Proof of Motorcade Stopping?

[Paul Trejo]

Paul, lets let it go.

It was not the truth was killed, the fact is the truth was never told at any point in any broadcast.

I suggest you listen to the ABC, NBC and CBS news broadcasts from when the news took over the airwaves till about 3:00 and list and analyze the disinformation broadcast by each network, then compare what each network reported and when they reported it, maybe you will be surprised to see the consistency of the disinformation broadcast as well as the timing of disinformation disseminated.

Thanks for the discussion.

Bob Mady

Well, OK Bob, I'll drop this line -- yet I still think you underestimate the News Sources for ABC, NBC and CBS -- if their own reporters are slow to get facts, they all rely on CENTRAL SOURCES of News -- often the AP or the UPI -- or the Federal Government itself. The "coordination" of news between ABC, NBC and CBS during a crisis simply doesn't puzzle me.

Thanks,

--Paul

[Paul Brancato]

How exactly did the news media get the national security message to suppress all evidence contradicting the lone nut scenario?

[Greg Burnham]

How exactly did the news media get the national security message to suppress all evidence contradicting the lone nut scenario?

Obviously, the Editors-in-Chief for the Washington Post, New York Times, and Boston Globe; as well as, Senior White House Correspondents from NBC, ABC, and CBS were all "Friends of Walker" and followed is command.

[B. A. Copeland]

How exactly did the news media get the national security message to suppress all evidence contradicting the lone nut scenario?

Obviously, the Editors-in-Chief for the Washington Post, New York Times, and Boston Globe; as well as, Senior White House Correspondents from NBC, ABC, and CBS were all "Friends of Walker" and followed is command.

Not to mention they are all embedded in Intelligence apparatus of the US lol...

[Paul Trejo]

How exactly did the news media get the national security message to suppress all evidence contradicting the lone nut scenario?

Obviously, the Editors-in-Chief for the Washington Post, New York Times, and Boston Globe; as well as, Senior White House Correspondents from NBC, ABC, and CBS were all "Friends of Walker" and followed is command.

Not to mention they are all embedded in Intelligence apparatus of the US lol...

Nope. The "Lone Nut" Cover-up was actually the opposite of what Edwin WALKER promoted.

Edwin WALKER directly told the WC attorneys that the "Lone Nut" scenario was all wrong -- and that OSWALD was a Communist.

The Mass Media did what they normally do in a national crisis -- simply print what the US Government and the FBI tells them to print -- after all -- it's for National Security.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 24, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Robert Mady]

Paul T., FYI

on thread concerning Jim Marrs, Mr. Caddy has posted a video of Jim Marrs presentation, post #14, at about 30 minutes into this Marrs states he talked with WALKER fall of 1964 and WALKER claimed he was told the rifle used in the attack on him was a 30-6 according to the police.

Marrs: "WALKER did not believe OSWALD had taken a shot at him"

Quote from WALKER told to Marrs - WALKER: "look, OSWALD and RUBY knew each other"

Edited February 26, 2015 by Robert Mady

[Greg Burnham]

Thanks for that post, Bob.

That's good research, sourced properly, and strong evidence to refute Paul Trejo's assertions.

I'm pointing this out before it happens as it has been long established by his track record:

This evidence will be dismissed out of hand by Paul Trejo. He will find something wrong with it.

He will not need to prove his criticism of this evidence because the fact that it does not support

his claim is good enough for him to ignore it.

"Special Pleading" never came in so handy.

[Paul Trejo]

Paul T., FYI

on thread concerning Jim Marrs, Mr. Caddy has posted a video of Jim Marrs presentation, post #14, at about 30 minutes into this Marrs states he talked with WALKER fall of 1964 and WALKER claimed he was told the rifle used in the attack on him was a 30-6 according to the police.

Marrs: "WALKER did not believe OSWALD had taken a shot at him"

Quote from WALKER told to Marrs - WALKER: "look, OSWALD and RUBY knew each other"

Well, Bob, I think Jim Marrs is jumping to a conclusion. Ex-General WALKER always held that OSWALD was one of *two* people who shot at him on 10 April 1963.

WALKER repeated this many times in his personal papers. Here's one example -- scroll down to the final paragraph to see WALKER's outspoken, 1967 opinion about Lee Harvey OSWALD:

http://www.pet880.com/images/19670404_EAW_Oswald_released.pdf

Furthermore, even to the Warren Commission Edwin WALKER insisted that OSWALD and RUBY knew each other. This became his obsession for awhile.

Still, ever since April 1963, and for the rest of his life, WALKER worried that his second "shooter" was still at large, and he wondered who it might have been.

At one point he thought that Michael PAINE might have been his second shooter. At another point he worried that Jack RUBY might have been his second shooter.

Yet it is an overstatement on the part of Jim Marrs to conclude that "WALKER did not believe that OSWALD shot at him."

Jim Marrs should have said, "WALKER did not believe that OSWALD alone shot at him." It was a team effort, according to Edwin WALKER. Here's another example from his personal papers -- his 1975 letter to Senator Frank Church:

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

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 26, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Robert Mady]

Paul T. anything may be possible, but in reading much of Jim Marrs works and listening to him I would personally consider him to be a master journalist who has been impeccable when it comes to fairly gathering evidence. I don't necessarily agree with his analysis or conclusions but when he claims WALKER told him to his face, I will take Marrs word for it. Maybe I am playing the fool, but until I see major flaws in Marrs work I will take what he says as evidence of value.

Is it possible to debunk Marrs statement, is it possible to post the authentic forensic 1964 police report from WALKER shooting, was it a MC 6.5 or a 30:6 bullet?

Edited February 26, 2015 by Robert Mady

[Paul Trejo]

Paul T. anything may be possible, but in reading much of Jim Marrs works and listening to him I would personally consider him to be a master journalist who has been impeccable when it comes to fairly gathering evidence. I don't necessarily agree with his analysis or conclusions but when he claims WALKER told him to his face, I will take Marrs word for it. Maybe I am playing the fool, but until I see major flaws in Marrs work I will take what he says as evidence of value.

Is it possible to debunk Marrs statement, is it possible to post the authentic forensic 1964 police report from WALKER shooting, was it a MC 6.5 or a .30-06 bullet?

Just to be clear, Bob, I'm not suggesting that OSWALD used his own MC 6.5 to shoot at WALKER. It might have been somebody ELSE's rifle. Also, insofar as OSWALD was only *one* of *two* "shooters" that night, it is just as possible that the *other* person (whoever it was) was the real shooter, and OSWALD was only that person's "accomplice." (Or, OSWALD, having a choice, simply used the better rifle.)

Using my approach of a "Unified Field Theory" of the JFK murder, in which I try to accommodate as much first-person data as possible -- let us stipulate that the bullet really *was* from a Mauser .30-06 -- and yet Marina (and the De Mohrenschildt's and V. Schmidt) told the truth about OSWALD's confession.

The reasonable solution is that OSWALD lied to Marina about being alone, about burying his rifle, and about taking the bus. Instead, OSWALD had (at least) one accomplice, used somebody ELSE's rifle, and rode in a car.

Again -- WALKER himself is the source of my position -- he says again and again that OSWALD was *one of two* shooters on 10 April 1963.

I'm not saying Jim Marrs is 100% wrong -- I'm saying that he missed this nuance in WALKER's story -- that WALKER was certain that *two* people shot at him -- and not "a lonely loner," to use WALKER's own words.

Did you read the words I posted from WALKER's own typewriter, Bob?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 27, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Robert Mady]

Yes Paul I read it.

Paul if we were splitting hairs concerning the exact content of Marrs words I would agree with you, but if WALKER had told Marrs that two men were there and OSWALD was one of them even though he didn't pull the trigger I would think it disingenuous of Marrs to have made that statement. Marrs has too much credibility that would be compromised telling half-truths concerning WALKER or OSWALD.

I can see your logic Paul and I can see that WALKER needs to be examined to see how he played into the cover-up or conspiracy.

Isn't it possible that if the DPD knew about OSWALD in their city that he might have been a suspect because of his known history, is it possible that he was picked up as a routine follow-up to any possible shooter? That OSWALD was released because there was no evidence he was involved or even that he had a solid alibi?

I think you are looking at shenanigans by either the conspirators to throw WALKER out front as a diversion or no-body by the name of WALKER desiring to again share the stage, hey look anyone, OSWALD shot at me too...really he did.

Edited February 26, 2015 by Robert Mady

[Paul Trejo]

Yes Paul I read it.

Paul if we were splitting hairs concerning the exact content of Marrs words I would agree with you, but if WALKER had told Marrs that two men were there and OSWALD was one of them even though he didn't pull the trigger I would think it disingenuous of Marrs to have made that statement. Marrs has too much credibility that would be compromised telling half-truths concerning WALKER or OSWALD.

I can see your logic Paul and I can see that WALKER needs to be examined to see how he played into the cover-up or conspiracy.

Isn't it possible that if the DPD knew about OSWALD in their city that he might have been a suspect because of his known history, is it possible that he was picked up as a routine follow-up to any possible shooter? That OSWALD was released because there was no evidence he was involved or even that he had a solid alibi?

I think you are looking at shenanigans by either the conspirators to throw WALKER out front as a diversion or no-body by the name of WALKER desiring to again share the stage, hey look anyone, OSWALD shot at me too...really he did.

Well, Bob, I consider this a useful discussion.

(1) FIRST ISSUE: If (and only if) Jim Marrs is extremely reliable, and never missed any nuance of any kind, then we have an interesting problem:

(1.1) WALKER told Jim Marrs that OSWALD did *not* shoot at him; and

(1.2) WALKER told many others that OSWALD *did* shoot at him.

(1.3) It comes down to this -- either WALKER changed his story, or Jim Marrs misunderstood WALKER. Well, we know that WALKER changed his story on other occasions -- even inside his own personal papers. WALKER changes the title of the person who told him "a few days later" that OSWALD had been his shooter, for example.

(2) SECOND ISSUE: It has been common sense in the past 50 years to say that WALKER's "April shooting" scenario was solely and only invented to make Lee Harvey OSWALD look like a "bad guy."

(2.1) I completely disagree with that scenario. Ex-General WALKER wanted the world to take OSWALD as a "Communist." The "Lone Nut" scenario painted by Hoover, the FBI and the Warren Commission, was completely *opposed* to the views of Ex-General WALKER.

(2.2) The psychological reason (IMHO) that JFK was murdered was so that WALKER could have revenge based on his personal paranoia that RFK was trying to kill him.

(2.3) Lee Harvey OSWALD was the tool that RFK was using to try to kill WALKER, as WALKER repeatedly said in his personal papers (and to the Deutsche Nationalzeitung the morning after the JFK murder).

(2.4) I find it unlikely that OSWALD would have been picked up by the DPD *without any DPD record of it*. Even if OSWALD had been picked up (as you and WALKER suspect) how could he be released without any booking? Yet Jesse Curry continually told WALKER that there was no evidence whatsoever that OSWALD was ever picked up by the DPD.

(2.5) What actually happened -- according to Dick Russell (TMWKTM, 1993) -- was that George and Jeanne De Mohrenschildt found out about OSWALD's role in the shooting, and George told Mr. and Mrs. Igor Voshinin on Easter Sunday 1963, and then Mrs. Voshinin immediately called the FBI and told them.

(2.6) I surmise from this that somebody in the FBI (or close to the FBI) quickly called Ex-General WALKER out of respect for him, to warn him about OSWALD.

(2.7) WALKER would have been astounded and outraged that given this report, that the DPD refused to arrest OSWALD and press charges. This bothered WALKER for the rest of his life. Here is the last article he ever wrote on the topic, just months before he died:

http://www.pet880.com/images/19920119_EAW_Oswald_arrested.pdf

(2.8) Why didn't the FBI or DPD act on Mrs. Voshinin's information? I don't know. It seems to me that they should have. It led WALKER to presume that RFK was controlling things in order to murder WALKER.

(3.0) THIRD ISSUE: In no way am I using WALKER as a distraction or diversion. In no way am I regarding WALKER as a "proof" that OSWALD was a "lone nut."

(3.1) The WALKER shooting is the key to the JFK assassination -- in which OSWALD is innocent -- and WALKER (along with the JBS, the Minutemen and the DPD) is guilty.

(3.2) By dismissing WALKER as a "harmless nut," JFK Researchers have failed to solve the JFK murder for a half-century.

(3.3) Again -- the topic of the JFK Motorcade stopping or slowing-down is IMHO related to WALKER, who led the DPD in the JFK murder precisely at the DPD-controlled Dealey Plaza, with DPD Chief Jesse Curry as the driver of the lead limo in the JFK Motorcade.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 27, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Thomas Graves]

Yes Paul I read it.

Paul if we were splitting hairs concerning the exact content of Marrs words I would agree with you, but if WALKER had told Marrs that two men were there and OSWALD was one of them even though he didn't pull the trigger I would think it disingenuous of Marrs to have made that statement. Marrs has too much credibility that would be compromised telling half-truths concerning WALKER or OSWALD.

I can see your logic Paul and I can see that WALKER needs to be examined to see how he played into the cover-up or conspiracy.

Isn't it possible that if the DPD knew about OSWALD in their city that he might have been a suspect because of his known history, is it possible that he was picked up as a routine follow-up to any possible shooter? That OSWALD was released because there was no evidence he was involved or even that he had a solid alibi?

I think you are looking at shenanigans by either the conspirators to throw WALKER out front as a diversion or no-body by the name of WALKER desiring to again share the stage, hey look anyone, OSWALD shot at me too...really he did.

[...]

The topic of the JFK Motorcade stopping or slowing-down is IMHO related to WALKER, who led the DPD in the JFK murder precisely at the DPD-controlled Dealey Plaza, with DPD Chief Jesse Curry as the driver of the lead limo in the JFK Motorcade.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

How far ahead of JFK's limousine was Curry's car?

How did Curry get Greer to slow down or stop exactly where and when he did?

Had at least one shot been already fired at JFK when Greer slowed down or stopped?

Was Curry in visual contact with Greer? If not, how could Curry "control" Greer as precisely as you seem to think he did?

--Tommy

Edited February 27, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Mark Knight]

Since there have been several references to a .30-06 being used in the Walker shooting, let's get the nomenclature correct.

It's a .30-06, and is spoken as "thirty ought six." It's a .30 caliber rifle cartridge, and it "was introduced to the United States Army in 1906...."

Thus...the "thirty-ought six."

It is correctly written as .30-06.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.30-06_Springfield

So if we're going to talk about the "thirty-ought six," then let's at least get it right. You don't have to be some kind of a "gun nut" to get this right; you just have to be a stickler for accuracy.

I know some here are not.

[Paul Trejo]

Fair enough, Mark. We'll use the correct notation: .30-06

--Paul