Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
June 4th 1968
#21
You have to imagine a person who saw the 2nd gunman shoot RFK who then ran after him yelling "get that man" is somebody who would not have quietly forgotten it afterwards. So there's probably an unknown dead American hero out there somewhere nobody knows about.
Reply
#22
Dawn Meredith Wrote:
Charles Drago Wrote:The second gunman described in this written statement could not have been Thane Eugene Cesar.

Cesar was the person closest to the kill shot position, from all that I have seen and read, but this does not preclude a third gun, or more. Nor does it preclude the notion that the gunman identified in this affidavit was able to get close enough in to have fired the kill shots.

Dawn

Alas, given the theft and sequestering by the LAPD of Scott Enyart's photos (among God knows how many additional views of the shooting), it is impossible to falsify (shades of JF!) the contention that "Cesar was the person closest to the kill shot position."
Reply
#23
Albert Doyle Wrote:You have to imagine a person who saw the 2nd gunman shoot RFK who then ran after him yelling "get that man" is somebody who would not have quietly forgotten it afterwards. So there's probably an unknown dead American hero out there somewhere nobody knows about.

Or -- as counter-intuitive as it may seem -- Get That Man Man may have been running interference.
Reply
#24
Charles Drago Wrote:
Albert Doyle Wrote:You have to imagine a person who saw the 2nd gunman shoot RFK who then ran after him yelling "get that man" is somebody who would not have quietly forgotten it afterwards. So there's probably an unknown dead American hero out there somewhere nobody knows about.

Or -- as counter-intuitive as it may seem -- Get That Man Man may have been running interference.

Here is one scenario: the guy yelling "get that man" is not the shooter but is now carrying the gun. If they grab the man, he has no gun and is released. The guy with the gun just keeps going.
"We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I

"We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl
Reply
#25
Charles Drago Wrote:
Albert Doyle Wrote:You have to imagine a person who saw the 2nd gunman shoot RFK who then ran after him yelling "get that man" is somebody who would not have quietly forgotten it afterwards. So there's probably an unknown dead American hero out there somewhere nobody knows about.

Or -- as counter-intuitive as it may seem -- Get That Man Man may have been running interference.

I agree, Charles. The man "acting out a pursuit scenario" no doubt was an accomplice, imo.
GO_SECURE

monk


"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."

James Hepburn -- Farewell America (1968)
Reply
#26
Charles Drago Wrote:Or -- as counter-intuitive as it may seem -- Get That Man Man may have been running interference.



I've already considered that. If someone's relative or coworker had gone to the speech and simply disappeared somebody would have mentioned it. If the 2nd gunman had passed-off his weapon and was tackled and apprehended without any weapon it would clear him. His facial resemblance to Sirhan would be used to claim that an understandable mistake was made. However this man would not clear a paraffin test if he ever got to that stage. Perhaps the good samaritan was convinced staying quiet was in his best interest?

Still though, this fails to completely clear the hurdles of counter-intuitiveness because any identification would eventually be prone to deep research scrutiny.
Reply
#27
Albert Doyle Wrote:
Charles Drago Wrote:Or -- as counter-intuitive as it may seem -- Get That Man Man may have been running interference.



I've already considered that. If someone's relative or coworker had gone to the speech and simply disappeared somebody would have mentioned it. If the 2nd gunman had passed-off his weapon and was tackled and apprehended without any weapon it would clear him. His facial resemblance to Sirhan would be used to claim that an understandable mistake was made. However this man would not clear a paraffin test if he ever got to that stage. Perhaps the good samaritan was convinced staying quiet was in his best interest?

Still though, this fails to completely clear the hurdles of counter-intuitiveness because any identification would eventually be prone to deep research scrutiny.

Not bad.

But "identification" would have been false, verifiable on the scene, and later "lost." Also, "deep research scrutiny" not only was anticipated; it would be welcomed for the cognitive dissonance it could be counted on to stir among the scrutinizers and their audiences.
Reply
#28
Ace Security Guard Thane Eugene Cesar was the delivery man.

Waiting behind the partition jutting into the pantry aisle was Sirhan II.

Others steered the target one way while misdirecting protectors another.

The shouting pursuer may have reported the incident to SUS.

SUS was run by Manny Pena and Hank Hernandez with AID/CIA links.

Inconvenient witnesses were ignored or intimidated.

Inconvenient evidence was confiscated and destroyed.

Cesar owned an H & R 922 which he lied he'd sold before the event.

Did the kill weapon enter on his person, and leave the same way.

No one checked him, and his statements are not trustworthy.

Had suspicion fallen on him his fallback was counterfire on the attacker.

Perhaps the weapon was taken from him, used, and returned to him.

Moldea in 1995 writes of clearing him with polygraphs.

Perhaps the flutter hinges on a prepared mind and the right questions.

Did you shoot the senator is not was your revolver used to shoot the senator.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSpoVH0c-...re=related

Not live, not a piano roll, not a piano.

See also, Kurt Vonnegut, Cat's Cradle. See the cat; see the cradle.

Or not.
Reply
#29
If the chaser was genuine a good detective might want to be looking for a speech antendee who died in a car crash on the way home or some other post Ambassador incident.


In such a free nation as America why get hung-up on a totally innocent man sitting in jail for decades in order to cover government murderers and traitorous Nazis.
Reply
#30
Received today from the Public Inquiry Unit over signature of C. Hallinin for Kamala Harris:

. . .we appreciate the time and effort. . .unable to assist you. This office has no authority to provide advice or representation to defendants. In addition, the role of the Attorney General's Office is to represent the State of California in criminal appellate cases and to advocate that convictions be upheld.

Subtext reads: Sirhan was quite capable of the same magic shooting as Oswald or Ray, to wit, point blank shots from three feet away, rear shots from front--

--go back to your videoscreen and watch dancing with transexuals. We have this justice thing totally.

Note: This is merely a state attorney general; should your narcotics organization wish to inquire about the Guns for Thugs Program, direct inquiries to Eric Holder, Dept AK 47, Stone Wall Armory, Washington, DC, 60468.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Anyone For 1968 Indiana and California Primary Demographics? Nathaniel Heidenheimer 0 2,917 21-12-2013, 04:43 PM
Last Post: Nathaniel Heidenheimer
  The 1968 RFK campaign As a critical lens on the history of the Democrats 1928-2013 Nathaniel Heidenheimer 2 4,116 16-06-2013, 08:47 PM
Last Post: Nathaniel Heidenheimer

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)