Nova, Cold Case JFK 2015

[claviger]

JFK Assassination: Conspiracy Under Forensics | What Really Happened? |
Biography Documentary Film
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLp2rFMJf2s


Nova Cold Case JFK HD & History Documentary 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE69hV4OGuM

[mainframetech]

2 of the usual stories of the JFK killing. Missing much of the real
evidence, and therefore misleading, but worked on the suckers.

Chris

[bigdog]

On Saturday, August 22, 2015 at 11:07:46 PM UTC-4, claviger wrote:

I liked what Josiah Thompson said early in the program. "You'd think it
would be the easiest case in the world to solve.".

Hey, Josiah. It was.

[Anthony Marsh]

CIA propaganda

[mainframetech]

Naah! That's what the conspirators were hoping, that there would be
enough suckers that would fall for the look of simplicity that they
wouldn't pursue the conspirators after the murder. But most foklks were
too smart for that and distrusted the seeming phony simplicity.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

Sure, if the government had not destroyed and lied about the evidence.

> Hey, Josiah. It was.
>
>

No, they were ordered to NOT solve it.

[claviger]

You seem to have fundamental problems understanding forensic ballistics.
Keep in mind ballistic science is a subset of physical science, known as
Physics. There are 4 categories of ballistic science pertaining to modern
ranged weapons classified as missile weapons, in this case tubular weapon
devices called Guns. The NOVA programs are very well done so even
non-experts can understand. By watching these scientific programs you
might learn something about trajectories too.

[mainframetech]

I've seen the NOVA programs and find that they have made major mistakes
in not examining the full range of evidence that is now available to them.

and as far as your opinions go, they offer no proof of anything and so
I don't bother about them.

Chris

[David Emerling]

On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 5:05:53 PM UTC-5, mainframetech wrote:

> Naah! That's what the conspirators were hoping, that there would be
> enough suckers that would fall for the look of simplicity that they
> wouldn't pursue the conspirators after the murder. But most foklks were
> too smart for that and distrusted the seeming phony simplicity.

For a person who is unable to identify the architects of this plot, you
sure know a lot about what was going on in their head.

So, what you seem to be saying is that the conspirators purposely made the
assassination and cover-up very convoluted so that the investigators would
look toward simplistic answers and, thus, overlook their intricate weave
of deception?

Brilliant!

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[Anthony Marsh]

But YOU can't.

[mainframetech]

On Tuesday, August 25, 2015 at 10:26:39 PM UTC-4, David Emerling wrote:
> On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 5:05:53 PM UTC-5, mainframetech wrote:
>
> > Naah! That's what the conspirators were hoping, that there would be
> > enough suckers that would fall for the look of simplicity that they

> > wouldn't pursue the conspirators after the murder. But most folks were

> > too smart for that and distrusted the seeming phony simplicity.
>
> For a person who is unable to identify the architects of this plot, you
> sure know a lot about what was going on in their head.
>

You're incorrect again. I've listed out a number of names that appear
to be amopng the original conspirators, starting from the top by LBJ, and
as you go down the line Robert Frazier (FBI Firearms expert and custodian
of the bullets), also suspicious are Greer and Kellerman for various
reasons, Greer decided to almost stop the limousine he was driving
(proven) when the first bullets struck, and was instrumental in the
striking of the final kill shot. Kellerman could have jumped over the
chrome overhead bar to get on top of JFK when the first shot was fired,
but stayed right where he was, though he commented in such a way that we
know that he knew they were under fire. He was also the main lawbreaker
in stealing the body from Parkland hospital and the Medical Examiner.

> So, what you seem to be saying is that the conspirators purposely made the
> assassination and cover-up very convoluted so that the investigators would
> look toward simplistic answers and, thus, overlook their intricate weave
> of deception?
>
> Brilliant!
>
> David Emerling
> Memphis, TN

WRONG again. The plan was very simple, but the complications came in
from LNs and CTs arguing about it and finding every little bit of fluff
they could dig up, and then arguing it to death. What actuallty happened
was fairly straightforward as far as an assassination went. The key
disinformation was to have a 'patsy' to blame and kill off after the
murder, so that the conspirators could go on with their lives and work
without fear of being caught and tried. More effort was spent in covering
up and supporting the 'patsy' part than the main part!


I notice that you've erased all the information that was in the
previous notes, which was some of the more critical stuff that couldn't be
disproven, and instead you picked out a more abstract topic to complain
about. What were your thoughts on the other things shown to you in the
previous missive?

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

No, they laid a trail of false leads to lead away from themselves.
It's called a False Flag operation.

[claviger]

Which is tantamount to saying you don't bother about Science. Field
testing is an important part of the Scientific Method, a key step in
research and analysis to test the efficacy of any proposed theory.

[mainframetech]

Don't throw your platitudes all over everyone. I'm not impressed.
Science has plenty of use, but it can also be misued, and it can be
ignored by many people. You'd be wise to try and produce more proof and
less insults too, that ad hominem style will get you nowhere and it proves
nothing, since it's all opinion.

Chris

[claviger]

On Saturday, August 29, 2015 at 11:42:29 AM UTC-5, mainframetech wrote:
> On Friday, August 28, 2015 at 12:11:30 PM UTC-4, claviger wrote:
>
> > Which is tantamount to saying you don't bother about Science. Field
> > testing is an important part of the Scientific Method, a key step in
> > research and analysis to test the efficacy of any proposed theory.
>
> Don't throw your platitudes all over everyone. I'm not impressed.

Simply basic science, something you seem unfamiliar with.

> Science has plenty of use, but it can also be misued, and it can be
> ignored by many people.

Like you.

> You'd be wise to try and produce more proof and less insults too, that ad
> hominem style will get you nowhere and it proves nothing, since it's all
> opinion.

When I produce proof you refuse to read it, i.e. a four part thorough
examination of all four GArnold stories. I've seen no other in-depth
analysis, yet you treat it like a hot potato you can't deal with. All
Reitzes did was compare details of these 4 interviews for comparison.
Three of the four interviews were by well known CT proponents, so they had
no reason to misquote GArnold since they were all on the same side of the
controversy.

[Anthony Marsh]

You are confusing opinion with truth.

[mainframetech]

On Tuesday, September 1, 2015 at 9:53:36 AM UTC-4, claviger wrote:
> On Saturday, August 29, 2015 at 11:42:29 AM UTC-5, mainframetech wrote:
> > On Friday, August 28, 2015 at 12:11:30 PM UTC-4, claviger wrote:
> >
> > > Which is tantamount to saying you don't bother about Science. Field
> > > testing is an important part of the Scientific Method, a key step in
> > > research and analysis to test the efficacy of any proposed theory.
> >
> > Don't throw your platitudes all over everyone. I'm not impressed.
>
> Simply basic science, something you seem unfamiliar with.
>

And don't waste my time with your insults, and ad hominem style, I'm not
impressed with that either. Use some sense and I'll be impressed.

> > Science has plenty of use, but it can also be misued, and it can be
> > ignored by many people.
>
> Like you.
>

Now we have your opinion, please supply some evidence in the case at
hand.

> > You'd be wise to try and produce more proof and less insults too, that ad
> > hominem style will get you nowhere and it proves nothing, since it's all
> > opinion.
>
> When I produce proof you refuse to read it, i.e. a four part thorough
> examination of all four GArnold stories. I've seen no other in-depth
> analysis, yet you treat it like a hot potato you can't deal with. All
> Reitzes did was compare details of these 4 interviews for comparison.
> Three of the four interviews were by well known CT proponents, so they had
> no reason to misquote GArnold since they were all on the same side of the
> controversy.

It ain't "can't", it's a matter of "won't". There cannot be a
reasonable article written by a rabid LN who uses insults and innuendo to
make a point.

Reitzes will find all kinds of situations wherre he will say that
Arnold was changing his story, but not one place will he come up with a
place where Arnold himself eas talking or beignquoted, only his own
statements.

When I produced a list of 39+ people that had seen the 'large hole' in
the BOH of JFK, I produced the context where they said it so that anyone
could go there and assure themselves of what was said by whom, and in what
context. Reitzes does not do that. Let me know when you go through his
stuff and check out all these so-called different versions of the story,
and when you've compiled a list of them, let me know and I'll go and check
them out.

Chris

[claviger]

The truth is Reitzes compared statements by GArnold when interviewed by 1
reporter, 2 book authors, and 1 TV documentary video. Assuming all these
interviewers quoted him correctly then it is obvious GArnold was changing
his story with each telling.

[mainframetech]

But dowes Reitzes give the text with quotes shown, and then the context
so that his 'proofs' can be checked? I doubt it.

Chris

[claviger]

If you read the articles you will know the answer.

[claviger]

NOVA
http://www.kpbs.org/


NOVA: Cold Case JFK
http://www.kpbs.org/photos/galleries/nova-cold-case-jfk/

Forensic pathologist and neuropathologist Dr. Peter Cummings led a team
from Boston University in creating an experimental 3D virtual
reconstruction of JFK’s skull for NOVA for the first time ever to
help determine the entry point of the gunshot wound to President
Kennedy’s head.

CREDIT: COURTESY OF GREGORY MAHONEY
https://kpbs.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com/img/photos/2013/11/08/NOVA_ColdCaseJFK_3DSkull_tx800.jpg?aae402d4163f394116c3dd6e602f75682c526327


Forensic pathologist and neuropathologist Dr. Peter Cummings led a team
from Boston University in creating an experimental 3D virtual
reconstruction of JFK’s skull for NOVA for the first time ever to
help determine the entry point of the gunshot wound to President
Kennedy’s head.

CREDIT: COURTESY OF GREGORY MAHONEY
https://kpbs.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com/img/photos/2013/11/08/NOVA_ColdCaseJFK_Skull2_tx800.jpg?aae402d4163f394116c3dd6e602f75682c526327

Greg Mahoney, Peter Cummings and James Pokines looking at monitor with image
of skull model.
CREDIT: COURTESY OF WGBH
https://kpbs.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com/img/photos/2013/11/08/NOVA_ColdCaseJFK_MonitorSkull_tx800.jpg?aae402d4163f394116c3dd6e602f75682c526327

[Anthony Marsh]

Childish. Compare it to the drawing done by Dr. Lawrence Angel:

http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/angelray.gif

They both make the same mistake of imagining a crack down the forehead.
That is not a crack. It is missing bone.
It is not accounting for the angle of view.

[Steve Barber]

I'll tell you right now that the 3 D computer model of the damaged skull
is nowhere near correct. Not only does the hole in the head not extend
back that far on the head, the flap of skull that they have representing
the flap in front of the ear is not located correctly nor is it as large
as the real thing.

[Anthony Marsh]

Exactly. But remember that they started with faulty data.
At least Lattimer was close.

[mainframetech]

Steve, you'll find many things not properly fitted to other things.
Wait until you begin looking through the 'leaked' autopsy photos...:)

Chris

[claviger]

You should make contact with them and point out these differences.

[Piotr Mancini]

On Sunday, August 23, 2015 at 9:08:53 PM UTC-5, bigdog wrote:
> I liked what Josiah Thompson said early in the program. "You'd think it
> would be the easiest case in the world to solve.".
>
> Hey, Josiah. It was.

Are you aware that the strategy used by you and most of your fellows is
exactly like this:

"Look, people, in 1492 Chris Columbus determined that there is a rather
large mass of land between Europe and India. We live there. Therefore:

LET THE MAKING OF MAPS, SATELLITES, GPS, STOP RIGHT NOW!!

Why? Because they make me very uncomfortable"

It must be really sad to live in a world devoid of logic and respect for
the sacred scientific pursuit. All those internal contradictions are bad
not only for your most valuable possession (your reputation and
credibility) but for your mental well being.

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

[Piotr Mancini]

On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 6:48:35 PM UTC-5, claviger wrote:
> You seem to have fundamental problems understanding forensic ballistics.
> Keep in mind ballistic science is a subset of physical science, known as
> Physics. There are 4 categories of ballistic science pertaining to modern
> ranged weapons classified as missile weapons, in this case tubular weapon
> devices called Guns. The NOVA programs are very well done so even
> non-experts can understand. By watching these scientific programs you
> might learn something about trajectories too.

Ah! A believer in science. Or so he keeps on claiming, with no evidence
whatsoever.

Clav:

Would you support a petition to have the PBS Nova producers cross the
street from Boston University, where MIT and Harvard are located?

Do you agree that a study with experts more representative than the
Dynamic Duo:

http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/PBS-Nova-Historical-Consultants.png

would be fairer to the PBS viewers (and taxpayers)?

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

ps: About "even non-experts can understand", how about comparing this:

https://goo.gl/MtKRnD

with this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gpc1XMupQ5I

[John McAdams]

On 13 Nov 2018 21:12:25 -0500, Piotr Mancini <piotr....@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 6:48:35 PM UTC-5, claviger wrote:
>> You seem to have fundamental problems understanding forensic ballistics.
>> Keep in mind ballistic science is a subset of physical science, known as
>> Physics. There are 4 categories of ballistic science pertaining to modern
>> ranged weapons classified as missile weapons, in this case tubular weapon
>> devices called Guns. The NOVA programs are very well done so even
>> non-experts can understand. By watching these scientific programs you
>> might learn something about trajectories too.
>
>Ah! A believer in science. Or so he keeps on claiming, with no evidence
>whatsoever.
>
>Clav:
>
>Would you support a petition to have the PBS Nova producers cross the
>street from Boston University, where MIT and Harvard are located?
>

Cross the Charles River.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[Piotr Mancini]

On Tuesday, August 25, 2015 at 9:26:39 PM UTC-5, David Emerling wrote:
> Brilliant!
>
> David Emerling
> Memphis, TN

Hi David:

Long time no see. Where have you been hiding?

Are you still a proponent of these notions?

- The work by Dale Myers deserves to be consecrated in the cathedral
dedicated to his adoration that you have built in YouTube. Let's ignore
the work done 10 years later with the massive resources at the disposal
of PBS Nova:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzqP6QprDWo

- Dale Myers should keep his files locked up, no matter how much money he
is offered for them, because those numbers are too complicated for the
American people to understand. Do you agree with Donald Trump Jr,
below?

"The tax returns of my daddy are yeah high. The American people would
never understand those complicated numbers".

- It is not the role of our top universities to enter the JFK case and
work in the clarification of the numerical aspects.

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

[Ramon F Herrera]

Good point. I stand corrected. Harvard has land on both sides of the
Charles.

Maybe the PBS producers thought they had to row, in wintertime.

-Ramon
Formerly of the Independent Republic of Cambridge
JFK Numbers

[Anthony Marsh]

Do you remember that I had to correct the HSCA map?
Why didn't you? Where we you when we needed you?
How's it coming with Windows Ai?

[Anthony Marsh]

There's a walking bridge.

> .John
> -----------------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>

[bigdog]

New technologies in recent years have only served to confirm the original
findings of the WC. Those new technologies weren't necessary however. It
was a very easy case to solve which is why the DPD was able to charge
Oswald about 12 hours after he fired the shots. No evidence has emerged in
the 55 years since which refutes the original findings of the DPD or the
WC. It is as certain that Oswald shot JFK and JDT as it is that Ruby shot
Oswald although we have a few who dispute the latter as well. You are
welcome to continue on your snipe hunt if you choose. Just don't expect me
to join you.

[Ramon F Herrera]

On 11/15/2018 10:33 AM, For the 100th time, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> Do you remember that I had to correct the HSCA map?
> Why didn't you? Where we you when we needed you?

In Venezuela.

> How's it coming with Windows AI?
>

2D is soooo last century. You and other Flat Earthers need not apply.

http://www.dealey-plaza.org/your-designers/Chuck%20Monanu/Around%20the%20Limo.mp4

Who is America going to believe?

- You?
- A reputable, nationwide company?

First, produce something like this:

http://www.dealey-plaza.org/your-designers/TruePoint/

next, come to my Houston office to give me a demo in the large screens,
like David Sauceda -manager of TruePoint for Texas- did.

... and then we can talk.

https://www.truepointscanning.com

Oh, I am going to be needing aerial photogrammetry as well.

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

[Jason Burke]

Named, of course, after the school waaay up Mass Ave.
Mainly because a couplea Tech engineers looked at when it was being
built and refused to let it be known as the MIT Bridge.

>
>> .John
>> -----------------------
>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>>
>
>

[Ramon F Herrera]

On 11/15/2018 5:24 PM, bigdog wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 13, 2018 at 9:11:39 PM UTC-5, Piotr Mancini wrote:
>> On Sunday, August 23, 2015 at 9:08:53 PM UTC-5, bigdog wrote:
>>> I liked what Josiah Thompson said early in the program. "You'd think it
>>> would be the easiest case in the world to solve.".
>>>
>>> Hey, Josiah. It was.
>>
>> Are you aware that the strategy used by you and most of your fellows is
>> exactly like this:
>>
>> "Look, people, in 1492 Chris Columbus determined that there is a rather
>> large mass of land between Europe and India. We live there. Therefore:
>>
>> LET THE MAKING OF MAPS, SATELLITES, GPS, STOP RIGHT NOW!!
>>
>> Why? Because they make me very uncomfortable"
>>
>> It must be really sad to live in a world devoid of logic and respect for
>> the sacred scientific pursuit. All those internal contradictions are bad
>> not only for your most valuable possession (your reputation and
>> credibility) but for your mental well being.
>>
>

> New technologies in recent years have only served to confirm the original
> findings of the WC. Those new technologies weren't necessary however.

The goal of the JFK Numbers initiative is NOT to solve anything. We are
not qualified. The goal is to bring NUMERICAL CLARITY, in a scientific
(first time in 55+ years) OPEN, environment to the case.

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

[Ramon F Herrera]

On 11/15/2018 5:24 PM, bigdog wrote:

> On Tuesday, November 13, 2018 at 9:11:39 PM UTC-5, Piotr Mancini wrote:
>> On Sunday, August 23, 2015 at 9:08:53 PM UTC-5, bigdog wrote:
>>> I liked what Josiah Thompson said early in the program. "You'd think it
>>> would be the easiest case in the world to solve.".
>>>
>>> Hey, Josiah. It was.
>>
>> Are you aware that the strategy used by you and most of your fellows is
>> exactly like this:
>>
>> "Look, people, in 1492 Chris Columbus determined that there is a rather
>> large mass of land between Europe and India. We live there. Therefore:
>>
>> LET THE MAKING OF MAPS, SATELLITES, GPS, STOP RIGHT NOW!!
>>
>> Why? Because they make me very uncomfortable"
>>
>> It must be really sad to live in a world devoid of logic and respect for
>> the sacred scientific pursuit. All those internal contradictions are bad
>> not only for your most valuable possession (your reputation and
>> credibility) but for your mental well being.
>>
>

> New technologies in recent years have only served to confirm the original
> findings of the WC. Those new technologies weren't necessary however.

Okay, let's make a deal: If I formally swear that the digitized X-rays
will only be used for preservation purposes, and I will NOT:

- Ask the Berlin Researchers to determine whether the X-rays are
legitimate.

- Call MIT and the top schools that have a reputation to uphold to
enter the case for the first time in 55+ years.

will you support making the most accurate copy of those 3 films?

Since those copies will be co-signed by all 4 parts involved, everybody
will trust them (another historical breakthrough by JFK Numbers)

Do we have a deal?

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

[claviger]

On Friday, November 16, 2018 at 8:52:26 AM UTC-6, Ramon F Herrera wrote:
> On 11/15/2018 10:33 AM, For the 100th time, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> > Do you remember that I had to correct the HSCA map?
> > Why didn't you? Where we you when we needed you?
>
> In Venezuela.

Where in Venezuela? Did you vote for those two Socialist
idiots Chavez & Maduro who destroyed such a beautiful
country?

[Anthony Marsh]

On 11/15/2018 6:24 PM, bigdog wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 13, 2018 at 9:11:39 PM UTC-5, Piotr Mancini wrote:
>> On Sunday, August 23, 2015 at 9:08:53 PM UTC-5, bigdog wrote:
>>> I liked what Josiah Thompson said early in the program. "You'd think it
>>> would be the easiest case in the world to solve.".
>>>
>>> Hey, Josiah. It was.
>>
>> Are you aware that the strategy used by you and most of your fellows is
>> exactly like this:
>>
>> "Look, people, in 1492 Chris Columbus determined that there is a rather
>> large mass of land between Europe and India. We live there. Therefore:
>>
>> LET THE MAKING OF MAPS, SATELLITES, GPS, STOP RIGHT NOW!!
>>
>> Why? Because they make me very uncomfortable"
>>
>> It must be really sad to live in a world devoid of logic and respect for
>> the sacred scientific pursuit. All those internal contradictions are bad
>> not only for your most valuable possession (your reputation and
>> credibility) but for your mental well being.
>>
>
> New technologies in recent years have only served to confirm the original
> findings of the WC. Those new technologies weren't necessary however. It
> was a very easy case to solve which is why the DPD was able to charge
> Oswald about 12 hours after he fired the shots. No evidence has emerged in

YES, so easy that the assistant DA was peparing to charge him with
conspiracy, "In Furtherance of an International Communist Conspiracy."
It was so obvious that most people instantly thought it must be a
conspiracy.

[Ramon F Herrera]

On 11/16/2018 11:45 PM, Ramon F Herrera wrote:
> On 11/15/2018 5:24 PM, bigdog wrote:
>
>> New technologies in recent years have only served to confirm the original
>> findings of the WC. Those new technologies weren't necessary however.
>
> Okay, let's make a deal: If I formally swear that the digitized X-rays
> will only be used for preservation purposes, and I will NOT:
>

> ??- Ask the Berlin Researchers to determine whether the X-rays are
> legitimate.
>
> ??- Call MIT and the top schools that have a reputation to uphold to

> enter the case for the first time in 55+ years.
>
> will you support making the most accurate copy of those 3 films?
>
> Since those copies will be co-signed by all 4 parts involved, everybody
> will trust them (another historical breakthrough by JFK Numbers)

There are 4 groups, respect to the legitimacy of the 2-Rays:

Let's enumerate the categories of participants (actual and potential) in
this project which -if accomplished- belongs in the history books. There
are 4 groups:

(1) The Notable Doctors of the LN persuasion. By definition they
believe in the legitimacy of the X-rays and therefore (being honest
physicians subject to the highest standards of professional reputation and
Ethics) will be very enthusiastic supporters of the studies by top experts
which will confirm their verdict and subsequent donation of a 3D cranium
model to the Archives. Users e-located inside the cranium scrutinizing
-from the telescopic to the microscopic level- will be able to see that
the fatal shot could only have been originated at the sniper's nest.

- Dr. Peter Cummings
- Dr. Michael Baden
- Dr. Vincent DiMaio

(2) Those of the CT persuasion who are convinced that the X-rays
have been manipulated in some way:

- Dr. David Mantik
- Dr. Michael Chesser
- Dr. Gary Aguilar

(3) The CT Notables who have determined that the X-rays are
legitimate:

- Dr. Randolph Robertson
- Dr. Joseph Riley

(4) Those who have decided to leave the ultimate determination to
Science:

- Dr. Cyril Wecht
- Ramon F. Herrera
(not a doctor, does not play one in Usenet much less TV, did *not*
attend MIT)

-Ramon
JFK Numbers

[Ramon F Herrera]

On 11/17/2018 10:02 AM, claviger wrote:
> On Friday, November 16, 2018 at 8:52:26 AM UTC-6, Ramon F Herrera wrote:
>> On 11/15/2018 10:33 AM, For the 100th time, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>>> Do you remember that I had to correct the HSCA map?
>>> Why didn't you? Where we you when we needed you?
>>
>> In Venezuela.
>
> Where in Venezuela?

Carora, Estado Lara, Venezuela. I was born here:

https://goo.gl/Bu655T

We lived in the blue house, the other one, today "Club Torres" is known
as "La Casa de las Herreras", because all the old maid great aunts lived
there. They were 18 children: 9 male, 9 female.

This is my cousin, deceased:

https://goo.gl/7pnDqA

This is his obituary in the New York Times, most respected newspaper in
the world:

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/13/world/americas/13campins.html


http://archive.boston.com/bostonglobe/obituaries/articles/2007/11/10/luis_herrera_campins_82_led_venezuela/?page=full

Another relative, Carolina Herrera:

https://goo.gl/3Sqj5D

She made the wedding dress for Sweet Caroline, was a guest in her wedding.

"Carolina Herrera is a Venezuelan fashion designer known for
"exceptional personal style" and for dressing various First Ladies,
including Jacqueline Onassis, Laura Bush, and Michelle Obama."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina_Herrera

> Did you vote for those two Socialist
> idiots Chavez & Maduro who destroyed such a beautiful
> country?
>

I am part of the resistance, in the US and Venezuela, since both countries
have been taken over by bastardos, hijos de puta who are very similar,
with almost identical principles, or rather lack thereof. We distributed
this before the cancer of El Bastardo was announced:

http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/politics/USAFCIS.jpg

-Ramon
JFK Numbers