Jump to content
The Education Forum

Was there a small white dog in the limo?


Recommended Posts

Maybe we haven't been looking hard enough for the small white

dog that Jean Hill said Jackie was holding up showing to JFK.

Here, her left hand is holding up SOMETHING, and it has two

white paws. JFK is amused by what Jackie is showing him.

Hmmmmmm?

Jack

Edited by Jack White
Link to comment
Share on other sites

nope...neither. guy in white uniform by building in martin film

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we haven't been looking hard enough for the small white

dog that Jean Hill said Jackie was holding up showing to JFK.

Here, her left hand is holding up SOMETHING, and it has two

white paws. JFK is amused by what Jackie is showing him.

Hmmmmmm?

Jack

Jack, you cannot be serious!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we haven't been looking hard enough for the small white

dog that Jean Hill said Jackie was holding up showing to JFK.

Here, her left hand is holding up SOMETHING, and it has two

white paws. JFK is amused by what Jackie is showing him.

Hmmmmmm?

Jack

Jack, I thought that was resolved with the Lambchop hand puppet on the seat. I believe you, or someone, posted an image of it on the seat. Can you repost that.

Peter...I was really just joking. I noticed what looked like a little

dog's paws and face and highlighted it. We KNOW there was no

real dog in the car. But I do think Jackie had a Lambchop puppet.

I was really calling attention to this frame which shows her HOLDING

SOMETHING UP IN THE AIR WITH HER LEFT HAND, AND JFK LOOKING

AT IT AND SMILING.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill, I'm beginning to wonder what you day would be like without some swing at Jack......It's hard getting off cigarettes and Jack bashing, but take it one post at a time.....deep breathing.....self control......atta boy....

Well, Peter ... allow me to tell you what that day would be like ....

It would be a day when Jack didn't use poor quality images to make his claims. It would be a day when he did post his images - that he would post a full frame image as well so one could better determine what they were seeing. It would be a day when sound responsible study of an image had actually taken place. And it would be a day when we wouldn't have Jack telling us how white women are black and how a motorcycle tire passing in front of a woman in a dress has changed her from a girl to a boy. (We saw the images Jack posted and I can't find a Zfilm copy as degraded as the one Jack used. Now compare that to the animation below)

And of course we wouldn't have people like yourself who must be just as photographically inept to be praising such nonsense, unless you have an agenda for wanting to accept poor research practices. Anyway, that would be what such a day would be like and wouldn't it be grand!

Bill Miller

The same moment in time from another angle shows Jackie has nothing in her left hand and is merely running her white gloved hand over her hair.

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter...I was really just joking. I noticed what looked like a little

dog's paws and face and highlighted it. We KNOW there was no

real dog in the car. But I do think Jackie had a Lambchop puppet.

Jack

It's funny how when one uses clear images ... an alleged white puppet becomes white flowers.

Jackie wore white gloves that extended several inches past her wrist. Along with special red roses, Jackie received a group (called a "spray") of white and yellow aster flowers. As easily seen in these and other close-up photos at Love Field, she cupped the asters in her glove UNDERNEATH the roses.

Once she stepped in the car, as seen in this WBAP-TV news film, she briefly showed the asters to JFK.

The "sock puppet" story is a myth - believed only by people who have not studied high-quality images.

Bill Miller

Link to comment
Share on other sites

235-904-jbc-love.jpg

As one former Naval Officer saluting another former Naval Officer, I must assume that JBC knew full well what the "Left-Handed" salute actually represents.

"Tecumseh has become not only the "God of 2.0" -- the passing grade point average at the academy -- but also the idol to whom loyal midshipmen give prayers and sacrificial offerings of pennies. Midshipmen offer a left-handed salute in tribute to Tecumseh"

"For those unaware, a left handed salute from Kerry's time in grade was a rebllious insult intended to openly insult the person being saluted. It lowers the stature of the person saluting in that it exposes his belief in a hidden agenda being manifest openly with blatent disregard to any accountabilty."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that we had about beaten Jean Hill's LITTLE WHITE DOG to death

when Chris Davidson emailed me yet another dog sighting. When enlarged

very big, I immediately saw yet another little white dog...the REINCARNATION

of my childhood pet Sissy, a white Toy Spitz (Samoyed). Note the close

facial resemblence!

Jean Hill saw "a little white dog". "Miller" and others see "white flowers".

I see a "little white dog". Chris sees a different dog. Who is to say which of us

is right or wrong? Each witness may have a slightly different interpretation.

Shall we let "Miller"decide for everyone? Or shall we try to find what

it was that Jean saw? She did SEE SOMETHING. What she saw is difficult

to decide, based on evidence and tampered evidence. But I know this:

Jean was NOT LYING about seeing a "dog".

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As one former Naval Officer saluting another former Naval Officer, I must assume that JBC knew full well what the "Left-Handed" salute actually represents.

"Tecumseh has become not only the "God of 2.0" -- the passing grade point average at the academy -- but also the idol to whom loyal midshipmen give prayers and sacrificial offerings of pennies. Midshipmen offer a left-handed salute in tribute to Tecumseh"

"For those unaware, a left handed salute from Kerry's time in grade was a rebllious insult intended to openly insult the person being saluted. It lowers the stature of the person saluting in that it exposes his belief in a hidden agenda being manifest openly with blatent disregard to any accountabilty."

A still photo can be misleading and for some reason I thought I had seen a piece of film showing Connally taking his hat off as Jackie came into the limo. Does anyone have any different knowledge than this?

Bill Miller

Link to comment
Share on other sites

235-904-jbc-love.jpg

As one former Naval Officer saluting another former Naval Officer, I must assume that JBC knew full well what the "Left-Handed" salute actually represents.

"Tecumseh has become not only the "God of 2.0" -- the passing grade point average at the academy -- but also the idol to whom loyal midshipmen give prayers and sacrificial offerings of pennies. Midshipmen offer a left-handed salute in tribute to Tecumseh"

"For those unaware, a left handed salute from Kerry's time in grade was a rebllious insult intended to openly insult the person being saluted. It lowers the stature of the person saluting in that it exposes his belief in a hidden agenda being manifest openly with blatent disregard to any accountabilty."

Purvis has never seen a Texan TIP HIS HAT to a lady. It is done with the left hand

to leave the right hand free for handshake or assistance. Chivalry, not navy.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that we had about beaten Jean Hill's LITTLE WHITE DOG to death

when Chris Davidson emailed me yet another dog sighting. When enlarged

very big, I immediately saw yet another little white dog...the REINCARNATION

of my childhood pet Sissy, a white Toy Spitz (Samoyed). Note the close

facial resemblence!

Jean Hill saw "a little white dog". "Miller" and others see "white flowers".

I see a "little white dog". Chris sees a different dog. Who is to say which of us

is right or wrong? Each witness may have a slightly different interpretation.

Shall we let "Miller"decide for everyone? Or shall we try to find what

it was that Jean saw? She did SEE SOMETHING. What she saw is difficult

to decide, based on evidence and tampered evidence. But I know this:

Jean was NOT LYING about seeing a "dog".

Jack

Jack, thank you for posting that. I totally agree.

She either saw a dog or thought she saw a dog. And as I stated previously, how close to the limo would she have to be to see this?

thanks

chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Turner

Two questions.

1, Where did the dog come from? Jackie certainly doesn't have it at Love field. Nor do any of the retinue appear to be carrying a dog.

2, Where did the dog go to after the assassination, it couldn't have simply disappeared.

I have no doubt that Jean Hill saw something that she took to be a small dog, but in all the excitement who could quible about a misidentification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jean Hill saw "a little white dog". "Miller" and others see "white flowers".

I see a "little white dog". Chris sees a different dog. Who is to say which of us

is right or wrong? Each witness may have a slightly different interpretation.

This is my opinion only and directed at only those who are capable of comprehending the message I am attempting to relay ...

I can certainly understand why if we limit ourselves to look at B&W images (many without clear detail) that something like a light colored bouquet of flowers could leave room for debate over how the image cane be interpreted, but what I am seeing is that when a really good sharp close-up of Jackie holding onto the object shows it to be a small bouquet of flowers, I have to wonder why would any rational person still be wasting time over whether or not those flowers could be viewed as a 'white dog' or not? Has not anyone here but me ever read Jean Hill's book? Would not Jean Hill know more about how the little white dog story came to be or are we better capable of knowing more about Jean that Jean knew about herself?

Jean and I have talked about this incident and I would have thought that Jack, having known Jean, would have heard the same things I did. And I am reasonably sure that Jean told this story in her book called "The Last Dissenting Witness". Jean had said that before that infamous filmed interview of her was ever taped ... that she and the interviewer had gone over the things that she had witnessed during the assasination. Jean had said that she originally didn't know what the light colored object was that she saw on the seat of the car as it quickly passed by, but the interviewer had told Jean that he wanted her to give whatever her 'impressions' were of what she had witnessed, thus Jean said that her impression was that possibly the first couple had a little white dog with them. It was that statement that Jean then repeated during the filmed interview that followed, which was in complianance to the request that was made of her beforehand by the interviewer, that she said in her book that she had ever since regretted making.

If one actually watches Jean in the Zapruder film, Jean only turns her head towards the limo just prior to the head shot and by the time Mary has taken her photo - the back seat would no longer be visible to Jean Hill. This means that Jean had less than .5 seconds or so to see from her elevated view what the little light colored object on the seat was. This would be equivalent to being shown a flash card in the same amount of time and then being asked to give your impression as to what you had seen. But regardless, it was Jean who told this story and it was Jean who said that she really didn't know what it was that she saw, but had only given the interviewer an idea as to what her impression was concerning what it might have been. This doesn't mean that Jean lied about anything, but rather she had only gave her impression to what she may have seen. So why would someone still be trying to make it out to be more than it really was? Those who were anti-Jean want to use that statement about the little dog to discredit her and those who want to vindicate Jean try and come up with images that could be interpreted as a little white dog. The whole thing seems silly to me once Jean, herself, has set the record straight and has shown that there was a simple explanation for why she made that statement during her filmed interview.

If there is a lesson to learn here, it is how blurred images can take on the appearance of about anything. That just because a witness gives an impression as to what they had saw and it is found to be in error - it doesn't mean the witnessees is lying. In post #13, Jack points out how the object in question (a bouquet of flowers in clear images) looks like his childhood pet dog ... a (Toy Spitz). In another blurred image the object looks like' Lamb Chop' (the puppet) when IMO the face of Lamb Chop looks totally different than Jack's childhood dog's face looked. All I can tell people is to look for the clearest images of the same and utilize them to the best of your ability. When possible - use color photos because what is thought to be a possible all white Lamb Chop puppet in a B&W image may be found to have some yellow colors to it that only a bouquet of aster flowers would have.

Below is a color image of fair quality and in it I can see 'Lamb Chop's' flowery petals.

Bill Miller

Edited by Bill Miller
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...