ROBERT HANSON - Anatomy of a Disinformationalist

[Edward Prichard]

One thing I did catch in the offerings of the Greer theorists is the misinterpretation of "a firecracker going off in the car". This was clearly meant as a description of Kennedy's head bursting open and not an actual blast in the car. The shots from the Knoll were close enough to mistake for being in the car when viewing this burst.

It's common sense that Greer couldn't possibly turn and shoot JFK without being either heard or noticed by all those around him. This is a prime example of both disinformation and conspiracy theory syndrome at the same time. Any major author who honors it is making a serious mistake in my opinion. By giving Greer a gun they are only handing a weapon to those who will use it to shoot their credibility.

Well, I am glad that you were sentient enough to catch "one" thing, and thank you for your interpretation of it.

How could a shot from the knoll cause a left temporal entry wound?

As for you "common sense" to Greer being noticed, if you did not cherry pick the testimony and exhibits--like Specter himself--you would understand the facts presented support the assertion that he was noticed.

Given the fact that your efforts are dismal at best, your opinion can be discounted to a high degree.

Let me place the theory and its supporting facts before you again so that you may make another attempt (hopefully you will have time to read them before they are censored again):

I find Horne's theory that Greer fired the "coup de grace" interesting. Essentially, he postulates that the snipers on the knoll, et al, missed and thus, Greer turned / slowed / stopped and then turned again in order to finish the task prior to the limo's departure from the "kill zone".

This unbelievable theory dates back to Newcomb and Adam's pioneering research in "Murder From Within". (Going further back, it should be duly noted that a number of emperors were murdered by the praetorian guard.) It does seem to fit a few thoroughly documented and un-refuted components of the crime together:

1. Greer's otherwise inexplicable actions behind the wheel during the shooting (strike one)
2. JFK being blown backwards away from Greer
3. Clint Hill's testimony
4. The "firecracker going off in the car", "right there in the car", "Secret Service shooting back", etc. reports of eyewitnesses
5. The Parkland reports of a left temporal entrance wound
6. The Parkland reports of a right rear exit wound--described as caused by a high velocity .45 caliber handgun round fired at close range
7. Greer's "constant vigilance" over JFK's corpse until sealed in it's burial casket and placed under guard in the White House--a surprising extended role for the president's driver, especially given his lack of "vigilance" behind the wheel during the attack--and during which time, secret alterations were made to the president's wounds (strike two)
8. Greer locking JFK's clothing in his locker in the White House garage
9. The FBI recording Greer's physical description in their report
10. Greer apparently perjuring himself in his statements to the effect of never having looked directly at JFK (strike three)
11. The Secret Service's complete confiscation and control of virtually all of the prima facie evidence and its sequestration to the White House within just 15 hours of the crime--much of which was handled by SAIC Kellerman and SA Greer personally
12. Garrison's claim that a .45 caliber slug was retrieved by a government agent on the scene
13. The late distribution of the Z-Film and the cropping of frames during the head shot sequence to exclude Greer from view

Despite these 13 points somewhat corroborating Newcomb, Adams, and Horne's theory of Greer firing a fatal shot on 11/22/63 and Greer's direct involvement in the coverup--all within the widely accepted context of culpability of certain members of the detail "enabling" the assassination--many profess that this was "impossible" for reasons that are not as convincing as the debunkers tone would have us believe. In the case of Jim Marrs, he simply states "It didn't happen." as his primary reason. The ad hominem fallacy is often presented in response as well. These responses appear to me to be inadequate, for the fact that they are mostly opinion vs facts or evidence, and given the number of "dots" that can be connected to Greer.

Another interesting phenomenon relating to this theory is that it appears to be a "radioactive" topic when raised in a number of assassination-related forums. In short, there seems to be no tolerance of it and it is cast aside as nonsense by moderators without any serious debate on the merits of the theory. When a debate is allowed and the theory cannot be easily dispensed with, the ad hominem fallacy is employed en masse. This is often generally justified by statements to the effect of insufficient evidence that amount to a double standard considering the lack of sufficient evidence for other more widely accepted theories.

Therefore, I'd like to know if this forum can explore the matter to the fullest degree, or if it must be cut off--even at the risk of the appearance of censorship or a perpetuation of the tendency to avoid subjects that run counter to the "conventional wisdom".

To me, Newcomb and Adam's research seem impeccable, and Horne certainly seems competent and credible. Not to mention the fact that there appears to be statements and evidence allowing for what Horne calls a "tentative possibility" to exist:

Dr. McCLELLAND - "Where you would expect to see this really great hole that is left behind would be, for instance, from a very high velocity missile fired at close range with a heavy caliber bullet, such as a .45 pistol fired at close range, which would make a small entrance hole, relatively, and particularly if it entered some portion of the anatomy such as the head, where there was a sudden change in density from the brain to the skull cavity, as it entered. As it left the body, it would still have a great deal of force behind it and would blow up a large segment of tissue as it exited."






SA HILL - "I heard a second firecracker type noise but it had a different sound-- like the sound of shooting a re-volver into something hard."