Question for DVP on his youtube channel

[pjsp...@aol.com]

From where did you get the 11-22-63 radio interview of Charles Brehm?
Do you know the time of the interview? I've been trying to figure out
which came first, his TV interview--which occurred about 3:15 CST---or
his radio interview.

Your help appreciated,

Pat Speer

[David Von Pein]

Pat,

I wish I knew the answer to that question myself. But I do not know.

It's interesting that you should bring this up, because when I put
together that Brehm video (which has a total of four interviews on it,
from 1963 to 1967), I wasn't sure whether I should "officially" label
the radio interview with an "11/22/63" date or not, because I was
somewhat unsure whether the interview was from the 22nd or not.

I ultimately did label it with a Nov. 22 date, which means I might
have confirmed the date before I did that (because I hate incorrect
info of that sort on my videos). But right now I cannot recall if (or
where) I did confirm the date.

And I certainly have no idea whether Brehm recorded his TV interview
first, or his radio interview. I put the radio interview after the TV
one on my video, though. But it might not chronologically accurate.

http://dvp-potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/12/charles-brehm.html

[pjsp...@aol.com]

On page 544 of Pictures of the Pain, Trask quotes from the radio
interview, and describes it as "one of several emotional interviews
recorded on audiotape that day." His source for this interview is
footnoted on page 560, and is an LP by Colpix Records entitled The
Actual Voices and Events of Four Days That Shocked the World." This
leads me to believe Trask is a clueless as we are as to what time this
was actually recorded.

Some EBAY listings for this record claim it was put together by WNEW,
if that's any help. I don't have the record, but if you do, maybe it
would be worth a look.

[Questionin]

<pjsp...@AOL.COM> wrote in message
news:289da6fe-b21e-4731...@x21g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

> From where did you get the 11-22-63 radio interview of Charles Brehm?
> Do you know the time of the interview? I've been trying to figure out
> which came first, his TV interview--which occurred about 3:15 CST---or
> his radio interview.

How it happened? Huh? Looks like another scalper site to me. Every thing
for sell with no value. Every link is a sell. Isn't there supposed to be
some rule against this sort of petty self promotion on this board. If not
I'll set up a fake, pretentious board too.

Anybody can get those interviews from the many documentaries. Why pay for
something when it is already free?

[steve...@peoplepc.com]

If my memory serves me correctly, Brehm told me in 1979, when I
first came to know him, that the radio interview was done with him
over the telephone from home. There is also an interview he gave from
home, I'm thinking with CBS, that is on LP album, and in the
background the radio is playing "Winchester Cathedral". I honestly
cannot recall which interview that is, nor do I recall if it was ever
broadcast on TV.

[David Von Pein]

>>> "Some EBAY listings for this record ["Four Days That Shocked The
World"] claim it was put together by WNEW, if that's any help. I don't

have the record, but if you do, maybe it would be worth a look." <<<

Yes, I have that recording of "Four Days That Shocked The World". It was
released on Audio-CD in 1993. You can hear the whole 49-minute program
below:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/08/four-days-that-shocked-world.html

Now that you mentioned it, the "Four Days" CD is most likely where I got
the Brehm radio interview. I just checked the extensive liner notes that
come with the Audio-CD, but there's no specific breakdown of times in the
notes that would give us any clue as to exactly when on November 22nd
Brehm did his radio interview.

There's an interesting "FBI" angle associated with that "Four Days" record
album too. See above link for some of the details on that.

[Anthony Marsh]

Most moderated newsgroups forbid posting SPAM.

[Anthony Marsh]

Who was the reporter in the first clip introducing the interview with
Brehm. Looks like a CBS anchor from New York, but I can't remember his
name. He said that Brehm was standing on the sidewalk. Can someone please
up a photo or film showing the sidewalk where Brehm was standing? The
Brehm said he was standing on the grass on Commerce Street. If that were
true then how could he have been 15-20 feet away from the limo at the time
of the head shot? How many times does a witness have to change his story
before you WC defenders figure out that he is not a reliable witness? Or
do you believe his original story?

You never seem to realize that even the best witness can make a simple
mistake like getting the name of the street wrong.

[pjsp...@aol.com]

Thanks, Steve, That sounds about right. I originally believed the radio
interview was first, but in listening to them on DVP's channel, it's clear
Brehm is more emotional in the TV interview. He also makes no mention of a
third shot after the head shot. Since he only mentions this later, on the
phone, at home, it seems possible he only decided there had been a third
shot AFTER hearing reports by others that there had been in fact three
shots.

[drummist1965]

Personally, I don't think Brehm changed the amount of shots he
actually heard, because he said many times that the 3rd shot seemed to be
the one that scared him the most. It scared him most because he thought
the gunman was going to start "shooting up the place". What most people
base his hearing 2 shots on is his agreement with a reporter who said "Two
shots", but, this does not mean that this was all Brehm heard.

Regarding the NBC interview at 3:15, look closely and in the background
is 5 year old Joe Brehm, looking out the window. Brehm said that they
remained at the sheriff's office for 3 or 4 hours. Evelyn Brehm, who
worked for Sanger-Harris at the time, was watching the coverage of the
assassination in the store when the interview came on, and she screamed
"Oh my God, that's my husband!".

[pjsp...@aol.com]

On Oct 10, 7:59 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>> "Some EBAY listings for this record ["Four Days That Shocked The
>
> World"] claim it was put together by WNEW, if that's any help. I don't
> have the record, but if you do, maybe it would be worth a look." <<<
>
> Yes, I have that recording of "Four Days That Shocked The World". It was
> released on Audio-CD in 1993. You can hear the whole 49-minute program
> below:
>

> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/08/four-days-that-shocked-world...

>
> Now that you mentioned it, the "Four Days" CD is most likely where I got
> the Brehm radio interview. I just checked the extensive liner notes that
> come with the Audio-CD, but there's no specific breakdown of times in the
> notes that would give us any clue as to exactly when on November 22nd
> Brehm did his radio interview.
>
> There's an interesting "FBI" angle associated with that "Four Days" record
> album too. See above link for some of the details on that.

Thanks, Dave. Upon further digging, I've come to believe that the
interview originated with KLIF. There is a Brehm interview on an LP
entitled KLIF--The Fateful Hours.

If anyone has that LP, and knows what it says in the liner notes, it
would be appreciated.

[Clubking01]

From my video records, an audio -only portion of Brehm’s interview was
broadcast at 3:13 pm from WBAP-TV. It ran approximately one minute and 30
seconds with reporter Tom Whelan on the air.

Whelan began the report with a description of J.C. Day removing a rifle
from the TSBD. He then played the emotional Brehm interview.

The video portion of the Brehm interview was broadcast on the Huntley-
Brinkley Report sometime later in the evening. It is not at a home
however. It looks like police headquarters and there are several
reporters’ microphones in his face. In the first few seconds, there is a
man in a hat standing behind Brehm and behind them is what looks like a
desk with several hats piled on top of each other. There is also some kind
of sign on the wall. I believe the reporter who is holding a phone up to
Brehm is James Kerr, as this is the same interview that Whelan played
earlier.

[David Von Pein]

Clubking,

Steve Barber never said or suggested that the TV interview was done at
Brehm's home. He was talking about Brehm's RADIO interview, as Steve
plainly said.

[drummist1965]

The interview of Brehm with the microphones and so forth that you refer
to was done at Dallas County Sheriff's office. In the frames preceding the
interview, while Brehm is seated in a chair, and there is no sound,
Brehm's 5 year old son Joe is looking out the window located behind his
father. Brehm is clearly describing the shooting and JFK's having put his
hand(s) to his chest area, after being shot.

[drummist1965]

On Oct 10, 11:03 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:

The reporter's name is Charles Murphy, and, he made many mistakes during
the broadcast in describing events on that day, including calling J.D.
Tippit "Officer Tipper".

As far as Brehm's misnaming the street he was standing on, and your claim
that Brehm was not a reliable witness, that is really stretching it a lot.
Brehm was obviously very affected by what he had just witnessed, and it's
no big deal that he misnamed the street he was standing on, under the
circumstances. For God's sake, Tony. He just saw the president of united
states, a person he deeply admired, get his head shot off.

[Anthony Marsh]

I saw the record at only one local library many hears ago.

[Anthony Marsh]

Wiki says:

NBC then switched to Charles Murphy of WBAP-TV in Fort Worth, who
substantiated the report by adding that the Dallas police department
had, only several minutes earlier, notified its officers that Kennedy
was dead.[12]

> As far as Brehm's misnaming the street he was standing on, and your claim
> that Brehm was not a reliable witness, that is really stretching it a lot.
> Brehm was obviously very affected by what he had just witnessed, and it's
> no big deal that he misnamed the street he was standing on, under the
> circumstances. For God's sake, Tony. He just saw the president of united
> states, a person he deeply admired, get his head shot off.
>

You miss the point. Every time you point out an error by a conspiracy
witness I can point out an error by a LN witness.

[drummist1965]

No I don't "miss the point". The point is, is that you are just
wrong.

[Clubking01]

You are correct with what Murphy said, but he was at WBAP-TV (NBC) not
KRLD-TV (CBS).

[drummist1965]

I did not mention which station he was with in my posts, but yes,
I knew he was the NBC affiliate, WBAP-TV.

[pjsp...@aol.com]

I went back and watched the NBC footage on DVP's Channel, and the footage
at 3:13--right before Jean Hill and Mary Moorman--is the video interview,
not the radio interview.

[Anthony Marsh]

>> From my video records, an audio -only portion of Brehm�s interview was

>> broadcast at 3:13 pm from WBAP-TV. It ran approximately one minute and 30
>> seconds with reporter Tom Whelan on the air.
>>
>> Whelan began the report with a description of J.C. Day removing a rifle
>> from the TSBD. He then played the emotional Brehm interview.
>>
>> The video portion of the Brehm interview was broadcast on the Huntley-
>> Brinkley Report sometime later in the evening. It is not at a home
>> however. It looks like police headquarters and there are several

>> reporters� microphones in his face. In the first few seconds, there is a

>> man in a hat standing behind Brehm and behind them is what looks like a
>> desk with several hats piled on top of each other. There is also some kind
>> of sign on the wall. I believe the reporter who is holding a phone up to
>> Brehm is James Kerr, as this is the same interview that Whelan played
>> earlier.
>
> I went back and watched the NBC footage on DVP's Channel, and the footage
> at 3:13--right before Jean Hill and Mary Moorman--is the video interview,
> not the radio interview.
>

Does the video "As it Happened" help at all?

[Robert Harris]

In article
<289da6fe-b21e-4731...@x21g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
"pjsp...@AOL.COM" <pjsp...@AOL.COM> wrote:

Excuse me Mr. Speer, but you made an outrageous claim regarding an
extremely important issue when you said there was no large protrusion in
the back of JFK's head following the final shots, and stated that it was
an illusion caused by Jackie's right hand.

I replied by posting a video in which it is quite easy to see that even
if her hand was blocking part of the head, the protrusion remained and
was just as massive as it was before.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXglIRrg3Kg

Why did you evade my response?

When I make errors like you did, I publicly acknowledge them and admit I
was wrong. Why can't you do the same?

Robert Harris

[Anthony Marsh]

How much of that is hair and how much is skull?

[Clubking01]

On Oct 13, 6:42 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:

> >>  From my video records, an audio -only portion of Brehm’s interview was

> >> broadcast at 3:13 pm from WBAP-TV. It ran approximately one minute and 30
> >> seconds with reporter Tom Whelan on the air.
>
> >> Whelan began the report with a description of J.C. Day removing a rifle
> >> from the TSBD.  He then played the emotional Brehm interview.
>
> >> The video portion of the Brehm interview was broadcast on the Huntley-
> >> Brinkley Report sometime later in the evening. It is not at a home
> >> however. It looks like police headquarters and there are several

> >> reporters’ microphones in his face. In the first few seconds, there is a

> >> man in a hat standing behind Brehm and behind them is what looks like a
> >> desk with several hats piled on top of each other. There is also some kind
> >> of sign on the wall. I believe the reporter who is holding a phone up to
> >> Brehm is James Kerr, as this is the same interview that Whelan played
> >> earlier.
>
> > I went back and watched the NBC footage on DVP's Channel, and the footage
> > at 3:13--right before Jean Hill and Mary Moorman--is the video interview,
> > not the radio interview.
>
> Does the video "As it Happened" help at all?

Well yes. That's where I saw the Brehm interview (audio-only at 3:13
pm). It was broadcast from the WBAP studio with Tom Whelan on the air.

[pjsp...@aol.com]

On Oct 14, 5:58 am, Robert Harris <bobharri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article
> <289da6fe-b21e-4731-b29b-65b8213f4...@x21g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,

Sorry, Bob, but there is no volcano-shaped blow-out at the back of the
head in the frames used by CTs to show as much. It's an illusion caused by
the outline of Jackie's hand, which is passing from his right shoulder
back towards her. If there is a frame in which a massive volcano-shaped
blow-out is visible AFTER her hand has passed back to Kennedy's left, then
that would be news to me and I suspect many others.

When you study the witness statements, moreover, it's quite clear there
was no small bullet entrance on the front of the head where many CTs
assume it to have been and no blow-out in the middle of the back of the
head where many CTs claim it to have been.

Now, if the protrusion to which you refer is not a volcano-shaped blow-
out, but an odd mis-shapen contour on the back of his head, well that
would be no surprise, considering the badly shattered nature of the skull.

[Jason Burke]

And just *when* have you admitted you are wrong with your ludicrous
"theory" about the shot at 285? Or are you just hoping that fallacy goes
away?

[Robert Harris]

In article
<5428e9a0-90aa-4c36...@r1g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
"pjsp...@AOL.COM" <pjsp...@AOL.COM> wrote:

> On Oct 14, 5:58?am, Robert Harris <bobharri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <289da6fe-b21e-4731-b29b-65b8213f4...@x21g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > ?"pjspe...@AOL.COM" <pjspe...@AOL.COM> wrote:
> > > From where did you get the 11-22-63 radio interview of Charles Brehm?
> > > Do you know the time of the interview? I've been trying to figure out
> > > which came first, his TV interview--which occurred about 3:15 CST---or
> > > his radio interview.
> >
> > > Your help appreciated,
> >
> > > Pat Speer
> >
> > Excuse me Mr. Speer, but you made an outrageous claim regarding an
> > extremely important issue when you said there was no large protrusion in
> > the back of JFK's head following the final shots, and stated that it was
> > an illusion caused by Jackie's right hand.
> >
> > I replied by posting a video in which it is quite easy to see that even
> > if her hand was blocking part of the head, the protrusion remained and
> > was just as massive as it was before.
> >

> >http://the-puzzle-palace.com/FBI_3452.tif

> >
> > Why did you evade my response?
> >
> > When I make errors like you did, I publicly acknowledge them and admit I
> > was wrong. Why can't you do the same?
> >
> > Robert Harris
>
> Sorry, Bob, but there is no volcano-shaped blow-out at the back of the
> head in the frames used by CTs to show as much. It's an illusion caused by
> the outline of Jackie's hand, which is passing from his right shoulder
> back towards her.

Pat, a bullshit argument does not improve with repetition.

You need to reply to my rebuttal, which is that the dimensions of her
hand were not nearly great enough to make any difference in what we are
seeing. Here is the video again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXglIRrg3Kg

Now are you going to respond or are you going to evade the fact that her
hand could not possibly have created an illusion as you claim?

> If there is a frame in which a massive volcano-shaped
> blow-out is visible AFTER her hand has passed back to Kennedy's left, then
> that would be news to me and I suspect many others.

It would only be news to those who are ignorant of what happened. After
you confirm that you were wrong about Jackie's hand, please look at this
video, which makes it crystal clear that this protrusion is easily seen in
other frames, and when it first occurred.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTvl9J0Hzwo

>
> When you study the witness statements, moreover, it's quite clear there
> was no small bullet entrance on the front of the head where many CTs
> assume it to have been and no blow-out in the middle of the back of the
> head where many CTs claim it to have been.

That has nothing to do with the presence of this massive protrusion. I
will be glad to tell you more about this once you get past your error
about its existence.

Please watch the videos and respond.


Robert Harris

[pjsp...@aol.com]

On Oct 15, 1:51 pm, Robert Harris <bobharri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article

> <5428e9a0-90aa-4c36-b763-721a5abe2...@r1g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,

I've seen your videos, Bob, but I took another look anyhow. You showed the
same frame over and over where Jackie's hand is blocking out the bottom
part of the back of the head. If you want to claim her hand was not
blocking out the bottom part of the head, you need to at the very minimum
argue that her hand, which can be seen on his right shoulder a split
second before, had already moved to his left shoulder. But you don't even
do that.

As far as your "massive protrusion"...the thought occurs you're trying to
have it both ways, and have the Zapruder film correlate with the
recollections of the Parkland witnesses. It appears to me, however, that
you're trying to claim there was a "protrusion" on the back of the head,
and not a hole. That's not what the Parkland witnesses saw. They said they
saw a large hole missing scalp and bone. I've concluded they were right,
but that they--on average--recalled this wound a few inches back of its
actual location. You seem to want to embrace this "protrusion" as if it is
the hole they described. But a "protrusion" is not a hole, Bob.

[Robert Harris]

In article
<2838ae58-44a7-4ca1...@p35g2000prp.googlegroups.com>,

> >http://jfkhistory.com/bell/bellarticle/BellArticle.html

> >
> >
> >
> > > When you study the witness statements, moreover, it's quite clear there
> > > was no small bullet entrance on the front of the head where many CTs
> > > assume it to have been and no blow-out in the middle of the back of the
> > > head where many CTs claim it to have been.
> >
> > That has nothing to do with the presence of this massive protrusion. I
> > will be glad to tell you more about this once you get past your error
> > about its existence.
> >
> > Please watch the videos and respond.
> >
> > Robert Harris
>
> I've seen your videos, Bob, but I took another look anyhow. You showed the
> same frame over and over where Jackie's hand is blocking out the bottom
> part of the back of the head. If you want to claim her hand was not
> blocking out the bottom part of the head, you need to at the very minimum
> argue that her hand, which can be seen on his right shoulder a split
> second before, had already moved to his left shoulder. But you don't even
> do that.

WATCH THE FUCKING VIDEO SO THAT YOU KNOW THAT I DO NOT CLAIM HER HAND IS
NOT BLOCKING PART OF THE HEAD.

In fact I illustrate exactly what it would look like if her hand wasn't
there.

Now, really look at the video and tell me if the protrusion goes away,
after we remove Jackie's hand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXglIRrg3Kg

>
> As far as your "massive protrusion"...the thought occurs you're trying to
> have it both ways, and have the Zapruder film correlate with the
> recollections of the Parkland witnesses. It appears to me, however, that
> you're trying to claim there was a "protrusion" on the back of the head,
> and not a hole.

I thought you said that you watched my videos on this subject. If you
had, you wouldn't be misrepresenting me.

After you confirm the existence of the protrusion, I will point you to
two or three videos which explain in great detail, exactly what
happened, and how Dr. Boswell fully confirmed my analysis.

> That's not what the Parkland witnesses saw.

I can't help that. What we can see, trumps them, in spades. And for all
I know, there may have been other damage in the BOH and probably was.

This is not an either/or proposition

> They said they
> saw a large hole missing scalp and bone. I've concluded they were right

LOL!! Well, that certainly settles things:-)

> but that they--on average--recalled this wound a few inches back of its
> actual location. You seem to want to embrace this "protrusion" as if it is
> the hole they described. But a "protrusion" is not a hole, Bob.

Great deduction Pat - of course, I never in my life said the protrusion
was a hole. If you had really seen my videos on this subject, you would
understand exactly what it was and how it got there.

But first, you need to understand that it was there.

And if you are honest, you will admit it.





Robert Harris

[Robert Harris]

In article
<bobharris77-5FCD...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net>,

Sigh... I really was hoping otherwise:-(








Robert Harris

[pjsp...@aol.com]

On Oct 20, 2:16 pm, Robert Harris <bobharri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article

> <bobharris77-5FCD5F.16045216102...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net>,

>  Robert Harris <bobharri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article

> > <2838ae58-44a7-4ca1-beea-968f34980...@p35g2000prp.googlegroups.com>,

I responded to your insulting nonsense, but it failed to make it
through the filter....sigh

[Don Roberdeau]

On Oct 9, 10:48 am, "pjspe...@AOL.COM" <pjspe...@AOL.COM> wrote:
> From where did you get the 11-22-63 radio interview of Charles Brehm?
> Do you know the time of the interview? I've been trying to figure out
> which came first, his TV interview--which occurred about 3:15 CST---or
> his radio interview.
>
> Your help appreciated,
>
> Pat Speer

Hi Pat.... (you probably are also aware of much of the following already,
so this is for the benefit of those who have yet to read + learn it)

Mr. Brehm's electronically broadcasted 11-22-63 interview statements were
actually provided after his very first quoted statements to a crowd that
included a Dallas Times Herald newspaper reporter in which the DTH
reporter quoted Brehm within minutes of the assassination, and while Mr.
Brehm was still standing in Dealey Plaza stating to the gathered crowd the
details of precisely what he witnessed from very close by.****

**** the photographer, William Allen, also captured a circa 12:40 PM CST
photo of Brehm speaking among that gathered, listening crowd, and right
facial cheek wounded victim James Tague is also visible standing near
Brehm in the photo. “Dallas Morning News" man Kent Biffle also described
that shortly after the attack, and while Biffle was still standing within
DP, he listened to a sobbing man who was most likely Mr. Brehm detailing
the president being shot.

In that same DTH article that quotes Mr. Brehm's statements (an article
that appeared in only the fifth and final 11-22-63 DTH edition that day
that printed Brehm's name as "Drehm") the reporter quoted Mr. Brehm as
stating that the shots he recalled hearing were fired from in front or
beside President Kennedy.

(QUOTE)

The witness Brehm was shaking uncontrollably as he further described the
shooting. "The first shot must not have been too solid, because he just
slumped. Then on the second shot he seemed to fall back." Brehm seemed to
think the shots came from in front of or beside the President. He
explained the President did not slump forward as if he would have after
being shot from the rear. The book depository building stands in the rear
of the President's location at the time of the shooting.

(END QUOTE)


Mr. Brehm (who, "surprisingly", was never called to personally WC testify,
his name is never mentioned in the warrenatti-report- canard, and,
apparently, in the 7+ years between its 1989 opening and his 1996 death
Mr. Brehm was never interviewed by anyone in the Sixth Floor Museum --
despite being one of the more widely known, and, THE closest Elm Street
witnesses to the shots fired at + into President Kennedy) was not just a
hard working salesman... or a hard working secretary.... or just a
pipe-fitter, or a young high school student, or just any DP witness who
had never been around weapons fire, or any DP witness who had never fired
a weapon, or any in-convenient DP "mistaken" witnesses that had never had
a nearby weapon fired towards themselves.

Almost everyone interested in the assassination now, and, much more than
most likely, everyone in “concerned” "officialdom" then that was
aware of him, most certainly knew that Mr. Brehm was in fact a WWII and
D-Day experienced, highly trained U.S. Army Ranger veteran.

Is it impossible/possible/likely that the WWII and D-Day veteran quickly
developed a realization as informations escalated exponentially and the
blacks, the whites, and the grays of 11-22-63 careened/were-careened
towards an end?

Could a battles-experienced Brehm realization have crystallized from the
considerations that he heard, saw, and (maybe, precisely, exactly like
several additional close witnesses also vividly detailed) what he SMELLED
at GROUND level 81' below, 228’ southwest of and away from the "lone
nut" "snipers lair", and, OPPOSITE the northeast direction of the
winds!!) that there was, at least, one additional armed assassin along
with the Latin man witnessed + detailed armed and very different
features/clothings described at the TSBD 6th floor far west open window,
and, those multiply-witnessed very different features/clothings described
near-in-firing-from the far southeast open window of the warrenatti-
apologists, supposed, "lone nut" "snipers lair".

As 11-22-63 went on and Mr. Brehm was centralized-cocooned within the
investigation with informations he smartly absorbed from investigators,
reporters, other witnesses, etc while waiting + providing his 11-22-63 DPD
statement (that to this second is one of several key witnesses statements
that are still missing from the evidence), he much more than likely
probably heard about the finding of a rifle near the, supposed, "lone nut"
"snipers lair", the forceful attempted-shooting arrest of only Oswald, no
other weapons or serious suspects arrested, and Brehm quickly synergized
these many learnings from others with what he personally saw, personally
heard, and personally had smelled, etc........maybe he realized that for a
very important reason he had to change his first DTH statement of shots
originating from in front of or beside JFK, to his statements of shots
that originated from "back at the corner of Elm and Houston Streets.”

Maybe for a very, very personal reason Mr. Brehm changed his recalled
shots locations and that he was sure that the distinctively separated 3rd
shot he recalled hearing after seeing a 2nd shot JFK head explosion (as
additional other co-witnesses also detailed in mutual support) was a wild
missed shot and it did not hit anyone or anything.

Possibly Mr. Brehm changed his recalled shots locations and the 3rd missed
shot and so he accomplished the exact same thing he successfully
accomplished when he scooped-up his young son, rapidly moved themselves
some, then protectively covered his son with near instantaneous,
instinctive, experienced actions within seconds of that missed 3rd
shot....

.... a loving Father .... priority protecting his young son Joe from any
harm and/or future recriminations.

Very similarly, it is also a fact that TSBD 6th floor warrenatti,
supposed, “lone nut” “snipers lair” assassin 1-shot-fired witness
Howard Brennan later changed his statement then publicly expressed
his claim that even though he, in fact, did lie, because Brennan
did not identify Oswald at an 11-22-63 DPD lineup -- and even though
Brennan had seen Oswald multiple times on TV -- Brennan’s priority
was to protect him/his family from any conspirators harm and/or
any conspirators future recriminations.

Are you also aware that there is also an interesting 2007 article
here....

http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=3&topic_id=58129&mesg_id=58129&page=

....that speaks of Mr. Brehm was a co-worker with Mr. Robert Yeargan,
a carpet sales manager for the "J. P. Awalt & Company". Yeargan had
privately filmed JFK in the murder-cade as he passed by Yeargan just
minutes before JFK reached DP. The Yeagan film was made public in
2007.

In the above 2007 article Mr. Yeargan states that after the
assassination he,

“…talked to one man who relayed his own account of the incident.

‘And so he was standing across the street where Kennedy was shot and
he saw a piece of Kennedy's head fly off right at land his own feet so
he said the man was dead right then,’ Yeargan said.” ****

**** I think that above quoted sentence where Yeargan describes that
Brehm told him he saw a piece of Kennedy's head fly off during the
shots should have correctly been written,

“...and he saw a piece of Kennedy's head fly off and land right at his
own feet, so, he said the man was dead right then"

Perhaps Mr. Yeagan can be contacted for learning exactly where and at
what afternoon time after Brehm's DP-given DTH statements Yeagan heard
Brehm's statements (or, maybe, Yeagan had wandered into DP just
afterward and was also part of that William Allen photographed
crowd?), and further details Yeagan can share for us?


Best Regards in Research,

Don

Donald Roberdeau
U.S.S. John F. Kennedy, CV-67, plank walker
Sooner, or later, The Truth emerges Clearly

For your considerations....

Homepage: President KENNEDY "Men of Courage" speech, and
Assassination Evidence,Witnesses, Suspects + Outstanding
Researchers Discoveries and Considerations....
http://droberdeau.blogspot.com/2009/08/1-men-of-courage-jfk-assassination_09.html


Dealey Plaza Map Detailing 11-22-63 Victims precise locations,
Witnesses, Films & Photos, Evidence, Suspected bullet trajectories,
Important information & Considerations, in One Convenient
Resource.... http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/2192/dpupdated110110.gif


Visual Report: "The First Bullet Impact Into President Kennedy: while
JFK was Hidden Under the 'magic-limbed-ricochet-tree' "....
http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/2446/206cropjfk1102308ms8.gif


Visual Report: Reality versus C.A.D. :
the Real World, versus, Garbage-In, Garbage-Out....
http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/8543/realityvscad.gif


Discovery: "Very Close JFK Assassination Witness ROSEMARY WILLIS
Zapruder Film Documented 2nd Headsnap: West, Ultrafast, and
Directly Towards the Grassy Knoll"....
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2394


T ogether
E veryone
A chieves
M ore


For the United States:

http://www.nationalterroralert.com/advisory7regional.gif

http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/

[Robert Harris]

In article
<090ebcbc-24b6-4944...@u24g2000pru.googlegroups.com>,
"pjsp...@AOL.COM" <pjsp...@AOL.COM> wrote:

> On Oct 20, 2:16?pm, Robert Harris <bobharri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <bobharris77-5FCD5F.16045216102...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net>,

> > ?Robert Harris <bobharri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > In article
> > > <2838ae58-44a7-4ca1-beea-968f34980...@p35g2000prp.googlegroups.com>,

> > > ?"pjspe...@AOL.COM" <pjspe...@AOL.COM> wrote:

Pat, this is an important issue. It's historical value is infinitely more
important than whether you or I get our feelings hurt.

Saying that there was no protrusion and that it was an optical illusion
caused by Jackie's hand, is just outrageous. I cannot fathom how you could
say such a thing, especially after I demonstrated to you that by removing
her hand, you only make the protrusion look larger.

You need to deal with this issue honestly and based solely on the
evidence. And it cannot matter whether you like me or not.

And if you do have to refer to may analysis, please discuss things that I
really did say.


Robert Harris

[pjsp...@aol.com]

On Oct 21, 7:27 pm, Robert Harris <bobharri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article

> <090ebcbc-24b6-4944-94c5-32e7e0c7d...@u24g2000pru.googlegroups.com>,

No, Robert, you need to deal with the issue honestly and quit telling
people with the gift of un-biased vision what it is they see or don't
see. I am a CT. I used to believe there was a "volcano-shape" on the
back of Kennedy's head. Then I woke up. You need to wake up.

[Robert Harris]

In article
<bd5b01b7-ad8e-46be...@j15g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
"pjsp...@AOL.COM" <pjsp...@AOL.COM> wrote:

> On Oct 21, 7:27?pm, Robert Harris <bobharri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <090ebcbc-24b6-4944-94c5-32e7e0c7d...@u24g2000pru.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

This is insane! Why are you saying this?

http://jfkhistory.com/337.jpg



Robert Harris