There was no cerebellar tissue on the gurney in Dallas; initial observations were in error-as I have previously documented to be a common ER occurrence. I doubt that General Surgeons in a rushed ER setting would be able to correctly identify macerated cerebellar tissue out of anatomical context anyway. The neurosurgeon present later walked back any comments on cerebellum as inaccurate and rushed.
      There is not a single forensic pathologist who has any knowledge of the case who has noted an orange size blowout to the back of the head or an entrance wound near JFK’s right ear. Where do you get information?
      Again, with no medical training you really are not capable of correctly interpreting the autopsy photos and x-rays, let alone reach conclusions based on your interpretations.

      • John Kirsch says:

        You write, in part, “… with no medical training you really are not capable of correctly interpreting the autopsy photos and x-rays, let alone reach conclusions based on your interpretations.”
        The implication, intentional or not, is that you do have medical training.
        But you have stated previously that you do not claim to be a medical expert.
        So what qualifies you to correctly interpret autopsy photos and x-rays?
        Is it your CPR training?
        What, in other words, is the basis for the authoritative-sounding statements you make on the medical evidence (and many other aspects of 11/22 as well)?
        Is it the “board-certified” pathologists you claim to know?

      • John McAdams says:

        It might be worth noting that Mantik thinks the Zapruder film is faked too.

        When somebody gets too carried away with “fakery,” that harms their credibility.

        • Jonathan says:

          John, too easy. Jeff Morley agrees with you. The Z-film was not faked, you believe.

          Let’s spar. You want to admit the Z-film into evidence in a trial.

          McACADAMS: I MOVE TO ADMIT THE ZAPRUDER FILM INTO EVIDENCE.

          DEFENSE: OBJECTION. (A) WHO FILMED THE FILM IN QUESTION; (B) WHERE WAS IT FILMED, (C) WHAT DOES IT DEPICT, (D) WHEN WAS IT FILMED, (D) HOW WAS IT FILMED?

          McACADAMS: IT WAS FILMED IN IN DEALEY PLAZA ON NOVEMBER 22, 1963 BY ABARAHAM ZAPRUDER ON A BELL AND HOWELL CAMERA.

          QUESTION: Is the Z-film consistent with other photographic records? Namely Altlgens6?

          McADAMS: crickets.

      • TLR says:

        “There was no cerebellar tissue on the gurney in Dallas; initial observations were in error-as I have previously documented to be a common ER occurrence. I doubt that General Surgeons in a rushed ER setting would be able to correctly identify macerated cerebellar tissue out of anatomical context anyway.”

        Were you there that day? And what are your medical qualifications?

        • Morley Upright says:

          Why would he have to be there and why would he need medical qualifications? Can I ask the same questions of conspiracy authors?.. this sounds only fair lol

  10. Jordan says:

    Aside from what may or may not have been performed by staff at Collins Radio, and given that it appears to have been on HF voice channels, some of the traffic may very well have been handled or monitored at minimum by AFMARS, or Army MARS…

  11. Preston Newe says:

    Those who do not see the significance of Doug Horne’s analysis of the Clifton version of the AF-1 tapes are invited to read what Mr. Horne has to say here at Greg Burnham’s new website:

    http://assassinationofjfk.net/the-af1-tapes-and-subsequent-events-at-andrews-afb-on-november-22-1963-what-was-supposed-to-happen-vs-what-did-happen/

    What’s glaringly missing in Horne’s analysis is information on the C-130 cargo plane that airlifted JFK’s death car out of Dallas; when it left Love Field & when it arrived at Andrews AFB. It needs to be cleared of suspicion JFK’s body was on it & surgical procedures were performed on the ambushed President while on it. At this point suspicion of such cannot be ruled out. As Brad stated in comments above, the search for unedited AF-1 tapes invites a search for the military personnel connected with the C-130 ‘JFK death car’ cargo plane. Active & former military people know all too well how the military uses what assets it has immediately available in any given emergency situation where there is no script & someone in higher authority is calling the shots.

    • Photon says:

      So Jackie Kennedy was in on the Conspiracy? Because she never left the body until LBJ was sworn in-on AF1; Godfrey McHugh was with the body during that ceremony.
      These body switching fables are simply ridiculous.

      • Preston Newe says:

        You either haven’t read Doug Horne’s essay posted at Greg Burnham’s website or didn’t comprehend what you read. Mr. Horne informs his readers Jackie ‘freshened up’ for 20 minutes. This is the time frame Horne believes JFK’s body was removed from his coffin without Jackie’s knowledge. Read the essay before you criticize the information contained within. What may seem ridiculous to a person that wasn’t present may have seemed just fine to persons committing criminal acts. You & Mr. Horne do share one common element: neither of you were present on AF-1.

      • Brad Milch says:

        Photon:

        Your comments seem to indicate you have not absorbed what Doug Horne is stating in his online essay. If that assessment is incorrect, the proper way to disagree with Mr. Horne is in the form of a rebuttal posted online. State what you don’t agree with & why. I’ll read it.

      • Gerry Simone says:

        Who said that a body was ‘switched’?

        (I can believe temporarily removed for secret examination under the guise of ‘national security’).

  12. Charles Beyer says:

    All aircraft that landed at love field 22 Nov 1963 need to be scrutinized as possible airlift vehicles for the body of President Kennedy, not just AF-1, AF-2 & the C-130 death car cargo plane. Military aircraft are constantly in the air at any given time & can be ordered to land at any runway. Nearby air bases such as Carlswell could also have ordered a flight to land at Love Field. Documentation such actions might produce on paper or in radio transmissions may not have been turned over to the ARRB by the military. The people that flew the aircraft know their story but locating them & getting them to talk to the public may not be an easy task, especially if fear of retaliation is evident for them after 50 years. Researchers will also be challenged to explain where & what scenario occurred that separated JFK’s body from his wife & how it was transported to any given aircraft without discovery.

    Regardless of the aircraft & the un-interviewed crews, many feel Bill Kelly & Doug Horne have found the Achilles Heel to the government’s explanation for the murder of President Kennedy. The sensitivity of this find can be found here in the comments section where an obvious attempt to steer the topic away from the AF-1 audio tapes, the C-130 death car cargo transport plane & Doug Horne’s stunning analysis of one version of them is staring Jeff Morley’s readers in the face. That in itself is motivation to concentrate on this topic because it leads to a conclusion to the puzzle on 22 Nov 1963.

  13. JKLamper says:

    I would like to see Jeff Morley’s explanation of this remark in the Dallas Morning News piece: “Kelly notes that the flight from Dallas to take JFK’s body back to Washington took almost four hours, or 240 minutes.”

  14. Hans Trayne says:

    In an effort to reach out globally via the long arms of the Internet & alert people involved on 22 November 1963 with the Liberty relay station, the flights of AF-1, AF-2, the ‘phantom’ C-130, Andrews Air Force Base, General Lemay & any others that picked up the radio transmissions or recorded them to inform them that Jeff Morley, Bill Kelly, Ed Primeau, Greg Burnham & several other JFK researchers would be interested in their stories, I put together a short video focusing on the ‘phantom’ C-130 crew & passengers here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOy3BwMSRds

    The invitation to contact Jeff Morley was extended to family, relatives, friends & former commanders. I believe within that elite group the actual unedited AF-1 tapes will be found, along with the recollections of people that heard the transmissions in real time.

    Some see a red flag in the close relationship between LeMay & the Collins contractor he helped but some of the people involved outlived LeMay. Whatever has been hidden or destroyed I believe will be found within the living witnesses.

    • Hans Trayne says:

      I failed to offer a salute & hat tip to JFK researcher Vince Palamera. It was Vince who found much of the information on the C-130 crew & its passengers & 1st posted it online in 1999 at a competing website. Mr. Palamera actually made contact with at least one of the persons onboard the ‘phantom’ C-130. That person subsequently refused to talk to Vince. I’ll include Mr. Palamera’s name on the list of interested JFK researchers persons with info can trust & contact when I update the YouTube video’s page this weekend.

      The information about the Andrews AFB logbook that shows no entries for the C-130 arriving 22-23 November 1963 came straight from Bill Kelly’s blog from 2013. My sincerest apologies to both researchers for failing to give credit where it was due. Thank you to Vince Palamera for extending the global reach effort via his website. Hopefully persons involved in some way or another will open up to investigative journalist Jeff Morley & share their stories with him privately.

  15. The newly released AF 1 transcript is an important piece of new evidence. First, it shows the ARRB did not have a real investigatory arm after Anne Buttimer left. Second, it shows that someone did not want all the information on the tapes public. Third, the new info is quite intriguing about LeMay coming into Washington from, I think, Canada.

    The reason seems to be Kennedy’s death. If so, this seems to corroborate with Paul O’Connor saying LeMay was at Bethesda that night.

    But its hard to find just center on one piece of evidence that has surfaced since Stone’s film. Since there has been a ton of new stuff that has surfaced since then that alters the database of evidence in this case. That is why Destiny Betrayed was about 95% rewritten with new information.

    Just to name a few others I think are key: the Chicago Plot, the declassified testimony of Delphine Roberts and the Clinton-Jackson witnesses,the Lopez Report, Jeremy Gunn’s new inquiry into the autopsy, the destruction of the NAA test (Blakey’s lynchpin), John Hunt’s sensational discoveries about the falsification of the record about CE 399, the new evidence questioning whether or not Oswald ever picked up CE 139 or the handgun, the incriminating files on Jim Angleton and Anne Goodpasture etc. I mean there are waves of this stuff. So its hard to choose, at least for me.

    A documentary prepared from this new material would be quite powerful for the public. Especially in light of what they have been given for the last two decades by the nets and cable.

  16. M. Ellis says:

    Doug Horne’s work on the brain examinations gets my vote right now.

    I’m also following the work of a Canadian, Robert Prudhomme, who has studied the ballistics of
    the Mannlicher-Carcano rounds and found a small but potentially fatal arithmetic error in the FBI’s
    report to the WC.

    If he’s right, it eliminates the possibility of the MC Carcano being used to kill Kennedy.
    It would change everything. And it would do it using the FBI’s own evidence given to the WC.

    His conclusions need to be tested, verified. But I think it is worth watching.

    https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?13292-FBI-Evidence-Proves-Oswald-s-Ammunition-was-not-Capable-of-Sufficient-Accuracy-to-Kill-JFK#.U2MjutoaySM

  17. By the way, one should add here the discoveries about Oswald are also very important. By writers like John Newman, Bill Davy, and Armstrong. I tried to incorporate this into my two chapters on Oswald in Destiny Betrayed. The attention given to the man by the FBI and CIA is very intriguing. As are his associations with various elements in New Orleans and Ruth and Michael Paine in Dallas. The Paines emerge from this new work as suspicious characters themselves.

    I should add here, although some of this is new, some of it was in the HSCA volumes. Including the fact that the CIA did not open a 201 file on Oswald until a year after his defection. A point Helms could not explain in his appearance before the HSCA.

    But one of the many problems with Jean Davison’s book Oswald’s Game is this: she does not acknowledge that fact. In fact, when you read her book, go ahead and look at all the references to the HSCA volumes on Oswald or the HSCA references to the CIA files. I guess since that stuff was not in Marina and Lee, Jean did not think it was important. Yet it is. Yet, Davison’s book could really have been written in say 1970. Which is why its so obsolete today. With what we know about Oswald’s files and the roles of Angleton, Hosty, Goodpasture and Phillips with them, her book is a quasi-museum piece.

    I wonder, does she acknowledge any of this is important to the Oswald case today? Would she change anything in light of these new discoveries? Or does she think the fact that Angleton had control over all of Oswald’s files at CIA HQ rather unimportant. Or the fact that Otepka’s request about Oswald being a real or fake defector being forwarded to Angleton, maybe that was not really important either?

  18. Bob Prudhomme says:

    I am flattered that Mr. Ellis considers my work worthy of posting on other forums.

    As I have stated so many times on the DPF, the FBI’s firearms expert, SA Robert A. Frazier, made so many mistakes in his testimony to the Warren Commission in 1964, I am almost believing he had a guilty conscience, and wanted us to see through the charade that was the coverup.

    I am currently writing a thread at the DPF, with the aid of a Mr. Drew Phipps of Texas, that takes a very critical look at the ballistic evidence Mr. Frazier gave to the WC, following test firings of C2766.

    It should prove to be a lot of fun, and the reader should come away with a whole new perspective on just how remarkably easy it was for the FBI to fool the American public. As far as I know, and I have been known to be wrong before, no JFK researcher has looked at the assassination from this perspective before.

    See you at the Deep Politics Forum.

    • Jonathan says:

      Many, many thanks for your work.

      I think Frazier told the truth when McCloy asked him if there was metal fouling in the barrel, and Frazier said he hadn’t checked for that. McCloy should have asked the obvious question, why didn’t you check the barrel?

      But of course Frazier had already provided the reason he hadn’t checked the barrel. It was badly corroded (rusted) as of the morning after the assassination, which means it hadn’t been fired at JFK.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more