My 60th Birthday

New Book, About FDR's Foreign Policy from 1937-1941, Coming Soon (in February 2017)

Six years in the making, my new book about President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his foreign policy "on the road to Pearl Harbor," titled: Deception, Intrigue, and the Road to War, will be published in February of 2017 (next month), and will be available at

This is a two volume work, and totals 742 pages (including the Afterword, Appendices, and Index).

The book takes a realpolitik approach to studying the actions of FDR during the run-up to Pearl Harbor, particularly during the crucial period of 1940-1941---an approach that I feel is long overdue.

Stay tuned for additional information as the book's publication date approaches!

Doug Horne, author, Inside the Assassination Records Review Board.
My 60th Birthday


This weekend I have contributed to a comment thread at following Jeff Morley's posting of Peter Voskamp's SEP 2014 interview of Richard Stolley of LIFE magazine, about Stolley's involvement with the Zapruder film the weekend following JFK's assassination.

This is a link to the JFKFACTS article by Peter Voskamp and the related comment thread, to which I refer here in this posting:

Once again (following my initial posting in the comment thread) I was subjected to the abrasive, sarcastic, and pejorative comments of one John McAdams---the foremost "lone-nutter" blogger in the United States---who rarely (if ever) engages in any gentlemanly discussion or debate about facts, and who usually tries to dismiss wholesale (without discussing factual evidence, or patterns in the evidence, or "the big picture") any ideas or conclusions that contradict the Warren Report's lone nut conclusion about the JFK assassination.

After observing him for some years, it is obvious to me that John McAdams is engaged in a full-time search-and-destroy mission, scouring all of the JFK chatrooms 24/7, with the sole intent of debunking or ridiculing any assertions, findings, or conclusions by American citizens that are at odds with the lone-nut findings of the Warren Commission.  He does not contribute anything positive to the JFK debate; rather, his sole intent is clearly to disrupt and sow dissention within the independent, honest, JFK research community.  (One can only wonder if he is doing this on behalf of someone else, and if so, what his "masters" are paying him for this "service.")  I find it extremely difficult to believe that he is engaged in this type of behavior solely out of a personal, genuine passion for the Warren Commission and its seriously flawed and discredited findings.  McAdams' behavior appears, on the surface, to be exactly the type of U.S. government-sponsored "third party surrogate" attacks on "conspiracy speech" advocated by President Obama's former cabinet member in charge of information, Cass Sunstein.  Sunstein (who eventually resigned his USG position under a cloud of controversy before the end of Obama's first term) co-authored a law school paper shortly before Obama took office advocating limitations on internet "conspiracy speech" in the U.S. by levying fines on "abusers" or even restricting their access to the internet; and he also advocated infiltration of "conspiracy groups" by government agents, and public attack on their ideas by U.S. government "third party surrogates."  Is John McAdams a propaganda tool of the U.S. government's intelligence community?  I don't know for sure, but it is a healthy question for us all to ask.  We may not know definitively for 50 years or more, until today's intelligence files are declassified.

I have decided to reproduce below what I posted this morning at JFKFACTS as a rebuttal to his latest inaccurate and scurrilous attack on my work; I decided this morning that if I remained silent, my silence might be misinterpreted by some as an inability to respond to his superficial criticism.  I wouldn't want anyone to think that I wasn't up to the task, or that I don't care when someone deviously attempts to discredit my many years of work on the JFK assassination.  On the other hand, I don't troll the chatrooms 24/7 like John McAdams and his ilk (Gary Mack, for example), so I don't have the time to respond to each and every sucurrilous or intellectually dishonest attack on my work---so I'm going to publish this one rebuttal on the tactics McAdams generally employs, and make my statement, and let it go at that.  I think you will all get the point when you read the piece I wrote this morning for the comment thread at JFKFACTS:

It is time for me to make a general comment here, for all readers of this thread.

If John McAdams had truly read any of my work on the Zapruder film---such as the 200 page Z film chapter, number 14 in my book "Inside the ARRB;" or my 19,000 word, footnoted research paper on the 2 NPIC events posted at would know that I have completely discredited David Wrone's book on the Zapruder film, and have done so with great specificity, quoting Wrone's incorrect conclusions verbatim, and citing exactly why his major conclusions (that the USG had no interest in the film and did not have the capability to alter it) are incorrect, in light of new evidence.  David Wrone's book misrepresented/failed to report properly on the 2 NPIC events, as I reported in my chapter 14, and that obfuscation, I believe, was intentional. Wrone's book, when it was published, was the best defense to date, at that time, of the Z film's authenticity.  But it now reads like a "flat earth" document, following Magellan's circumnavigation of the globe.  Citing David Wrone's book at this point in the Z film debate is about as useful as citing the Warren Report when discussing the medical evidence.

No one who has watched Dino Brugioni's interview in the Shane O'Sullivan piece titled "The Zapruder Film Mystery" has expressed anything but respect for his excellent memory and his integrity, and this includes the moderator on this site, Jefferson Morley. Dino's memories, when recorded on video in 2011, were 47 years old, and yet were more truthful, and useful, and reliable, than much of the testimony taken by the Warren Commission just months after JFK's assassination.  The best example of this is Dr. James J. Humes, who perjured himself on many occasions before the Warren Commission.  Humes' testimony was not "valid" just because it was "fresh."  And Dino Brugioni's recollections (and those of Homer McMahon of NPIC in 1997) are not "invalid" just because they were not recorded in 1964.  Each witnesses' testimony and recollections must be evaluated independently, within the context of all known evidence and what they have said previously.  Every oral historian and jurist knows this.

On those occasions when he discusses my work, McAdams keeps trotting out his favorite old shibboleth about how no one can trust 30+ year old memories; he attempts to use this rather lame, simplistic dismissal---a standard lawyer's trick used in adversarial proceedings---whenever he cannot counter any of my specific assertions or conclusions by discussing specific evidence, or by discussing the pattern revealed by a large body of facts (and what those facts mean).  On the rare occasions when he does discuss facts, he attempts to use a "reductionist" approach---which entails ignoring the "big picture" and selectively picking out one statement among many made by someone else, in an attempt to destroy a larger argument by nitpicking to death, and casting doubt upon, one small item in a large body of evidence.  I find this approach to the JFK assassination counterproductive, for in adopting these methods, Mr. McAdams contributes nothing positive to the JFK debate; his sole object seems to be to cast the maximum doubt possible upon any facts contrary to the Warren Commission's findings, and to debunk the serious work of dedicated JFK researchers, whose sole goal is to determine what really happened in our country in 1963.

But for the sake of this response, let me on this one occasion, counter his tired old argument that we cannot trust 30+ year old memories---which is demonstrably not true---by stating that most of the evidence that causes us to mistrust the Warren Commission's medical conclusions are NOT 30+ year old memories, but rather, are contemporaneous documents created at or near the time of the assassination, to wit:

(1) The Boyajian Report dated 11/26/63, which records the arrival of JFK's body at the Bethesda morgue 20 minutes prior to the Andrews AFB motorcade;
(2)The Sibert and O'Neill FBI FD-302 report dated 11/26/63, which quotes Dr. Humes' statement at the autopsy (when describing the condition of JFK's body) that there had been "surgery of the head area, namely, in the top of the skull."  The significance of this statement is that there was no cranial surgery in Dallas.
(3) The receipt trail for the JFK autopsy report (from both 1965 and from 1967) which proves that the Secret Service TWICE relinquished "original autopsy reports" on JFK to others.  The point here is that you cannot give away an "original" twice, if there was only one original.  And we know the first draft of the autopsy report was burned by Dr. Humes in his fireplace after it was revised, because this is what Humes testified to in 1964 before Arlen Specter of the Warren Commission.  That was not a 30+ year old memory---it was only about 4 months after the assassination.  So we can have no confidence today in the extant autopsy report.
(4) National Archives personnel recorded in a written report on 10/31/66 that all of the paragraph nine materials (see the APR '65 inventory) given to RFK in 1965 (including the brain and an "original autopsy report") were not returned to the govt by the Kennedy family; and we have a 1969 memo written by Assistant S.S. Director Tom Kelley which records that the group of USG officials he was meeting with discussed the missing autopsy report, and the incendiary nature of that fact, and decided to do nothing about it.
(5) The Joint Casket Bearer Team's official report written in 1963 lists the time that the honor guard took the Dallas casket into the morgue as "2000 hours," or 8:00 PM.  This contemporaneous document records the final casket entry (of three) that night at the Bethesda morgue; and when married with the Boyajian report (documenting the first casket entry at 18:35 hours, or 6:35 PM) proves that there was a shell game underway at Bethesda Naval Hospital on 11/22/63 with JFK's body, and that its chain of custody from Dallas to Bethesda was broken---seriously compromised.
(6) The Gawler's Funeral Home "first call sheet" prepared on 11/22/63 records that JFK's body arrived at Bethesda Naval Hospital in a metal shipping casket, a term which had a specific meaning within the funeral trade.  His body did not leave Dallas in a cheap, lightweight silver (or gray) aluminum shipping casket; rather, it left Dallas in a heavy, dark brown, bronze ceremonial viewing coffin. The break in the chain of custody of JFK's body already established by the Boyajian report and the report of the Casket Bearer Team is further substantiated by this written record created on 11/22/63.
(7) The contemporaneous treatment notes and reports of the Parkland treating physicians written on 11/22/63---they are certainly not 30+ year old memories---all record a large head wound in the rear, or right rear, of President Kennedy's head.  None of them describe any damage to the top of the head or to the right side.  Those are not my interpretations of what they wrote, for if one consults a medical anatomy atlas, there is only ONE possible interpretation to what they wrote: JFK had a large defect in the back of his head, devoid of scalp and skull, extruding cerebral AND CEREBELLAR tissue.  Those key observations speak to a fatal shot from the front, and dramatically disagree with the later autopsy conclusions.

I could go on and on, but by now the readers of this thread surely get the point: you cannot dismiss serious evidence, and the conclusions derived from studying the patterns in that evidence, by refusing to discuss the facts, and by resorting to simplistic techniques to attempt to discount "wholesale" everything someone says.  That is an intellectually dishonest approach.  END
My 60th Birthday

Here is My Response to Jeremy Gunn's 50th Anniversary Speech About the JFK Evidence

Jefferson Morley's blogsite has just posted a one-and-one-half hour speech made by Jeremy Gunn on the 50th anniversary of the JFK assassination. Jeremy Gunn flew from Morocco, where he and his wife were then reportedly employed as professors, to Maine, just to make the speech---and then flew home to Morrocco, according to the person who introduced him in the video.

For those of you who do not know, Jeremy Gunn wore two hats at the ARRB for the first 2 years I was there: he was the Chief of Research and Analysis (the director of all the analysts on the 4 record teams: FBI, CIA, Military, and Secret Service), and was the General Counsel.  When David Marwell (the Executive Director of the ARRB staff for its first 3 years) departed from the ARRB staff one year prior to shutdown, the five Review Board members eventually (belatedly, and not immediately) appointed Jeremy as the new Executive Director, circa November of 1997.  He served as our second Executive Director from roughly November of 1997 until his abrupt resignation in July of 1998, about 3 months prior to shutdown of the ARRB.  The rather incurious and conservative Board Members did not appreciate or like Jeremy's intense curiosity about all of the conflicts in the evidence of the JFK assassination, and so relations between Jeremy Gunn and the Board were strained, to say the least, once he took over as Executive Director.  He left "under a cloud," an unexplained cloud of obvious animus between him and the Board; I still do not know the reasons for his abrupt departure 3 months before our sunset.  From December of 1995, through the end of September 1997, I worked extremely closely with Jeremy Gunn as his primary research assistant helping him prepare for the ten depositions we conducted of witnesses to, and participants in, the JFK military autopsy.  I was present at all ten of those depositions, and was familiar with his thinking about the evidence going into each deposition, and after each deposition was concluded.

Having been hired by Gunn in 1995, and having worked closely with him for over 2 years (until we had a major falling out over the future direction of our research activity), I watched the video with great interest, because for many years following the sunset of the ARRB, Jeremy Gunn had told people that the JFK assassination was no longer a part of his life, and that he did not wish to discuss it anymore.  I knew that this attitude of his was changing a bit, since he had given a tepid interview to NPR last autumn in 2013, in which he discussed just a few of the irregularities in the medical evidence (without discussing the obvious implications of those irregularities---namely, a major U.S. government cover-up).

Jeff Morley at JFKFACTS has just posted the video of Jeremy's 50th anniversary speech in Maine last November, and here are the comments I just posted about the video at JFKFACTS:

As a person who was hired by Jeremy Gunn in 1995, and who worked closely under him (and with him) from August of 1995 until his abrupt and mysterious resignation from the ARRB (for unknown reasons) in July of 1998, I watched this presentation made by Jeremy Gunn in November of 2013 with great interest. Overall, I found it to be a good primer for those newly approaching the case, with respect to how many of the details about what really happened in Dealey Plaza in 1963 are truly "unknowable," because of the many conflicts within the evidentiary record, and because of the many instances where key evidence in the case has a badly broken chain-of-custody. Jeremy also pointed out that in many cases supposedly "key evidence," such as the Zapruder film, is subject to differing interpretations by different viewers; just as the reliability of witness testimony is subject to differing opinions by those evaluating their testimony or their recollections. For the most part, his speech was a cautionary tale about not jumping to conclusions without first considering ALL of the evidence about any facet of the assassination, pro or con. Jeremy is saying here that one must approach all evidence (film evidence such as the Z film or many of the autopsy photos; eyewitness testimony; and so-called forensics evidence) with extreme caution, and take nothing for granted about its accuracy or provenance.

Yet---and I find this unfortunate---Jeremy continues to use all of the uncertainties about the evidence as a "mask" to hide behind in a sense, which allows him to continue to say that he personally has no idea who killed President Kennedy, in an attempt to avoid controversy. Significantly, I do recall reading an interview he gave to a Washington D.C. law journal circa the year 2000, in which he stated that he thought that far into the future the official consensus of government and media would be that Lee Harvey Oswald had killed President Kennedy, and that he personally thought that this ultimate "verdict of history" would be INCORRECT. That is the true Jeremy Gunn, the one I knew and worked with for almost 3 years---who while not knowing who assassinated JFK, certainly believed that there had been a massive U.S. government cover-up of the facts surrounding his death, particularly of the medical evidence, and of the Mexico City evidence. This is the true value of this 2013 presentation: the many specific examples he gave of why we cannot trust the medical evidence or the Mexico City evidence.

Jeremy Gunn, unfortunately, made some factual errors during his presentation. As someone who has also spoken publicly about the assassination, I know how easy it is to make an inadvertent mistake when speaking before an audience. Nevertheless, it is important for someone to correct Jeremy's inadvertent errors, so here goes:

1. Gunn stated that the autopsy doctors had not seen the autopsy photos before their ARRB depositions; this was incorrect. Humes, Boswell, and Ebersole saw the original autopsy photos and x-rays on 11-1-1966 and created a catalogue listing of what they depicted; Humes, Boswell, and Finck saw them again in January of 1967 when gathered together by the Justice Department to write a report; and Humes, Boswell and Finck saw prints of some of the transparencies before the HSCA in 1977 and 1978.

2. Gunn mistakenly said that Dr. Humes had never told the W.C. that he had burned the first draft of the autopsy report. That is not true. Humes admitted this under oath to Arlen Specter (burning the original after preparing a revision), but tried to change the focus solely to his destruction of notes, when before the HSCA.

3.Gunn stated incorrectly that "the Secretary of the Navy, Arleigh Burke," was present at JFK's autopsy. This was untrue, and with some sympathy I could tell from his presentation that he knew he had misspoken. The truth is that the Surgeon General of the Navy, Admiral Kenney, was present; along with George Burkley, the President's military physician, as well as Admiral Galloway, who was in charge of the entire Bethesda complex. There was at least one other flag officer present as well: General Wehle (U.S. Army), the Commandant of the MDW. There is some reason to believe that one of JFK's enemies, USAF General Curtis LeMay, was present at his autopsy; but there is no evidence to suggest that another of his adversaries, Navy Admiral Arleigh Burke, was present.

4. Jeremy Gunn correctly admitted the importance of 2 brain exams (vice one) having taken place following the autopsy on JFK's body, but deftly avoided discussing the unavoidable implications: namely, that the brain photos in the Archives today were taken at the second exam, not the first, and CANNOT BE photos of JFK's brain. This is undeniably true; I know Jeremy believes it; and he was dodging the implications of this fact (U.S. government cover-up) by not mentioning the implications of the second brain exam.

5. Gunn's personal bias toward the authenticity of the Zapruder film was blatantly obvious; but he may not yet have been acquainted with the remarkable testimony of Dino Brugioni, the Chief of Information at the CIA's NPIC in 1963, who saw a different Z film the weekend of the assassination. If Jeremy could view the 4 hour, 15 minute video interview of Dino that I recorded on video in 2011, I'm confident his views on the authenticity of the Zapruder film would be modified.

6. In discussing the Dallas physicians Jeremy incorrectly stated that none of them had been pressured to change their minds about what they saw on 11/22/63. This is not true. Nurse Audrey Bell relayed to Jeremy and I personally, in 1997, that Dr. Perry had told her the day after the assassination that officials at Bethesda Naval Hospital had pressured him all night long to change his opinion about the throat wound being an entrance wound, and to say instead that it had been a wound of exit. If that is not pressure, I do not know what is. Also, the HSCA became aware of reliable hearsay that Secret Service Agent Elmer Moore later admitted to a third party (James Gochenaur) that he had "leaned on Dr. Perry about the throat wound" and that he felt remorse for that. [Moore was the official who showed the Dallas doctors the final version of the autopsy report on Dec 11th, 1963.]

In conclusion, Jeremy's speech is a good introductory primer about the hazards involved in investigating the JFK case; but as usual, he is unwilling to directly say what I know for a fact---that he personally believes there was a government cover-up of the medical evidence and of the Mexico City evidence, or discuss the obvious implications of those cover-ups. In refusing to go this far in public statements, I believe Jeremy hopes to avoid censure by the academic community, and any ensuing risk to his career. If you will watch his speech a second time, you will see that he actually acknowledges terrible conflicts in the evidence in these 2 areas, and much wrongdoing by government officials, but is unwilling to discuss the implications.

One of the most significant things Jeremy Gunn ever said to me about the medical evidence was that in his opinion, the JFK autopsy photos placed into the official record---we both knew there were numerous autopsy photos that had been “deep-sixed,” or suppressed---were intended to CONCEAL, rather than to reveal what had happened. In other words, the intent of the culled collection of photos was to conceal the reality of the event, and present a misleading picture of what had truly transpired during JFK’s assassination. This revelatory statement (which he made more than once to me) reveals, without any doubt whatsoever, that while Jeremy Gunn could not figure out who had killed President Kennedy, he believed without any doubt that the U.S. government had covered up the crime.


My 60th Birthday

Very Favorable Review of Online Lecture "Altered History" Posted at

A gentleman named Charles Burris---whom I have never met or spoken with---has posted a most favorable review of my 6 hour, 20 minute, 5-part HD video lecture titled: "Altered History," about the JFK medical cover-up and the alteration of the Zapruder film.

Here is the link to this very generous review:

Check it out!  Embedded in the review is a link to the 5-part video lecture. 

Thanks, Charles!

My 60th Birthday


Dear friends,

Today, the final segment of my five-part video lecture about the JFK assassination, "Altered History," was put up online by the sponsor, the Future of Freedom Foundation. I would like to once again thank Jacob Hornberger and the FFF for sponsoring this video lecture.

It is appropriate for the final part of my lecture to go up online today, for today is the 50th anniversary of the issuance of the Warren Report.  As I explain throughout my lecture, the medical evidence used by the Warren Commission to support its conclusion that JFK was hit only by two bullets, and only from behind, has now been thoroughly discredited.

All five parts of this 6 hour, 20 minute presentation can be accessed NOW via this one link:

Almost anyone who views this lecture in its entirety, no matter what the level of their knowledge about the case, will surely learn something new that they did not know before.

My 60th Birthday

New JFK Documentary, "A COUP IN CAMELOT," To Appear Soon

Last year I sat for an extended interview in Los Angeles for the documentarians producing "A Coup in Camelot."

An advance screening will be shown at 5 PM on October 26th, at the Texas Theater in Dallas, Texas.

Here is the link to the website just put up by the producers:

Stay tuned for further developments...broadcast arrangements are not yet firmed up.
My 60th Birthday

5-Part Video Lecture Re-Launched at the Future of Freedom Foundation

In the blog he wrote today, Jacob Hornberger re-launched my five-part video presentation on the JFK medical evidence in today's Future of Freedom Foundation newsletter.  (See my own journal entry immediately below, from September 15th, for my own extensive launch of this educational series last Monday.)

Jacob wanted everyone to know that the technical problems we experienced in streaming the video for the last couple of days have now been resolved.  Parts 1 and 2 are online now, and parts 3, 4, and 5 will be launched next week.

The new introductory article Jacob wrote today, about the inportance of the JFK autopsy, is a very powerful essay which everyone should read---powerful in its simplicity and in the direct nature of its line of argument:

I hope all interested parties will now refocus on this important topic, on this 50th anniversary of the Warren Commission Report.  END
My 60th Birthday

Video Lecture "Altered History" (6 hrs, 20 min.) Now Online for Viewing

By Douglas P. Horne, author of "Inside the Assassination Records Review Board"

I am pleased to announce that a project in the making since May of this year---an HD video recording of my Power Point presentation titled "Altered History: Deceit and Deception in the JFK Assassination Medical Evidence"---has just been posted online by the Future of Freedom Foundation (FFF) and its President, Jacob Hornberger, a libertarian activist and a loyal supporter of my work.

This lecture, which in many respects is a condensation of most of the principal points in my five volume book, is intentionally being issued on the 50th anniversary of the publication of the Warren Report.  Thanks to the efforts of the hard-working staff members of the HSCA and the ARRB, and the tireless research of countless independent citizen-researchers over the last half-century, we know much more now about the JFK medical evidence than we did 50 years ago when the Warren Report was published.  We can say with confidence today that the Warren Report's simplistic conclusions that JFK was hit only by two shots, and only by shots fired from behind, is now completely unsupportable (and untrue), based upon the present improved state of our collective knowledge, as represented in this HD video presentation launched today by the Future of Freedom Foundation.

And without a medical conclusion that JFK was hit only by two shots, fired from above and behind him, the Warren Commission's case that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin of the 35th President falls apart and is unsupportable.  That is why this lecture is so important.  It destroys the basic underpinnings of the Warren Report---its medical findings and conclusions.

This first link is to the "launch article" published today online by Jacob Hornberger:

This next link is to Part 1 of the 5-Part Video Lecture (which will also lead you to subsequent releases in the coming days):

What Jacob Hornberger asked me to do in this video was to take my basic power point presentation about the JFK medical cover-up, which he witnessed when I presented it recently at American University, and expand upon many of the slides with some additional commentary.  The result is this 5-part HD video put up by the FFF via U-Tube.  A new air segment will be issued about every other day, until the conclusion is put up on September 24th, the 50th anniversary of the day Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered his whitewash of the Kennedy assassination to President Lyndon B. Johnson.

Also available now are two e-books (both sold for only 99 cents):

(1) My seven essays titled "JFK's War With the National Security Establishment," at this link:

(2) Jacob Hornberger's excellent series of 12 essays titled "The Kennedy Autopsy," at this link:

Both of these e-books make valuable companions to the content of my video lecture, and expand in more detail upon topics introduced in the lecture.

When the mainstream media tries to tell us once again on September 24th of this year (the 50th anniversary of the Warren Report) that the Kennedy assassination is a closed case, you can respond by referring anyone who is interested to the above links.  Invite everyone you know to examine the evidence, to think for themselves about what it all means, and to challenge authority when falsehoods are presented as "truths" by the fourth estate (which lost its independence on this subject, and its curiosity about this subject, long ago).  END
My 60th Birthday

Major Lecture on JFK Medical Evidence Scheduled for Friday Night, Sep 26th in D.C.

By Douglas Horne, author of "Inside the Assassination Records Review Board"

There are two JFK assassination conferences in the Washington D.C. area on the 50th anniversary of the Warren Report, the weekend of Sep 26-28, 2014.

One, hosted by the AARC, will be in Bethesda, Maryland; and the other, organized by David Denton's JFK Historical Group, will be at the Crowne Plaza Old Town Hotel in Alexandria, Virginia.

I will be making a TWO-HOUR PRESENTATION on Friday night, Sep 26th, from 6:30 to 8:30 PM, at the Crown Plaza Hotel in Old Town Alexandria, titled THE JFK MEDICAL EVIDENCE: INADMISSIBLE AT TRIAL.

Here is a link to information about the conference at which I am speaking:

The Warren Report 50 Years Later:
A Critical Examination

Presented by the JFK Historical Group

Alexandria, Virginia
September 26-28, 2014

Even if you are attending "the other conference" hosted by the AARC in Bethesda, you can still attend individual lectures (such as mine) in Old Town at the Crowne Plaza for an admission price of only $20.00 per lecture, payable at the door.

My lecture will be a grand overview of the current state of the JFK medical evidence, post-ARRB---that is, what we know today that the American public did not know when the Warren Report was issued 50 years ago.

Based on what we know now, a simplistic---and indeed, dishonest---set of conclusions like The Warren Report could not be issued to the American public today.  Indeed, the major underpinnings of the Warren Report's conclusions about how President Kennedy was assassinated would not be admitted into evidence at trial, based on what we know about that evidence today.

And without this basic conclusion of the Warren Commission's that JFK was shot only from behind, and hit by only two bullets, the entire Warren Report falls apart.

I encourage everyone interested in the current state of the medical evidence to attend my lecture.  You won't hear what I am about to tell you in the mainstream media---so do yourself a favor and show up, on September 26th, between 6:30 and 8:30 PM!  END