Shots from inside the presidential limo

[Paul Rigby]

Now wait a minute. If I read the above correctly, Truly testified the car swerved to the left and Skelton said it got in to the right hand lane.

Presumably both cannot be right.

Tim,

Take a deep breath and have another go: One was viewing from the limo's front, the other from its rear. Ergo, their testimony is mutually reinforcing.

Eyewitnesses make mistakes. Eyewitness identification often produces grave mistakes in criminal cases.

As general propositions, unobjectionable. Of course, it is every bit as true that eyewitnesses sometimes get things spectacularly right. They are, though, whatever their strengths & deficiencies, the foundation of any criminal justice system. Why is that not the case in the matter of the assassination of John F. Kennedy?

And is it seriously your contention in this specific instance that all of the cited witnesses got it wrong?

Moreover I do not recall that you posted a single witness who testified he or she saw Greer shoot the President--not a single one! With all the witnesses around, no one saw Greer pull out his gun? That's pretty hard to accept assuming Greer in fact shot JFK.

How many eyewitnesses had a clear enough view to see? But you're right in one sense - it would be nice to have more testimony to that effect. But I have to observe - Is there a theory on the "how" of the assassination that doesn't have exactly the same problem?

Nor have you ever posted your theory re why Greer did it and Kellerman conspired with him by keeping quiet about it.

Loyal foot-soldier of the National Security State, I assume. Incidentally, take a look at the sentence structure of some of Kellerman's replies before the Commission - unless he learnt his American English from the pages of Time-Life, I get the strong impression his first language was a Germanic one.

[Paul Rigby]

The "rehashing" of pure BS is not in the realm of learning, within the content and context of education.

A much more impressive point in the hands of someone who can spell, punctuate, and construct coherent sentences without recourse to swearing.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

The "rehashing" of pure BS is not in the realm of learning, within the content and context of education.

A much more impressive point in the hands of someone who can spell, punctuate, and construct coherent sentences without recourse to swearing.

Although my age has assisted in caring less about "spellcheck" and/or proofreading, at least it has yet to fail me in recognition of Bovine Feces/aka BS such as the "Greer" did it manure.

And, if and when others who are searching for the facts and truths in this matter begin to "cull" out those who expouse what are totally stupid and asinine theories, then they just may gain some credence among the rational thinking groupings who know that something is wrong with the presented facts of the assassination.

After all, this is supposed to be the "Education Forum".

NOT the "STUPID THEORY FORUM"!

[Denis Pointing]

Quote:How many eyewitnesses had a clear enough view to see? Unquote.

There's only three eyewitnesses I would take notice of, in THIS context, that would be Jackie Kennedy, Governor Connally and Mrs Connally.

Quote: A much more impressive point in the hands of someone who can spell, punctuate, and construct coherent sentences without recourse to swearing. Unquote

I dont really care about Tom's spelling etc, I'm more interested in what he has to say. He talks a lot more sense than you my friend. Denis.

Edited August 29, 2007 by Denis Pointing

[Paul Rigby]

There's only four eyewitnesses I would take notice of, in THIS context, that would be Jackie Kennedy, Governor Connally and Mrs Connally.

Your choice, Dennis.

It ain't mine.

Paul

[Bill Miller]

Did anyone at the initial showings ever mention agents piling onto the car?

I haven't got all the early reports - any chance you can get Mack to start sharing them?

Paul, I asked if ANYONE at the initial showings ever mention seeing agents piling into the limo ... you do not need 'ALL the early reports' - just the ones that you have seen that would make you think it happened. Just the voice of common sense and sound reasoning shows you to be so far off on this one that you just cannot be serious about any of it. Moorman's photo shows no agents piling onto anything. As the limo is racing towards the underpass, only Clint Hill is seen on the car according to Altgens seventh photograph. The Daniel film shows on Hill on the back of the car and like all the other films and photos - the SS Agents (except Hill) are on the 'Queen Mary'. In fact, the photos of the limo racing to Parkland (the Newman and Miller photos) show only Clint Hill on the limo. So how much further do you wish to carry this nonsense???

Bill Miller

Edited August 29, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Tim Gratz]

Paul wrote:

"Incidentally, take a look at the sentence structure of some of Kellerman's replies before the Commission - unless he learnt his American English from the pages of Time-Life, I get the strong impression his first language was a Germanic one. [Emphasis supplied.]

Incredibly, Paul has now opened up an entire new line of assassination research for us: the ethnic backgrounds of "persons of interest." So should we be looking for Germans, or for Jews? Maybe Italians? Certainly there must be some linkage between a person's ethnicity and his willingness to participate in an assassination.

Paul, are you aware of any scientific studies on this issue?

Perhaps there should be a new thread devoted just to this subject.

Edited August 30, 2007 by Tim Gratz

[Bill Miller]

Roy Truly, 3WCH221: "After the first shot... I saw the President's car swerve to the left and stop somewheres down in the area..."

I would like to think that if someone gave even a half a minute of thought to how things would have looked to Roy Truly or anyone else behind or in front of the limo, then they might better understand why certain descriptions were given. The limo certainly could look stopped when going only 4 mph at the time of the kill shot while heading towards or away from a witness. Maybe this is why people standing perpendicular to the car saw the continued forward movement of the limo while saying 'it only faltered'.

As an ancient Russian proverb – that distilled essence of the accumulated peasant wisdom of the millennia, no less – has it: “Beware of White Russians bearing cinematic gifts.” How very true. Once we move beyond the fake film and its motley supporting acts, we are obliged to fall back on one of our deepest and most primitive instincts – the desire to read. Strange things happen when we revert to nature: we find patterns. Here’s another of them:

Left Veer witnesses

From in front:

1. Railway worker Roy Skelton, who viewed the assassination from the overpass:

“then the car [the presidential limousine – PR] got in the right hand lane,” 19WCH496.

2. Policeman J.W. Foster, again situated on the overpass:

“immediately after President Kennedy was struck…the car in which he was riding pulled to the curb,” Warren Commission Document 897, pp.20-21.

How about instead of falling back on our primitive instincts - we fall back on the assassination films and photos. If you look at the Daniels film ... the limo started moving into the right lane as it passed through the underpass. The limo passes near the curb before the film ends. Non-specific descriptions being contemplated by people who haven't looked to the photographic evidence so to search for reasonable explanations is the best reason IMO for the conflicts to some.

Bill Miller

Edited August 30, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Tim Gratz]

Bill wrote:

If you look at the Daniels film ... the limo started moving into the right lane as it passed through the underpass.

Bill, while I normally agree with just about everything you post, I must disagree with your use of the Daniels' film to make any point. I just finished reading Professor Fetzer's latest book, "The Great Daniels Film Hoax: Still More Deceit and Deception in the Death of JFK."

As Paul wrote in Post #22 in this thread:

"...a yes, a lot of fake films, with no proper provenances, or chains of possession" referring to the Nix, Bronson, Muchmore and Zapruder films. Yeah, the bad guys got them all!

Got to hand it to those conspirators. They must have had their hands full faking all those films!

Edited August 30, 2007 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Gratz]

Paul entitled this thread: "Shots from inside the presidential limo."

Paul, just how many shots do you think Greer got off?

Edited August 30, 2007 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Gratz]

As mentioned in a previous thread, Paul apparently takes the position that many of the motion pictures taken in DP were altered. He is forced to take that position since, as Dr. Thompson points out in an essay on the Zapruder film controversy: "When it became clear that the Nix and Muchmore films matched the Zapruder film, they too were branded "fake." But surely all the films and photos taken in Dealey Plaza cannot be 'fake.'"

And this portion of his essay is of great importance:

The claims that government agents confiscated films do not compel belief. When Professor Fetzer claims that the FBI tracked any assassination films or photos that came to the attention of the Kodak lab, he is blowing his usual smoke. As Richard Trask and others have pointed out, the FBI was rather passive with respect to photos and films of the assassination. All the Bureau did was ask the Kodak lab to enclose with returned film or photos a request asking the photographer to get in touch with the FBI if the film or photos concerned the assassination. At one of the other labs, the FBI had a couple of men looking at the prints which came out of the processor for a short period of time. But as Trask made clear, FBI efforts were "not fully focused and lacked investigative follow-through." The Muchmore film was shown on WNEW-TV in New York before the FBI even heard of it. Similar fates befell other films which have kept surfacing over the years. Only last year, a previously unknown series of slides showing the motorcade in Dealey Plaza was given to the Sixth Floor Museum. Given the fact that no one had any idea who was filming in Dealey Plaza or where that film might be developed there was no way the government could throw a net over the photo record of what happened in Dealey Plaza.

Edited August 30, 2007 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Gratz]

Paul, please correct me if I am wrong on what follows.

In order for the (ridiculous) Greer shot Kennedy" premise to be true, these points must be true:

(1) At least two if not three of the motion pictures taken in DP had to have been altered.

(2) Since none of the limousine occupants reported seeing Greer shoot Kennedy or hearing a shot from within the car, then it follows that Kellerman must also have been part of the conspiracy since he would have had to see and hear it and that Mrs. Connally and Mrs. Kennedy who at least most probably would have seen or heard the shot must have kept their mouths shut for a reason you cannot suggest. In so doing, they knew they were letting the man who shot their husband escape criminal prosecution.

Moreover, you must admit, I think, that none of the witnesses (one exception I think) said he or she saw a gun in the limousine. You must also admit you cannot really suggest a cogent reason why Greer would kill the man he was sworn to protect.

Edited August 30, 2007 by Tim Gratz

[Paul Rigby]

Paul entitled this thread: "Shots from inside the presidential limo."

Paul, just how many shots do you think Greer got off?

Two, Tim.

[Jack White]

Paul, please correct me if I am wrong on what follows.

In order for the (ridiculous) Greer shot Kennedy" premise to be true, these points must be true:

(1) At least two if not three of the motion pictures taken in DP had to have been altered.

(2) Since none of the limousine occupants reported seeing Greer shoot Kennedy or hearing a shot from within the car, then it follows that Kellerman must also have been part of the conspiracy since he would have had to see and hear it and that Mrs. Connally and Mrs. Kennedy who at least most probably would have seen or heard the shot must have kept their mouths shut for a reason you cannot suggest. In so doing, they knew they were letting the man who shot their husband escape criminal prosecution.

Moreover, you must admit, I think, that none of the witnesses (one exception I think) said he or she saw a gun in the limousine. You must also admit you cannot really suggest a cogent reason why Greer would kill the man he was sworn to protect.

Unfortunately, for once I must agree with Gratz.

No witness and no limo occupant was aware of such an activity. A gun FIRED IN THE CAR

WOULD MAKE A DEAFENING SOUND.

If having Greer fire the fatal shot WAS PART OF THE PLAN, it is the most stupid thing imaginable.

Having an SS man, who was busy driving the car, shoot the president as hundreds of witnesses

looked on, makes no sense at all. It negates all the careful framing of LHO, and all of the other

evidence. If the plan was to have Greer do the deed, it did not need to be in a motorcade in

Dallas in Dealey Plaza. He could have done it at any time anywhere.

Everyone is entitled to analyse the facts and theorize what happened. But the only theory

dumber than this is that Jackie fired the shot.

Jack

[Miles Scull]

Everyone is entitled to analyse the facts and theorize what happened. But the only theory

dumber than this is that Jackie fired the shot.

Jack

Are you overlooking the Badge Man theory?

Where does that fit?

Miles