02-04-2015, 01:44 PM
If the CIA wanted this car, they could have bought it for a song and a promise from Richard himself back in the early 90's when he was asking for money for the vehicle.
My main problems with Richard's thesis back then were:
a) Richard said it was Ruth Paine's car. From the beginning of JFK assassination research, everybody but Roger Craig (who never went to look at Ruth Paine's car to see if it was the same car) and apparently Craig's partner Wiseburg(?)/Wizeman(?) (who did go to Ruth Paine's house but didn't see the events at Dealy Plaza like Craig) knew that Ruth Paine owned an entirely different vehicle. The Warren Commission said it was a Chevy station wagon. See for yourself:
![[Image: attachment.php?attachmentid=6810&stc=1]](https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=6810&stc=1)
and
![[Image: attachment.php?attachmentid=6811&stc=1]](https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=6811&stc=1)
b) Now, that doesn't exclude the remote possibility that GG Wing's vehicle was used during the assassination in 1963. However, the title history (that Richard ran) clearly shows Wing bought the car in 1965. Furthermore the Turista sticker is dated 1964, making it at least 39 days too late for a quick getaway vehicle to Mexico. (I offered to run down the history of the Turista sticker for Richard, but he declined. He apparently hasn't managed to give that a shot himself in the last 20 years, either)
c) I do not doubt that the car was being used as some sort of showpiece for whatever Wing wanted to show, or remind people of. But Wing never bothered to explain it. The "Red Ripper" angle could have been anybody, including Richard himself. It seems just as likely (to me at least) that Wing, by creating a clever and subtle mystery, was attempting to increase the resale value of his relic.
d) the bulk of Richard's work is examining "connections," (...the knee bone is connected to the thigh bone...) which I find to be of minimal and limited probative value, even if interesting. Unfortunately much conspiracy research is of this variety.
My main problems with Richard's thesis back then were:
a) Richard said it was Ruth Paine's car. From the beginning of JFK assassination research, everybody but Roger Craig (who never went to look at Ruth Paine's car to see if it was the same car) and apparently Craig's partner Wiseburg(?)/Wizeman(?) (who did go to Ruth Paine's house but didn't see the events at Dealy Plaza like Craig) knew that Ruth Paine owned an entirely different vehicle. The Warren Commission said it was a Chevy station wagon. See for yourself:
and
b) Now, that doesn't exclude the remote possibility that GG Wing's vehicle was used during the assassination in 1963. However, the title history (that Richard ran) clearly shows Wing bought the car in 1965. Furthermore the Turista sticker is dated 1964, making it at least 39 days too late for a quick getaway vehicle to Mexico. (I offered to run down the history of the Turista sticker for Richard, but he declined. He apparently hasn't managed to give that a shot himself in the last 20 years, either)
c) I do not doubt that the car was being used as some sort of showpiece for whatever Wing wanted to show, or remind people of. But Wing never bothered to explain it. The "Red Ripper" angle could have been anybody, including Richard himself. It seems just as likely (to me at least) that Wing, by creating a clever and subtle mystery, was attempting to increase the resale value of his relic.
d) the bulk of Richard's work is examining "connections," (...the knee bone is connected to the thigh bone...) which I find to be of minimal and limited probative value, even if interesting. Unfortunately much conspiracy research is of this variety.
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."

