Jump to content
The Education Forum

HONEST ANSWERS ABOUT THE MURDER OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY: A NEW LOOK AT THE JFK ASSASSINATION (2021)- 3/19/2021


Recommended Posts

Vince, you mention in your video that Gerald Blaine should prepare himself better with information facts before presenting false claims as he did on national television speaking to interviewer Brian Lamb via the "Q & A" C-Span program.

One that stuck out so starkly it was embarrassing to see and hear was Blaine's condescending rebuke of you Vince for your self-proclaimed expertise. And Blaine went off about how many like you had created myths about the shooting of JFK and how the limo slowed down or even stopped just before and during the head shot.

Blaine cockily claimed the limo did not slow down and never went slower that 11 mph.

Vince, and other members...take a look at the Zapruder film video via my link.

It's only 30 seconds long. Watch the speed of JFK's limo right up to just before JFK is shot in the head. Look at how fast the limo is going by watching the grass area beyond it as it is coming down Elm...then see how this background movement slows to a crawl if not a stop just before the head shot. You call this "not a slow down?"

The limo was certainly not moving at 11 mph or more a second before, during and just after the head shot.

I have seen versions of the Zapruder film that show Greer and Kellerman much more clearly in the limo during the shooting sequence.

In one of these Greer turns "180 degrees" around right as Kennedy slumps down next to Jackie's face and a split second before the head shot. Greer does this full turn to look directly at JFK at the exact same time the limo almost comes to a stop.

The correlation between Greer turning completely around and the limo slowing greatly at the exact same time makes all the sense in the world...because what driver doesn't lift his foot off the accelerator ( or even taps the brakes ) when he or she performs a full 180 turn and is looking behind the car they are driving instead of in front of it?

Greer was "still" looking straight back at JFK when JFK's head exploded. You can even see Greer wince and duck slightly when he sees the gruesome bloody spray hit on JFK.

At that point, Greer finally turns back to look straight ahead and floor the accelerator. But during his 180 degree turn around the limo slows so greatly to some it seemed to stop. Jackie testified how shocked and sickened she was that the driver of the limo slowed the car ( she says stopped ) right before the head shot.

Watch the regular speed Zapruder film from my link below.

Especially between the 17 second thru 20 second mark.

You will see the background grass movement slow almost to a stop. Also, you can see driver Bill Greer's head turned just about 180 degrees backward and looking at JFK when the bloody spray head shot occurs. A split second "later" Greer turns back around to the front and floors it.

After viewing this "real time" Zapruder film video, judge for yourself whether you think Gerald Blaine was more accurate dismissing the limo slowing as a myth, perpetrated by people like VP...or Blaine looking and sounding like a fraud.

The man was in Austin Texas during the JFK event.

 
 
 
Dallas, Texas November 22, 1963. Filmed by Abraham Zapruder.
 

 

 

Edited by Joe Bauer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

6 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

I think that Greer-shot-the-president theory is pure disinformation, just like mortal errors ridiculous story (still highly rated on amazon, unfortunately) of SSA Hickey accidentally shooting JFK.  They're both pure horseshit.  A CIA Mockingbird wet dream.  Meant to distract from real research on the subject as well as distill public opinion with sensationalism.   

Ron B. and others:

I try to be as open-minded and gentle as I can be in JFKA discussions, as the hard details of what actually happened are not nailed down. In addition, there is planted disinformation afoot, and any of us can be fooled on some matters (including me).  

But, after all, we have the Zapruder film and numerous witnesses. I see no indication anyone inside the JFK limo was shooting. Beyond that, who would plan to have someone inside the limo shoot a President in public and get away with it? And no one saw the Secret Service man with the automatic weapon shoot JFK? 

Reasonable people can disagree, and do. But let us be reasonable. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Ron B. and others:

I try to be as open-minded and gentle as I can be in JFKA discussions, as the hard details of what actually happened are not nailed down. In addition, there is planted disinformation afoot, and any of us can be fooled on some matters (including me).  

But, after all, we have the Zapruder film and numerous witnesses. I see no indication anyone inside the JFK limo was shooting. Beyond that, who would plan to have someone inside the limo shoot a President in public and get away with it? And no one saw the Secret Service man with the automatic weapon shoot JFK? 

Reasonable people can disagree, and do. But let us be reasonable. 

 

 

I don't disagree.  Not sure what you mean here but yes Zapruder does not show Greer firing.  Hickey is once again ridiculous.  That's reasonable to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

I don't disagree.  Not sure what you mean here but yes Zapruder does not show Greer firing.  Hickey is once again ridiculous.  That's reasonable to me.

Yes, I mean the Zapruder does not show anyone inside the limo, or a follow-up car, shooting at JFK. No eyewitnesses reported as such, including the Connallys, Jackie etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

I think that Greer-shot-the-president theory is disinformation, just like mortal errors ridiculous story (still highly rated on amazon, unfortunately) of SSA Hickey accidentally shooting JFK.  They're both pure horseshit.  A CIA Mockingbird wet dream.  Meant to distract from real research on the subject as well as distill public opinion with sensationalism.   

I agree, Ron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/11/2021 at 9:46 PM, Greg Doudna said:

Thanks Vince. 

Deb responds:

"I believe info about Ruth’s trip is in Douglass’ “JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters.” The road-trip Ruth took to visit her sister in 9/1963 is common knowledge; I believe it’s a part of Ruth’s WC testimony or HSCA testimony because it pertained to her dropping off Marina, et al, at LHO’s place in LA. Ruth’s sister’s name was Sylvia Hoke & her employment with CIA is a matter of record. I do not recall saying that Ruth visited her sister at CIA headquarters. She may have. But Ruth stayed with her sister in VA, according to Ruth. IOW, Ruth visited her sister who worked at CIA headquarters. Whether or not Ruth traipsed across the seal on the floor of CIA headquarters is unknown. Here is documentation of Ruth’s sisters’ CIA employment.

 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=103906&fbclid=IwAR3u75a7Jr-POgREbYJ7A0Dl1io8DWznFHZsix3O4qc-PhqJxsieGZXadpQ#relPageId=7

 

Ruth’s sisters’ full name was “Sylvia Hyde Hoke.” I don’t know if she is still living. Ruth’s father also had intelligence connections.

 

Ruth still admits to visiting her sister in Sept. 1963. This is from a Village Voice article July 29, 2020. Seems Ruth is still pumping her cover story.

 

170545512_286282426231219_3869490999736720670_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=f79d6e&_nc_eui2=AeECNe6RWf-PkzVRX_khuRldr1hWdU9a3kOvWFZ1T1reQxEWQd-1ZpaB_y-x3HWqMcE&_nc_ohc=4_tLbH_vV_AAX9Le1cO&_nc_ad=z-m&_nc_cid=0&_nc_ht=scontent.xx&tp=6&oh=5233fcee77b1f045cbbe38e9661043f5&oe=609BD91D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/12/2021 at 6:51 PM, Vince Palamara said:

Deb responds:

"I believe info about Ruth’s trip is in Douglass’ “JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters.” The road-trip Ruth took to visit her sister in 9/1963 is common knowledge; I believe it’s a part of Ruth’s WC testimony or HSCA testimony because it pertained to her dropping off Marina, et al, at LHO’s place in LA. Ruth’s sister’s name was Sylvia Hoke & her employment with CIA is a matter of record. I do not recall saying that Ruth visited her sister at CIA headquarters. She may have. But Ruth stayed with her sister in VA, according to Ruth. IOW, Ruth visited her sister who worked at CIA headquarters. Whether or not Ruth traipsed across the seal on the floor of CIA headquarters is unknown. Here is documentation of Ruth’s sisters’ CIA employment.

 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=103906&fbclid=IwAR3u75a7Jr-POgREbYJ7A0Dl1io8DWznFHZsix3O4qc-PhqJxsieGZXadpQ#relPageId=7

 

Ruth’s sisters’ full name was “Sylvia Hyde Hoke.” I don’t know if she is still living. Ruth’s father also had intelligence connections.

 

Ruth still admits to visiting her sister in Sept. 1963. This is from a Village Voice article July 29, 2020. Seems Ruth is still pumping her cover story.

 

170545512_286282426231219_3869490999736720670_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=f79d6e&_nc_eui2=AeECNe6RWf-PkzVRX_khuRldr1hWdU9a3kOvWFZ1T1reQxEWQd-1ZpaB_y-x3HWqMcE&_nc_ohc=4_tLbH_vV_AAX9Le1cO&_nc_ad=z-m&_nc_cid=0&_nc_ht=scontent.xx&tp=6&oh=5233fcee77b1f045cbbe38e9661043f5&oe=609BD91D

Thank you Vince for obtaining this clarification that there is no truth or basis to the claim of knowledge, as quoted and footnoted to Deb Galantine in your book, that Ruth Paine visited CIA headquarters in Washington, D.C.

Here is the full passage with the claim that appears two times in your book without qualification:

"As researcher Deb Galantine wrote to the author:

'Oswald apparently arrived in Mexico City on 9/27/63. But this report [document of Floyd Boring claim of sighting of Oswald in d.c. on 9/27/63] has him in Washington, D.C. on that date. Ruth Paine had recently returned to New Orleans shortly before this date from the Washington D.C. area. She had incorporated a visit to CIA headquarters while in the D.C. area in order to 'see her sister'. I have doubts about Ruth traveling alone on her road trip with two small children. I suspect she took her husband along. So it may be possible that Michael Paine stayed behind in the area. Someone in the D.C./PA/Baltimore area was impersonating Oswald in several places during that time frame." (Honest Answers, p. 236; also pp. 162-163)

I checked Douglass, JFK and the Unspeakable, and Douglass says nothing of any visit of Ruth to CIA headquarters. The point matters in that Ruth testified to the New Orleans grand jury under penalty of perjury, under questioning from Garrison, that she did not work, directly or indirectly, for the CIA. From the grand jury transcript (ellipses are in the transcript).

Q. Did you or your husband at any time directly or indirectly work for any Federal Law Enforcement Agency?

A. Not I, and I doubt Michael would have without my knowing it.

Q. How about the Central Intelligence Agency?

A. No.

Q. To your knowledge, have you met anyone who worked for the Central Intelligence Agency?

A. I just don't know. Conceivably, but in other words he didn't just come up to me and say here I am . . .

Q. That's what I say, to your knowledge.

A. No.

Q. No one has ever identified himself as an agent of the Central Intelligence Agency?

A. No, not to my knowledge.

The claim appearing in your book, to the extent that your readers read it and believe it to be true, will become one more case of Ruth Paine being unjustly smeared, with this claim perceived to be evidence that Ruth Paine has been untruthful.

So this raises the question: what can be done to remedy this, so that this new "false fact" does not get quoted and requoted and go viral, when it is a fabrication put into print? (I do not mean intentionally Vince.)

Your prompt obtaining and reporting of Deb Galantine's statement that nothing supports that claim, posted on this forum, is honorable. 

Edited by Greg Doudna
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Garrison did not ask Ruth about her sister's employment by the CIA since he did not know that at the time.

He asked her what agency of government her sister worked for.  

Ruth said she did not know.  (Hmm)

He then asked her if she recalled where she lived. 

Ruth said she did not know. (Double Hmmm)

When Garrison tried to guess if it was Falls Church VA, Ruth gave him a 'well maybe' kind of an answer.

This was false.  The Hokes lived in Maryland.  

So according  to Ruth, under oath, she 

1. Did not know what her sister did or who she worked for while she was visiting her.

2. Did not know what city she visited her in.  Even though she drove down from the Northeast and had to have it mapped out.

3. Did not even know the state her sister lived in!!  

Geez, Greg, how can we remedy how Ruth mislead Garrison under oath? Citizen's arrest maybe?

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Garrison did not ask Ruth about her sister's employment by the CIA since he did not know that at the time.

He asked her what agency of government her sister worked for.  

Ruth said she did not know.  (Hmm)

He then asked her if she recalled where she lived. 

Ruth said she did not know. (Double Hmmm)

When Garrison tried to guess if it was Falls Church VA, Ruth gave him a 'well maybe' kind of an answer.

This was false.  The Hokes lived in Maryland.  

So according  to Ruth, under oath, she 

1. Did not know what her sister did or who she worked for while she was visiting her.

2. Did not know what city she visited her in.  Even though she drove down from the Northeast and had to have it mapped out.

3. Did not even know the state her sister live in!!  

Geez, Greg, how can we remedy how Ruth mislead Garrison under oath? Citizen's arrest maybe.

Mic drop

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vince Palamara -- reading here about the harassment you faced in 2013 -- appalling. The fact that this guy wrote to the CEO of your company to get you fired is one of the dirtiest, shittiest things imaginable.  His accusations of "un-American activity" are laughable and ironically are the only un-American thing here, this notion that your constitutionally-protected speech is somehow in and of itself not American. HIS actions were the un-American actions here.

In addition, it shows that your work evidently was hitting some kind of nerve if you've got people trying to interfere with your life.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Garrison did not ask Ruth about her sister's employment by the CIA since he did not know that at the time.

He asked her what agency of government her sister worked for.  

Ruth said she did not know.  (Hmm)

He then asked her if she recalled where she lived. 

Ruth said she did not know. (Double Hmmm)

When Garrison tried to guess if it was Falls Church VA, Ruth gave him a 'well maybe' kind of an answer.

This was false.  The Hokes lived in Maryland.  

So according  to Ruth, under oath, she 

1. Did not know what her sister did or who she worked for while she was visiting her.

2. Did not know what city she visited her in.  Even though she drove down from the Northeast and had to have it mapped out.

3. Did not even know the state her sister lived in!!  

Geez, Greg, how can we remedy how Ruth mislead Garrison under oath? Citizen's arrest maybe?

For those who defend Ruth Paine, even they must admit that in the area of her answers to questions relating to her sister, she is clearly evasive. Feigning ignorance about even the most basic questions.

Ruth was very sharp in all her testimonies. Recalling every incident ( major and minor ) involving Marina and Lee with extraordinary detail. She even recalls emotional reactions of Marina and Lee and herself during these scenes. 

Ruth remembered details of the apartment Lee and Marina lived in when she arrived to bring Marina back to her home in Irving. She stayed two nights there, correct?

However, when it came to her sister and her visit to her home the Summer of 1963 Ruth seems to draw a blank? Can't remember times, locations, conversations, activities, etc. ?

Edited by Joe Bauer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Garrison did not ask Ruth about her sister's employment by the CIA since he did not know that at the time.

He asked her what agency of government her sister worked for.  

Ruth said she did not know.  (Hmm)

He then asked her if she recalled where she lived. 

Ruth said she did not know. (Double Hmmm)

When Garrison tried to guess if it was Falls Church VA, Ruth gave him a 'well maybe' kind of an answer.

This was false.  The Hokes lived in Maryland.  

So according  to Ruth, under oath, she 

1. Did not know what her sister did or who she worked for while she was visiting her.

2. Did not know what city she visited her in.  Even though she drove down from the Northeast and had to have it mapped out.

3. Did not even know the state her sister lived in!!  

Geez, Greg, how can we remedy how Ruth mislead Garrison under oath? Citizen's arrest maybe?

Irrelevant to issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have posted a correction in my earlier, with strikethrough lines for transparency of what was corrected. I have also deleted the last line asking for other researchers to comment concerning how to handle cases of inadvertant but damaging publication of untruths about persons. Not that the question is not of interest--not least because it is something that nearly all of us, myself included, do from time to time even with the best of efforts not to do so, and a discussion of "best practices" in such cases when it is discovered or brought to attention would be a worthy topic--but that would probably best be done elsewhere as another topic of discussion. Vince responded promptly and acknowledged and posted the correction honorably.

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...