Discrediting Secret Service complicity in the elimination of JFK…

[Paul Rigby]

Is a branch of assassination research which has attracted few takers. This is curious, because the transparency of the campaign offers easy pickings. If one wants them, of course. Here’s one blogger who plainly doesn’t:

http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2009/07/di...ehold.html

“Aangirfan” fails to mention that Milton William Cooper’s Behold a Pale Horse (Flagstaff, Arizona: Light Technology Publishing, 1991) had in its sights one particular theory of “the how” – that William Greer, the driver of the presidential limousine, was responsible. A startling omission, as will become clear, for here is Cooper doing precisely that:

“At some point President Kennedy discovered portions of the truth concerning drugs and aliens…[Kennedy] was murdered by the Secret Service agent who drove his car in the motorcade and the act is plainly visible in the Zapruder film…,”

p.215. So, the fake film proves it, does it? Of course not, for the film bears little or no resemblance to what actually happened on Elm.

Three chapters later, we are in to “Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion” territory. By astonishing coincidence, David Icke employed much the same admixture in his disinformational farrago, Robot’s Rebellion: The Story of the Turquoise Tracksuit Renaissance (Bath, UK: Gateway Books, 1994), published three years later.

Coincidence? Or a co-ordinated campaign on both sides of the Atlantic?

One important clue lies in what happened next: Those intent upon discrediting the notion of Greer’s role as assassin sought to rewrite the history of the assertion. Despite the fact that it had first been set out in detail as long ago as 1974, in Newcomb and Adams’ Murder From Within (Santa Barbara, California: Probe), a succession of researchers who knew this to be the case began producing essays and web postings which invited the uniformed to believe that Cooper, writing seventeen years later, was the pioneer. And as Cooper (and/or Icke) also promulgated a host of unrelated absurdities, the curious were to be frightened off the scent.

A text-book piece of spook work.

The moral of the tale? The next time you see a veteran researcher pretending that William Cooper and David Icke set the Greer-did-it in motion, you’ve just met a liar.

[Magda Hassan]

A response to your post from Aangirfan Paul?

http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2009/07/di...ehold.html

Disinformation; William Cooper's Behold a Pale Horse; Soros's alleged infiltration of the 'alternative' media


William Cooper's book Behold a Pale Horse details Cooper's claims about the influence of UFOs on the US government.

Cooper reported that the government of the United States has had contact and has entered into a bargain with an extraterrestrial society and that those ETs were responsible for abductions.

Cooper's father was in the military.

Cooper was in the military.

Cooper was a member of the US Naval Intelligence Briefing Team of the Commander in Chief of the United States Pacific Fleet.

Cooper may well have been, perhaps unwittingly, a disinformation agent.

Cooper's aim may have been to disinform the public about the JFK assassination and about people like Alex Jones.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Magda - I agree.

William Cooper is probably a low level version of Fred Lee Crisman - as here:

http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/...php?t=1107

[Paul Rigby]

Cooper's aim may have been to disinform the public about the JFK assassination and about people like Alex Jones.

Other way round, Maggie, but I admire your diligence, as ever. I was moved to post by Aangifan's uncharacteristic reticence on the subject of the precise nature of Cooper's theory in the JFK case. It's not as if it has ever wanted for grounding. Just what did the eyewitnesses, as opposed to the transparently faked films, have to tell us about the activities of the SS during the execution? The picture which emerges is startlingly different:

[QUOTE]Mrs. Marvin Faye Chism: “The two men in the front of the car stood up, and then when the second shot was fired, they all fell down and the car took off just like that,” 19WCH472.

John Arthur Chism: “And the two men in the front seat, I don’t know who they were, looked back, and just about the time they looked back, the second shot was fired,” 19WCH471.

S.M. Holland: “After the first shot the secret service man raised up in the seat with a machine gun and then dropped back down in the seat. And they immediately sped off,” 19WCH480.

George Davis: “[He] saw guns in the hands of the secret service agents with President Kennedy, saw President Kennedy slumped forward, and the police motorcycle escort manouever swiftly about the area,” 22WCH837.

Jean Hill: “There was scrambling around in the front seat…Secret service agents shooting back…I just thought, Oh, goodness, the secret service is shooting back,” 6WCH208-212.

That last quote finds a direct echo in the murder of RFK:

Don Schulman: “Just then the guard…took out his gun. And he fired also…The guard definitely pulled out his gun and fired,” KNXT-TV reporter, minutes after the assassination of RFK, within Ted Charach’s landmark documentary, The Second Gun.

Nor was it that some of the very closest eye- and earwitnesses failed to reinforce the suggestion that treachery was afoot in the presidential limo:

Bobby Hargis:
Mr. Stern: Do you recall your impression at the time regarding the shots?
Hargis: “Well, at the time it sounded like the shots were right next to me,” 6WCH294.

Austin Miller:
Mr. Belin: “Where did the shots sound like they came from?”
Miller: “Well, the way it sounded like, it came from the, I would say right there in the car,” 6WCH225.

Charles Brehm: “Drehm seemed to think the shots came from in front or beside the President. He explained the President did not slump forward as if [sic] he would have after being shot from the rear,” “President Dead, Connally Shot,” The Dallas Times Herald, 22 November 1963, p.2 [cited by Joachim Joesten. Oswald: Assassin or Fall Guy? (London: Merlin Press, 1964), p.176.]

Officer E. L. Boone:" I heard three shots coming from the vicinity of where the President's car was,” 19WCH508.

Jack Franzen: “He said he heard the sound of an explosion which appeared to him to come from the President's car and ...small fragments flying inside the vehicle and immediately assumed someone had tossed a firecracker inside the automobile,” 22WCH840.

Mrs. Jack Franzen: “Shortly after the President’s automobile passed by…she heard a noise which sounded as if someone had thrown a firecracker into the President’s automobile…at approximately the same time she noticed dust or small pieces of debris flying from the President’s automobile,” 24WCH525.

James Altgens: “The last shot sounded like it came from the left side of the car, if it was close range because, if it were a pistol it would have to be fired at close range for any degree of accuracy," 7WCH518.

Hugh Betzner, Jr.: “I cannot remember exactly where I was when I saw the following: I heard at least two shots fired and I saw what looked like a firecracker going off in the president's car. My assumption for this was because I saw fragments going up in the air,” 19WCH467

Mary Moorman: “The sound popped, well it just sounded like, well, you know, there might have been a firecracker right there in that car,” Jay Hogan interview with Mary Moorman and Jean Hill, KRLD Radio (Dallas), 15:30hrs (CST), 22 November 1963, Tape 5B and 6A (NARA) – see
http://educationforum.iphost.com/index.p...topic=9364

As I noted elsewhere recently, I’m always very impressed by the official follow-ups to any witness suggestions of in-car shots: change the subject, or pretend no such inference could reasonably be drawn.

All of which makes one wonder why the FBI bothered recording that full physical description of Greer following its interview with him on November 27, 1963. As in the case of the medical intern responsible for pumping up and down on Oswald’s stomach after the later was gut-shot, I suppose it was just for the hell of it.

But it wasn't enough for the SS to undertake the hit, a text-book direct-positive elimination. They also a) checked the victim was mortally wounded and b) laid the false up the grassy knoll:

1) Earl Cabell: “No; we couldn't tell. We could tell, of course, there was confusion in the presidential car--activity. The Secret Service men ran to that car,” 7WCH479.

2) James Chaney and other unnamed Dallas officers, as related by fellow motorcycle outrider, Marrion L. Baker: “I talked to Jim Chaney…during the time that the Secret Service men were trying to get into the car…from the time the first shot rang out, the car stopped completely, pulled to the left and stopped…I heard several of them say that, Mr. Truly he was standing out there, he said it stopped. Several officers said it stopped completely,” 3WCH265.

3) Norman Similas: “I swung back to look at the car. A Secret Service man ran up with his gun drawn…The Secret Service man opened the car door and I saw the President slumped down to the floor…,” Source: “‘I saw president fall’ – Willowdale man,” Toronto Daily Star, (All Star Night edition), Friday, 22 November 1963, pp.1&13

4) Robert Baskin: “The motorcade ground to a halt. There was a good deal of activity round the President’s car, with Secret Service men running about,” Source: “Day Began As Auspiciously As Any in Kennedy’s Career,” The Dallas Morning News, 23 November 1963, p.2

B) The false trail to the knoll:

1) Ronald B. Fischer: “And, after that, we stood there for 10 or 15 seconds and then we ran up to the top of the hill there where all the Secret Service men had run, thinking that that's where the bullets had come from since they seemed to be searching that area over there. They jumped off-out of cars and ran up the side of the hill there and onto the tracks where these passenger--freight cars were,” 6WCH196

2) Jack Franzen: “He noticed the men, who were presumed to be Secret Service Agents, riding in the car directly behind the President's car, unloading from the car, some with firearms in their hands, and noticed police officers and these plain clothesmen [sic] running up the grassy slope across Elm Street from his location and toward a wooded and bushy area located across Elm Street from him,” Statement to the FBI, November 24, 1963.
http://www.jfk-online.com/franzen.html

It really is all there, if we want it: It is the CIA's job to make sure we don't.

[Paul Rigby]

Once we insert Greer's shooting role into the heart of the plot, we have what Marcus Aurelius termed "a rational continuity." We see how the SS' actions before, during and after the coup hang together, from the abrupt changes in key personnel prior to November 22, through the hit itself, and to the theft of the body (and other evidence, not least clothing), from Texas.

Best of all, we have an entirely satisfactory answer as to why the SS washed out the back of the presidential limousine at Parkland - well before it could conceivably have known, assuming the unknown external shooter(s) scenario, the evidentiary value of the killing's residue.

This has long been the dead-giveaway as to SS complicity, a logical inference assiduously ignored by great swathes of what is termed "the research community."

And we have the most powerful explanation of all as to why control and fakery of photographic footage was essential to the plot.

[Paul Rigby]

Magda - I agree.

William Cooper is probably a low level version of Fred Lee Crisman - as here:

http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/...php?t=1107

A welcome reminder of the deep roots of the UFO psy-op/JFK conflation: I'd forgotten all about Bannister, in particular.

Worth adding Aline Mosby to the list. The daughter of the owner of a string of radio stations in, I hope I've remembered this right, Montana, she took to the air (in both senses) on a UFO "hunt" in the early to mid-1950s. And then pops up in Moscow at the time of Oswald's sojourn for the CIA. Small world, universe of coincidences.

Or perhaps not.

[Charles Drago]

As Paul likely knows, after careful consideration I see not a scintilla of evidence to suggest that Greer fired at JFK.

The Z-film does not figure into my thinking on this matter.

In all likelihood, agents of the Secret Service were involved in the assassination conspiracy. But the Greer theory, like the umbrella gun/dart theory and so many other JFK-related red herrings, has been promoted (not by Paul, whose sincerity and good intentions I accept at face value) in the main by forces aiding and abetting the cover-up.

[Paul Rigby]

But the Greer theory, like the umbrella gun/dart theory and so many other JFK-related red herrings, has been promoted...in the main by forces aiding and abetting the cover-up.

Dulles to Humes: “Just another question. Am I correct in assuming from what you say that this wound is entirely inconsistent with a wound that might have been administered if the shot were fired from in front of or beside of the President: it had to be fired from behind the President?” [2WCH360].

Someone, CD, and not just a little ole anyone, was mighty concerned by the notion that Greer did it.

[Mark Stapleton]

How could Greer have shot JFK without Nellie Connally or Jackie seeing it?

[Charles Drago]

But the Greer theory, like the umbrella gun/dart theory and so many other JFK-related red herrings, has been promoted...in the main by forces aiding and abetting the cover-up.

Dulles to Humes: “Just another question. Am I correct in assuming from what you say that this wound is entirely inconsistent with a wound that might have been administered if the shot were fired from in front of or beside of the President: it had to be fired from behind the President?” [2WCH360].

Someone, CD, and not just a little ole anyone, was mighty concerned by the notion that Greer did it.

Paul,

"In front of" means only that; distance is not implied.

"Beside" means only that; distance is not implied.

Your inferences are unsustainable absent truly compelling evidence.

The questions, I suggest, were posed to support the pre-ordained "from behind" lie.

"From behind" means only that; distance is not implied.

Now unless you suggest that "from behind" implies "from the trunk," your argument as buttressed in the last post remains wholly unconvincing.