Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Kennedy Detail


William Kelly
 Share

Recommended Posts

From: Gary Mack

Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 2:50 PM

Subject: Secret Service agents on Sixth Floor Museum program

C-SPAN 2's Book TV series will be showing The Sixth Floor Museum's 11/20/10 public program with Secret Service agents Gerald Blaine and Clint Hill, along with writer Lisa McCubbin, whose book The Kennedy Detail tells of the agents' years with JFK and the Kennedy assassination.

This one hour event, which I was privileged to act as moderator, was held on the Museum's 7th floor in the former Texas School Book Depository before an audience of about 300. Check your local listings:

Gary Mack

The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza

U.S. History

The Kennedy Detail: JFK's Secret Service Agents Break Their Silence

Gerald Blaine; Lisa McCubbin

About the Program

Gerald Blaine, one of the secret service agents assigned to the Kennedy detail the day the President was assassinated on November 22, 1963, reports on his and his colleagues rememberances of the day. Mr. Blaine is joined in conversation, by his co-author Lisa McCubbin and Clint Hill, the agent who covered Jackie Kennedy following the shooting. The event is held at the Sixth Floor Museum in Dallas.

Gerald Blaine is a former U.S. Secret Service Agent who served on President Eisenhower's and President Kennedy's security detail. For more information, visit kennedydetail.com.

Buy the author's book from:
|
|

Lisa McCubbin has worked as a journalist and a media consultant. For more information, visit lisamccubbin.com.

  • Sunday, December 12th at 8am (ET)
  • Monday, December 13th at 2am (ET)
  • Saturday, December 18th at 2pm (ET)
  • Friday, December 31st at 9am (ET)
  • Saturday, January 1st at 7pm (ET)

Edited by William Kelly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From: Gary Mack

Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 2:50 PM

Subject: Secret Service agents on Sixth Floor Museum program

C-SPAN 2's Book TV series will be showing The Sixth Floor Museum's 11/20/10 public program with Secret Service agents Gerald Blaine and Clint Hill, along with writer Lisa McCubbin, whose book The Kennedy Detail tells of the agents' years with JFK and the Kennedy assassination.

This one hour event, which I was privileged to act as moderator, was held on the Museum's 7th floor in the former Texas School Book Depository before an audience of about 300. Check your local listings:

Gary Mack

The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza

U.S. History

The Kennedy Detail: JFK's Secret Service Agents Break Their Silence

Gerald Blaine; Lisa McCubbin

About the Program

Gerald Blaine, one of the secret service agents assigned to the Kennedy detail the day the President was assassinated on November 22, 1963, reports on his and his colleagues rememberances of the day. Mr. Blaine is joined in conversation, by his co-author Lisa McCubbin and Clint Hill, the agent who covered Jackie Kennedy following the shooting. The event is held at the Sixth Floor Museum in Dallas.

Gerald Blaine is a former U.S. Secret Service Agent who served on President Eisenhower's and President Kennedy's security detail. For more information, visit kennedydetail.com.

Buy the author's book from:
|
|

Lisa McCubbin has worked as a journalist and a media consultant. For more information, visit lisamccubbin.com.

  • Sunday, December 12th at 8am (ET)
  • Monday, December 13th at 2am (ET)
  • Saturday, December 18th at 2pm (ET)
  • Friday, December 31st at 9am (ET)
  • Saturday, January 1st at 7pm (ET)

Will they discuss their rejection of the Single Bullet Theory?

Hill twice saying in the book that he saw a "fist sized" hole in the back of JFK's head?

That Blaine has the Chicago and Tampa Advance Reports the Secret Service claimed they intentionally destroyed after they were requested by the ARRB?

We'll soon find out.

BK

http://jfkcountercoup.wordpress.com/

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2010/11/col-frank-m-brandstetter.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...a "fist sized" hole in the back of JFK's head...

In most of the radio/TV interviews with Clint Hill that I've heard during his book tour, he was saying that the gaping hole was "above the right ear" (which, of course, IS exactly where the wound was actually located, as everybody can easily see in the Z-Film and the autopsy photographs and X-rays).

http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2010/12/kennedy-detail.html

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...a "fist sized" hole in the back of JFK's head...

In most of the radio/TV interviews with Clint Hill that I've heard during his book tour, he was saying that the gaping hole was "above the right ear" (which, of course, IS exactly where the wound was actually located, as everybody can easily see in the Z-Film and the autopsy photographs and X-rays).

http://JFK-Archives....edy-detail.html

Except that's not what he says in the book.

He says very explicity, twice, the first time while in the back of the car, he sees a "fist sized hole in the back of the head."

Then after the autopsy, Kellerman and a technician in a white overcoat lifted JFK's body and point out the hole in the back,

and he sees for the second time, very clearly and precisely, "a fist sized hole in the back of the head."

Of course when hearing this a forensic pathologist, cop or CSI will tell you that such a hole is a sure sign of an exit wound. Period.

Now of course someone must have pointed this out to thim, and he can blame Lisa McCubbin for not getting it right, but there's

no mention of any ear in the book.

And he can change his tune if he wants to.

Does he also dispute the single-bullet-theory like he does in the book, very clearly and precisely saying first shot hit JFK in the back,

second shot hit JBC and their shot hit JFK in the head. Period.

I guess they didn't run the manuscript past the government redactors and Secret Service censors before it was published.

BK

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/

Edited by William Kelly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...a "fist sized" hole in the back of JFK's head...

In most of the radio/TV interviews with Clint Hill that I've heard during his book tour, he was saying that the gaping hole was "above the right ear" (which, of course, IS exactly where the wound was actually located, as everybody can easily see in the Z-Film and the autopsy photographs and X-rays).

http://JFK-Archives....edy-detail.html

Except that's not what he says in the book.

He says very explicity, twice, the first time while in the back of the car, he sees a "fist sized hole in the back of the head."

Then after the autopsy, Kellerman and a technician in a white overcoat lifted JFK's body and point out the hole in the back,

and he sees for the second time, very clearly and precisely, "a fist sized hole in the back of the head."

Of course when hearing this a forensic pathologist, cop or CSI will tell you that such a hole is a sure sign of an exit wound. Period.

Now of course someone must have pointed this out to thim, and he can blame Lisa McCubbin for not getting it right, but there's

no mention of any ear in the book.

And he can change his tune if he wants to.

Does he also dispute the single-bullet-theory like he does in the book, very clearly and precisely saying first shot hit JFK in the back,

second shot hit JBC and their shot hit JFK in the head. Period.

I guess they didn't run the manuscript past the government redactors and Secret Service censors before it was published.

BK

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/

Nor is that really what he's been saying in recent interviews.

For example, in a BBC radio 4 audio interview published online 12/1/10 Hill says:

"The third shot which I heard and felt because I was near the presidential vehicle when that happened hit the president in the head--upper right rear of the right ear--and it spewed blood matter, brain matter, and bone fragments out over the car and myself."

And:

"there was a hole in his skull above his right ear to the rear about the size of my palm."

It's pretty clear that what Hill is saying is that he saw a hole that extended from above the right ear to the back of the head.

IOW he saw a hole in the right rear portion of the head - just like the Parkland doctors.

Having just seen the C-SPAN show, I think Gary Mack did a good job monderating the program and touched on most of the important issues.

They say the book was not previewed by the government, but Hill says he read it six times before approving it and every word is accurate, so

he must know that the book says a "fist sized hole in the back of the head" twice.

While both Hill and Blaine are going with the three shots, three hits scenario, no SBT, but all fired by a lone assassin, Hill now says the "fist sized hole" was

behind the right ear, and then he puts his hand on the back of the head.

That's still a fist sized hole in the back of the head any way you hear it or look at it.

BK

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Monkeys: a lesson from behavioral biology

Start with a cage containing five monkeys. Inside the cage, hang a banana on a string and place a set of stairs under it. Before long, a monkey will go to the stairs and start to climb towards the banana. As soon as he touches the stairs, spray all of the other monkeys with cold water.

After a while, another monkey makes an attempt with the same result, all the other monkeys are sprayed with cold water. Pretty soon when another monkey tries to climb the stairs, the other monkeys will try to prevent it. Now, put away the cold water.

Remove one monkey from the cage and replace it with a new one. The new monkey sees the banana and wants to climb the stairs. To his surprise and horror, all of the other monkeys attack him. After another attempt and attack, he knows that if he tries to climb the stairs, he will be assaulted.

Next, remove another of the original five monkeys and replace it with a new one. The newcomer goes to the stairs and is attacked. The previous newcomer takes part in the punishment with enthusiasm!

Likewise, replace a third original monkey with a new one, then a fourth, then the fifth. Every time the newest monkey takes to the stairs, he is attacked. Most of the monkeys that are beating him have no idea why they were not permitted to climb the stairs or why they are participating in the beating of the newest monkey.

After replacing all the original monkeys, none of the remaining monkeys have ever been sprayed with cold water. Nevertheless, no monkey ever again approaches the stairs to try for the banana. Why not? Because as far as they know that's the way it's always been done around here.

And that, my friends, is how the myth of the Kennedy assassination begins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...a "fist sized" hole in the back of JFK's head...

In most of the radio/TV interviews with Clint Hill that I've heard during his book tour, he was saying that the gaping hole was "above the right ear" (which, of course, IS exactly where the wound was actually located, as everybody can easily see in the Z-Film and the autopsy photographs and X-rays).

http://JFK-Archives....edy-detail.html

Except that's not what he says in the book.

He says very explicity, twice, the first time while in the back of the car, he sees a "fist sized hole in the back of the head."

Then after the autopsy, Kellerman and a technician in a white overcoat lifted JFK's body and point out the hole in the back,

and he sees for the second time, very clearly and precisely, "a fist sized hole in the back of the head."

Of course when hearing this a forensic pathologist, cop or CSI will tell you that such a hole is a sure sign of an exit wound. Period.

Now of course someone must have pointed this out to thim, and he can blame Lisa McCubbin for not getting it right, but there's

no mention of any ear in the book.

And he can change his tune if he wants to.

Does he also dispute the single-bullet-theory like he does in the book, very clearly and precisely saying first shot hit JFK in the back,

second shot hit JBC and their shot hit JFK in the head. Period.

I guess they didn't run the manuscript past the government redactors and Secret Service censors before it was published.

BK

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/

Bill, Hill first described the wound as being above the ear years before this book was written. McCubbin undoubtedly wrote the text based on Hill's early statements and testimony. In his recent interviews, he has also added "to the rear" several times when saying the wound was above the ear. This suggests to me that, in Hill's recollection, the wound was above the ear, and slightly to the rear. If so, then this is consistent with his earlier claims the wound was on the back of the head, etc. Some like to believe the back of the head means only the posterior wall, the back side of the head, when it can just as easily be interpreted to mean the back HALF of the head, with the halfway mark being anywhere from the front of the ear back. I mean, if I got mugged from behind and someone hit me above my right ear, I might very well say I got hit in the back of the head. Wouldn't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Monkeys: a lesson from behavioral biology

Start with a cage containing five monkeys. Inside the cage, hang a banana on a string and place a set of stairs under it. Before long, a monkey will go to the stairs and start to climb towards the banana. As soon as he touches the stairs, spray all of the other monkeys with cold water.

After a while, another monkey makes an attempt with the same result, all the other monkeys are sprayed with cold water. Pretty soon when another monkey tries to climb the stairs, the other monkeys will try to prevent it. Now, put away the cold water.

Remove one monkey from the cage and replace it with a new one. The new monkey sees the banana and wants to climb the stairs. To his surprise and horror, all of the other monkeys attack him. After another attempt and attack, he knows that if he tries to climb the stairs, he will be assaulted.

Next, remove another of the original five monkeys and replace it with a new one. The newcomer goes to the stairs and is attacked. The previous newcomer takes part in the punishment with enthusiasm!

Likewise, replace a third original monkey with a new one, then a fourth, then the fifth. Every time the newest monkey takes to the stairs, he is attacked. Most of the monkeys that are beating him have no idea why they were not permitted to climb the stairs or why they are participating in the beating of the newest monkey.

After replacing all the original monkeys, none of the remaining monkeys have ever been sprayed with cold water. Nevertheless, no monkey ever again approaches the stairs to try for the banana. Why not? Because as far as they know that's the way it's always been done around here.

And that, my friends, is how the myth of the Kennedy assassination begins.

I really like the example, but am not clear how it applies. Are you saying that today's CTs have no thoughts of their own, and are simply following the examples set by others?

Or are the monkeys LNs, who've been conditioned to attack CTs, without remembering why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...a "fist sized" hole in the back of JFK's head...

In most of the radio/TV interviews with Clint Hill that I've heard during his book tour, he was saying that the gaping hole was "above the right ear" (which, of course, IS exactly where the wound was actually located, as everybody can easily see in the Z-Film and the autopsy photographs and X-rays).

http://JFK-Archives....edy-detail.html

Except that's not what he says in the book.

He says very explicity, twice, the first time while in the back of the car, he sees a "fist sized hole in the back of the head."

Then after the autopsy, Kellerman and a technician in a white overcoat lifted JFK's body and point out the hole in the back,

and he sees for the second time, very clearly and precisely, "a fist sized hole in the back of the head."

Of course when hearing this a forensic pathologist, cop or CSI will tell you that such a hole is a sure sign of an exit wound. Period.

Now of course someone must have pointed this out to thim, and he can blame Lisa McCubbin for not getting it right, but there's

no mention of any ear in the book.

And he can change his tune if he wants to.

Does he also dispute the single-bullet-theory like he does in the book, very clearly and precisely saying first shot hit JFK in the back,

second shot hit JBC and their shot hit JFK in the head. Period.

I guess they didn't run the manuscript past the government redactors and Secret Service censors before it was published.

BK

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/

Bill, Hill first described the wound as being above the ear years before this book was written. McCubbin undoubtedly wrote the text based on Hill's early statements and testimony. In his recent interviews, he has also added "to the rear" several times when saying the wound was above the ear. This suggests to me that, in Hill's recollection, the wound was above the ear, and slightly to the rear. If so, then this is consistent with his earlier claims the wound was on the back of the head, etc. Some like to believe the back of the head means only the posterior wall, the back side of the head, when it can just as easily be interpreted to mean the back HALF of the head, with the halfway mark being anywhere from the front of the ear back. I mean, if I got mugged from behind and someone hit me above my right ear, I might very well say I got hit in the back of the head. Wouldn't you?

Yes, but if you were shot by a bullet you would have a small entrance wound the size of the circumfrance of the bullet - less than a quarter of a inch, and a large exit wound - the size of fist.

Those facts don't change, even if the victim is the President of the USA.

And what Hill said before or says now, he didn't say it in the book, which he read six times before publication, according to his talk at the Sixth Floor Muse, and he accepts what he says in the book as fact.

Even at the Sixth Floor show and tell, he describes the wound he saw "fist sized" and places it behind the right ear.

What's the argument?

Bill Kelly

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...a "fist sized" hole in the back of JFK's head...

In most of the radio/TV interviews with Clint Hill that I've heard during his book tour, he was saying that the gaping hole was "above the right ear" (which, of course, IS exactly where the wound was actually located, as everybody can easily see in the Z-Film and the autopsy photographs and X-rays).

http://JFK-Archives....edy-detail.html

Except that's not what he says in the book.

He says very explicity, twice, the first time while in the back of the car, he sees a "fist sized hole in the back of the head."

Then after the autopsy, Kellerman and a technician in a white overcoat lifted JFK's body and point out the hole in the back,

and he sees for the second time, very clearly and precisely, "a fist sized hole in the back of the head."

Of course when hearing this a forensic pathologist, cop or CSI will tell you that such a hole is a sure sign of an exit wound. Period.

Now of course someone must have pointed this out to thim, and he can blame Lisa McCubbin for not getting it right, but there's

no mention of any ear in the book.

And he can change his tune if he wants to.

Does he also dispute the single-bullet-theory like he does in the book, very clearly and precisely saying first shot hit JFK in the back,

second shot hit JBC and their shot hit JFK in the head. Period.

I guess they didn't run the manuscript past the government redactors and Secret Service censors before it was published.

BK

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/

Bill, Hill first described the wound as being above the ear years before this book was written. McCubbin undoubtedly wrote the text based on Hill's early statements and testimony. In his recent interviews, he has also added "to the rear" several times when saying the wound was above the ear. This suggests to me that, in Hill's recollection, the wound was above the ear, and slightly to the rear. If so, then this is consistent with his earlier claims the wound was on the back of the head, etc. Some like to believe the back of the head means only the posterior wall, the back side of the head, when it can just as easily be interpreted to mean the back HALF of the head, with the halfway mark being anywhere from the front of the ear back. I mean, if I got mugged from behind and someone hit me above my right ear, I might very well say I got hit in the back of the head. Wouldn't you?

Yes, but if you were shot by a bullet you would have a small entrance wound the size of the circumfrance of the bullet - less than a quarter of a inch, and a large exit wound - the size of fist.

Those facts don't change, even if the victim is the President of the USA.

And what Hill said before or says now, he didn't say it in the book, which he read six times before publication, according to his talk at the Sixth Floor Muse, and he accepts what he says in the book as fact.

Even at the Sixth Floor show and tell, he describes the wound he saw "fist sized" and places it behind the right ear.

What's the argument?

Bill Kelly

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/

My argument's not with you, but with those who'd claim Hill has changed his recollection of the wound to fit the official story, when there's no evidence this is true.

There are those among us who'd like to believe Hill's earliest statements suggest there was a wound on the far back of the head in the occipital region, and that Hill has obviously been convinced to change his recollection.

That's pretty silly, IMO, seeing as Hill most emphatically disagrees with the single-bullet theory and how his current recollection of the wound location is still a few inches off from where it is shown in the autopsy photos

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or are the monkeys LNs, who've been conditioned to attack CTs, without remembering why?

The myth is that Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, killed Kennedy.

You make a good point, though, about many so called Conspiracy Theorists, who also follow the crowd, and fail to think outside the box.

Edited by Peter McGuire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...a "fist sized" hole in the back of JFK's head...

In most of the radio/TV interviews with Clint Hill that I've heard during his book tour, he was saying that the gaping hole was "above the right ear" (which, of course, IS exactly where the wound was actually located, as everybody can easily see in the Z-Film and the autopsy photographs and X-rays).

http://JFK-Archives....edy-detail.html

Except that's not what he says in the book.

He says very explicity, twice, the first time while in the back of the car, he sees a "fist sized hole in the back of the head."

Then after the autopsy, Kellerman and a technician in a white overcoat lifted JFK's body and point out the hole in the back,

and he sees for the second time, very clearly and precisely, "a fist sized hole in the back of the head."

Of course when hearing this a forensic pathologist, cop or CSI will tell you that such a hole is a sure sign of an exit wound. Period.

Now of course someone must have pointed this out to thim, and he can blame Lisa McCubbin for not getting it right, but there's

no mention of any ear in the book.

And he can change his tune if he wants to.

Does he also dispute the single-bullet-theory like he does in the book, very clearly and precisely saying first shot hit JFK in the back,

second shot hit JBC and their shot hit JFK in the head. Period.

I guess they didn't run the manuscript past the government redactors and Secret Service censors before it was published.

BK

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/

Bill, Hill first described the wound as being above the ear years before this book was written. McCubbin undoubtedly wrote the text based on Hill's early statements and testimony. In his recent interviews, he has also added "to the rear" several times when saying the wound was above the ear. This suggests to me that, in Hill's recollection, the wound was above the ear, and slightly to the rear. If so, then this is consistent with his earlier claims the wound was on the back of the head, etc. Some like to believe the back of the head means only the posterior wall, the back side of the head, when it can just as easily be interpreted to mean the back HALF of the head, with the halfway mark being anywhere from the front of the ear back. I mean, if I got mugged from behind and someone hit me above my right ear, I might very well say I got hit in the back of the head. Wouldn't you?

Yes, but if you were shot by a bullet you would have a small entrance wound the size of the circumfrance of the bullet - less than a quarter of a inch, and a large exit wound - the size of fist.

Those facts don't change, even if the victim is the President of the USA.

And what Hill said before or says now, he didn't say it in the book, which he read six times before publication, according to his talk at the Sixth Floor Muse, and he accepts what he says in the book as fact.

Even at the Sixth Floor show and tell, he describes the wound he saw "fist sized" and places it behind the right ear.

What's the argument?

Bill Kelly

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/

My argument's not with you, but with those who'd claim Hill has changed his recollection of the wound to fit the official story, when there's no evidence this is true.

There are those among us who'd like to believe Hill's earliest statements suggest there was a wound on the far back of the head in the occipital region, and that Hill has obviously been convinced to change his recollection.

That's pretty silly, IMO, seeing as Hill most emphatically disagrees with the single-bullet theory and how his current recollection of the wound location is still a few inches off from where it is shown in the autopsy photos

Hill is a most interesting person. Although he doesn't remember hearing a second shot, he doesn't believe in the SBT and that the first shot hit JFK in back, second shot hit Connally and the third shot JFK in the head. He doesn't believe this to be that controversial as he notes others, like Nellie Connally, also hold this view. They still attribute the three shots to the Sixth Floor Sniper, who the believe to be Oswald.

Nor does Hill consider the consequences of his consistant description of the rear head wound being the size of a fist, which is indicative of an exit wound. In the book he is very definitive about the back of the head and the size of the fist, and now has added "behind the ear," but for the most part, his descriptions remain pretty much the same as far as I can tell.

And like Lisa McCubbin said on the show, when given the choice between what researchers say - and by extension the Warren Commission and documented sources - and what these guys say, they were there, so the reasonable person must go with the witness, even though we know that many witnesses are wrong and do lie.

In the course of his Sixth Floor/CSPAN2 appearance, Hill also recalled how he stayed with Jackie for a year before returning to the White House Detail and being assigned to work LBJ's ranch. But when LBJ saw him, he freaked, and ordered him out of there, saying Hill was a Kennedy loyalist, and someone he couldn't trust, like he trusted Orrin Bartlett and had him personally assigned to AF1. But after LBJ cooled down, and Hill's superior explained the situation to LBJ, Hill stayed on.

Blaine on the other hand, says on the book's web site, but not in the book, that "LBJ wasn't JFK," and some of his idioscrencies - like pissing on the agents legs and saying, "That's my perogative," led him to IBM, following another LBJ staffer who also found LBJ to be somewhat bizarre (See: Jack Hight oral history at LBJ Library on line).

BK

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2010/11/col-frank-m-brandstetter.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Subject: The Kennedy Detail

Date: 12/13/2010 3:06:23 AM Eastern Standard Time

From: David Von Pein

To: Gary Mack

Hi Gary,

I just finished watching an encore presentation on C-Span2 of the program you hosted at The Sixth Floor Museum featuring Gerald Blaine, Clint Hill, and Lisa McCubbin.

And I just wanted to drop you this note to say how much I enjoyed the program. I wish it could have lasted another hour.

One of the best parts of the interview was when you destroyed the longstanding myth about the "open windows", with Mr. Blaine and Mr. Hill saying that there were no strict policies in place in 1963 that would have allowed the Secret Service to have seen to it that every last window was closed in Dallas on November 22nd. It just was not possible. And I'm glad you asked them that question (among other good ones too).

Thank you. And Happy Holidays.

David Von Pein

==================================================

Subject: RE: The Kennedy Detail

Date: 12/13/2010 5:16:18 PM Eastern Standard Time

From: Gary Mack

To: David Von Pein

Thanks very much, Dave, your thoughts are appreciated. My favorite was the limo speed and the turn, but the window story was also near the top. I tried to answer the questions that researchers wanted that were not either in the book or on the [Discovery Channel] TV show.

Gary

==================================================

The one-hour program from The Sixth Floor Museum is now available to watch online:

The%2BKennedy%2BDetail%2B6th%2BFloor%2BMuseum%2BProgram.jpg

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I enjoyed the program, there was one spot that kinda shocked me, and one that kinda disappointed me. When trying to goad Hill into talking about the shooting, Gary opened with "You heard three shots". Now, why would he do this? Was he trying to skip over the (bad for the single-assassin conclusion) fact that Hill famously only heard two shots, or did he simply forget as much? That was the CT in me. The LN in me was also annoyed a bit. As Bill has discussed, when Hill first described the wound above the ear, he shaded it slightly to the back of the ear, an inch or two in back of where it is on the autopsy photos. Now, Gary had to know this. So why didn't he just ask Hill, point blank, if Hill was aware that for years people have taken his earliest descriptions of the wound to mean the far back of the head, and that even the location he'd just pointed out was a bit behind the location of the wound on the autopsy photos. He could then have followed up and found out if Hill had ever looked at the photos or was he just relying on memory, etc. I mean, to me, that was one of the elephants in the room, that could have been cleared up.

Still, even so, I thought Gary did a fine job. I've listened to five or six of these Blaine/Hill interviews now, and Mack was the only one to ask Hill about the single-bullet theory, and whether or not he realized this put him at odds with the findings of the Warren Commission. While he could have asked a follow-up--something along the lines of "Do you realize that many people have studied the case since those days and come to the conclusion that, without one of the shots striking both Kennedy and Connally, one would have to conclude there was more than one shooter?" OR "While you base your conclusion of three shots three hits on the statements of Sam Kinney, are you aware that Sam initially said no such thing, and claimed instead that he couldn't even remember which of the last two shots struck the President?" these might have proved upsetting to the already paid his dues Hill.

Clint Hill(11-20-10 interview of Hill and Gerald Blaine by Gary Mack at the Sixth Floor Museum, broadcast on CSPAN2, 12-12-10) (When Mack offers "You heard three shots.") "The three shots all came from the same location." (When Mack asks if the three shots were evenly spaced) "I didn't hear the second shot, so I only heard two shots. The first shot came from my right rear. And I was looking to the left of the grassy area on the left hand side of Elm Street when I heard the shot. My vision took me to the right toward that shot. In so doing my eyes went across the back of the President's car. I saw him grab at his throat and he started to lurch to his left. He didn't move too far but he was trying to go to his left. I knew something was wrong. So I jumped off the car and started running to the President's car, trying to get there in time to get on top and cover--what we try to do is cover and evacuate. I was trying to get there to cover up so nobody would depart further damage to the President or Mrs. Kennedy. About the time I got to the car, just before I got there, the third shot--that I heard, and I felt--hit the President in the head just above the right ear, right up in here (he places his hand just above his right ear, with some of his fingers to the back of the his ear), and blood and brain matter were spewing all over the place, including on me. About that time Mrs. Kennedy came out of her seat out onto the trunk of the car. She was trying to retrieve something that had come off the President's head and went to the right rear. I slipped at first while trying to get onto the car 'cause Bill Greer the driver accelerated the car. I gained my footing again, got up on the car, and helped her get back in the seat. When I did that the President fell over to his left onto her lap and I could see the upper right portion of his head (he again places his hand above his right ear with the first few fingers to the back of the ear) had a large hole about the size of my palm. It looked like somebody had taken a scoop and removed brain matter and just thrown it around the car--blood and brain matter and bone particles all around the car. His eyes were fixed. I was quite sure it was a fatal wound." (When Mack points out to him that the scenario Hill has been pushing in his recent interviews entails three shots and three hits) "That is correct." (When Mack points out that this puts Hill at odds with the conclusions of the Warren Commission) "I recognize that. But the two of us believe that the second shot hit Governor Connally. The other person who said that, Nellie Connally, was sitting right beside him when he was hit. So I think I'm in pretty good company in believing that the second shot hit the Governor and that the third shot was the fatal wound to the President."

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...