Great show, James. I agree with you about those three crazy theories you mentioned: Greer shot JFK. Jackie shot JFK and the SS man shot JFK. All arrant nonsense.However, regarding Greer, what is your take on Doug Horne's volume V of Inside the ARRB where Doug mentions reluctantly what Clint Hill told a steward on board the plane as it left Love Field? Doug mentions that Clint was helped by a steward to change the blood soaked shirt he was wearing. According to Doug, Clint Hill confided to the steward that when he jumped onto the back of the limousine he looked down and saw the gaping hole in back right side of JFK's head and he also saw Greer with a nickel silver gun in his rightand pointing it in Clint's face. As for the film Parkland, I haven't seen it nor do I intend to. I've read a few reviews.The most frequently used words to describe Parkland are "boring" and "snoozefest". I hope Tom Hanks recoups his losses on this turkey of a film from a turkey of a book. The best thing to come out of this shambles is that Bugliosi's "magnum opus" has been exposed as a bunch of bull and for that we are grateful. (Clint's) face.
The ballistics do not support it. If Greer had shot JFK, then because he was to JFK's right/front, his brains would have been blown out to the right/rear but instead they were blown out to the left/rear. Even if Greer had drawn his weapon, he cannot have shot JFK.
Was Greer not to JFK's left/front, James? You write that JFK's brains were blown out to the left/rear. Surely you mean to the right/rear? Forgive me if I am misreading what you have written.
James I got you now. The shot to JFK's right temple blew his brains out on the right rear side of his head BUT the right rear side of JFK's head was pointing to the left. Sorry for my non-point. What was I thinking?! You are absolutely correct, James.
Regardless of where the bullet entered (to not beg the question), if Greer to his left/front had shot JFK, especially with a .45, his brains would have been blow out to the right/rear. But instead they were blown out to the left/rear (viewing the limo from behind). So Greer cannot have shot JFK. Check out the diagrams of the wound in "Dealey Plaza Revisited: What happened to JFK?" for more.
It seems as if each major anniversary of the JFK assassination takes us farther from the truth judging by what the media put out for our consumption.‘Parkland’ movie review - Washington Post http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-10-03/news/42652433_1_jfk-assassination-dealey-plaza-abraham-zapruder..... “Parkland” is anything but inevitable. Serious, careful, assiduously uninflected, Landesman’s often fascinating tick-tock -----stands as the anti-“JFK,” Oliver Stone’s fever dream of a grand unified conspiracy theory.-------- Rather than lead viewers down rabbit holes populated by babushka ladies and umbrella men, “Parkland” simply focuses on the known facts, without speculation and with minimal stylistic embellishment. A film of modest ambition and workmanlike pacing, it breaks little new ground, either in form or content. Then again, that may be the point.
The Whitewashington PishFor:" A film of modest ambition and workmanlike pacing, it breaks little new ground, either in form or content. Then again, that may be the point."Read:" A lazy low-budget shoddy piece of soporific drek, it adds nothingto our understanding either in its cheapo and facile approach or bargain bin delivery.Having said that, it misses the point entirely."
TRUTH ABOUT WHO KILLED JFK IS KNOWN AND IT WAS A CONSPIRACYCTKA: Citizens for Truth about the Kennedy Assassination http://www.ctka.net/nbc_cia.htmlJim Garrison With the arrival of the 40th anniversary of President Kennedy's assassination, it was hardly surprising that one of the major television networks attempted to make the case for Lee Oswald's sole guilt. Despite four decades of solid research indicating a conspiracy, the American viewing public was once again treated to a one-sided, unfair and unbalanced presentation.On June 19th, 1967 NBC aired an hour long "analysis" of New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison's investigation titled, The JFK Conspiracy: The Case of Jim Garrison. While unnecessary to rehash Garrison's case here, in summary Garrison's investigation focused on three individuals: A former Eastern Airlines pilot and probable CIA asset, David Ferrie; ex-FBI man and private detective Guy Banister; and Managing Director of the International Trade Mart, Clay Shaw. Garrison believed all three were connected to American intelligence and had, at a minimum, conspired to set up Oswald as a potential patsy in the JFK assassination. Barely three months into his investigation, Garrison's main suspect, the forty-nine year old David Ferrie, died apparently of natural causes. Banister had also passed away in 1964 as a result of a heart attack. On March 1st, 1967 Garrison arrested the surviving member of this trio, the CIA connected Clay Shaw. By mid-March both the Grand Jury and a three-judge panel had ordered Shaw to trial.Garrison's case was big news and predictably the news media swung into attack mode. None was more vicious or had more resources at their disposal than NBC. For the job as lead investigative reporter, NBC assigned Walter Sheridan. Shortly after Shaw's arrest Sheridan arrived in New Orleans and began questioning witnesses — perhaps bribing and intimidating would be a better choice of words. Sheridan questioned a former electronics expert and CIA asset Gordon Novel and immediately put him on a $500 a day retainer. (Novel had briefly consulted with Garrison's team). Sheridan then urged Novel to skip town to avoid being indicted and paid him an additional $750 while Novel was in Columbus Ohio.......... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~JFK WAS KILLED BY THE CIA SAID JIM GARRISON IN 1967: SEE YOU TUBE VIDEO OF JIM'S TV SPEECHGarrison says in rebuttal to NBC, Oswald's fingerprints were not on the gun and list of other evidence clearing Oswald of crime and that he was in the employ of the CIA.? Jim Garrison Response - Kennedy Assassination - YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hqo2c_SxQag
In the Parkland trailer did the secret service man tell Zapruder that nuclear war could break out if Zapruder didn't hand over the film and help the investigation on what exactly had happened on 11/22/1963? I don't think this happened in real life and is being used in the Parkland film for dramatic effect. But even so why the heck would the director put such nonsense in the secret service man's mouth? Where did the director find this piece of rubbish? Why would anyone be talking about nuclear war so soon after the assassination and before LHO is even arrested and charged with shooting JFK?The Parkland flim flam is pure bullshit for what it excludes and for what it includes. Parkland is pap!!
'Jackie did shoot jfk' in a sense. she was the one who activated the squib which jfk positioned himself for following the first 'shot' to the throat. this first 'shot' was necessary in order for jfk to be able to brace himself for the activation of the powerful Hollywood style squib. it expoded and rolled up his head, sending him back and to the left, back and to the left. if it was a genuine initial shot thru the back of the neck, through tissue and bone, jfk would have been a dead duck, instantly and categorically. SoldierOfTheLord, who put forward (in great detail) the 'Jackie shot jfk' theory on letsrollforums and battled constantly with Culto toward the beginning of the thread, ended up, like everyone else, forced to abandon his 'truth' in favour of the real truth - that the assassination was a staged event, along with those of lee Harvey Oswald and mary pinchott mayer. the very fact that you didn't mention the faked/staged assassination as a viable alternative theory roars volumes jim. JFK staged assassination thread;http://letsrollforums.com/jfk-murder-staged-event-t23127.htmlindex to the thread;http://letsrollforums.com/showpost.php?p=225299&postcount=238there are none so blind as those who follow someone who just will not see. mechanism of the psy-op;http://letsrollforums.com/showpost.php?p=241354the most important single page you will have read in a long time.comments jim? (I won't be holding my breath!).
Honest to God, I only have so much time for nonsense and rubbish. Those who want more on the assassination should watch, "What happened to JFK--and why it matters today" or "JFK Part 1: A National Security Event - Oswald didn't do it" and "JFK Part 2: A National Security Event - How it was done".
Some day bill. not today though.take it easy.
why was Oswald, a military asset, allowed to give a press conference in the first place? it only enabled him to declare to the world that he was a patsy, and could only ever have served to encourage suspicion towards the military/government (those responsible according to jim!)? but this was exactly the idea! it was all a scripted set up. it is just more conspiracy junk that is always thrown in to these type psy-ops to steer enquirers into la-la land and away from the faked heart of matters. the fact that Oswald's 'murder' has also been shown to have been staged doesn't even come into it.
is that the same type rubbish and nonsense as the no-plane theory rubbish and nonsenseyou so violently dismissed for years, only for to come around completely to that something that you had so previously vehemently denied jim?2 months after looking into 9/11 conspiracy for the first time in 2011, I landed on no planes and 9/11 video and victim fakery, and have not wavered since. I have studied all of culto's work on the jfk matter and will not waver from that other truth, that the jfk assassination was a staged affair! it is proven beyond all reasonable doubt!