Gary Mack

[Denis Pointing]

]

Was Healy the shooter on the sixth floor then?

[quote

I hate to upset Wild Bill, perhaps even you but I was in Saigon (actually US Element MAAG Headquarters, Cholon, Saigon's then sister city) on-duty, when JFK was murdered....

Dont be too hasty now Healy...I think Dankbaar's getting ready to offer you a book deal!!

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Edited November 28, 2008 by Denis Pointing

[Duke Lane]

No, you said that Healy has as much to do with the JFK assassination as Files. Since Files was shooting from the knoll, I figured you meant to say that Healy was the still unknown shooter from the sixth floor.

Has anything changed that would make one believe Files was in the RR yard shooting at JFK? Bowers saw two mean along the fence between he and the underpass. One wore a plaid jacket posing as a SS Agent - doesn't seem to fit Files description. The other man was said to be heavy-set, which doesn't fit Files description either. Anything new to add???

Hmmm ... does he fit the description of Ed Hoffman's "suit man," who also doesn't fit any of Bowers' descriptions?

Maybe we can all agree that Lee Bowers was "mistaken," eh?

[Wim Dankbaar]

Has anything changed that would make one believe Files was in the RR yard shooting at JFK? Bowers saw two mean along the fence between he and the underpass. One wore a plaid jacket posing as a SS Agent - doesn't seem to fit Files description. The other man was said to be heavy-set, which doesn't fit Files description either. Anything new to add???

Bill Miller[/b]

Nothing new to add, only old stuff and a question: Where did you learn that the plaid jacket man posed as an SS agent?

Here's the old stuff:

James Files says he wore a plaid poplin jacket. Lee Bowers described a young man with such a coat:

Mr. BOWERS. Directly in line, towards the mouth of the underpass, there were two men. One man, middle-aged, or slightly older, fairly heavy-set, in a white shirt, fairly dark trousers. Another younger man, about midtwenties, in either a plaid shirt or plaid coat or jacket.Mr. BALL.. Were they standing together or standing separately?

Mr. BOWERS. They were standing within 10 or 15 feet of each other, and gave no appearance of being together, as far as I knew.

JF: As for Ed Hoffman’s statement, I think he got a little confused or tried to add a little extra, kind of dress it up. Then again, maybe he believes he saw it that way. The only thing he got right was me kneeling down putting the weapon away.

[Duke Lane]

... James Files says he wore a plaid poplin jacket. Lee Bowers described a young man with such a coat:

Mr. BOWERS. Directly in line, towards the mouth of the underpass, there were two men. One man, middle-aged, or slightly older, fairly heavy-set, in a white shirt, fairly dark trousers. Another younger man, about midtwenties, in either a plaid shirt or plaid coat or jacket.

Mr. BALL.. Were they standing together or standing separately?

Mr. BOWERS. They were standing within 10 or 15 feet of each other, and gave no appearance of being together, as far as I knew.

JF: As for Ed Hoffman's statement, I think he got a little confused or tried to add a little extra, kind of dress it up. Then again, maybe he believes he saw it that way. The only thing he got right was me kneeling down putting the weapon away.

I'm reminded of an impassioned plea I'd recently heard wherein the speaker made rationalization to accept the argument of his subject on the basis of, in effect, "How would he know this if he wasn't there? How could he have known about that unless he was there?"

I realized while listening to the man that I knew those things too, so I must've been there too, for how else could I have known them? Not only that, but I knew things that the subject didn't know until I'd pointed them out. I wondered: gee whiz, is it possible that he learned about those things we both knew the same way I did, by reading about them?

So I wish to "prove" my having "been there." I find that Lee Bowers described a man in a "plaid shirt or plaid coat or jacket." Okay, so I was wearing a plaid garment and let's clarify that by noting it was a sport coat; Bowers got it right, wow! And to prove it was me, I'll add in my concern about being noticed, gun in hand, by any of those three cars ol' Bowers had noticed driving around the parking lot. See? That proves I was there, cuz how would I know about those three cars if I hadn't been there?

And oh! I remember a cop - I don't know his name - who pulled a gun on a guy in a suit but then looked a little sheepish when the guy pulled out his wallet. Oh, it wasn't a wallet, it was Secret Service credentials? Well, I wasn't close enough to be able to tell what he showed that cop, but boy, whaddaya know, see? There's additional proof that I was there, otherwise how would I know about the cop and the gun and what I'd thought all these years was a wallet? Wow. That's a revelation. I had no idea how close I might've been to getting caught! Whew. Count my lucky stars, that's what I'm-a gonna do!

I believe that I've now established my presence on the grassy knoll. Let me tell you next about what I did down in Oak Cliff to get Oswald captured. Y'see, I had the use of this red Falcon from some guy who worked at a radio company, connected with LBJ somehow. We parked by this Mexican restaurant, I forget its name right now, and I remember this mechanic crossing the street, giving us "the eye," y'know what I mean? ....

It's fairly easy to put all this stuff together; if I can do it, can't someone else? Especially someone who maybe gets some coaching from someone else keen on having "discovered" him? "Y'know, Lee Bowers also said there was a man, a big man, heavyset, wearing dark pants and a white shirt standing nearby. Did you see him?" Well, golly gee whiz, yeah, he was maybe 250 lbs., wasn't he? Short hair? Yeah, he was there; I remember him. I didn't pay much attention to him at the time, y'know, I was busy waiting to take my shot when the parade came by, but now that you mention it, yeah, he was there.

Well, duh.

I'm impressed. Not.

[David G. Healy]

As for a suppressed pistol from the knoll? Regardless of caliber, frankly, I can't think of a worse *short distance type* of weapon to use..... A pistol with a 13 inch + barrel, on a moving target?

A SLOW-MOVING target, by all accounts, and moreover a target APPROACHING the shooter. Are you saying that a pistol is not a lethal weapon? can you please elaborate on the DATA and the REASONING behind your opinion?

Frankly Ray, I don't care if the moving target and vehicle were approaching a shooter. Or a non-moving target at the necessary concealed shooter distance. Bad choice of weapon for assassination unless your within 20 or so feet.

The lethality of a pistol is just that, in ones hands, of course the damn thing is LETHAL. Further, from personal experience, I qualified in the ARMY as expert with a COLT-45cal. handgun. Based on that experience alone, utilizing a handgun of any caliber, at any distance over 50 feet is damn risky business. Risky as in: MISSING the target and YOU get blown away. REASONING enough?

You know there's been much discussion and debate about recreating the 3 shot SBT theory from the TSBD. Shots made from 100 to 200+ feet, utilizing large caliber (sonic) rifles. Not many experts will agree those long-rifle, high caliber shots were possible, by Oswald, or for that matter, NRA type Expert Marksmen who attempted same. Ask those same NRA type marksmen if a pistol shot to the head, a moving target, from the DP knoll or area surrounding the knoll were possible. I doubt you'd find expert opinion re a pistol shot scenario from that area remotely possible (read: probable kill results). Having said that, a shot from a pistol from the same area for distraction purposes, now that is another story -- A suicide move on the knoll shooters part, with little hope for a kill, but......

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Based on that experience alone, utilizing a handgun of any caliber, at any distance over 50 feet is damn risky business. Risky as in: MISSING the target and YOU get blown away. REASONING enough?

OK, This army website confirms that the maximum effective range for the colt .45 is 50 metres

http://www.military-net.com/education/mpdweapons.html

However this hunting website suggests that a really good shot could bag a deer with a pistol at ranges up to 100 yards. I gather that the Colt .45 is not the only pistol an assassin could choose.

For example, when shooting a hunting pistol chambered for a 100 yard deer cartridge, if I can keep my shots within an 8" circle shooting with one hand from a standing position at 25 yards, I can shoot at a deer from that position at that range. If I can keep all of my shots within an 8" circle from a two handed standing position at 50 yards, that is the range at which I can shoot a deer from that position. If I can keep my bullets in an 8" circle at 75 yards from a sitting position, I am good to go from that position out to 75 yards. If I can keep all of my bullets in that 8" circle at 100 yards from a sitting position with a solid rest, I must be able to assume that position to engage a deer at that range, which is also the maximum permissible range for my cartridge.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_hunting.htm

I do not know the precise distance but I bet Bill Miller can enlighten us on the distance from Hatman to JFK at Z312-13?

-- A suicide move on the knoll shooters part ....

I don't see why a knoll shooter was on a suicide mission, since there was absolutely no police presence in or even close to Hatman's location. Chief Curry and Sherrif Decker did not dismiss the knoll as a suicide location, otherwise they would not have issued radio instructions for cops to check the area.

But what prompted my initial question was your statement that Zapruder was either deaf or had foreknowledge. I am asking how you know that that the shots were loud enough to scare Zapruder down off his perch.

Edited November 28, 2008 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Pamela Brown]

Raymond Carroll said:

But what prompted my initial question was your statement that Zapruder was either deaf or had foreknowledge. I am asking how you know that that the shots were loud enough to scare Zapruder down off his perch.

We know that his camera jiggled when shots were fired, so they had to be somewhat loud.

[Bill Miller]

name='Wim Dankbaar' date='Nov 28 2008, 03:23 PM' post='159055'

Nothing new to add, only old stuff and a question: Where did you learn that the plaid jacket man posed as an SS agent?

Good question ... You can look this up and check it for accuracy because I am going on memory here - Lee Bowers said that he lost sight of one of the two men who said was along the fence (the heavy set man) and the other man (plaid clothing man) was still visible to him. Then I seem to recall Bowers talking about a policeman coming up to the man that Lee could still see. I believe it was Officer Smith who said that he met a man at the fence who showed him credentials as a SS man. This description and encounter does not match the alleged movements of Files post shooting.

Bill Miller

Edited November 29, 2008 by Bill Miller

[Duke Lane]

name='Wim Dankbaar' date='Nov 28 2008, 03:23 PM' post='159055']Nothing new to add, only old stuff and a question: Where did you learn that the plaid jacket man posed as an SS agent?

Good question ... You can look this up and check it for accuracy because I am going on memory here - Lee Bowers said that he lost sight of one of the two men who said was along the fence (the heavy set man) and the other man (plaid clothing man) was still visible to him. Then I seem to recall Bowers talking about a policeman coming up to the man that Lee could still see. I believe it was Officer Smith who said that he met a man at the fence who showed him credentials as a SS man. This description and encounter does not match the alleged movements of Files post shooting.

My point, somewhat exactly.

[Wim Dankbaar]

name='Wim Dankbaar' date='Nov 28 2008, 03:23 PM' post='159055'

Nothing new to add, only old stuff and a question: Where did you learn that the plaid jacket man posed as an SS agent?

Good question ... You can look this up and check it for accuracy because I am going on memory here - Lee Bowers said that he lost sight of one of the two men who said was along the fence (the heavy set man) and the other man (plaid clothing man) was still visible to him. Then I seem to recall Bowers talking about a policeman coming up to the man that Lee could still see. I believe it was Officer Smith who said that he met a man at the fence who showed him credentials as a SS man. This description and encounter does not match the alleged movements of Files post shooting.

Bill Miller

Sorry, but that is all rubbish. Bowers never said that the plaid coat man showed credentials (of whatever sort) to a police officer.

You also mixed up the man he thought was still there, which was not the plaid coat man.

Wim

Mr. Bowers.

No; he left the motorcade and came up the incline on the motorcycle.

Mr. Ball.

Was his motorcycle directed toward any particular people?

Mr. Bowers.

He came up into this area where there are some trees, and where I had described the two men were in the general vicinity of this.

Mr. Ball.

Were the two men there at the time?

Mr. Bowers.

I--as far as I know, one of them was. The other I could not say.

The darker dressed man was too hard to distinguish from the trees. The white shirt, yes; I think he was.

[David G. Healy]

name='Wim Dankbaar' date='Nov 28 2008, 03:23 PM' post='159055'

Nothing new to add, only old stuff and a question: Where did you learn that the plaid jacket man posed as an SS agent?

Good question ... You can look this up and check it for accuracy because I am going on memory here - Lee Bowers said that he lost sight of one of the two men who said was along the fence (the heavy set man) and the other man (plaid clothing man) was still visible to him. Then I seem to recall Bowers talking about a policeman coming up to the man that Lee could still see. I believe it was Officer Smith who said that he met a man at the fence who showed him credentials as a SS man. This description and encounter does not match the alleged movements of Files post shooting.

Bill Miller

"I seem to recall..."...., "I believe..." "Then, I seem to recall..." "...going on memory here..." LMFAO! C'mon, what's up?

[Bill Miller]

"I seem to recall..."...., "I believe..." "Then, I seem to recall..." "...going on memory here..." LMFAO! C'mon, what's up?

Taking a break from getting that request finished so you can view the said in-camera original Zapruder film, David? One would think that after all that talk about you needing access to it so to put the matter to rest once and for all ... that you'd at least make out a simple written request do examine it. If its the color paper and ink that you cannot decide on, then go with white paper and black ink ... they do let you have pens at the home - don't they!

Bill Miller

[Ed LeDoux]

Now now boys. Lets keep things civil and get back on topic please.

Where were we...oh yeah Gary Mack.

I have had numerous "discussions" where he expressed his views and I stood my ground and was not persuaded by his arguments. He has a right to his opinions and I mine, Tippit being a major one.

If your easily flummoxed by one person trying to steer you one way or the other then your skin is much too thin for the likes of The Mack.

As for Denis saying he is "...undoubtedly the most knowledgeable researcher on this forum, arguable in the world. Because he only deals in facts and not wild theory..." I do not agree.

Gary tried to convince me the Medium Grey jacket was Oswald' and he might have picked it up at a second hand store or garage sale, as it was getting cold and he may have needed a warm coat. Sounds not only like wild speculation but a non sequitur, he already had a warm jacket for winter. Maybe in the spring he would have bought a size small windbreaker with all that cash he was carrying ($184+) , and with that kind of dough he would be able to buy new retail! Gary would say he was to cheap or frugal to buy new clothes, so Gary why buy it at all if you already have a nice warm coat and are so tight with money you can't buy your kid shoes but your buying extra jackets.

So yeah Gary does not always make a convincing argument.

Our ideas on what a reporter would/should do have clashed too with regards to seeing a rifle pointing out of a window and not even snapping a photo or trying to get a scoop on a sniper shooting at a Presidential Motorcade, or perhaps pointing this out to a cop. If you know there is a shooter in a window of a building but did nothing personally or professionally about it I find that hard to believe. So your choice would be to not follow the cop running to the building or take even a single photo of the exterior? Gary say's yes a good reporter would not deviate and stick with your assignment, to which I say then why get out of the car and run around the knoll? Why not stay in the car which will take off and possibly leave you with nothing but pictures of people lying on the grass and miss going to the Trade-Mart for a (YAWN) speech. NO, a good reporter goes where the story takes him. The baloney about other reporters will be coming along soon enough doesn't cut it. Your there, the story is there, you jumped out of a car to chase that story but ignore the very thing that makes the story, the shooter, and the cop about to confront said shooter. Let the next reporter go to the Trade-Mart and get the reaction there, whats the difference. Difference is the next reporter wouldn't know what you know about the rifle/which window/sixth floor/ etc. and would be less effective at that scene. Whereas both you and the next reporter along would be equal when it comes to the Trade-Mart story. Get it.

About the wallet, he made it seem the reporter could never make a mistake about its ownership. As if he was infallible.

I had to point out all the news reports which, in the heat of the moment, were without substantiated facts reported and later found to be wrong. Seems Gary always wants his cake and to eat it too. People are wrong only when it is convenient for him, and not vice verse.

The fact is he is very knowledgeable about all these things, yet has some strange quirk that doesn't let him believe his own eyes at times.

Sorry Gary but I needed to come clean here in this confessional about what I perceive to be your underlying faults.

I can't sit quietly and be jabbed with a SFM stick and not develop a strong opinion about such prodding. If he has some secret knowledge about this case and still speculates like a novice then I have to question why??

I do thank him for his help (be it asked for or not) and have, I hope, returned the favor when I can, seems the decent thing to do.

I don't think too many of us here agree on all the minutia or even some of the larger aspects, but at least we can see that it only takes one fact to go from conspiracy theory to a conspiracy.

You with us on that Gary?

[Pamela Brown]

Now now boys. Lets keep things civil and get back on topic please.

Where were we...oh yeah Gary Mack.

I have had numerous "discussions" where he expressed his views and I stood my ground and was not persuaded by his arguments. He has a right to his opinions and I mine, Tippit being a major one.

If your easily flummoxed by one person trying to steer you one way or the other then your skin is much too thin for the likes of The Mack.

As for Denis saying he is "...undoubtedly the most knowledgeable researcher on this forum, arguable in the world. Because he only deals in facts and not wild theory..." I do not agree.

Gary tried to convince me the Medium Grey jacket was Oswald' and he might have picked it up at a second hand store or garage sale, as it was getting cold and he may have needed a warm coat. Sounds not only like wild speculation but a non sequitur, he already had a warm jacket for winter. Maybe in the spring he would have bought a size small windbreaker with all that cash he was carrying ($184+) , and with that kind of dough he would be able to buy new retail! Gary would say he was to cheap or frugal to buy new clothes, so Gary why buy it at all if you already have a nice warm coat and are so tight with money you can't buy your kid shoes but your buying extra jackets.

So yeah Gary does not always make a convincing argument.

Our ideas on what a reporter would/should do have clashed too with regards to seeing a rifle pointing out of a window and not even snapping a photo or trying to get a scoop on a sniper shooting at a Presidential Motorcade, or perhaps pointing this out to a cop. If you know there is a shooter in a window of a building but did nothing personally or professionally about it I find that hard to believe. So your choice would be to not follow the cop running to the building or take even a single photo of the exterior? Gary say's yes a good reporter would not deviate and stick with your assignment, to which I say then why get out of the car and run around the knoll? Why not stay in the car which will take off and possibly leave you with nothing but pictures of people lying on the grass and miss going to the Trade-Mart for a (YAWN) speech. NO, a good reporter goes where the story takes him. The baloney about other reporters will be coming along soon enough doesn't cut it. Your there, the story is there, you jumped out of a car to chase that story but ignore the very thing that makes the story, the shooter, and the cop about to confront said shooter. Let the next reporter go to the Trade-Mart and get the reaction there, whats the difference. Difference is the next reporter wouldn't know what you know about the rifle/which window/sixth floor/ etc. and would be less effective at that scene. Whereas both you and the next reporter along would be equal when it comes to the Trade-Mart story. Get it.

About the wallet, he made it seem the reporter could never make a mistake about its ownership. As if he was infallible.

I had to point out all the news reports which, in the heat of the moment, were without substantiated facts reported and later found to be wrong. Seems Gary always wants his cake and to eat it too. People are wrong only when it is convenient for him, and not vice verse.

The fact is he is very knowledgeable about all these things, yet has some strange quirk that doesn't let him believe his own eyes at times.

Sorry Gary but I needed to come clean here in this confessional about what I perceive to be your underlying faults.

I can't sit quietly and be jabbed with a SFM stick and not develop a strong opinion about such prodding. If he has some secret knowledge about this case and still speculates like a novice then I have to question why??

I do thank him for his help (be it asked for or not) and have, I hope, returned the favor when I can, seems the decent thing to do.

I don't think too many of us here agree on all the minutia or even some of the larger aspects, but at least we can see that it only takes one fact to go from conspiracy theory to a conspiracy.

You with us on that Gary?

Gary Mack knows enough to be dangerous. He knows what to hide and what to exploit. However, he seems to have too many agendas to be able to be consistent. He has no qualms about misusing evidence to prove a false point, as in the case of the SS color limo photos, which he falsely claimed were taken at 1 a.m. 11.23.63 during the FBI forensic exam of the limo when he knows perfectly well they were not taken until late the following afternoon. His assertions cannot be trusted if you are interested in knowing what really happened.

[David G. Healy]

"I seem to recall..."...., "I believe..." "Then, I seem to recall..." "...going on memory here..." LMFAO! C'mon, what's up?

Taking a break from getting that request finished so you can view the said in-camera original Zapruder film, David? One would think that after all that talk about you needing access to it so to put the matter to rest once and for all ... that you'd at least make out a simple written request do examine it. If its the color paper and ink that you cannot decide on, then go with white paper and black ink ... they do let you have pens at the home - don't they!

Bill Miller

when it comes to JFK assassination research, you're a joke Wild Bill -- but I do enjoy watching you dance. If you're the next generation..... LMFAO. Carry on!

Edited November 30, 2008 by David G. Healy