About John Kennedy

People often tell me I could be a great man. I'd rather be a good man.

Zack and Jim

TRANSCRIPT OF RADIO TALKSHOW
COAST TO COAST AM
WITH HOST GEORGE NOORY
AND GUESTS JIM MARRS AND ZACK SHELTON

Listen to the talkshow! (Quicktime player) click here.
To hear the audio interview you can also go to www.coasttocoastam.com and click on “show info”, select “past shows” and select 19 november 2003. A subscription for a month is $ 6.95

Date: Thursday 20 november, 2003

G = George Noory
Z = Zack Shelton
J = Jim Marrs

G ? It was a crime that shocked the world, the assassination of president John F. Kennedy, and from that moment of that horrible day in Dallas, forty years ago, the world has been embroiled in controversy. Did Lee Harvey Oswald act alone? Perhaps there were other shooters? Was it a conspiracy? Regardless of what you believe, the shooting of our president took away something from all of us. We all remember that day and we were never quite the same.

November 22, this Saturday, marks the 40st anniversary of JFK?s death. Forty years ?.. it seems like almost yesterday, doesn?t it? And those of us who were around then, remember the day. We remember exactly were we were when we heard the news. And when you think of time, think about this: When Kennedy was killed, WW II had ended merely 18 years before that event. Only 18 years!

Tonight on coast to coast AM, a very special 4 hours presentation with a number of guests on the assassination of John F. Kennedy. They will bring their theories to what they think might have happened on that day in Dealey Plaza in Dallas. Zack Shelton has a BA in criminal justice from Loyola University in New Orleans, Louisiana, that he received in 1973. He spent 28 years in law enforcement with the FBI and is now retired. Zack is currently the president and owner of Z. Shelton and associates, a private investigator firm in Texas. In addition he has been investigating the assassination of JFK since his retirement in 1998, assisted by approximately eight other retired FBI agents.

Jim Marrs, many of you know of him, is an award winning journalist and has more than 30 years experience with several Texas newspapers. He has taught a course on the JFK assassination at the University of Texas in Arlington since 1976. In 1999 he began teaching a course on UFO?s, perhaps one of the first university level UFO courses in the nation. Jim also investigated the US army?s remote viewing program, 3 years before it was publicly acknowledged by the CIA and then produced Alien Agenda, in addition to his book Rule by Secrecy. It has been termed an underground bestseller. And the book of course connects the secret societies with the ancient mysteries. Tonight on coast to coast this hour, my guests are Zack Shelton and Jim Marrs.
Zack, welcome to Coast to Coast! How are you, sir?

Z ? Good George! Thank you for having us!

G ? Well, it?s my pleasure, and Jim, welcome back!

J ? Hey George, it?s always a pleasure to be with you!

G ? For me as well! Zack, let?s start with you briefly. Give me your take on the assassination, I wanna know your theory, before we get into some of the things that you and Jim have uncovered.

Z – Well, I?d have to say, George, I really don?t have any theories. Mainly I am going where the evidence takes me. I came across some information in 1980 while I was working on a case ? I guess we didn?t mention that I worked on organised crime in Kansas city and Chicago ? and while in Chicago I came across some information ?.. a comment that was made by one of the mobsters there, that always stuck with me. I gave this information in 1992 to a private investigator by the name of Joe West, out of Houston Texas. He found this particular individual and this individual said that he is the man who took the shot from the grassy knoll ? and since 1998 I have been researching and investigating trying to prove or disprove this man?s story. During that process I have teamed up, came across approximately 8 to 10 other retired FBI agents that worked on organised crime in Chicago, and uh .. we?re here today!

G ? All right, very good. Jim Marrs, your thoughts!

J ? Well , I too have never really operated on theories, I have gone to look for facts. I think one of the most monstruous theories of them all, is the single assassin theory. And I like to quickly make a few remarks about the ABC 2 hour special tonight. It was kind of incredible, because it is a very well done production, very well managed, and of course it has a computer simulation, and of course we all know that a computer tells you the truth all the time? except actually it doesn?t, because anybody that operates a computer, realizes it is garbage in, garbage out!

And the reason I mention that, George, is that on any computer analysis or any computer simulation such as they had, which depicted all of Dealey Plaza, you have to have the exact measurements, distances, elevations, the exact numbers to make it work. Otherwise you are just drawing a picture.

I?m assuming that they used the Warren Commission?s survey of Dealey Plaza for their re-enactment in their computer simulation. If they did, then you can FORGET it, Okay? Because years ago I interviewed Bob West, who was the county surveyor of Dallas county back at that time and his friend Chester Brewman. Both of these men were hired by the Warren Commision to submit a survey of Dealey Plaza, do a platmap and provide them with the distances, elevations and all of the basic data. Both of those men told me that the Warren Commission altered their numbers!

G ? Altered the numbers?

J ? Altered the numbers! They also had on their original map, places that said ?Bullet mark on the street here, bullet mark on the sidewalk here.? And then both of them said they were instructed to remove that from the map, and of course the Warren Commission never mentioned those bullet strikes. Now I KNOW this is true because both of them told me that! And Chester Brewman gave me a copy of the original map, which I still have.

G – Okay, and as you both know of course, the controversy here is whether Lee Harvey Oswald was the shooter, whether Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, if there was a conspiracy, whether there were a number of other shooters in Dealey Plaza on that horrible day. Zack, tell me a little bit more about this individual who claims he took the shot from the grassy knoll?

Z ? Yes, this individual was a close confidant and a driver and a kind of gopher for an individual by the name of Charles Nicoletti. Nicoletti was a subboss working for the Chicago mob. And basically his story starts in ninety ? or let?s say in april 1963, when he states that Chuck Nicoletti came from the house of Sam Giancana, or no, uuh correct me, the house of Tony Accardo, where Sam Giancana, Tony Accardo and Chuck Nicoletti met and basically came to Files that evening and said ?We have a contract on the president of the United States?.

What?s interesting about that particular time, is that it is the same time that another individual that we have, who was a CIA operative, received orders from his handler that he was to start making false identifications for Lee Harvey Oswald. Now, taken that from there, and when I started to contact these other retired FBI agents, I came across what I think is the biggest, which I would call probably the smoking gun of this whole case. And I would like to share that with you, George.

G ? Please go ahead!

Z ? The two agents that viewed the autopsy ? as you know the FBI did not have any jurisdiction over the investigation of the death of a president – all the jurisdiction lied within the authorities of Dallas ..

G ? Which truly was unbelievable, but you are absolutely right!

Z ? Now, when Airforce One left, headed back towards Washington to take the president to the Bethesda hospital for the autopsy, these two agents received a phonecall from headquarters and were told to report to Andrews airforce base and for taking the motorcade to Bethesda and also view the autopsy to uphold the FBI?s interest. These are the only two agents, or let?s say the only two individuals that night, that took notes as to who was in and out of that room.

I have filmed agent Jim Sibert and have talked to agent Francis O?Neill, both of whom viewed the autopsy. And what they have to say, just totally blows the Warren Commission out of the water. Uh, for instance, and bear with me, I just got three paragraphs and I think these three paragraphs will prove there was a conspiracy and a cover-up.

G ? Okay, By all means, go ahead!

Z ? (reading out loud) ?During the last stages of this autopsy Dr. Humes located an opening which appeared to be a bullet hole, which was below the shoulders and two inches to the right of the middle line of the spinal column.?

That happens to be five and a half inches below the neck line.

?This opening was probed by Dr Humes with a finger, at which time it was determined that the trajectory of the missile entered at this point and entered in a downward position of 55 to 60 degrees. Further probing determined that the distance traveled by this missile was a SHORT distance, in as much that the end of the opening could be felt with a finger. In as much that no complete bullet of any size could be located in the brain area, and likewise no bullet could be located in the back or any other area of the body, as determined by total-body X-rays and inspection revealing that there was no point of exit. The individuals performing the autopsy were at a loss to explaining why they could not find no bullets.?

What that means, is that this bullet that enterered the back of president Kennedy did not exit the body. If you believe these two agents? testimony of their report, there cannot be, can NOT be a magic bullet.

G – Well, but if that bullet never exited the body and they X-rayed the president and couldn?t find the bullet, what happened to it?

Z – Well, this is an interesting question, because what happened, is that agent Sibert then went to the telephone and called the firearms-unit of the FBI lab and told agent Killian the problem that they had and that they could not find an exit wound. And could he explain that? Is there such a thing as an ice bullet? And he (Killian) said , well, I think I have your answer: Agents from the Secret Service just walked in and handed me a bullet that was found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital.

G ? Right!

Z ? He went back and told this to Dr. Humes and Dr. Humes said, well , I think that settles it, uh what must have happened is that the bullet fell out of the wound upon cardiac massage conducted by the doctors at Parkland Hospital???. Now , whatever, the point I am making is that that bullet that did not exit the body, is the only backwound, or neckwound, whatever, on the back of Kennedy, and that coincides with the testimony that I heard this morning from Mrs. Connally, that a first shot occurred, she knew that the president was shot, she turned around , or let?s see, Connally turned around and when he did, then he (Connally) was shot. This lady, that is probably the best witness you can have, she was sitting right next to her husband, she knows there were two separate shots that hit, let?s say one shot to the president and another shot to Connally.

G – What would the purpose be of using an ice bullet? And I assume what you mean by that is a bullet that is actually made of ice, right? And it melts?

Z ? Well, that was a question asked by the investigator because they could not find a bullet or an exitwound. So his natural thought was that , you know, some kind of ice bullet, that melted or whatever ?..

G ? Okay, but what is the purpose of even shooting someone with an ice bullet? So it melts away, so what? What is the rational here?

Z ? Well, the rational is that the question was asked because they could not find the bullet, and that?s the only explanation that he could come to , I guess, as whether there is such a thing as an ice bullet.

G ? Yeah, I know, but the question is why use an ice bullet as opposed to A bullet? A regular bullet?

J ? No evidence.

Z – No evidence, right.

J- If I can jump in quickly? Zack, tell ?m about the fact that the two agents you talked to, also talked to Roy Kellerman, who was a Secret Service agent in the car and we now know that when Kennedy was first hit, he said ?I?m hit, get me to the hospital?. And the reason that this is significant, is because if the bullet had passed through his throat and come out at his adam?s apple, as they argue now, he wouldn?t have to be able to say anything.

G ? No, not at all. Not at all. And also by what we have always heard that after his skull got blasted away, that came relatively soon as well. I mean we were dealing with just a matter of seconds in between shots, we were told, right?

J ? 5.6 seconds.

G ? Yeah, there?s no way he could have even spoken. Uh, It?s weird . He couldn?t have talked with the way the Warren Commission reported the crime.

Z ? Right, that?s exactly correct. And what we have here, that proves the conspiracy, because that proves there were four shots. What proves the cover-up is that these agents never testified for the Warren Commission. I know for a fact that J. Edgar Hoover read that report, there is no doubt in my mind that he would, but he (also) quotes this report to president Johnson in several paragraphs of a memorandum that Hoover wrote approximately six days after the assassination.

Now the question is why would you send these two agents to witness an autopsy and not have them testify before the Warren Commission?

G ? Good point! Hold that thought, Zack, and we?ll come back with you, Jim Marrs, in just a moment as well. I?m George Noory, tonight on Coast to Coast a special four-hour edition devoted entirely to the assassination of John F. Kennedy, forty years ago this coming Saturday. I?ll be back in a moment.

– Music break –

G ? And welcome back to Coast to Coast, I?m George Noory with this special investigation of the JFK assassination with my guests this hour Zack Shelton and Jim Marrs. Zack, we?ll go to you in a second, but Jim, the theory of the multiple shooters, is that it was a triangular shoot based on those that believe in that. If that?s the case, where were the shooters positioned?

J ? Well, that?s where you get into theories and that?s where you get into lots of speculations and that?s where you get into lots of the conspiracy books that have been published, and the basic problem there, George, is nobody knows for sure because up till this very day there has never been an adequate full and honest investigation of this case. Let me also say that what I find most amazing right now, is that in all the retrospectives that are being broadcasted and televized to the american public today, now former government spokesmen, former government officials are now telling us things like: yes, there was a plot between the CIA and the mafia working together and plots against Castro to ensue assasination.

Also we?re being told now: Yes, Oswald was in touch with David Ferrie, Guy Banister, former FBI, CIA people, anti-Castro cubans from Cuba. This is information that they DENIED for more than fifteen years and now they tell it like: “Oh well, we all knew that!” And the reason I mention that is because the only reason that this information is out now is not because of any government investigation, but because of the huge number of assassination researcher, private researchers. Private citizens that have taken it upon themselves to investigate this case. And now they just freely admit that all that was going on. I noticed in the ABC special tonight that at the very moment that they were saying that Oswald had no connections to anyone, they show him in his Civil Air Patrol uniform. Well, he was a member of the Civil Air Patrol, Okay? And it has now been established that his leader in the Civil Air Patrol in New Orleans, when he (Oswald) was just a young boy, was none other than David Ferrie! Who has been connected not only to the mafia but also to the CIA.

And this is important because the individual we are now talking about, who says he is the grassy knoll gunman, says he too worked for both the mafia and the CIA and in fact reported to a ranking senior officer of the CIA. And this is the same officer that was identified years ago by a leader of the anti-Castro cubans, who says he saw this officer in the company of Lee Harvey Oswald.

G ? Why would this person admit that he was the grassy knoll shooter? Zack, do you want to handle that one?

Z- Yeah , I can handle that! Before I do, I tell you what, you?re in for a treat the next two hours, Jim Fetzer is really great to talk to. ,

G – Yes, he is a good man , I ?ve known him from my days in St. Louis. He ?s a professor of course up there in Minnesota, and you?re absolutely right, but you all bring a different perspective … and the SAME perspective and that?s what?s important of getting you all together tonight. And I appreciate what you are all doing.

Z – Well, I can tell you this, George: I was the one who came up with this particular individual who says he is the grassy knoll shooter.

G ? Is he still alive?

Z ? Yes he is. In fact Jim and I ? well, I didn?t have the occasion to talk to him, but Jim just talked to him yesterday. And I talked to him five years ago. I think he?s still skittish of me because I?m former FBI.

G ? How old is he now? Roughly?

Z – Uh ? 62

G ? So he was a 22 /23 year old ?

Z ? He was 21 years old.

G ? All right (with some disbelief in voice)

J ? Well, keep in mind Lee Oswald had just barely turned 24.

G ? Yeah, Yes, that?s true

Z ? Well, 20 over while in the Marine corps and also doing some other things.

G – All right. Now this person who claims he is the grassy knoll shooter?

Z- Well, let me tell you what happened, George. I was working on a case, I was working on this particular guy, he was a subject of mine, highjacking trucker trailer loads of goods and selling them out of Melrose park, which is totally mob, so you can?t operate there unless you?ve got the blessings of the mob. I sent an undercover agent in, he made three buys. At the same time he was taking cars to Dallas in a chop shop operation ?. and Dallas indicted him. And the guy that cooperated for the FBI, I interviewed (him) for three days and during the course of the interviews he said: ?Let me tell you something weird, Zack! We?re driving trough Dealey Plaza one day and Files really gets weird on me, … and states that if the American people really would know what happened here, they wouldn?t be able to handle it.”

George, it was said in a tone not like you and I would say: If we really knew what happened we couldn?t handle it! It was said in a way that this man knew something. Well, there was no reason for this guy telling me this. Now the question is, why did this assassin say it? So that bothered me and stuck with me for years. I didn?t write it down or put it in a report because it had nothing to do with what I was talking about ?..

G ? Did you tell anybody else at the time?

Z ? At the time, no, I did not.

G ? All right…

Z ? So in 1992 I picked up a local newspaper here and in the paper on the frontpage, it must have been in november , there was a big article on the conspiracy ‘who killed JFK?’, written by a local newsman here with the notes from a conversation with a private investigator named Joe West. So I met with Joe West, to make a long story short, I told him about the comment. I said he is in jail somewhere in the United States. At that time I didn?t know where he was. Well, Joe West found him. There was communication by letters and uh? it was to the point of ?I don?t wanna talk to you!?, to the point of ?Ok, I?ll talk to you, but I can?t help you!? Then to the point of ?Okay, hypothetically if you were there, where would you have been??, to the point of actual confession. But he did not confess untill after Joe West died.. Joe West died of a massive heart attack. And after he did, that is when Files confessed. He says he confessed because of Joe West. Because Joe spent at least eight months romancing this guy and never did hear his confession ?.. and he just liked Joe West. Now, that may sound strange ?

G ? Mmm, mmm (confirming)

Z – But that?s a reason he said he did his confession.

G ? Now does he understand that some law enforcement authorities might charge him with this? Or do you think that may never occur?

J – He thinks that will never happen because if there was ever a charge and he was brought into court, then the government involvement in all this would come out, and so they will see to it that that doesn?t happen.

G ? Oh my! … This ?.This is a shattering story! ? It really is!

J ? It is! It?s a massive story. And it should be investigated with a fine tooth comb. But instead it?s ignored. And all we get is psycho-diabole like ?Oh, well, nobody can really handle the fact that just a lone nut with no connections, can take down the great president!?

G ? Uh .. Jim and Zack, Of course we all know about the error rate with a polygraph test, but it sure would be interesting to see James Files hooked up to one, wouldn?t it?

Z ? Oh I agree , and then ?

J ? Well, hey wait, he HAS taken a polygraph!

G ? He HAS?

J ? That?s true !

G ? Did he pass?

J ? He passed! There was some hesitation ? there was some problem with one part of his story , but it did NOT have to do with the actual shooting.

G ? All right. Well, given the fact that he was there, do you still believe , Jim, that Oswald was up there in the School Book Depository?

J ? No, I?ll just simply quote Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry back in the sixties when he said ?We never could put him in that window with the rifle!?

G ? But somebody was up there?!

J ? Somebody was up there, there were shots from the Schoolbook Depository but nobody beyond any reasonable shadow of a doubt that it was Lee Harvey Oswald. In fact what I discovered in the Dallas Police files, when they were opened in about 1992 following the Oliver Stone movie, was that the Dallas police, just two hours after the shooting had done a parafine test on Oswald and it showed some nitrates on his hands, but NO nitrates or gunpowder on his face. And Zack, would you agree that someone who had fired that old military rifle, especially as fast as he did, there would undoubtedly have been some gunpowder traces?

Z ? I would agree and I?d like to add to that, George, I was able to come across, and of course Jim told me about it months before, but I had to find out myself, and I DID find out. I found an FBI lab report, dated November 23rd, which is the next day of course, on Saturday. All the evidence that was taken by the Dallas Police Department from the sixth floor of the Book Depository, was delivered to the FBI Lab in Washington DC at midnight that night. The tests were run the next morning and the report was written the next day after the evidence was returned, which happened to be (also) the rifle. Well, strangely enough ?. and I?ll read it for you: ?No latent prints of any value were developed on Oswald?s revolver, the cartridge cases, the unfired cartridge, the clip of the rifle or the inner parts of the rifle. The latent prints appearing in the photographs taken of the rifle K-1 by the Dallas Police, are too fragmentary and indistinct to be of any value for identification purposes.?

In other words, George, they didn’t find one print of Lee Harvey Oswald on that rifle. On Monday they have a print! But you have to understand that that rifle returned to Dallas on Saturday night. And Jim?, I think you talked to him, I didn?t, why don?t you tell ?em what the director of Miller funeral home says?

J ? Right, The director, the then director of Miller funeral home that was handling funeral arrangements for Oswald, I talked to him, but that was only after a written newsaccount in one of the Fort Worth papers that said that the FBI came with a crimelab kit and spent a long time in the morgue. So I asked Mr. Paul Groody about this and he said ?Oh yes!? I said: Where you there when the FBI put Oswald?s hand on the rifle? And he said ?Yes, we had a heck of a time to get the fingerprint ink off of his dead hand in time for the burial.?

G ? Geez, Oh my God!

Z ? George, I never believed that statement untill I read this FBI lab report.

G ? Is James Files his real name or is that not? ..

J ? No, that is not his real name!

G- All right! Is it possible and would you two be willing to try to get him along with both of you back on the air here? At a certain date?

Z ? Well, you ? we can?t get him! He is locked there in jail.

G ? Well, sometimes they are allowed to come to the phone. I have interviewed death row inmates, hours before they were electrocuted. So ..

J – Well, we can certainly ask. But I will say this too: I don?t want to go into the particulars, but uh ?the only reason that he talked with us, is because of some particular circumstances that are not going to be repeated. So therefore I can say , I think it?s gonna be pretty difficult to get him to speak on the air.

G ? So what are you going to do?

Z ? George, we like to tell you though, that we have not only him, but we have two other individuals on tape, on file, that were participants. Files tells a story, he states that Nicoletti and Roselli were there that day, that Nicoletti took the shot, he took the shot and Roselli was kind of the link between the mob and the CIA. Well, we have the individual that flew in Johnny Roselli. Files says that he didn?t know how Nicoletti got to Dallas, and that Roselli was flown in on a military aircraft.

G ? Wasn?t Roselli a ?friend? of J. Edgar Hoover? Wasn?t there some kind of relationship there?

Z ? No, I think you …

G ? Hoover went to a racetrack, Roselli fixed the bets for him and things like that?

Z ? No, I think you?re talking about Frank Costello!

G ? Was it Costello? Okay!

J ? But Roselli was intimately involved in the secret war against Castro. In fact, I?ve spoken to CIA pilots of that time that said they were flabbergasted in later years to learn that Roselli was actually a mob chief, because he came in then, and they only knew him as Colonel Roselli.

G ? It is strange, I also talked to the son of the late Joe Bonanno and uh ..

Z ? Bill Bonanno!

G ? Yes, and he claims that, you know, that his father had a lot of information.

Z ? Well, Roselli supposedly confessed to him.

G ? Exactly!

Z ? To Bill Bonanno. And that?s an interesting thing, George, because people say ?Now wait a minute, how come nobody is talking about this if they did this, the mobsters did this?? That was on tonight! You know: ?How come these big mobsters did not?.?? This was not a mob hit, okay? The mob was utilized, but it was not a mob hit. Not everybody in the mob did know about this hit.

G ? So the question is, Zack and Jim, Why do in Kennedy? Why did they want him out? And who wanted him out?

J ? They didn?t care one way or another. They were simply mechanics.

G ? But I mean …

J ? They were ordered to do a job and they did it.

G ? But who was ?they? that wanted this done?

J ? Okay, well, I can tell you this right now: In a criminal case, if you commit a murder and I do not report you but I know about it, or I had the weapon or something like that, I am an acomplice after the fact ??

G ? Yes, you are!

J ? And I can be executed for the murder although the evidence shows that I never pulled the trigger, right?

G ? Yep!

J ? Okay, therefore I can say with absolute certainty that in this case the guilty parties who could be convicted as accessories after the fact, are Lyndon B. Johnson and J. Edgar Hoover. Who were friends and both hated and feared the Kennedy?s, who feared their job loss because of the Kennedy?s and who both had been connected to organised crime elements ?? And the reason I can say this, is because I can prove that both of these men took steps to sidetrack the official investigation. They took steps that altered evidence and destroyed evidence, hid evidence, intimidated witnesses ?. and this, George, by the way, is what changes what otherwise would have been a Texas homicide, to a national coup d?etat!

G ? And they were afraid to let us all know about it.

J ? (chuckling) Well, you can?t let everybody know that there was a coup d?etat or they might realize they don?t live in a free country anymore …

G ? And this was the country that?s supposed to be the freeest of the world .. and uh, if this had happened and this had been released, revealed, who knows what would have happened during those very tumultuous times?

There have been reports recently, a new book that claims that perhaps Lyndon Johnson was behind the assassination. Johnson?s family is outraged at that theory!… and uh, I wanted to get both of your quick take on that?

Z – Well, I can answer that?? We eh, I don?t think Jim has either, we don?t have definite information he called the shots, we don?t have definite information that he was even involved. We do think that he was part of the cover-up, but I can says this: Guidance led me in different ways, and one of these was just by luck, I talked to this big money person in Texas that I asked ?Who killed JFK?? and his answer was LBJ. And I said Why? And he said: ?Well we were friends with his bagman? and I won?t mention the names, but the bagman told us personally that he used to go to New Orleans, Louisiana and picked up bags of cash and bring it to LBJ, from Carlos Marcello. And I said: ?Wow! Well, when was this? When he was president? Or Vice President??

?Oh I think it was when he was President!? I asked him to be filmed, just saying that one thing. And he picks up the phone and in front of me, calls the individual?s son, the guy was dead, and the son basically confirmed it. And that ?uh, George this whole thing is a big puzzle!

G – Yes!

J ? Yes, George, and let me say this: I don?t want everybody to think that just Lyndon Johnson was involved in this, or that it was just the democrats or whatever. I?m looking here at a book written by H.R Haldeman, who was …

G ? He was one of Nixon?s men!

J ? Yes, one of Nixon?s boys, and here he writes , he says, if you all remember during Watergate the Nixon Tapes and all the focus over that: Nixon went to pay 2 million dollars to E. Howard Hunt, a CIA officer, who was leading and training the anti-Castro cubans, he (Nixon) said: ?Pay him the 2 million dollars! This could open up the whole Bay of Pigs thing! This could look bad for us, this could look bad for the CIA!? And in Haldeman?s book, he says that it seems that in all these Nixon references to the Bay of Pigs, he was actually referring to the Kennedy assassination!

G ? Zack Shelton and Jim Marrs, my guests, their websites by the way ?.. Jim?s website hooked up with Coast to Coast, there you will see the books that he has written?. Both of you; Thanks! And uh ? Will we ever get to bottom of it?

J ? We?re working on it!

G ? All right, Thanks Zack, Thanks Jim, I appreciate it!

END

Gary Mack

A discussion with Gary Mack

As most of you may know, Gary Mack is the curator of the sixth floor museum, housed in the Texas Schoolbook Depository in Dallas. He is also considered a top expert on the JFK assassination, and as such often asked to participate in JFK documentaries, TV or radio programs.

Gary is also friends with Dave Perry, who has very specific opinions about witnesses and JFK researchers, like myself for example.

http://home.comcast.net/~dperry1943/

It is my opinion that it is their mission to discredit all new and credible evidence for conspiracy.

—– Original Message —–
From: Wim Dankbaar
To: Gary Mack
Cc: Dave Perry
Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2005 9:44 AM
Subject: Hey Gary

I am now convinced you and Perry work for the other side. Wanna discuss it?

Wim

—————————————————————–

Sure. Here’s my reply: ABSOLUTELY FALSE.

Your turn.

Gary

——————————————————————

—– Original Message —–
From: Wim Dankbaar
To: Gary Mack
Cc: Dave Perry
Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2005 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: Hey Gary

I did not expect you to admit it 😉

Then why do you state on public radio programs there is no conclusive evidence for conspiracy and no conclusive evidence for shots from the front?

Wim

————————————————————————

That’s not what I said. I said, and have said several times, that there isn’t any HARD evidence, except for the acoustics.

The acoustics evidence is in dispute, which is why it is not hard evidence. As a matter of fact, Don Thomas and I are exploring ways to expand on his recent paper and Washington presentation. We both believe the HSCA acoustics evidence of two shooters is essentially correct.

There are plenty of theories about the assassination from qualified and unqualified people, but theories aren’t evidence and they never have been.

See, it’s very simple.

Dave’s thoughts are his and I have mine.

Gary Mack

———————————————————————————–

—– Original Message —–
From: Wim Dankbaar
To: gmack@jfk.org
Sent: Sunday, December 25, 2005 3:33 PM
Subject: reply

Hard evidence or conclusive evidence is the same.

GM: No, they are not.

I say they are. What , according to you is the difference?

You never say in public “except for the acoustics”, but even if you would say it, it would not be the truth and you know it.

GM: That is YOUR theory.

No, not a theory, you wish it were. There is an overwhelming amount of HARD evidence for shots from the front. The sad thing is you know that, thus you are willfully denying it. You know what my theory is? That you are protecting the conspiracy willfully and knowingly. That you are an accessory after the fact. That you don’t mind treason in exchange for a mighty buck. That is my theory, because I cannot prove it beyond any doubt.

The biggest THEORY of them all, the one that you say that history is “pretty clear” on, is that Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK alone. A theory is a thesis that has not been proven or lacks evidence. This is especially the case for the thesis of the Warren Report. Why do you never mention that?

GM: History shows that there is no hard evidence overturning the WC conclusion that Oswald acted alone.

Gary, can we take this debate public? So I can show others how full of crap that statement is?

GM: It is a theory that the WR is wrong. There is no hard evidence of anyone other than Oswald firing at JFK.

It is not a theory nor a possibility that the WR is wrong, it is a proven fact that it is wrong. Again, you know this. Hence, stating otherwise is a willful lie.

You know, you do it pretty sneaky. You always leave the impression that that is still the most plausible theory, and all the others lack hard evidence.

GM: When someone produces hard evidence, then history will have been changed. No one has yet done that.

There IS hard evidence to prove the Warren Report a bunch of treacherous lies, a fraud designed to deceive the American public. Again, you know this very very well.

You know better than any of us that the “Lee Harvey Oswald did it alone theory” is the one theory that lacks hard evidence most of all. In fact the so called evidence can be proven nonsense in any court of law.

GM: Again, that is your theory.

Again, not a theory, you wish it were.

In order to leave your impression standing you HAVE TO suggest that the witnesses are wrong, as well as the evidence for frontal shots.

GM: Not all witnesses were wrong. But witness opinions are nothing more than that….and they are not hard evidence.

Oh really? Then why are witnesses used by prosecutors to put murderers behind bars? Are you re-inventing law?

For example on the Houston radio program on 11/22/2005 , you suggested that all the witnesses running to the knoll in pursuit of one or more assassins were just confused by the echoes of Dealey Plaza.

GM: They were confused, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they were all correct or all incorrect. I have spoken to enough eyewitnesses and read enough testimony to know that most witnesses heard three shots, not four, and they disagreed about where they came from. That’s why witness recollectins are not hard evidence.

Ofcourse some of them were confused. With shots coming from multiple directions, front and back, it was not easy for some witnesses to determine where they came from. However you will have to ignore the concensus of the witnesses to make your mud stick on the wall. That concensus is this one:

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/images/witnessesDP.JPG

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/images/witnessdeputies.JPG

You even want to suggest that the double bang, heard by virtually all of the witnesses, the two almost simultaneous shots, which could not have been fired from the same bolt action rifle, was nothing more than an echo of one shot.

GM: That’s not true,

Oh, that is interesting! So it is not true that you want to suggest that? The alternative is to accept that the double bang was two separate shots, exactly as witness Lee Bowers said. Hence not from the same rifle, hence more than one gunman, hence conspiracy, hence Warren Report blown to pieces. Now be specific Gary, what is it that you DO SAY about the double bang?

GM: and you cannot pick and choose which ones may or may not have been right so only a recording of the assassination can prove the spacing between the shots. That will be an interesting development, for according to the acoustics evidence, the first two shots were fired 1.6 seconds apart – probably too fast for Oswald’s rifle. For that reason, I have urged for 20+ years that the acoustics evidence of the TSBD shots be examined in the same minute detail as was the knoll shot. Are you aware that has never been done?

Who cares? That is concentrating on nitpicking that will not uncover anything new. It is diverting attention from the important stuff that needs to be re-examined and focused on. This nitpicking on unimportant details is exactly what I would want you to do if I would want the truth kept covered-up. And it happens to be exactly what YOU are doing. 1.6 seconds is not probably too fast for Oswald’s rifle, it is CERTAINLY too fast. But that is exacly your modus operandi. To reduce certainties to probabilities, possibilities and “maybe’s”.

Additionally in order to leave your impressions standing, you HAVE to discredit the testimonies of Chauncey Holt, Tosh Plumlee, Judyth Baker and James Files. In fact, you rather ignore them when you are asked to vent your opinions on TV and radio programs, for which you are frequently asked.

GM: Four people with nothing but stories – that is not hard evidence.

That is a blatant lie. They can all backup their stories, they can all prove who they say they are, and for most of them there is documentary and even PHYSICAL evidence to backup their stories. Take the dented shell casing found in Dealey Plaza for example.

Let me ask you point blank: Is it your statement that the single bullet theory is possible?

GM: Of course it is possible. Is it likely? No, but there’s no hard evidence that it is impossible.

There you go again. Of course it is IMPOSSIBLE, and again, you know this. Therefore you are a mouthpiece for the people that do not want the truth known to the public.

After all, that is the THEORY that the lone assassin viewpoint rests on. Without a single bullet theory there is no lone assassin.

GM: The single bullet theory was tested and found to be possible. In the absence of any other hard evidence, therefore, it must have happened.

Again, you know full well what a load of crap this statement is. Other than its impossible trajectory there are numurous other proven reasons that the single bullet theory is impossible. You focus on the trajectory in hope that the other reasons go unnoticed. But you ARE cognizant of them, and you DO know that they exist. Here are just a few, not for you, but for those who may get to read this exchange:

Hoover explains to his friend and neighbour Lyndon Johnson, ON TAPE, that both Kennedy and Connally were wounded by a total of three bullets that all hit their target. This is right after the assassination. However, after more than 6 months the Warren Commission can no longer ignore the testimony of James Tague and is forced to put him on the stand.

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/images/Warrencommission.jpg

James Tague was standing under the triple underpass and was slightly injured on the cheek by a flying piece of concrete from a bullet that missed and hit a sidewalk curb.

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/images/tagueunderpass.jpg

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/images/curb.jpg

The trajectory for such a shot through the presidential limousine, lines up better for a shot from a low floor in the Daltex building, than a high floor in the book depository, but this is ignored by the warren Commision.

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/images/taguediagram.jpg

Now the Commission is faced with the dilemma to explain all the wounds of the two men with only two bullets. It is only then that the infamous single bullet theory is born, with Mr. Arlen Specter giving birth to it. The far more logical route in any proper investigation would have been to account for more bullets, and thus more gunmen, and thus a conspiracy. But since the predetermined conclusion of the Commission was to convict Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone assassin, the Commission desperately clings to Specter’s single bullet theory. This THEORY asserts that one bullet emerged in almost undamaged condition, traversing through Kennedy’s neck, without hitting any bone, then piercing Connally’s torso, then shattering his wristbone and ending up in his thigh, thus causing a total of SEVEN wounds.

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/images/magicbullet.jpg

The single bullet theory is not only an insult to any physician, but to the intelligence of any person that has studied it. The impossible trajectory of the bullet is often cited:

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/images/magicbulletdrawing.jpg

but there are far better reasons to dismiss it to Wonderland. First the bullet fragments removed from Connally’s wrist weighed more than the weight missing from the magic bullet. Secondly, wen we use the Commission’s own locations for Kennedy’s back and neckwound, the trajectory of the bullet shows that it would have hit the bone of the vertebrae.

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/images/neckdisk.gif

Thirdly, the autopsy doctors in Bethesda probed the backwound and determined that it the trajectory was at a 45 degrees downward angle and that it was a SHALLOW wound that did not go anywhere. Hence the bullet DID NOT traverse through Kennedy. There WAS NO exit wound, the back wound and the throatwound were NOT connected. These are more irrefutable reasons that the magic bullet did NOT exit at Kennedy’s throat. They would be accepted as proof in any court of law. A Jury or Judge would quickly rule that the single bullet theory, on which the Warren Commission’s conclusion rests, is nonsense.

The report of FBI Agents Sibert and O’neal reads in part:

“Dr. Humes located an opening which appeared to be a bullet hole which was below the shoulders and two inches to the right of the middle line of the spinal column. This opening was probed by Dr. Humes with the finger at which time it was determined that the trajectory of the missile had entered at a downward position for 45 to 60 degrees. Further probing determined that the distance traveled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger, inasmuch as a complete bullet of any size could be located in the brain area and likewise no bullet could be located in the back or any other areas. An inspection revealed there was no point of exit.” (Thus it is no surprise that Specter lied to the Commission that agent Sibert had not made a report, and that neither of these two federal officers were called to testify.)

Fourthly, we are asked to believe that the bullet inflicting all this damage, causing seven wounds, comes out in a near pristine condition, while the other bullet from Oswald’s antique rifle explodes in Kennedy’ s head in dustlike fragments. In addtion, the original FBI report dated november 23 , 1963, shows that one live round and only two, NOT three spent cartridges were found in the sniper’s nest of the Schoolbook depository. Thus Oswald, if he fired any shots at all, could not have fired more than two shots. Only one of these reasons is sufficient to reject the single bullet theory. I have named four and there are still more.

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/images/2shells1live%20round.jpg

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/images/fbi1.BMP (zoom in on Q6 ,Q7, Q8)

As an ardent researcher of the JFK assassination and as the curator of the sixth floor museum, you, Gary Mack, are aware of all of the above reasons that prove the single bullet theory impossible and a willful lie.

Here’s another question, just to get some clarity from you: Do you support the thesis that the photographed three tramps in Dealey Plaza were Gedney, Doyle and Abrams?

GM: There’s no hard evidence they were anyone else.

First this is a lie. There is much harder evidence that they were Chauncey Holt, Charles Harrelson and Charles Rogers. Not only Holt’s confession but also photographical analysis by facial experts who are highly respected in other criminal investigations. Secondly, there is no hard evidence that they were Gedney , Doyle and Abrams, other than 3 so-called arrest records without mugshots and fingerprints. Imagine: these are alledgedly arrests in connection with the death of a President, and there are no mugshots and no fingerprints? These records are suddenly “found” 30 years later, coincidently just at the time that Chauncey Holt went public with his revelations.

Thrid question: Do you maintain that there is no hard evidence form a shot from the grassy knoll?

GM: The hard evidence of a shot from the knoll is the acoustics evidence, in my personal opinion. The Badge Man photo is interesting, but not clear enough to be hard evidence.

Another lie to the stack. There is a ton of hard evidence for a shot from the front, starting with the Zapruder film, from which a child can see that the headshot came from the right front, which is why it was kept away from the public until it had to be shown on TV in 1975. I will not list all the remaining evidence here, for you know the rest, but the puff of smoke seen by witnesses, the smell of gunpowder smelled by witnesses, the medical evidence, the massive exit hole in Kennedy’s back of the head, the witness accounts of the doctors and those present at the autopsy, the trajectory of the bloodspray, the Harper fragment, the account of the embalmer Thom Evans Robinson, Malcolm Kilduff, JFK’s Press Secretary, are just a few examples.

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/doctors.htm

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/pointing_to_head.htm

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/EMBALMER.htm

And do you maintain that that the throat wound could have been caused by an exiting bullet fired from behind?

GM: There’s no hard evidence it could not have been. Here’s an example. The simple explanation, which I have talked about publicly several times, is that the trajectory through JFK is upward. That cannot happen with a bullet moving downward. The explanation, of course, is that JFK was leaning forward. But it appears that he didn’t lean forward until after being hit. Therefore, the upward trajectory suggests the SBT is wrong. But a suggestion is not hard evidence. Understand?

No and yes. No, I do not understand it is a suggestion, I understand it is another piece of proof that the SBT is not possible. Yes, I do understand your modus operandi. You reduce the hard irrefutable evidence to incredible suggestions. That is your mission, one which you perform reasonably well under the difficult circumstances you have to work with. That is the only credit I give you.

Wim

———————————————————————————

Wim –

You asked what I thought and I told you – honestly and completely.

I already know what your theories are and I find them lacking, like most – but not all – conspiracy theories.

Thanks for the opportunity to reply, but there’s no point in continuing.

Gary Mack

———————————————————————————-

Next time you go on radio, ask them to get me on the show too 😉 You know, just to have a representative for the conspiracy “lunatics”.

Wim

———————————————————————————-

Gary Mack in the 1988 documentary “The men who killed Kennedy” :

We are not a free country anymore. Because the people that are smart enough and powerful enough to take out a President like that, and get away with it for 25 years, are probably involved in other areas of the Government. In other words, the country is being run by people we did not vote for.

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

Email received 28 june 2007:

I also happen to believe that Gary Mack is an apologist for the Lone Gunman Theory/Warren Commission Report. Here is the latest example I’ve discovered. Madeleine Duncan Brown has appeared in several interviews describing a party which occurred the night before the JFK assassination at which several powerful people were in attendance. The list includes LBJ, Hoover, Nixon, and many of Johnson’s rich, Texas oil buddies.

Gary Mack is on record for doing his utmost to pick her story apart. For example, he claims that Hoover never had a black chauffeur – thereby proving that Brown’s testimony was wrong. In fact, what Brown said was – and anybody can view it on Youtube in the latest “Men Who Killed Kennedy (The Guilty Men, segment 3) – was that “a” black chauffeur was present. Well, the above-mentioned TV show interviews one May Newman who corroborates that it was in fact oil tycoon Clint Murchison who had the black chauffeur and that it was he, the black chauffeur, who drove Hoover around that evening. Mack could have learned this in a second had he simply watched the program and not been drawn to distraction by picking at straws.

Here’s what I think about Gary Mack. I remember him being featured extensively in the original Men Who Killed Kennedy back in 1988, and he appeared to be a JFK researcher who seemed to be sincerely interested in uncovering the obvious conspiracy of JFK’s murder. Since then, however, he has done a complete about-face, and become a shill for the Warren Commission Report and all of its proponents. I wonder if his position as Curator of the 6th Floor Museum has only served to corrupt his honesty and objectivity. After all, he does spend most of his days rubbing shoulders with the very same power base which was responsible for JFK’s death in the first place. He wouldn’t want to lose that cushy, well-paying job by rocking the boat, now would he?

Frank


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

Compare the two clips:

1988: Gary Mack comments on the single bullet theory:

Jack Ruby

A picture says more than a thousand words. Imagine what moving pictures say ..


Jack Ruby (Oswald’s assassin) makes a statement to reporters after he has been permitted a new trial. He says :


Everything pertaining to what’s happening has never come to the surface. The world will never know the true facts, of what occurred, my motives. The people had , that had so much to gain and had such an ulterior motive for putting me in the position I’m in, will never let the true facts come above board to the world.

Reporter : Are these people in very high positions Jack ??

Jack : Yes.

Why has nobody seen this footage at the time it was shot? Because certain people with enough power didn’t want you to see it. Just like they didn’t want you to see the Zapruder film. Imagine what would have happened if the american public was shown just both of these films.
Other quotes of Jack Ruby that are on film:
“Gentlemen, I want to tell the truth, but I cannot tell it here. If you want a fair shake out of me, you have to take me to Washington”

“When I mentioned about Adlai Stevenson, if he was vice president there would never have been an assassination of our beloved President Kennedy ” Asked if he would explain it again Ruby continued “Well the answer is the man in office now” – that man was Lyndon Johnson.
Watch the video clip (Windows media) Click here.

Ruby fearing for his life, and the life of his family told the Warren commission….”Well, you won’t see me again. I tell you that a whole new form of government is going to take over the country, and I know I won’t live to see you another time”
While Ruby is in jail, he writes this letter:
It reads: “you must believe me that I know what is taking place, so please with all my heart, you must believe me, because I am counting on you to save this country a lot of blood-shed. As soon as you get out you must read Texan looks at Lyndon (A Texan Looks at Lyndon by J. Evetts Haley) , and it may open your eyes to a lot of things. This man is a Nazi in the worst order.”
Further on in this letter Ruby writes: … isn’t it strange that Oswald who hasn’t worked a lick most of his life, should be fortunate enough to get a job at the Book Building two weeks before the president himself didn’t know as to when he was to visit Dallas, now where would a jerk like Oswald get the information that the president was coming to Dallas? Only one person could have had that information, and that man was Johnson who knew weeks in advance as to what was going to happen, because he is the one who was going to arrange the trip for the president, this had been planned long before the president himself knew about, so you can figure that one out. The only one who gained by the shooting of the president was Johnson, and he was in a car in the rear and safe when the shooting took place. What would the Russians, Castro or anyone else have to gain by eliminating the president? If Johnson was so heartbroken over Kennedy, why didn’t he do something for Robert Kennedy? All he did was snub him.
This letter and Ruby’s remarks to the press, suggest that Ruby became only later convinced that Johnson was a power behind the scenes. During his Warren testimony he shows no inkling of this conviction.
Johnson is sworn in as President on Airforce One
Standing next to a mourning Jackie, LBJ gets a wink and a smile from Congressman Albert Thomas
Here is another interesting document that says Ruby worked for Richard Nixon: Click here
Fragment of Jack Ruby’s testimony for the Warren Commisssion:

Representative FORD: Are there any questions that ought to be asked to help clarify the situation that you described?

Mr. RUBY: There is only one thing. If you don’t take me back to Washington tonight to give me a chance to prove to the President that I am not guilty, then you will see the most tragic thing that will ever happen.

RUBY: Maybe something can be saved, something can be done.

What have you got to answer to that, Chief Justice Warren?

Chief Justice WARREN: Well, I don’t know what can be done, Mr. Ruby, because I don’t know what you anticipate we will encounter.

Mr. RUBY: All I know is maybe something can be saved. Because right now, I want to tell you this, I am used as a scapegoat, and there is no greater weapon that you can use to create some falsehood about some of the Jewish faith, especially at the terrible heinous crime such as the killing of President Kennedy.

Now maybe something can be saved. It may not be too late, whatever happens, if our President, Lyndon Johnson, knew the truth from me.

But if I am eliminated, there won’t be any way of knowing.

Right now, when I leave your presence now, I am the only one that can bring out the truth to our President, who believes in righteousness and justice.

But he has been told, I am certain, that I was part of a plot to assassinate the President.

I know your hands are tied; you are helpless.

Chief Justice WARREN: The President will know everything that you have said, everything that you have said.

Mr. RUBY: But I won’t be around, Chief Justice. I won’t be around to verify these things you are going to tell the President.

Mr. TONAHILL: Who do you think is going to eliminate you, Jack?

Mr. RUBY: I have been used for a purpose, and there will be a certain tragic occurrence happening if you don’t take my testimony and somehow vindicate me so my people don’t suffer because of what I have done.

Chief Justice WARREN: But we have taken your testimony. We have it here. It will be in permanent form for the President of the United States and for the Congress of the United States, and for the courts of the United States, and for the people of the entire world.

It is there. It will be recorded for all to see. That is the purpose of our coming here today. We feel that you are entitled to have your story told.

Mr. RUBY: You have lost me though. You have lost me, Chief Justice Warren.

Chief Justice WARREN: Lost you in what sense?

Mr. RUBY: I won’t be around for you to come and question me again.

Chief Justice WARREN: Well, it is very hard for me to believe that. I am sure that everybody would want to protect you to the very limit.

Mr. RUBY: All I want is a lie detector test, and you refuse to give it to me.

Because as it stands now–and the truth serum, and any other–Pentothal–how do you pronounce it, whatever it is. And they will not give it to me, because I want to tell the truth.

And then I want to leave this world. But I don’t want my people to be blamed for something that is untrue, that they claim has happened.

Chief Justice WARREN: Mr. Ruby, I promise you that you will be able to take such a test.