I don’t really want write this, but I feel compelled to try to convince you how JFK was assassinated.
I’m talking about the mechanics here.
Hopefully I can disabuse you of the idea that it was a lone gunmen.
I want you put yourself in the place of the person who was entrusted to plan the assassination.
It was planned, right?
Accepting that as a given, how would you kill John Kennedy?
Would you use one gunman, two gunmen, or more?
Keep in mind that it’s essential that you kill the President of the United States, not necessarily that you get away with it.
If you have a choice between killing the president and not getting caught you want to choose the former.
Killing the president is not like robbing a bank.
In robbing a bank if you have a choice between successfully robbing the bank and not getting caught, you would choose the latter.
In robbing a bank, the key is to not get caught.
In killing the president, the key is to kill the president.
Because when you kill the president, your guy controls the investigation. So if you get caught, you don’t get caught.
With that stated it is essential that you be successful in killing the president.
You must kill the president.
Your goal is also to blame it on one lone gunmen.
Now, you know that in 1963, using an MC (Manlicher-Carcano) with a bolt action, that a lone gunmen can only get off at most four shots within 7.5 seconds assuming that the first shot is fired at 0 seconds. Hence: 0, 2.5, 5, 7.5.
It takes about 2.5 seconds to reload the rifle with the bolt.
Given that, how will you plan assassination?
Will you use one gunman in the rear in the TSBD?
Will you use one gunman to the front on the grassy knoll?
Or will you use two gunman, one to the rear, and one on the grassy knoll?
Two would be better than one, for sure. Two would be better because what would happen if a lone gunman has a bad day?
Two would be better than one, because what would happen if the car sped up after the first shot was heard? A rear gunman would have a tougher shot. What would happen if the car stopped and backed up at high speed? A front gunman would have a tougher shot.
You have to prepare for what all contingencies.
I think most planners would agree that having two gunmen would spread risk. It would give you a better chance of success.
But is risk spread sufficiently enough with two gunmen alone?
Who can predict all the crazy things that might happen that day?
Maybe it would be better to have four gunman, two fore and two aft, in order to spread risk even greater.
If that were the case, would you each have them fire one bullet or would you have them fire two bullets?
Well, if they each fired two bullets, that would mean eight shots, and that would seriously screw up the fairytale that you want to present.
It would screw it up because a lone gunman couldn’t possibly get off eight shots.
But what if four of the eight bullets were silenced?
Could this be done?
From a high speed rifle, the answer is no. There is no way to suppress the crack of a high speed supersonic rifle. A silencer will not do the trick because the sound of the supersonic rifle in large part comes from the Mach cone caused by the bullet traveling past the sound barrier.
There are actually two sounds made by a high speed rifle. There is the sound behind the bullet, and there is the sound in front of the bullet.
The sound behind the bullet is caused by the explosion of gases in the rifle. That can be suppressed with a silencer.
The sound in front of the bullet is caused by virtue of the fact that the bullet is traveling faster than the speed of sound.
That sound in front of the bullet cannot be suppressed by a silencer.
But, what if you didn’t use a supersonic rifle?
What if you used a DeLisle carbine that shoots below the speed of sound?
These carbines, invented by the British and used in World War II are remarkably silent.
Using a subsonic rifle for four of the bullets will allow you to shoot an extra four bullets while still maintaining the narrative of a lone gunman.
And this is what I propose happened.
It is the scenario most consistent with what we know about JFK’s assassination.
Given that, though, if you could accept that eight bullets were fired, with four being subsonic, and with two shooters in front, and two shooters to the rear, how could they ever be coordinated in time?
It is essential that the bullets are heard no closer than 2.5 seconds apart.
How could you possibly coordinate the shooters?
How could you possibly coordinate the shooters in 1963?
Could you use a wireless transceiver?
It’s possible, but it would be probably better to go with something more old-fashioned.
Why would you want to rely on technology when technology is not necessary.
Why would you want to bet your life on technology.
Remember, if you get caught, and the president doesn’t die, you will die. You will be executed.
So how would you coordinate those two teams of assassins?
Well, here is how I would do it.
I would place two individuals down there on the ground where the president is traveling by.
I would have them stand at 90° perpendicular to the curb, and I would have them raise their arms, in a coordinated way to signal back to the teams when to fire. PA = Person A; PB = Person B.
Shot 1 PA: Arm up PB: Arm down. Supersonic. Front.
Shot 2 PA: Arm up PB: Arm up. Subsonic. Back.
Shot 3 PA: Arm down PB: Arm up. Subsonic. Front.
Shot 4 PA: Arm down PB: Arm down. Supersonic. Back.
Shot 5 PA: Arm up PB: Arm down. Subsonic. Back.
Shot 6 PA: Arm up PB: Arm up. Supersonic. Front.
Shot 7 PA: Arm down PB: Arm up. Supersonic. Back.
Shot 8 PA: Arm down PB: Arm down. Subsonic. Front.
Then, since the sequence repeats itself, I would have four of the shots go out before the midway mark, and four shots after the midway mark.
In that manner, the heard shots will not approximate each other closer than 2.5 seconds.
Standing behind each team of assassins will be a team leader, who will be watching the two people down on the ground. As he sees their hands move in accordance with the paradigm above, he will tap his assassins on the back at which point they will fire. In that manner the assassins follow the President.
This is the best and most logical way to plan the assassination
And that is exactly how Seymour Bolten planned it.
It is so totally German and so totally logical.
Bolten’s extraction may have been Russian, but he was a German to the core, and that’s the way Germans think.
They are a totally logical people.
They are Vulcans.
Seymour Bolton was on the German Squad at DeWitt Clinton High School. He spent 2 1/2 years being guarded by the Germans in a POW camp in Poland. After the war, he worked in Germany for three years under Lucius Clay. After he finished his fellowship at Harvard, he went to work for the CIA. He returned to Germany in 1955 and spent five years there.
He loved Germany. He loved the German people. He may have hated Hitler’s guts, but he loved the German way of doing things.
When Willy Brandt was feted at a state dinner by Richard Nixon, Seymour Bolten was on the invitation list. He was there.
Seymour Bolten loved Germany, and he thought like a German.
He was a hard worker, and he was a smart, smart guy.
There existed a certain enthrallment with Germany during the 1920s and 30s.
Yes, of course, we had fought the Germans in WWI and defeated them, there was still a respect for Germany, especially amongst intellectuals.
Germany has always been respected for its order, logicality, and work ethic.
These are traits to be admired and encouraged.
Germany has also enjoyed an extraordinary influence academically in the United States. Between 1870 and 1910 they had extraordinary influence upon our colleges and universities. It was the Germans who established the first kindergartens.
Germany was seen as place of great minds and great thinkers.
My father received a classical training during medical school. He gifted me his anatomy books which were illustrated by the German anatomist Johannes Sobotta.
My father to illustrate a point would often use German words like punkt.
When I gathered information about Seymour Bolten I could see much of my father who was slightly older than Bolten.
They were both diligent hard workers, traditional, academically inclined, humble, uncaring about fame, and no nonsense type of guys.
Both were dutiful officers of the Empire.
I suppose I inherited much of my father’s work ethic and realistic view (cynicism) about the world.
I can’t tell you when I started to suspect Seymour Bolten as the architect of the assassination. I suppose it was a gradual realization.
I’ve always had that ability to sense out stuff.
I can only tell you that, as I came to realize the depth of planning in the assassination, particularly the Tippit killing, I said, to myself: “I know this guy.”
Maybe I know him because I knew my father and because my father was so like Bolten in many respects. Obviously, they aren’t the same person, but they’re close enough even though they worked in unrelated fields.
You can’t pull off the assassination of the president and get away with it unless it is methodicically planned.
Methodical planning requires an individual who is diligent, well organized in their mind, smart as hell and well read.
It also requires an individual who is always thinking about how he can get screwed.
You can’t just go in to Dealey Plaza and fire some bullets. It all has to be thought out into the past and into the future.
Only a true “German” could have so obsessively planned this out.
… To be continued.
Copyright 2023 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved
Leave a Reply