Silliness... A Brief History

[Dean Hagerman]

Jack, just a request.

Could you consider adding ''in me'', or something to that effect, after NO DOUBT, please?

No. There is NO DOUBT that Mary and Jean were NOT on the grass as seen in Zapruder.

There is NO DOUBT, PERIOD. All other possibilities have been considered. There is

NO DOUBT. NO DOUBT at all.

Jack,

Read the paragraph under the photo:

Come on Kathy

Bill Sloan wrote that little tid-bit under the photo not Jean Hill

[Jack White]

Book was by Bill Sloan with Jean Hill.

Are you saying that she disagreed with Sloan? Why did she allow it and never mention it?

Also I did read Trask POTP, pg. 250. Trask is talking about a letter he rec'd from Hill in 1965. She wrote" I had jumped into the street and yelled, "Mr. President , we want to take your picture! He raised his head and turned it in our direction. just as the beginning of a smile creased his face, the first shot rang out and he slumped forward into Mrs. Kennedy's lap." Trask says, in the same paragraph, that Jean's account is not the same as what the film shows, and on page 251-252, he goes into more detail about changes she has made in her story.

Kathy

That is TRASK'S OPINION. He is a well known LONENUTTER. Even the 6thFM carries his books!

He is quoting directly what Jean said and ALWAYS SAID.

[Pat Speer]

Book was by Bill Sloan with Jean Hill.

Are you saying that she disagreed with Sloan? Why did she allow it and never mention it?

Also I did read Trask POTP, pg. 250. Trask is talking about a letter he rec'd from Hill in 1965. She wrote" I had jumped into the street and yelled, "Mr. President , we want to take your picture! He raised his head and turned it in our direction. just as the beginning of a smile creased his face, the first shot rang out and he slumped forward into Mrs. Kennedy's lap." Trask says, in the same paragraph, that Jean's account is not the same as what the film shows, and on page 251-252, he goes into more detail about changes she has made in her story.

Kathy

That is TRASK'S OPINION. He is a well known LONENUTTER. Even the 6thFM carries his books!

He is quoting directly what Jean said and ALWAYS SAID.

ALWAYS, Jack? At the 28:30 point of Part 2 of Jean's 6-15-2000 interview on Black Op radio, she was asked specifically where she was at the moment of the head shot. She replied "I was right at the curb. I had been out in the street but was back on the curb at the time of the shots." Later, around 31:00, she was asked if there was anything in the Zapruder film that was at odds with her recollections, and replied "I think it goes along with what I said."

Edited February 14, 2010 by Pat Speer

[Barb Junkkarinen]

That is TRASK'S OPINION. He is a well known LONENUTTER. Even the 6thFM carries his books!

He is quoting directly what Jean said and ALWAYS SAID.

ALWAYS, Jack? At the 28:30 point of Part 2 of Jean's 6-15-2000 interview on Black Op radio, she was asked specifically where she was at the moment of the head shot. She replied "I was right at the curb. I had been out in the street but was back on the curb at the time of the shots." Later, around 31:00, she was asked if there was anything in the Zapruder film that was at odds with her recollections, and replied "I think it goes along with what I said."

What Jean "always" told me and anyone else around when holding court in Dealey Plaza was that where she was standing was exactly where she stood that day with Moorman, as Moorman took her photo .... and she was always on the grass, and always wearing red. She was also recognized by whomever was at the microphone just before the commemorative moment as being over there, on that exact spot, dressed in red.... and as people turned to look, she would smile and wave.

Bests,

Barb :-)

[John Dolva]

I rhink this thread as it stands should be written up and edited as a monograph for ready distribution. I think I'd buy a hardback copy if I ever came across one.

[Jack White]

Book was by Bill Sloan with Jean Hill.

Are you saying that she disagreed with Sloan? Why did she allow it and never mention it?

Also I did read Trask POTP, pg. 250. Trask is talking about a letter he rec'd from Hill in 1965. She wrote" I had jumped into the street and yelled, "Mr. President , we want to take your picture! He raised his head and turned it in our direction. just as the beginning of a smile creased his face, the first shot rang out and he slumped forward into Mrs. Kennedy's lap." Trask says, in the same paragraph, that Jean's account is not the same as what the film shows, and on page 251-252, he goes into more detail about changes she has made in her story.

Kathy

That is TRASK'S OPINION. He is a well known LONENUTTER. Even the 6thFM carries his books!

He is quoting directly what Jean said and ALWAYS SAID.

ALWAYS, Jack? At the 28:30 point of Part 2 of Jean's 6-15-2000 interview on Black Op radio, she was asked specifically where she was at the moment of the head shot. She replied "I was right at the curb. I had been out in the street but was back on the curb at the time of the shots." Later, around 31:00, she was asked if there was anything in the Zapruder film that was at odds with her recollections, and replied "I think it goes along with what I said."

Her early statements are in the volumes. In 1965, she wrote to Trask, saying she was in the street.

I talked to her on dozens of occasions. She ALWAYS said she stepped into the street, without variation.

It makes NO DIFFERENCE what she may have said on a computer radio show. We do not know the

circumstances of what she may have said, but it does not trump ALL OF HER STATEMENTS FOR 40 YEARS.

[Pat Speer]

Book was by Bill Sloan with Jean Hill.

Are you saying that she disagreed with Sloan? Why did she allow it and never mention it?

Also I did read Trask POTP, pg. 250. Trask is talking about a letter he rec'd from Hill in 1965. She wrote" I had jumped into the street and yelled, "Mr. President , we want to take your picture! He raised his head and turned it in our direction. just as the beginning of a smile creased his face, the first shot rang out and he slumped forward into Mrs. Kennedy's lap." Trask says, in the same paragraph, that Jean's account is not the same as what the film shows, and on page 251-252, he goes into more detail about changes she has made in her story.

Kathy

That is TRASK'S OPINION. He is a well known LONENUTTER. Even the 6thFM carries his books!

He is quoting directly what Jean said and ALWAYS SAID.

ALWAYS, Jack? At the 28:30 point of Part 2 of Jean's 6-15-2000 interview on Black Op radio, she was asked specifically where she was at the moment of the head shot. She replied "I was right at the curb. I had been out in the street but was back on the curb at the time of the shots." Later, around 31:00, she was asked if there was anything in the Zapruder film that was at odds with her recollections, and replied "I think it goes along with what I said."

Her early statements are in the volumes. In 1965, she wrote to Trask, saying she was in the street.

I talked to her on dozens of occasions. She ALWAYS said she stepped into the street, without variation.

It makes NO DIFFERENCE what she may have said on a computer radio show. We do not know the

circumstances of what she may have said, but it does not trump ALL OF HER STATEMENTS FOR 40 YEARS.

Wrong. We do know the circumstances of what she DID say on Black Op. Len Osanic received an email mid-interview from someone, perhaps one of your supporters, perhaps not, but definitely someone familiar with your "Moorman in the Street" argument, asking if she was in the street or on the grass at the time of the shooting. He asked her the question, in an attempt to get her to clarify her position on this once and for all, and SHE SHOT YOUR THEORY DOWN. A few minutes later, as a bit of a follow-up, Len asked her if there was ANYTHING in the Zapruder film that was not as she remembered it. Here, she equivocated a bit and said she never saw the film until many years after the event, etc, but then specified that her actions in the film were as she remembered them... In other words, she felt the film was legit.

If I recall, Mary Moorman is also on record as stating the film is an accurate depiction of events as she remembered them. Maybe someone else knows when or where she said this. Maybe I'm wrong, and she never did say this. But it is crystal clear she NEVER subscribed to YOUR theory she was in the street, and that that proves the Z-film is inauthentic. If she had, you'd have pointed us to her signed statement saying so a long time ago, now wouldn't have you?

Edited February 14, 2010 by Pat Speer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Speer, many of your posts are an embarrassment. Try reading THE LAST DISSENTING WITNESS about Jean Hill, who was there with her, which was extensively discussed on earlier threads (where you must have been napping) or visit "Moorman in the Street Revisited" at the easily accessible site,

http://www.jfkresearch.com/Moorman/ , which includes testimony from Mary and from Jean of which you are abysmally ignorant. And read the Appendix, in which David Lifton discusses the disgusting behavior of Gary Mack in manipulating Mary from stepping into the street when she wanted to do so and even constraining her from saying what she had done. I used to think you were a harmless but misinformed student of the case, but your massive ignorance in posting when you obviously don't know what you are talking about has disillusioned me completely and forever.

Book was by Bill Sloan with Jean Hill.

Are you saying that she disagreed with Sloan? Why did she allow it and never mention it?

Also I did read Trask POTP, pg. 250. Trask is talking about a letter he rec'd from Hill in 1965. She wrote" I had jumped into the street and yelled, "Mr. President , we want to take your picture! He raised his head and turned it in our direction. just as the beginning of a smile creased his face, the first shot rang out and he slumped forward into Mrs. Kennedy's lap." Trask says, in the same paragraph, that Jean's account is not the same as what the film shows, and on page 251-252, he goes into more detail about changes she has made in her story.

Kathy

That is TRASK'S OPINION. He is a well known LONENUTTER. Even the 6thFM carries his books!

He is quoting directly what Jean said and ALWAYS SAID.

ALWAYS, Jack? At the 28:30 point of Part 2 of Jean's 6-15-2000 interview on Black Op radio, she was asked specifically where she was at the moment of the head shot. She replied "I was right at the curb. I had been out in the street but was back on the curb at the time of the shots." Later, around 31:00, she was asked if there was anything in the Zapruder film that was at odds with her recollections, and replied "I think it goes along with what I said."

Her early statements are in the volumes. In 1965, she wrote to Trask, saying she was in the street.

I talked to her on dozens of occasions. She ALWAYS said she stepped into the street, without variation.

It makes NO DIFFERENCE what she may have said on a computer radio show. We do not know the

circumstances of what she may have said, but it does not trump ALL OF HER STATEMENTS FOR 40 YEARS.

Wrong. We do know the circumstances of what she DID say on Black Op. Len Osanic received an email mid-interview from someone, perhaps one of your supporters, perhaps not, but definitely someone familiar with your "Moorman in the Street" argument, asking if she was in the street or on the grass at the time of the shooting. He asked her the question, in an attempt to get her to clarify her position on this once and for all, and SHE SHOT YOUR THEORY DOWN. A few minutes later, as a bit of a follow-up, Len asked her if there was ANYTHING in the Zapruder film that was not as she remembered it. Here, she equivocated a bit and said she never saw the film until many years after the event, etc, but then specified that her actions in the film were as she remembered them... In other words, she felt the film was legit.

If I recall, Mary Moorman is also on record as stating the film is an accurate depiction of events as she remembered them. Maybe someone else knows when or where she said this. Maybe I'm wrong, and she never did say this. But it is crystal clear she NEVER subscribed to YOUR theory she was in the street, and that that proves the Z-film is inauthentic. If she had, you'd have pointed us to her signed statement saying so a long time ago, now wouldn't have you?

Edited February 14, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Josiah Thompson]

Hi, Bill...I and we (many others) have shown conclusively that Mary Moorman

was standing in the street as she repeatedly said and not on the curb as

Zapruder shows her. Dr. Thompson resists ALL PROOFS that the Z film has been

faked. Even though this issue is just ONE of more than a dozen, he continues

to harp on an irrelevant issue that he calls THE GAP. This is a meaningless

term invented by him. HE CAN MAKE THE GAP AS LARGE AS HE WANTS, it

will still mean nothing to finding Mary's line of sight.

Jack

Jack, you're starting to sound like John McAdams, who, in order to avoid admitting that his SBT has a different point of exit on Kennedy's throat than the HSCA's SBT, refused to admit that two bullets entering in the same location, one heading upward and one heading downward, would not exit from the same location.

IF Josiah's re-enactment photo from 54 inches more accurately re-creates the size and shape of the windows, including the gap, than your re-enactment, then it is obvious the Moorman photo could have been taken, indeed probably was taken, from 54 inches, and that any Moorman in the street argument built around the idea her photo only lines up at a lower level is false.

If you agree and think there are other reasons to believe the photo is fake, please say what they are.

If you disagree...why?

Pat, I hope you and others can understand my bewilderment. About a decade ago Jack White misread the Moorman photo and proclaimed seeing a line-up in the photo that doesn't exist. The exact nature of the mistake was pointed out nine years ago. This last thread shows that Todd Vaughan was in Dealey Plaza when they performed the "experiment" they have been crowing about for years. He looked through the transit they set up and could see clearly that they had not done what they claimed they had done. Mantik's notes of the same "experiment" show it was what Vaughan's experience indicated it was.... a scam.

Yet, when this is all pointed out with photos illustating the crucial points, all Jack White can do is yell, "I'm right. He's wrong. I'm right. He's wrong. Off with his head!" Meanwhile, Fetzer (who said "Oh xxxx!" when Vaughan arrived near the transit) contents himself with telling people to read more of his books and dumps on you. Neither one will defend themselves against the obvious judgments that spring from Vaughan's explicit memories and Mantik's notes. Sometimes it seems like this whole discussion has passed through the looking glass.

Josiah Thompson

[Jack White]

Hi, Bill...I and we (many others) have shown conclusively that Mary Moorman

was standing in the street as she repeatedly said and not on the curb as

Zapruder shows her. Dr. Thompson resists ALL PROOFS that the Z film has been

faked. Even though this issue is just ONE of more than a dozen, he continues

to harp on an irrelevant issue that he calls THE GAP. This is a meaningless

term invented by him. HE CAN MAKE THE GAP AS LARGE AS HE WANTS, it

will still mean nothing to finding Mary's line of sight.

Jack

Jack, you're starting to sound like John McAdams, who, in order to avoid admitting that his SBT has a different point of exit on Kennedy's throat than the HSCA's SBT, refused to admit that two bullets entering in the same location, one heading upward and one heading downward, would not exit from the same location.

IF Josiah's re-enactment photo from 54 inches more accurately re-creates the size and shape of the windows, including the gap, than your re-enactment, then it is obvious the Moorman photo could have been taken, indeed probably was taken, from 54 inches, and that any Moorman in the street argument built around the idea her photo only lines up at a lower level is false.

If you agree and think there are other reasons to believe the photo is fake, please say what they are.

If you disagree...why?

Pat, I hope you and others can understand my bewilderment. About a decade ago Jack White misread the Moorman photo and proclaimed seeing a line-up in the photo that doesn't exist. The exact nature of the mistake was pointed out nine years ago. This last thread shows that Todd Vaughan was in Dealey Plaza when they performed the "experiment" they have been crowing about for years. He looked through the transit they set up and could see clearly that they had not done what they claimed they had done. Mantik's notes of the same "experiment" show it was what Vaughan's experience indicated it was.... a scam.

Yet, when this is all pointed out with photos illustating the crucial points, all Jack White can do is yell, "I'm right. He's wrong. I'm right. He's wrong. Off with his head!" Meanwhile, Fetzer (who said "Oh xxxx!" when Vaughan arrived near the transit) contents himself with telling people to read more of his books and dumps on you. Neither one will defend themselves against the obvious judgments that spring from Vaughan's explicit memories and Mantik's notes. Sometimes it seems like this whole discussion has passed through the looking glass.

Josiah Thompson

Quoting Jim: many of your posts are an embarrassment. Try reading THE LAST DISSENTING WITNESS about Jean Hill, who was there with her, which was extensively discussed on earlier threads (where you must have been napping) or visit "Moorman in the Street Revisited" at the easily accessible site,

http://www.jfkresearch.com/Moorman/ , which includes testimony from Mary and from Jean of which you are abysmally ignorant. And read the Appendix, in which David Lifton discusses the disgusting behavior of Gary Mack in manipulating Mary from stepping into the street when she wanted to do so and even constraining her from saying what she had done. I used to think you were a harmless but misinformed student of the case, but your massive ignorance in posting when you obviously don't know what you are talking about has disillusioned me completely and forever.

Dr. Thompson has become a one-trick pony; he ignores the true facts as outlined by Dr. Fetzer above.

He is obsessed with "a gap" which is irrelevant. We have GRANTED HIM HIS GAP, because IT MAKES

NO DIFFERENCE IN ANY STUDIES. He is invited to do ANY STUDY he wants USING THE EXACT GAP

he sees in any copy of Moorman he wants. If his study is honest, Mary still has to be in the street.

[John Dolva]

''We have GRANTED HIM HIS GAP, because IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE IN ANY STUDIES.'' - classic

Edited February 15, 2010 by John Dolva

[Jack White]

''We have GRANTED HIM HIS GAP, because IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE IN ANY STUDIES.'' - classic

Classic what?

[John Dolva]

poor research mo

[Pat Speer]

Speer, many of your posts are an embarrassment. Try reading THE LAST DISSENTING WITNESS about Jean Hill, who was there with her, which was extensively discussed on earlier threads (where you must have been napping) or visit "Moorman in the Street Revisited" at the easily accessible site,

http://www.jfkresearch.com/Moorman/ , which includes testimony from Mary and from Jean of which you are abysmally ignorant. And read the Appendix, in which David Lifton discusses the disgusting behavior of Gary Mack in manipulating Mary from stepping into the street when she wanted to do so and even constraining her from saying what she had done. I used to think you were a harmless but misinformed student of the case, but your massive ignorance in posting when you obviously don't know what you are talking about has disillusioned me completely and forever.

Jim, if you have ever visited chapters 5 thru 9 at my website you would know that I have published the most complete record of eyewitness statements to the shooting ever attempted, and am better aware of what the witnesses said than anyone within a mile of your sewing circle. I am acutely aware of their statements, and their MANY CONTRADICTIONS. Which is why I knew that Jean had shot your pet theory down, and dropped it dead in the gutter, like an abandoned puppy hit by a truck called the truth. C'mon, now, let's be honest. Did you know that she said what she said on Black Op? And, if so, why didn't you admit as much in your Moorman in the Street revisited article? (And, BTW, if you think you're free to push a theory based on the statements of a few witnesses, and NOT include statements made by these witnesses in which they attempted to set the record straight, and DISAGREED with your theory, then how is it, exactly, that you are any better than the Warren Commission?)

And, au countraire, it is not my massive ignorance but your blind reliance on whimsical theories that is the problem. I mean, c'mon, some lady said something that doesn't jive with the Zapruder film, and this PROVES the Zapruder film is fake? Really? What are we, two-year-olds? No responsible adult, let alone a professor of critical thinking, could possibly believe such silliness. If you dared ask your mother what shirt your dad wore in her wedding photos, and she recalled him wearing a different shirt than the one he wore in the wedding photos, would you then claim the photos were fake? Of course not.

P.S. Did you really forget that The Last Dissenting Witness also said Jean was on the grass (See Post #15)? Or were you just playing? I mean, really, how gullible would one have to be to believe that she could really have been so close that she could almost touch the fender of the limousine? Uhhh...if she was really that close wouldn't she have 1) have been run over by her boyfriend's motorcycle, or 2) have created a scene whereby she got her boyfriend in trouble?

Sometimes you have to think critically to figure out what the truth is. Now which one of the statements below is more likely to reflect what really happened? The deliberately dramatic narrative in a ghost-written book? Or the straightforward answer to a straightforward question asked by YOUR friend, Len Osanic?

From patspeer.com, chapter 7:

(JFK: The Last Dissenting Witness, 1992, co-written with Bill Sloan ) "Hey, Mr. President," Jean shouted impulsively when the car was almost abreast of her. 'Look Over here. We want to take your picture.' In her desperation and excitement. She stepped off the curb into the street as she spoke, almost touching the front fender of the limousine before she instinctively drew back...What a great picture this is going to be, Jean thought, as Mary raised her camera. She sighted through the viewfinder, and... CRACK!...almost simultaneously, Jean heard a shot. Mary hesitated as an expression of pain and confusion crossed the president's face. His hands jerked convulsively toward his throat . CRACK! Jean saw the president driven backward and sideways as a second shot struck him with tremendous force. The whole back of his head appeared to explode and a cloud of blood-red mist filled the air and spattered on the windshield of J.B.'s motorcycle. Approximately an eighth of a second later (as investigators would later determine), as the President was falling toward his wife, Mary clicked the shutter of the Polaroid. Then Jean heard Jackie Kennedy's anguished cry: 'My God, they've shot my husband!' ...'Jean, get down!' Mary screamed, as she and the other panicked bystanders nearby threw themselves to the ground...Jean stood there, immobilized by the shock of what she had seen, while her friend tugged desperately at her legs. On the other side of the street, at the top of the little green mound universally known today as the 'grassy knoll,' Jean had seen an incredible sight...A muzzle flash, a puff of smoke, and the shadowy figure of a man holding a rifle, barely visible above the wooden fence at the top of the knoll, still in the very act of murdering the president of the United States."

(Interview on Black Op Radio, 6-15-00) (When asked where she thought the shots came from) "I saw a shooter behind the fence on the grassy knoll, and the debris and so forth, the blood and the brains, hit my boyfriend's helmet and he was riding (a pause, to which Len Osanic adds 'to the rear left,' to which she adds) "right." (When it was repeated that she thought the shots came from the front) "Yes, I saw the man." (When asked if she saw a puff of smoke) "a puff of smoke, a flash of light from the rifle. I caught a glimpse of someone up there." (When discussing the possibility she would have been hit) "We were within ten feet of the car." (When discussing the shots from the sniper's nest) "I feel like those shots were just to get attention and get people looking in the wrong direction. And I think they succeeded." (When asked what the shots sounded like) "It sounded like gunfire, yes...I knew immediately it was gunshots. I never thought it was firecrackers... (When asked how many shots she heard) "4 to 6. I know that I heard 4 and as many as 6." (When asked what she was looking at) "I was actually watching Kennedy...I was following his head, and just as his head blew off is when I saw the flash of light from in front of him...So I knew it was a shot that came from the front." (When asked if she saw the limousine stop during the shooting) "I know it was hardly moving, if not stopped at one point."(When discussing the possibility limousine driver William Greer shot Kennedy) "I have no idea what happened in the car." (When asked if she was in the street or on the grass at the time of the head shot) "I was right at the curb. I had been out in the street but was back on the curb at the time of the shots." (When asked where the limo was in relation to her at the time of the shots) "Just before me but the head shot was right in line with me." (When asked if she noticed anything in the Z-film that was at variance with her recollections) "I think it goes along with what I said."

Edited February 15, 2010 by Pat Speer