Pamela Brown Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, Sean Coleman said: Pam, enjoyed your essay. Sorry to rake over old coals, but why does George Whitaker’s testimony not impress you? He seems a decent bloke with nothing to gain from his story- a bit like Roger Craig. Shame his ‘subordinates’ weren’t named. Surely you jest. I consider Whitaker a false witness... https://thewhitakerhoax.wordpress.com/ But go on searching for his 'subordinates'...let me know what you find... Edited June 30, 2021 by Pamela Brown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Butler Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 (edited) Windshield bullet strike on p limo I read Pamela Brown’s post on a “hole is a hole theory” piece. It certainly challenges the idea there was a hole, a through and through hole, in the windshield of the p. limo rear the rearview mirror. She establishes evidence to question the credibility of a hole in the windshield. If one looks at the windshield in Altgens 3 or 4 (I can never get this one right) then one doesn’t see a defect. This is a section of the photo saying there was preparation for film alteration by cutting this photo into sections. If you look at the reflections this tells you that this photo was not in the intersection of Main and Houston. Where are the streets and crowds? In this alleged Altgens photo there is no hole or defect in the windshield near the rear view mirror. Moving on to Altgens 5. There is no defect that can be seen in the windshield near the rearview mirror. This is a hard call since the photo is not that good. Altgens 6 is another story. There may be two defects in the windshield. One is certainly questionable. The other not. Number 1 appears to be something. It is two blurred and vague to tell what. Some said there was a bullet strike on the passenger’s side low on the windshield. This may be where the arrow points or not. Number 2. Is definitely a hole through the windshield. Altgens 6 has been altered. This may be an alteration, but I don’t think so. It is not there in earlier Altgens photos. The alteration on Altgens 6 was a rush job. And, the significance of the bullet hole was not considered at the time hours after the assassination. The alterers may not have seen the hole in the windshield. There is another confusing thing about this Altgens 6 photo. This is marked No. 3. No. 3 appears to be the p. limo’s side rear view mirror. SS agent Kellerman is seen in other media constantly watching the President through that rear view mirror. I believe at this point the mirror is showing John Connally. I will not defend that position. It just appears that way. Perhaps the angle is right to show John Connally. In conclusion, the bullet shot defect in the windshield at the least shows that there were more shots than 3. Edited June 30, 2021 by John Butler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Coleman Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 5 hours ago, Pamela Brown said: Surely you jest. I consider Whitaker a false witness... https://thewhitakerhoax.wordpress.com/ But go on searching for his 'subordinates'...let me know what you find... The DW essay you linked was a good read. However it seems to promote the Whitaker story? My extensive research into the subordinates led me to believe they met untimely, gruesome deaths with all their records eradicated. Drat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now