Proof of Motorcade Stopping?

[Thomas Graves]

I'll say it straight out.

I do not know if Paul Trejo is a xxxx or not.

I do know that--absent reasons due to cognitive impairment--he displays characteristics consistent with intellectual dishonesty as defined in the dictionary:

1. Intellectual dishonesty is a failure to apply standards of rational evaluation that one is aware of, usually in a self-serving fashion.

​That is different than calling someone a xxxx.

Greg,

It certainly is intellectual dishonesty for a person to refuse to admit having made a factual or conceptual error when it's pointed out to him, but to instead rephrase it slightly and keep right on saying it, or to "go silent" on it for a few of months and resurrect it later, slightly rephrased.

IMHO that's what I think Word Twister does all to often.

--Tommy

Edited February 19, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Mady]

Thomas, your ranting's are a sign of cognitive dissonance.

> no photographs were altered that I know of. AS MATTER OF FACT : every photograph supports the model I presented

> films were altered : AS A MATTER OF FACT : films also support the model I presented.

> OSWALD was on the steps and can be seen in the Hughes film as well as Altgens #6, as stated in FRITZ'S notes.

> film clips of LOVELADY were staged on a later date specifically to create (disinformation) evidence of him in a plaid shirt

<> LOVELADY claimed to have worn a red and white vertically stripped short sleeved shirt, this evidence was accepted and unquestioned as being true by the FBI, the WC and the news media. LOVELADY utterly failed to recognizably identify himself in Altgens #6 at the specific request of SPECTRE. But "unbiased" researchers since, somehow can justify rejecting this evidence for some vague reasons. This is cognitive dissonance.

> limo began slowing down around Z-300 and then slowed almost to a stop or momentarily halted to allow HILL to board the limo, before GREER accelerated out of DP

> 1st rifle shot heard occurred at Z-313

Proofs for all of these points are covered in other threads.

Researchers have been convinced (programmed) that the assassination mystery can't be solved, this is a delusion.

Edited February 19, 2015 by Robert Mady

[Greg Burnham]

Proofs for all of these points are covered in other threads.

Researchers have been convinced (programmed) that the assassination mystery can't be solved, this is a delusion.

The so-called "assassination mystery" does not exist and it never has.

[Robert Mady]

Paul T., I appreciate your posts.

I stated, that I know little to nothing about WALKER, so I appreciate all that you have offered in the way of information.

My steadfast perspective on the state involvement in killing KENNEDY stems from my understanding of how they murdered KENNEDY and how the evidence was manipulated to support their fiction, the witness testimonies verses the government testimonies and the stark difference between the two as well as countless other significant pieces of evidence. There is no longer an illusion of mystery, I have no doubt what occurred on 11/22/1963 and this knowledge frees me of entanglements that seem to bind the researcher to illusion.

The proofs of how the assassination occurred are posted in numerous threads.

My fundamental belief about OSWALD was of him being a intelligence asset / pawn. Disinformation was planted to make him into something he was not, evidence OSWALD shot at WALKER to me is nothing more than confirmation of a disinformation campaign. OSWALD is not part of the plot, he was associated with intelligence assets, but none of those assets were involved in plot.

OSWALD is a waste of our time as is WALKER - IMO

[Paul Trejo]

Trejo,

Is it true that you never mention the fact that Walker didn't verifiably claim until after the assassination that right after someone had taken a shot at him, he somehow knew that it was Oswald?

--Tommy

Yes, Tommy, it's true.

The personal papers of Edwin WALKER never claim that Walker knew his assailant was Lee Harvey OSWALD until the following Sunday -- when he claims somebody in an official capacity in Dallas personally told him.

Here is only one of many examples in WALKER's personal papers -- this is his letter to Senator Frank Church in 1975.

http://www.pet880.com/images/19750623_EAW_to_Frank_Church.pdf

The term that WALKER uses is, "within days." The corresponds to the findings of Dick Russell (TMWKTM, 1992) when he interviewed Mr. and Mrs. Igor Voshinin, who said that on Easter Sunday 1963 (four days after the WALKER shooting) George De Mohrenschildt told them that he strongly suspected OSWALD of the shooting, since he and Jeanne had found a sniper's rifle at the OSWALD residence, and OSWALD didn't deny it, but appeared to be guilty.

Mrs. Voshinin (says Russell) called the FBI immediately after George left, supplying the FBI with OSWALD's name.

If (and only if) that account is true and correct, then I presume that the FBI (or somebody affiliated) called Edwin WALKER to warn him of this. WALKER never named the person who told him.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 19, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

Paul T., I appreciate your posts.

I stated, that I know little to nothing about WALKER, so I appreciate all that you have offered in the way of information.

My steadfast perspective on the state involvement in killing KENNEDY stems from my understanding of how they murdered KENNEDY and how the evidence was manipulated to support their fiction, the witness testimonies verses the government testimonies and the stark difference between the two as well as countless other significant pieces of evidence. There is no longer an illusion of mystery, I have no doubt what occurred on 11/22/1963 and this knowledge frees me of entanglements that seem to bind the researcher to illusion.

The proofs of how the assassination occurred are posted in numerous threads.

My fundamental belief about OSWALD was of him being a intelligence asset / pawn. Disinformation was planted to make him into something he was not, evidence OSWALD shot at WALKER to me is nothing more than confirmation of a disinformation campaign. OSWALD is not part of the plot, he was associated with intelligence assets, but none of those assets were involved in plot. OSWALD is a waste of our time as is WALKER - IMO

OK, Bob, fair enough. The main differences between your theory and mine are these:

(1) OSWALD did believe he was a CIA pawn -- but actually that was a Fake CIA (Banister, Shaw, Ferrie, Crisman, Martin), just as his FPCC in NOLA was a Fake FPCC.

(2) The disinformation about OSWALD was that he was a Communist, specifically of the FPCC variety.

(3) The history of OSWALD shooting at WALKER is true -- not invented. Evidence abounds. To deny this is to imagine that people who hated WALKER (De Mohrenschildt, Paine, Schmidt) were somehow convinced to lie to support WALKER -- which makes no sense.

(4) WALKER is the key to the JFK murder, because OSWALD was specifically WALKER's Patsy. IMHO, Guy Banister & Co. only framed OSWALD at the request of Edwin WALKER.

(5) The people who wanted JFK dead also wanted the USA to invade Cuba (and to believe that OSWALD was Communist).

(6) The people who said OSWALD was a "Lone Nut" did not kill JFK -- but covered up the truth for National Security reasons.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 19, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

Proofs for all of these points are covered in other threads.

Researchers have been convinced (programmed) that the assassination mystery can't be solved, this is a delusion.

The so-called "assassination mystery" does not exist and it never has.

Oh, really, Greg? Then what's YOUR theory of the JFK assassination?

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

[Greg Burnham]

I have no "theory" of the assassination.

JFK was, in fact--not in theory--killed as the result of a conspiracy. That those investigating the crime, including the FBI, the Secret Service and members of the Warren Commission and their staff

were aware that JFK was not the victim of a lone assassin indicates that there was a concerted effort to obstruct justice. No matter the "reason" one offers to justify or explain this attempt to cover-

up the crime, it remains an indication of complicity on the part of those involved in that obstruction. In American jurisprudence, the crime of alteration or destruction of evidence for the purpose of

obstructing justice is tantamount to guilt for the original crime being investigated.

[Robert Mady]

Paul T., if OSWALD was in custody by 12pm the night of the WALKER shooting, can you post the documents from the DPD verifying he was brought in for questioning or arrested? Certainly if there was any evidentiary value in WALKERS claims the CHURCH committee would have uncovered this evidence as would have the WC.

Can you provide who within the DPD informed WALKER that OSWALD was a suspect, WALKER seems to have neglected to specify a name of the person who told him?

Couldn't WALKER have made up the information within the letter to CHURCH?

IF OSWALD was so radical that he purchased a rifle and then took a shot at WALKER, what was an aristocratic gentleman like De Mohenshildt doing associating with OSWALD as well as visiting him at his house? Did De Morenshildt break off all contact with OSWALD after discovering OSWALD was a nut or did he continue on with the relationship as if nothing happened? Didn't De Morehnshildt proclaim OSWALD to be innocent? Doug Horne claimed De Morehnshildt wrote multiple letters to president LBJ on behalf of OSWALD, what does this mean?

Actions speak louder than disinformation.

Edited February 19, 2015 by Robert Mady

[Greg Burnham]

And, as is so often the case, Paul Trejo has succeeded in derailing yet another thread's topic by steering it once again to his "theory" involving General Walker.

This topic was about Proof of the Motorcade Stopping. It was not about General Walker. Yet Paul would have us believe that Walker changed the motorcade

route or gave the order to have it changed, which then resulted in what exactly?

Do you see how this works, yet, Robert?

Perhaps my earlier sarcastic posting of the "fake article" will make more sense in this context. I saw the thread coming apart as soon as he opened his mouth.

The only way that Walker's relevance to this thread's original topic could be argued would be the posting of EVIDENCE in support of such a claim. If the evidence

doesn't exist, then neither does the relevance.

Edited February 19, 2015 by Greg Burnham

[Paul Trejo]

Paul T., if OSWALD was in custody by 12pm the night of the WALKER shooting, can you post the documents from the DPD verifying he was brought in for questioning or arrested? Certainly if there was any evidentiary value in WALKERS claims the CHURCH committee would have uncovered this evidence as would have the WC.

Can you provide who within the DPD informed WALKER that OSWALD was a suspect, WALKER seems to have neglected to specify a name of the person who told him?

Couldn't WALKER have made up the information within the letter to CHURCH?

IF OSWALD was so radical that he purchased a rifle and then took a shot at WALKER, what was an aristocratic gentleman like De Mohenshildt doing associating with OSWALD as well as visiting him at his house? Did De Morenshildt break off all contact with OSWALD after discovering OSWALD was a nut or did he continue on with the relationship as if nothing happened? Didn't De Morehnshildt proclaim OSWALD to be innocent? Doug Horne claimed De Morehnshildt wrote multiple letters to president LBJ on behalf of OSWALD, what does this mean?

Actions speak louder than disinformation.

Well, Bob, you got me there. There are no known (revealed) documents from the DPD to confirm WALKER's oft-stated claim that the DPD had Lee Harvey OSWALD in custody by midnight of 10 April 1963.

As for the Church Committee, they did not reply to Edwin WALKER's request -- even out of courtesy. WALKER had by 1975 been considered merely a "nut case," and actually the HSCA neglected to call WALKER as a witness -- it's biggest mistake, IMHO.

Now, IMHO, this doesn't prove that WALKER really was a "nut case," but it only proves that those trying to solve the JFK murder had already lost the scent of the key players of the right-wing in 1963 -- no sense of American History.

There is no way I know to even guess at the name of the person who allegedly warned WALKER on Easter Sunday 1963 that OSWALD had been his shooter. Jesse Curry and the DPD offices consistently denied that they ever had OSWALD in custody that night, or that OSWALD was ever a suspect. WALKER openly accused Curry of conspiring with the FBI to conceal the truth, e.g. in this December, 1981 letter in his personal papers:

http://www.pet880.com/images/19811212_Walker_on_JFK_3.JPG

You are correct, Bob, that it is at least *possible* that WALKER made up the information in his letter to CHURCH. Yet WALKER repeated that same story, insisting it was true, from the night of JFK's murder to the end of his life.

As for George De Mohrenschildt, he was no gentleman, but an opportunist. He was born into aristocracy, but the Communists took his family's Estate in Russia, leaving them with nothing except their education. George had to scratch and claw his way back up. Evidently the CIA gave George an oil-exploration contract in Haiti, if he would "babysit" OSWALD, to ensure that OSWALD wasn't working for the USSR.

George was fully satisfied that OSWALD remained a loyal Marine, but George could not restrain himself or his friends from meddling in OSWALD's life -- with his marriage, his jobs, even his children.

George De Mohrenschildt broke off all contact with OSWALD after discovering that OSWALD shot at WALKER. Period. He made a joke about it that night, but then he and Jeanne left the OSWALD apartment, never to see them again.

To the end of his days, George De Mohrenschildt insisted that OSWALD was innocent of killing JFK. He told this to the Warren Commission, and repeated this in his statement to the HSCA (I'm a Patsy!). George knew WALKER did it, IMHO.

Finally -- this remains relevant to the theme of this thread -- did the JFK motorcade stop at the Grassy Knoll -- because I claim it at least slowed down, since the DPD, working for Edwin WALKER, lay in wait for JFK behind that picket fence.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 21, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Greg Burnham]

Finally -- this remains relevant to the theme of this thread -- did the JFK motorcade stop at the Grassy Knoll -- because I claim it at least slowed down, since the DPD, working for Edwin WALKER, lay in wait for JFK behind that picket fence.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

You have provided no evidence that the DPD worked for Walker. Lack of evidence equates to lack of relevance at this juncture.

[Robert Mady]

Paul T., witnesses did not claim shots came from behind the picket fence, they claimed the shots came from the monument area, you are repeating disinformation imbedded in conspiracy dogma that has no significant basis within testimonial evidence.

A theory also falls short when using the WC/R and conspiracy theories that proclaim the fatal head wound was the last shot fired or the third shot fired, which translates to the SSA failed to react to two shots then GREER slowed or stopped the limo for the third shot, no witnesses claimed this, they claimed the limo came to a halt after the first shot, no witness reacted to any gunfire until the fatal head wound, how did WALKER convince every witness in DP to not react to gunfire? Do you not get it, your scenario can not work. Plus it means WALKER talked GREER into stopping the limo and got KELLERMAN and the rest of the SSA to stand down.

And no witness in DP including JACKIE claimed the SSA failed to react, why is this???

Why did GREER not stop before the first shot fired or before the second? Why did he wait until the rifle shot at Z-313 to slow or stop the limo?

Edited February 19, 2015 by Robert Mady

[Thomas Graves]

Thomas, your ranting's are a sign of cognitive dissonance.

> no photographs were altered that I know of. AS MATTER OF FACT : every photograph supports the model I presented

> films were altered : AS A MATTER OF FACT : films also support the model I presented.

> OSWALD was on the steps and can be seen in the Hughes film as well as Altgens #6, as stated in FRITZ'S notes.

> film clips of LOVELADY were staged on a later date specifically to create (disinformation) evidence of him in a plaid shirt

<> LOVELADY claimed to have worn a red and white vertically stripped short sleeved shirt, this evidence was accepted and unquestioned as being true by the FBI, the WC and the news media. LOVELADY utterly failed to recognizably identify himself in Altgens #6 at the specific request of SPECTRE. But "unbiased" researchers since, somehow can justify rejecting this evidence for some vague reasons. This is cognitive dissonance.

> limo began slowing down around Z-300 and then slowed almost to a stop or momentarily halted to allow HILL to board the limo, before GREER accelerated out of DP

> 1st rifle shot heard occurred at Z-313

Proofs for all of these points are covered in other threads.

Researchers have been convinced (programmed) that the assassination mystery can't be solved, this is a delusion.

Exactly what I'm talking about, Bobby.

Your words in red:

"Film clips of Lovelady [standing in close proximity to co-workers Bonnie Ray Williams and Danny Arce in front of a building that sure looks like the TSBD in a "scene" that sure looks realistic for the situation that must have existed a few minutes after the assassination, and - oh yeah - filmed by two amateur photographers wouldn't you know; and yet another clip filmed by a third photographer a couple hours later of someone who sure looks like Lovelady wearing the same gosh darn plaid shirt but now sitting in a chair inside what sure looks like the police department as someone who sure looks like Oswald is taken past him] were staged on a later date specifically to create (disinformation) evidence of him in a plaid shirt."

Why did the bad guys go to all that trouble, Bobby? I mean, they must have had to cordon off the TSBD at your "later date" to keep away all the nosy gawkers and lookie loos (or did they build a fake building that looked just like the TSBD, and if so where did they do that-- Area 51?) and killed all of those "extras" including two guys who were dead (pardon the pun) ringers for Bonnie Ray Williams and Danny Arce, you know to keep 'em from talking about it, just to make it look like Billy Lovelady had worn his red and black and grey plaid shirt on 11/22/63. Why was it so dog gone dangerous to the bad guys that Billy Baby had worn his vertically striped shirt that day, instead, as you claim? Because he might be confused with Doorman, Howdy Doody, or Prayer Man?

Seriously now, Bobby. Your saying that I (or anyone else) am suffering from "cognitive dissonance" (did you pick up that phrase from a psychiatrist?) is like The Pot Calling The Kettle "Black." Of course another saying that comes to mind is, "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones."

It's time for you to take a long, hard look at yourself in the mirror, Bobby Boy.

--Tommy

Edited February 19, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Paul Trejo]

Paul T., witnesses did not claim shots came from behind the picket fence, they claimed the shots came from the monument area, you are repeating disinformation imbedded in conspiracy dogma that has no significant basis within testimonial evidence.

A theory also falls short when using the WC/R and conspiracy theories that proclaim the fatal head wound was the last shot fired or the third shot fired, which translates to the SSA failed to react to two shots then GREER slowed or stopped the limo for the third shot, no witnesses claimed this, they claimed the limo came to a halt after the first shot, no witness reacted to any gunfire until the fatal head wound, how did WALKER convince every witness in DP to not react to gunfire? Do you not get it, your scenario can not work. Plus it means WALKER talked GREER into stopping the limo and got KELLERMAN and the rest of the SSA to stand down.

And no witness in DP including JACKIE claimed the SSA failed to react, why is this???

Why did GREER not stop before the first shot fired or before the second? Why did he wait until the rifle shot at Z-313 to slow or stop the limo?

Bob, have you not seen Mark Lane's 1964 film, "Rush to Judgment"????

That film shows several eye-witnesses pointing behind the picket fence -- and insisting that they heard shots from there, and even saw puffs of smoke coming from there. Did you not see that film? I strongly urge you to rent that film and watch the entire thing. It is one of the best criticisms of the Warren Report ever produced.

Also, Bob, the Zapruder film seems to clearly show that the fatal head-shot was the final shot. Do you think the Zapruder film was tampered with beyond all recognition??

Do you have a theory of the shots, Bob? How many do you count? I happen to count seven.

In any case -- you misunderstand my position; in no way did I ever imply that WALKER planned every shot of the JFK murder -- and every move.

WALKER, in my theory, planned the shooters in Dealey Plaza -- three Teams -- with Walkie-talkies and an umbrella man for a visual coordination signal.

WALKER had people in the DPD on his side -- but also shooters from NOLA among radical Cuban Exiles, bitter over the Bay of Pigs.

WALKER did not have to give individual orders for the JFK limo to slow down. My opinion still remains -- until actual evidence is shown -- that the JFK limo driver slowed down *in response to the limo in front of him, driven by DPD Chief Jesse Curry, which deliberately slowed down.*

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 19, 2015 by Paul Trejo