ROBERT HANSON - Anatomy of a Disinformationalist

[Gil Jesus]

Frankly, I'm surprised that such elemental questions are being asked. It as if IQs suddenly drop when the Greer theory is raised.

Good one. Insult members who don't agree with your theories.

What's next, saying something bad about my mother ?

[Seamus Coogan]

Frankly, I'm surprised that such elemental questions are being asked. It as if IQs suddenly drop when the Greer theory is raised.

Good one. Insult members who don't agree with your theories.

What's next, saying something bad about my mother ?

Hey dont worry this asshole hasn't contributed anything near what you have over the years mate and he wouldn't know either he's just an ingrate and soon to be kaiboshed I imagine.

[Edward Prichard]

Good one. Insult members who don't agree with your theories.

What's next, saying something bad about my mother ?

My apologies. I thought this was a forum for open discussion about the assassination of John F. Kennedy. I now see that views divergent from the main contributors are not welcome.

I have found nothing here that sufficiently refutes the research and findings of Fred Newcomb, Perry Adams, Dan Robertson, Doug Horne, and myself--including the detailed list of corroborating testimony and exhibits I have provided--that William Robert Greer fired at JFK on 11/22/63.

When rude, coy, and general remarks have fail to dissuade, this forum resorts to blatant censorship.

Mr. Rigby, feel free to send me a private message. To all of the other jokers, I bid you a pleasant sleep.

[Seamus Coogan]

Good one. Insult members who don't agree with your theories.

What's next, saying something bad about my mother ?

My apologies. I thought this was a forum for open discussion about the assassination of John F. Kennedy. I now see that views divergent from the main contributors are not welcome.

I have found nothing here that sufficiently refutes the research and findings of Fred Newcomb, Perry Adams, Dan Robertson, Doug Horne, and myself--including the detailed list of corroborating testimony and exhibits I have provided--that William Robert Greer fired at JFK on 11/22/63.

When rude, coy, and general remarks have fail to dissuade, this forum resorts to blatant censorship.

Mr. Rigby, feel free to send me a private message. To all of the other jokers, I bid you a pleasant sleep.

Yeah well send your chums this from me :moon:

[Albert Doyle]

Using high conspiracy logic to defend the Greer-did-it theory is, to me, like defending a moss-covered aboriginal shaman who comes in to a famous hospital and dances around the bed of a terminal victim who then recovers. Those who believe in the magic of this practice would then argue that witchdoctor medicine was being persecuted and "censored" by modern day doctors who were hypocrites for not following their own objective medical philosophies. Proponents of moss-covered, body painted, and beaded witchdoctors would then be able to offer a long argument for the highly technical bio-molecular aspects of organic jungle medicine. They would be able to mount highly sophisticated arguments for faith-healing and natural organic jungle plants etc. All this aimed at allowing moss-covered and body painted, talisman-staffed witchdoctors to do regular dancing around beds in hospitals with magic jungle dust.

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.

[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."

[Edward Prichard]

Yeah well send your chums this from me :moon:

Why? You are as relevant as a dog barking at the night.

[Charles Drago]

All,

"Prichard" is "Hanson" -- an entity assigned to disrupt and mislead.

Its previous attempts to do so here under the "Hanson" identity were rebuffed. It was sent packing. It surfaced on another Internet site and fabricated quotes over my signature.

Visit http://www.disclose.tv/forum/jackie-kill...ml#p429358

There you will see the following post from me:

To Whom It May Concern:

On page 13 of the DRIVER KILLED KENNEDY thread, the message posted on Sun, December 5, 2010 12:31 am by 7forever over my signature is a FORGERY.

In my capacity as owner and founder of Deep Politics Forum, I previously had exposed a not-so-cleverly written fabrication by one Robert Hanson in which he falsified the historical record to attempt to defend his indefensible "driver did it" position.

My original expose has been altered -- by Hanson and/or parties unknown -- to make it appear that I endorse his lies and distortions.

To the moderators and owners of this website: Please make note of the IP address from which this post originates. It is the ONLY address from which I will post on this forum. You will discover that it is not the address from which the forgery originated.

Be advised that I shall seek all available remedies should additional forgeries over my signature appear here or anywhere else.

Charles R. Drago
Co-founder, co-owner
Deep Politics Forum

Then go to the sixth post down on page 13 of that site to see how "Hanson" doctored my DPF words offered as the initial post on the thread found here:

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...ationalist

Compare the two and witness the lies and disinformation tactics of "Pritchard/Hanson".

[Seamus Coogan]

Yeah well send your chums this from me :moon:

Why? You are as relevant as a dog barking at the night.

This dogs got some others for you and your chums :monkeypiss::loco::fullofit: so irrelevant you cant help yourself replying you can't keep away.

[Albert Doyle]

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

Somewhere in that vague patronization I believe you are agreeing that my context is correct (which means yours is wrong).

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

Which, according to your own logic, would cause a "back and to the right" reaction. I'd have to see the exhumed body of the president first, at this point.

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".

Greer was a pretty quick thinker considering JFK had been hit. Also, with the speed of the car being so slow, how did the snipers miss? And considering the angle of trajectory, where did the missed shots go, seeing how they couldn't be so far off as to not strike the objects behind Kennedy? These were downward shots.