Did Secret Service Agent George Hickey Accidentally Kill JFK?

[David Von Pein]

THE "HICKEY SHOT KENNEDY" THEORY DOESN'T HOLD ANY WATER WHEN WEIGHED
AGAINST THE EVIDENCE THAT'S TELLING THE WORLD IT NEVER COULD HAVE
HAPPENED

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

The kooky-as-all-get-out theory that has Secret Service Agent George
W. Hickey Jr. accidentally firing the fatal gunshot into President
John F. Kennedy's head in the midst of an assassination attempt being
carried out by Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas' Dealey Plaza on November
22, 1963 is a preposterous and completely-untenable hunk of pure
speculation....and there are several reasons why.

To begin with, the very idea that Agent Hickey, via this crazy theory,
would have actually had the extreme misfortune of being able to "find"
John Kennedy's head just perfectly via his one "accidental shot" that
was discharged from his AR-15 rifle (and miraculously miss everything
else and everybody else in between himself and JFK) is just way too
far-fetched a notion for anyone to seriously consider as fact.

Giving credence to such a loony theory would mean literally ignoring
so many common-sense things (and ignoring so much evidence and
witnesses), it's pathetic. Such as.....

You'd have to believe that Agent Hickey just kept his mouth shut about
the "accident" with his AR-15 rifle. And you'd have to believe that
David Powers, a friend and personal aide of JFK's, who was sitting in
the very same car as Hickey, had somehow not even noticed this rifle
blast going off just inches behind where he was seated (or you'll have
to believe that Powers was "in" on the "cover-up" which would have
followed, which is nonsense of the first order; Powers would be the
very last person I'd suspect of covering up anything with respect to
JFK's death).

If Hickey had truly fired that fatal shot, you'd also have to swallow
that every one of the many other Secret Service agents in that follow-
up car in the motorcade (a total of seven additional agents) either
ALL didn't hear the loud rifle shot from right inside their own
vehicle...or that every single one of these men lied later on when
none of them corroborated such a shot from Hickey's weapon. Logical?
Hardly.

Kennedy aide Kenny O'Donnell was also one of the ten men riding in
that SS vehicle on November 22nd; and Mr. O'Donnell also failed to
back up such "Hickey Did It" nonsense.

Plus -- No witness that I am aware of claimed to have heard a shot
being fired from around the area of "Queen Mary" (the code name for
the Secret Service follow-up car), which is yet another annoying fly
in this theory's ointment.

And the biggie -- If a Hickey shot killed the President, then a
logical and reasonable explanation needs to be put forth to explain
away the two large bullet fragments that were conclusively proven to
have been fired from Lee Harvey Oswald's very own Mannlicher-Carcano
rifle that were found in the front-seat area of the Presidential
limousine.

And I've never seen such a logical or reasonable evidence-based answer
to that critical flaw within the "Hickey Shot Kennedy" theory.

Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots from the southeast corner window
of the sixth floor of his workplace (the Texas School Book Depository
on Elm Street). The evidence supporting this fact is overwhelming.

And it's obvious that Oswald's second shot (aka the "Single-Bullet
Theory" shot) did NOT produce the badly-damaged bullet fragments that
were discovered in the limousine's front seat. And, IMO, Oswald's
first (missed) shot could obviously not have caused the limo fragments
either.

If a missed shot, moving at approx. 2,000 fps had struck the limo's
windshield and/or chrome strip (which were items within the car that
were slightly damaged during the shooting), that bullet would almost
certainly have penetrated the glass and/or chrome area of the car.
Such a full-velocity shot would not have simply dented the chrome,
broken up badly, and then scraped the windshield. The FBI's Robert
Frazier (who did extensive work for the Warren Commission after the
assassination) testified to this, in fact.

That leaves only the JFK head shot to account for the front-seat
bullet fragments. Oswald's third and fatal shot struck President
Kennedy in the back of the head, causing the now-severely-slowed-down
bullet fragments coming from JFK's skull to continue to move forward,
where the two fragments each struck one of the ultimately-damaged
areas at the front of the car (the windshield and the chrome strip/
frame).

A look at the front-seat bullet fragments (CE567 and CE569), linked
conclusively to CE139 (Oswald's bolt-action Carcano rifle):

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0141b.htm

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0142a.htm

Another thing that tends to debunk the Hickey theory is the fact that
out of the many still photographs and films taken in Dealey Plaza that
Friday in November of '63, not one of them can corroborate the theory
of Hickey shooting the President. There's not a photo in existence
that shows Agent Hickey with a rifle in his hands while riding through
Dealey Plaza.

There is also the official statement that was made by (and signed by)
Secret Service Agent George Hickey on 11/22/63, which includes the
following words:

"At the end of the last report {gunshot} I reached to the bottom of
the car and picked up the AR-15 rifle, cocked and loaded it, and
turned to the rear. At this point the cars were passing under the
overpass and as a result we had left the scene of the shooting. I kept
the AR-15 rifle ready as we proceeded at a high rate of speed to the
hospital." -- George W. Hickey, Jr.

So, Hickey says in that original signed report/statement that he
didn't even TOUCH the AR-15 rifle until AFTER the last gunshot had
already been fired in Dealey Plaza.

Agent Hickey's complete "Original Report" can be found here:

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/m_j_russ/Sa-hicke.htm

Therefore, in order to believe that President Kennedy was killed by an
accidental gunshot fired from the Secret Service follow-up car, it
becomes necessary to also believe that the above-referenced report
signed by George Hickey of the United States Secret Service is nothing
but a pack of lies.

Another of the errors associated with this Hickey theory (as put forth
in Bonar Menninger's 1992 book "MORTAL ERROR: THE SHOT THAT KILLED
JFK") is the notion that President Kennedy uttered the words "I am
hit" prior to being struck in the head by the fatal gunshot.

To be perfectly fair to author Menninger, that information about the
President allegedly saying "I am hit" isn't a fabricated piece of info
at all. It's in the official Warren Commission record, appearing
within the testimony of Secret Service agent Roy Kellerman (who was
riding next to driver Bill Greer in the front seat of the Presidential
limousine during the Dallas motorcade on November 22, 1963).

So Mr. Menninger does have one witness who claimed the President made
such a statement after the gunfire began in Dealey Plaza. Absolutely
no witnesses, however, have been unearthed who can support and/or
verify the main thesis put forth in "Mortal Error", i.e., the idea
that George Hickey accidentally ended the life of America's 35th
President.

Here's the relevant testimony given Mr. Kellerman:

ROY KELLERMAN -- "I turned my head to the right because whatever this
noise was I was sure that it came from the right and perhaps into the
rear; and as I turned my head to the right to view whatever it was or
see whatever it was, I heard a voice from the back seat and I firmly
believe it was the President's, 'My God, I am hit', and I turned
around and he has got his hands up here like this."

ARLEN SPECTER -- "With relationship to that first noise that you have
described, when did you hear the voice?"

MR. KELLERMAN -- "Okay. From the noise of which I was in the process
of turning to determine where it was or what it was, it carried on
right then. Why I am so positive, gentlemen, that it was his {JFK's}
voice, there is only one man in that back seat that was from Boston,
and the accents carried very clearly."

MR. SPECTER -- "Well, had you become familiar with the President's
voice prior to that day?"

MR. KELLERMAN -- "Yes; very much so."

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/kellerma.htm

Now, prior to accepting as fact the above scenario which has John F.
Kennedy actually speaking before the fatal shot hit him, I'd advise
reading some additional Warren Commission testimony, that being the
testimony given by the two women (Jacqueline Kennedy and Nellie
Connally) who were also riding in that limousine with the President
and Roy Kellerman.

The testimony of both Jackie and Nellie, who were each sitting closer
to President Kennedy in the car than was Mr. Kellerman, should leave
very little doubt about whether any audible words came out of JFK's
mouth throughout the entire shooting timeline. Let's have a look:

ARLEN SPECTER -- "Did President Kennedy say anything at all after the
shooting?"

NELLIE CONNALLY -- "He did not say anything."

=================================

JACQUELINE KENNEDY -- "And my husband never made any sound."

=================================

J. LEE RANKIN -- "Do you recall anyone saying anything else during the
time of the shooting?"

MRS. KENNEDY -- "No; there weren't any words. There was just Governor
Connally's."

=================================

"Mortal Error" is just one more publication in the ever-expanding and
bulging library of JFK assassination books. And it's also one more
book, among many others, that can be filed in the category reserved
for "Groundless And Baseless Theories Regarding The Kennedy
Assassination".

In short, the 361-page book "Mortal Error" and the "Hickey Fired The
Fatal Shot" theory are nothing but "Monumental Errors" themselves.

David Von Pein
January 2006

===================================================

SOME "HICKEY"-RELATED DISCUSSIONS AND OTHER WEBLINKS:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/561b01e4cb153284

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/9de16e9fe84813be

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5fe6fea277069438

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/843ccb83cbe285ef

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/9d1cc867b0b9646a

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b27f53eace64593f

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f717207e153620f4

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/138855c20a6d5ba0

http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/discussions/start-thread.html/ref=cm_rdp_dp/002-2065385-6525668?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0312080743&authorID=A1FDW1SPYKB354&store=yourstore&reviewID=R1NDDJNK9HO8W3&displayType=ReviewDetail

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0312080743/ref=cm_rdp_product/002-2065385-6525668

===================================================

[David Von Pein]

DEBATING THE HICKEY THEORY WITH "GRIZZLIE" (JULY 2006)..........

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/24c8c6ec4879c531/3346c4df5d2f47a9?hl=en&

>>> "I notice that every time things start to get rough for you, you whine, and you snip out the arguments that you can't respond to, declare victory and go home." <<<

Only a kook would say the above nonsense. So it appears Grizzlie has
earned that "K" trophy. Sorry, Griz, but you deserve that title, based
on the totality of this "Hickey Shot JFK" this thread alone.

>>> "And you've added circular reasoning to the mix, assuming the point that you want to prove." <<<

Would that be somewhat similar to the type of reasoning you've used in
this thread when you uttered this piece of hilarious, impossible-to-
prove (or support) speculation re. exactly where Lee Oswald was aiming
his rifle?:

"LHO was probably aiming at the back center of the president's head
and the fatal head shot actually struck him at the top of the head."
-- Grizzlie Antagonist; July 25, 2006; 10:48 PM EDT

I guess the word "probably" was put into the above comment to give
Griz a loophole to crawl through when I bring this up from time to
time. Good strategy, too, I suppose. Because, technically, the word
"probably" in there will do the trick in that regard. But that's easy
to see through.

>>> "I guess that the two females {Jackie and Nellie} were too frightened to be of much use as witnesses or to be conscious of everything that was going on around them." <<<

I love this one! The two ladies (who were not injured by bullets in
any fashion, to dull their senses on that basis) were "too frightened"
to hear JFK's statement -- and yet these same two ladies WERE somehow
not "too frightened" to hear the comments being uttered by EVERYBODY
ELSE in the vehicle -- i.e., Jackie HEARD John Connally's "My God"
statement and Kellerman's words as well.

And Nellie HEARD Jackie Kennedy's comments about the brains in her
hands, plus other words spoken by the First Lady. And Nellie recalls
JBC's "Oh, no, no, no" comment, too.

Amazing, isn't it, that the ladies were able to hear everybody, it
seems, EXCEPT John F. Kennedy's words?

Some "circular reasoning" perhaps on Griz's part (or some other type
of oddball reasoning anyway)?

No...because of those two words he started it off with to protect him
from that accusation -- "I guess". Damn. He covered himself again.

I kinda wish Griz was a standard "CTer" -- because this comment....

"I guess that the two females were too frightened to be of much use as
witnesses or to be conscious of everything that was going on around
them."

....is just tailor-made for being thrown back into a full-fledged
"Patsy CTer's" face re. Nellie's not being worth a hoot as a witness
due to her "frightened" status at the time. Because she's the perfect
anti-SBT witness, as we all know, for most CT-Kooks.

Come on, Griz, change your stripes to an outright CTer...just for
today...I'm dying to use the above Nellie argument on a CT-Kook.
Please!

OK...never mind. I'll just have to wait until Ben-boy goes senile and
says the same thing about Nellie being a crappy witness. (Dammit.) :(

>>> "Given that he {LHO} was aiming to kill, are you moronic enough to believe that he said to himself, "I'll aim for the top of his head and see how close I can come to missing him without actually missing him"?" <<<

LOL! What a goof! You still can't see the illogic of your "aiming"
bullshit, can you?

You seem to think that Oswald's aim would positively = Where the
bullet actually entered.

I know you seem to think this, based on this prior comment on the
subject:

"LHO was probably aiming at the back center of the president's head
and the fatal head shot actually struck him at the top of the head."
-- The Griz

Although WHY you seem to believe that the entry wound on JFK's head
was somehow at the "top" of the head...is anybody's guess. Beats me
why you seem to think this (even via your Hickey theory).

>>> "Obviously, dickwad, he would aim for the CENTER of his target and not for his target's edge." <<<

So what? Again...how does the "aim" = "the place the bullet hit". Do
you think Oswald was THAT good a shot? (I think Ozzie was a fair shot,
yes...but he did miss the head twice in three tries.)

And does your "dickwad" remark give me the right-of-way to call you a
"kook" a couple more times here? Just curious. (I think 1 "dickwad"
should entitle me to 2 "kooks" any day of the week...don't you?)

>>> "And I also see no reason to get bogged down in this shit about whether the head shot hit Oswald's "exact" target." <<<

LOL! The irony of it all.

>>> "And you're the one that has to live with your head planted firmly inside your worthless ass." <<<

Oh boy! That allows me to have a minimum of three more "kook"
references. Because one "worthless ass" = at least 3 "kooks".

>>> "By your reasoning, that would have to mean that everyone else in the car was mute. Otherwise, you're just engaging in a kooky pick-and-choose fishing expedition." <<<

Where did I hear that exact phrase before? Oh, yeah.

But my "picking & choosing" is more logical. With your fishing trip,
you've got only ONE passenger out of 5 (not counting JFK of course,
because he couldn't be polled) claiming to hear JFK say anything. My
trip to catch some bass and/or trout has way more people hearing other
people's comments -- EXCEPT that ALL of them missed hearing JFK's
words.

Odd, huh? Well maybe not to a Donahue bootlicker, it isn't.

>>> "But they're on film and the film doesn't show them shooting JFK. You really are poaching onto Rossley territory with this Mongoloid idiocy." <<<

LOL! And my "Mongoloid Idiocy" is considered far more crazy and out in
left field, it seems, than Grizzlie's proven-to-be-nutty Hickey-Shot-
The-President tripe?

Is that about the size of your latest comment, Griz-Kook?

Oh...and I get 1 more "kook" besides that last one (your "Mongoloid"
thingy in there permitted me that. Thanks.)

>>> "I doubt that he was aiming at Connally, but he would have withheld fire against his target -- whoever his target was -- until the car was on Elm Street because he would have assumed that a frontal shot would render HIM - Oswald - more visible to the Secret Service." <<<

At last! Something we can agree on!

With the above paragraph, I completely concur. Well-stated too. And
concise. Nice. (And that is something I've continually fought CTers
about too, using the exact same logic you've used here, Griz, when
battling the ever-popular "Why Didn't Oswald Take The Easiest Shot On
Houston St.?" inquiry that CT-Kooks love to ask every now and again.)

~~taking back one "kook" reference because of a mutual agreement re.
above statement~~

>>> "But no one claimed to have seen {him; Brehm} wield a firearm, and a number of people saw Hickey holding the AR-15 at the operative time." <<<

I forgot who those "number of people" were again, Griz. Can you remind
me, and the masses?

>>> "I assume that Connally's presence would have been announced in the papers and/or that he {Oswald} could comfortably assume that the Governor would be in the same motorcade as the President." <<<

Two "agreements" in one post! Somebody call Ripley's!

Although this one's really only half of an agreement. I've never heard
it stated that Oswald could (or did) know for sure what people
(besides JFK and probably Jackie) would be riding in the Dallas
motorcade.

But, maybe the papers did print that information prior to November
22nd. (For the "He Was Shooting At Connally" brigade, let's hope so
anyway. Otherwise that particular strange theory is out on a very
shaky limb. As if it weren't anyhow.)

>>> "It doesn't matter. Obviously, Kellerman heard JFK say what he said. If the women didn't hear it, there must be a reason for it. I'm speculating on what the reason was." <<<

Nice to be able to "speculate" when you're in the vast minority, isn't
it?

And, of course, it's not JUST "the women". Nobody else in the car
heard any JFK comments either. But, there must be a GR ("Griz Reason")
for them missing it too. Probably the same as the female excuse,
right?

You'll just ignore, or explain away, how 100% of the non-Kellerman
passengers in that car somehow failed to hear JFK say a word. (Try the
Z-Film for "proof", Griz. That might help. Although JFK's hands are
over his mouth just after Z224, so I doubt it will help. But you could
try and read the lips anyway.)

And, while on this subject, Jean Hill didn't hear JFK either....but
she DID hear Jackie talking after the shooting. Hmmmm. Odd that SHE,
too, missed the voice of Jack. (Yeah, I know, I'm propping up a "CT"
witness as one of my own. But, what the hell. Just this once, OK?)

Of course, I can't really figure out why in the world JFK's saying
anything is so important to Mr. Donahue and his Hickey theory. It
seems rather immaterial and meaningless to me, even from the Hickey
POV. Oh, well. Kooks sometimes like to ramble about unimportant
shit...perhaps this is one of those times.

~~girds loins for next retort -- Griz's standard "Read a book"~~

Don't let me down, Griz-Kook.

>>> "But it doesn't matter. Kellerman's testimony is unshakable. Obviously, it's considerably more likely that he heard what he heard and others missed it than it is that he only fancied that he heard it." <<<

Two "doesn't matters" in a row. Nice.

And two "obviouslys" (-lies?) to boot. Great. (Bud made a reference to
kooks using "obviously" a lot. Had something to do with them being
kooky, I think. Seems to fit here anyway.)

>>> "Why don't you visit some singles club and see if you can maneuver your way to kissing a girl for the first time in your life?" <<<

How do you know I even like girls, Griz? "Speculating" again
perhaps....like with many other things today?

(This should prompt a nice evil reply from Nutsack. Let's wait and see
if he comes through as expected.)

>>> "It doesn't matter..." <<<

This is becoming the Griz Mantra, it would appear. Wonder what DOES
matter. (Only Donahue-speculated items, I would surmise.)

>>> "...because YOU'RE the one complaining that Hickey's shot was too accurate." <<<

~~can only stare in blank dismay at this comment and its lunacy~~

>>> "It doesn't matter..." <<<

He's doing it on purpose now. To run up a tally, so they'll all
"blend" together...like a salad or something. :)

>>> "You're not going to wait for an occasion {to call Griz a kook}. I don't have to wait either." <<<

I'm busted on this one. I will fess up.

~~tosses away the now-unneeded "5 Free Kooks" tokens~~

>>> "Austin Miller..." <<<

Let's see...Austin's the guy who said shots came from "right inside
the car" (the President's car, that is).

Well...that's a good witness to prop up. At least you're getting
closer to somebody who says they heard a shot from the SS vehicle.

Only problem there is...Austin said ALL the shots came from "inside
the car". Not just one.

Wanna start again?

Or is Miller supposedly an "I Saw Hickey With The AR15 Before The Head
Shot" witness? I just looked over his brief WC testimony, and saw
nothing that would indicate that. Did I miss it? Or not?

>>> "Your own mantra is becoming a Faggot Mantra. I don't care if that sounds like tomnln to you." <<<

"Obviously" you don't.

>>> "You hinted that you were gay..." <<<

Only to give you kooks something else to chew on and spit out. (Ooh,
that hurt! Don't bite so hard, Tom & Griz! I've only got one of 'em,
ya know!)

>>> "...and while that might not otherwise matter to me for the purpose of this discussion, your personality is that of a bitchy queen." <<<

And exactly how does that quality NOT fit the prerequisite here in the
Kook-Nuthouse??

And, btw, your personality has been oh-so-rosy in this thread, too.
(Full of "dickwads" and "worthless asses" and all. But I guess you're
allowed to say those things and be a "bitchy queen", because you're a
kook....which is oh so "obvious" to me now.)

>>> "I'm getting tired of the way you posture yourself..." <<<

I've been taking classes to improve my posture. Think that'll help me
any?

Martha "I Was Nowhere Near DP On November 22 No Matter What Griz Says"
Stewart is teaching that class. Wanna join?

>>> "...and this might be my last contribution to the discussion." <<<

Threats like THAT will get you everywhere!

Post-Script......

And your propping up Skinny Holland and (esp.) Austin Miller is a
howl! You're actually prepared to do a little pickin' and choosin' of
witnesses, and you decide on those guys....despite the very ambiguous
nature of both of those witness' words.

"Man falling over" couldn't = "President falling over" to you, Griz?

And you've completely invented Miller's testimony about him positively
(or so it seems) seeing a SS man with a rifle at the proper "operative
time" to shoot JFK with it.

That whole thing is mighty weak. Better check with Mr. Donahue again.
Surely he can figure a way out of this mess by coming up with a FEW
more witnesses who can state something completely fuzzy, hazy, and
totally-ambiguous in nature enough to make you stomp your feet some
more and cry "Hickey's Guilty"!

Right?

Hope so. Because your case is a pathetically-crappy one to date.

"Man falling over" = "Hickey Must Have Shot JFK With His AR15"!!!!!

ROFL!!

Make him stop! Please!

BTW -- Austin Miller twice uses the words "man" and "fall" during his
testimony, but it's fairly clear to me that BOTH of these references
are referring to one person (JFK) "falling over". In one of those
references, in fact, he was positively referring to JFK, because he
mentions a "women" [sic] (woman} grabbing the "man". It therefore
stands to reason that Miller's OTHER "man" reference also equates to
JFK as well. .....

~~~~~~~~~~

Mr. MILLER -- "I wouldn't want to say it was the President. It was a
convertible, but I saw a man fall over. I don't know whose convertible
it was."

~~~~~~~~~~

Again -- "I DON'T KNOW WHOSE CONVERTIBLE IT WAS." --- And this quote
here is the only "man" reference that Griz can prop up for his "Hickey
Did It" purposes.

Boy, that's a great hunk of testimony to build your theory around
(even partially), huh?? The witness doesn't even know if it's the
President's car or the SS car....but that's good enough for Griz
evidently.

Holy Mackerel, the gall of it.

>>> "Only one man fell over, and that was Hickey." <<<

Unless we choose to count the man who was being assassinated at that
precise moment along that section of Elm Street....right?

But why would the assassination victim count in this scenario you're
painting, right?

After all, JFK only did, in fact, "fall" over in the car, and he was a
"man", and he was riding in a "convertible" with a "woman" next to him
(who "grabbed" him).

Yep, sure sounds like Hickey alright.

LOL!

>>> "Miller must have seen Hickey fall over because Hickey is the only one who fell over and Miller specifically declined to say that the man who fell over was in the President's car." <<<

KL (Kook Logic) at its finest!

Miller "declining" to say whether or not it was JFK equates to (via
KL) the "falling man" positively being George Hickey, Jr. of the
United States Secret Service.

In-cred-ible!

Miller wasn't SURE which car had the "falling man" in it. But we don't
need him to specifically SAY "It Was Kennedy Falling" -- because
Miller said this (which is just as good as saying it was JFK falling):

"And it was after that I saw some man in the car fall forward, and a
women [sic] next to him grab him and hollered..."

Did Hickey have a woman next to him in the SS car too.

And your likely retort of --- "Miller's SECOND 'man falling' reference
doesn't refer to JFK in any way" --- is pretty weak, because Miller
then claims he had no idea which "convertible" it was.

Common sense dictates that BOTH "falling man" references = JFK. The
first one definitely does. The second one does too, IMO. And even if
it doesn't, Griz is on a shaky limb when trying to prop Miller's
account up to support the Hickey nonsense (via just Miller's "I don't
know whose convertible it was" comment all by itself).

Not to mention the fact that the words "rifle" and "gun" never appear
even once in Miller's testimony transcript. And he supposedly is being
propped up for use in the "Hickey-Did-It" club??

The gall of some kooks is simply astounding, huh?

>>> "Interviewer: After the second time he was hit, what did the Secret Service men do?

{S.M.} Holland: Well, I noticed that this Secret Service man stood up
in the car, in the President's car.

Interviewer: When did he stand up in the car?

Holland: Just about the same time the President was shot the second
time. He jumped up in the seat and was standing up in the, on the
seat. Now I actually thought when they started up, I actually thought
he was shot, too, because he fell backwards just like he was shot, but
it jerked him down when they started off." <<<

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Grizzlie is ACTUALLY using the above words of Skinny Holland to
support the idea that Holland was referring to HICKEY in the above
interview??????!!!!!!

You've GOT to be kidding me!

EVERY scrap of that interview tells us Holland was talking about CLINT
HILL and no one else.

Holland said -- "Well, I noticed that this Secret Service man stood up
in the car, IN THE PRESIDENT'S CAR." (Emphasis mine.)

This obviously means Clint Hill. It cannot possibly indicate anyone
other than Clinton Hill.

Then we have this from Mr. Holland -- "He jumped up in the seat and
was standing up in the, on the seat. Now I actually thought when they
started up, I actually thought he was shot, too, because he fell
backwards just like he was shot, but it jerked him down when they
started off."

The above portion of Holland's interview is also referring to Clint
Hill (based on the fact that Mr. Holland is STILL REFERRING TO THE
PRESIDENT'S CAR HERE, if for no other reason)!

The remark about the SS Agent being "jerked down when they started
off" is perfectly-consistent with what happened to Clint Hill after
the fatal shot, when he slipped trying to get up on the back step of
X-100.

Maybe Griz was just trying to "trap" me here, ya think? (In order to
get me to actually AGREE with stuff that a pro-CT witness said.)

Because there's no way Griz (or anyone) can possibly be silly enough
to equate Holland's "President's car" remarks with Holland actually
meaning it was Hickey in the follow-up SS car.

Holy smokes. This must have been some kind of trick.

~~~~~~~~~~~

Now, onward to the Griz misrepresentations re. Holland's WC testimony
(which is actually taken directly from Holland's 11/22/63 affidavit,
because Holland was asked to read the verbatim affidavit for the
WC).........

"After the first shot the President slumped over and Mrs. Kennedy
jumped up and tried to get over in the back seat to him and then the
second shot rang out. 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." -- S.M. Holland

Now, there's a pretty fair-sized problem with Mr. Holland being able
to support the Hickey-Did-It theory via those above remarks (as anyone
should easily be able to determine).

I.E.:

Holland claims that Mrs. Kennedy "jumped up and tried to get over in
the back seat to him" AFTER THE FIRST SHOT -- which is quite clearly
in error re. the timeline of the shots. (And this wording here from
Holland sure sounds to me an awful lot like he's describing Jackie's
action that she took after the LAST SHOT, not the "first shot". She
never "jumped up" until a few seconds AFTER THE FINAL SHOT WAS FIRED.)

Therefore, when Holland says that the SS man who "raised up in the
seat with a machine gun" AFTER the "FIRST" shot also -- when we put
these two supposedly "first-shot" observations together, where are we?

It seems fairly obvious that Holland's "first shot" reference wouldn't
differ in "Holland-Perceived Time" re. when he thought the first shot
occurred....therefore, in Holland's mind, Hickey and Jackie are doing
these "after the first shot" things at the very same point in time.
Which would mean that Hickey didn't "raise up" with the "machine gun"
until (in reality) after the last shot was already fired and when
Holland was seeing Mrs. Kennedy crawling along the back of the car
after she "jumps up" for the ONLY time during the shooting sequence.

There's also a lack of consistency between the Griz-supplied 1967
interview with Holland and Holland's 1963-1964 statements.*

* = Griz surely knew of this inconsistency before he posted
that....how could he not? Or did he? The '67 thing wasn't followed by
a Griz statement saying: See how Holland changed his testimony
conveniently for a pro-WC interviewer? Which made me initially think
Griz thought the two Holland items (affidavit & '67 interview) were
meant to (together as a unit) bolster the Hickey-did-it theory. I'm
not so sure Griz doesn't still somehow think that those two Holland
statements corroborate each other in some crazy fashion to both
support Griz's belief in the Hickey theory.

~shrugs~

And, in point of (another) fact, if it was Griz's intention (by
posting what he deems conflicting statements by Skinny Holland) to
show that Holland told the truth in 1963, but was lying in that circa
'67 interview -- that's not a valid contention either, I do not
believe.

Holland was talking about two completely-different points in time in
those two statements -- therefore he is probably correct (to a degree)
in BOTH statements. He did see Hickey raise up in the SS car, and he
did see Clint Hill climb onto X-100.

So, Holland, via these statements, cannot be made out to be a story-
changer or a WC butt-kisser of any kind via his '67 statement, IMO.

Odd, huh, an LNer promoting the testimony of a CT star witness?? Odd,
indeed. But for the purposes of this particular debate, it's a valid
and worthy exercise.

Well, anyway, on the basis that anyone could possibly think those two
Holland items in any way are in-sync to bolster the Hickey-Did-It
theory --- In Holland's WC account, he said the SS man (in the SS car)
"raised up" after the FIRST shot. But in the '67 interview -- we find
this:

~~~~~~

Interviewer: "When did he stand up in the car?"

Holland: "Just about the same time the President was shot the second
time."

~~~~~~

Clearly, Holland is talking about TWO different things, and TWO
different points in "Holland Time". (Doesn't matter if it's "real"
time or not...because it's all based on what Holland THOUGHT was
happening, of course, when assessing his remarks for these purposes.)

And, of course, as previously mentioned, Holland is actually talking
about two different SS agents in these two statements, given his
"President's car" reference in that '67 interview supplied by
Grizzlie.

The crucial point about it being two different SS agents can also be
easily determined simply by reading the first question asked by the
interviewer during that '67 Holland interview...when the interviewer
asked:

~~~~~~~

"After the second time he {obviously meaning JFK} was hit, what did
the Secret Service men do?"

~~~~~~~

Clearly, given the question there, Holland isn't going to start
talking about what happened in the motorcade after the "first
shot" (or what Mr. Holland perceived to be the "first" shot, would be
a better and more-accurate way to phrase it).

Also.....

Another thing that (at least partially) tends to debunk the Hickey-Did-
It notion is the Jim Altgens (#6) photo, which shows the President's
limo and the SS follow-up car at approximately a point in time that
equates to Z255. (If not exactly then, it's certainly a picture that
was snapped AFTER at least one shot had been fired, and probably two.)

And where's Agent Hickey "raising up" with the AR15 rifle? .....

www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/images/Altgens.jpg

The Altgens photo isn't the best piece of evidence to try to debunk
the Hickey theory with -- but it is one more piece of the "This Theory
Is Pretty Much Impossible" puzzle that should be weighed, assessed,
and considered.

[eca...@tx.rr.com]

> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0...
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0...

> read more »...

DVP this is a Six Star response
to an extra nUtTy theory that
didn't deserve that much
attention. You have killed a
gnat with a sledge hammer!
MR ;~D

[David Von Pein]

>>> "...An extra nutty theory that didn't deserve that much attention. You have killed a gnat with a sledge hammer!" <<<

Yeah, I know. But I got wound up and couldn't stop.

It's actually a re-post from early 2006...but with some extra comments
and links added.

[lazu...@webtv.net]

Why don't you guys trash yer pal grizzlie Antagonist? can't do that
right? he's one of the lone nut club...

[Walt]

Mortal Error is a government sponsered book intended for those who are
too smart to believe the Single bullet theory, but don't want to
believe that JFK was murdered by a conspiracy. Many American's lack
the guts to face the reality of a cold blooded murder in broad
daylight, in front of hundreds of witnesses.... but they're too smart
to believe the utter nonsense of the "magic bullet".... Mortal error
was intended to give them an altnative scanario, that they could
accept and be comfortable with. The book is a bigger crock than the
Warren Report..... both books failed to convince clear thinking
Americans.

Walt

[luthie...@yahoo.com]

i agree, and although i know JFK was murdered in broad daylight by our
own gov., im not in denial!! its just another attempt to deceive
people and draw them away from the reality of the situtation. another
commonly known tactic of our lovely government.

[Gil Jesus]

On Mar 8, 9:06 am, "Walt" <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>

> Mortal Error is a government sponsered book intended for those who are
> too smart to believe the Single bullet theory, but don't want to
> believe that JFK was murdered by a conspiracy. Many American's lack
> the guts to face the reality of a cold blooded murder in broad
> daylight, in front of hundreds of witnesses.... but they're too smart
> to believe the utter nonsense of the "magic bullet".... Mortal error
> was intended to give them an altnative scanario, that they could
> accept and be comfortable with. The book is a bigger crock than the
> Warren Report..... both books failed to convince clear thinking
> Americans.
>
> Walt

Gil Jesus: I totally agree with Walt. I bought the book, but not the
theory. I found it as much BS as Case Closed. After I read it, I
tossed it in the garbage.

[Gil Jesus]

On Mar 8, 6:31 pm, "Gil Jesus" <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:

> Gil Jesus: I totally agree with Walt. I bought the book, but not the
> theory. I found it as much BS as Case Closed. After I read it, I
> tossed it in the garbage.

This theory, in my opinion, rated up there with the farcial William
Cooper version of the Zapruder film, a washout version that purported
to show agent Greer reach back and shoot JFK with a handgun.

But a clearer version of the Zapruder film showed no such thing, it
showed Greer look back, but what Cooper had washed out was not a gun
in Greer's hand, but the sunlight reflecting off the head of agent
Kellerman.

In that regard, the Cooper film is an obvious fraud to anyone who has
seen the Zapruder film. I had purchased a copy out of curiosity, but
as soon as I saw it I knew it was a fake.

Be advised, there are charlatans and deceivers out there on BOTH
sides of this issue.
It's always best to seek a second or third source when investigating
theories.

[Grizzlie Antagonist]

Yes.

[David Von Pein]

>>> "Yes." <<<

Then I guess Hickey had a Mannlicher-Carcano in the SS car, instead of
that AR-15. And Hickey's Carcano fired bullets that ballistically
matched Rifle #C2766.

Go figure.

[Grizzlie Antagonist]

Hickey accidentally killed JFK, while attempting to respond to
Oswald's fire.

Why are you even bothering to bring up the subject? I'm not reading
anything that you're saying underneath the headings anyway.

A few weeks ago, I pointed out that JFK was a vain arrogant worthless
melon-headed mother**** who was scarcely worthy of the privilege of
living anyway. Oswald's mistake was in attempting to execute the
spavined little hunchback before he (the hunchback and not Oswald) had
actually received due process of law.

And just because I made those observations, you called me a "fucked up
and despicable kook". But that's OK because I think you're a stage
boy fruit loop. You talk like a stage boy fruit loop.

But if you feel that way about what I have to say, why are you giving
me another platform by bringing up this subject again? I'd just about
disengaged from these JFK groups and here you invite me back.

[David Von Pein]

>>> "Hickey accidentally killed JFK, while attempting to respond to Oswald's fire." <<<

Oh, yes, I know what happened now, Grizz!!! .... Oswald's bullet and
Hickey's bullet MERGED/MELDED into a SINGLE bullet just as it entered
JFK's head!!

And (luckily for the SS "cover-up" that would follow) ONLY Oswald's
bullet fragments were found inside Kennedy's head or in the limousine.

That, of course, would explain why THREE spent shells were found in
Oz's nest and why no AR-15 fragments were found anyplace. (A Magically-
Melding Bullet Theory, With Carcano Overpowering The AR-15 Bullet.)

Of course, you still have to deal with this.....

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/Sa-hicke.htm

And you still have to deal with Powers and O'Donnell and Hill and
Landis and McIntyre and Roberts and the other SS agents I haven't
named yet who were in Queen Mary on 11/22.

But, I'm sure you'll ignore all those guys.

>>> "Why are you even bothering to bring up the subject?" <<<

I didn't. You did.

>>> "A few weeks ago, I pointed out that JFK was a vain arrogant worthless melon-headed mother{fucker} who was scarcely worthy of the privilege of living anyway." <<<

You're just as despicable and disgusting as ever, I see.

>>> "And just because I made those observations, you called me a "fucked up and despicable kook"." <<<

Yep. Sure did. It fits now too. Thanks for saving me the trouble by
posting it yourself.

>>> "But that's OK because I think you're a stage boy fruit loop." <<<

Is that made by Quaker Oats, General Mills, or Kellogg's?

>>> "You talk like a stage boy fruit loop." <<<

Whatever the heck that is. (But I guess you know.)

>>> "But if you feel that way about what I have to say, why are you giving me another platform by bringing up this subject again?

I didn't. You did....on March 21st, 2007, at 3:09 AM (EDT), when you
bumped this thread after a 13-day hiatus by saying "Yes".

>>> "I'd just about disengaged from these JFK groups and here you invite me back." <<<

Oh, so *I'M* the one who supposedly bumped this thread after thirteen
days of idleness, eh?

Am I dreaming? Or are you even MORE of a kook than you were in 2006,
Grizzlie?

[Grizzlie Antagonist]

On Mar 21, 8:55 pm, "David Von Pein" <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>> "Hickey accidentally killed JFK, while attempting to respond to Oswald's fire." <<<
>
> Oh, yes, I know what happened now, Grizz!!!

How can you know what happened when scientists and political activists
can't even make up their minds?

They're all debating over whether you are what you are because of
heredity or lifestyle choice. And until they've decided, you still
can't marry Cliff Varnell - not in my state, anyway.

[aeffects]

On Mar 21, 6:52 pm, "Grizzlie Antagonist" <lloydsofhanf...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Hickey accidentally killed JFK, while attempting to respond to
> Oswald's fire.
>
> Why are you even bothering to bring up the subject? I'm not reading
> anything that you're saying underneath the headings anyway.
>
> A few weeks ago, I pointed out that JFK was a vain arrogant worthless
> melon-headed mother**** who was scarcely worthy of the privilege of
> living anyway. Oswald's mistake was in attempting to execute the
> spavined little hunchback before he (the hunchback and not Oswald) had
> actually received due process of law.

gawd I love it when you talk like that, you old rascal you -- we need
more of you whacked out, ball-less reprobates representing the Lone
Nutter cause -- GREAT for business...

Truck on beef-stick!

[David Von Pein]

The Grizz-man is getting kookier by the day (as is fairly obvious).

You USED to be a normal kinda guy....didn't you (i.e., a non-
fruitcake)?

I thought so anyway. What happened?

[Grizzlie Antagonist]

You might be able to marry Cliff Varnell in Canada, perhaps, and a few
European countries, but I don't know if the full faith and credit
clause would require your marriage to be recognized in any of the
United States.

[David Von Pein]

http://images.dvdtalk.com/images/smilies/shrug.gif

[Grizzlie Antagonist]

OK, OK; in San Francisco, they might issue you and Cliffie a marriage
license, but the State of California still won't recognize it.

[freak...@gmail.com]

Although I agree on two points of what you say, one that Hickey could not have fired the shot and two that Kennedy could not have said anything. I cannot agree that the fragments from the front of the car were from the fatal shot or that the first shot missed the car. Mainly because the first shot came from the front, not the back. Plus the fact that the so called magic bullet theory is complete and utter nonsense. The E.R. doctors themselves said that the neck wound was an entry wound and that the back wound do not penetrate for than one inch if that. So that leaves not 3 shots but 4, 3 hitting Kennedy and one hitting the Governor, and it is those fragments that were found in the car. Now do I pretend to know who was behind it, no. I really doubt if the whole story can ever be known. But does the evidence support the conclusion that there were at least 2 or even 3 shooters? Yes, it does. Was Oswald totally innocent, I doubt it. But was he set up to take the fall, again I would say yes. I sincerely doubt if he was ever meant to have left the building alive. In conclusion, all I can say is look at the evidence itself and not at what the Warren Commission Fairy tale. And do it with an open mind for the truth shall set you free.

[nathanw...@gmail.com]

Hickey killed jfk by accident you dont have to be a good shot from 15 feet away to lose your balance and pull the trigger and hit something was it a accident yes ..like they say a bullent does not have a name just a destination if hickey would have not took the safty off the ar 15 than jfk would be alive

[inkj...@gmail.com]

[jbig...@aol.com]

On Thursday, March 8, 2007 2:48:38 AM UTC-5, David Von Pein wrote:

And yet it happed Shot by SS

[tonyvil...@gmail.com]

It all makes sense it was a accident but the secret service had to cover it up. The government had to help in the cover up. How would it look to Americans that there beloved president was killed by accident by the people supposed to protect him. That's why the Warren commission didn't talk to most of the witnesses. They had to help in the cover up. As well as the FBI.

It was to there best interest that we believe the mafia or Castro had there hand in Kennedys death it took the heat off them. So I believe the secret service killed and lead the cover up.

[john....@gmail.com]

On Saturday, November 9, 2013 10:10:06 PM UTC-5, tonyvil...@gmail.com wrote:
> It all makes sense it was a accident but the secret service had to cover it up. The government had to help in the cover up. How would it look to Americans that there beloved president was killed by accident by the people supposed to protect him. That's why the Warren commission didn't talk to most of the witnesses. They had to help in the cover up. As well as the FBI.
>
>
>
> It was to there best interest that we believe the mafia or Castro had there hand in Kennedys death it took the heat off them. So I believe the secret service killed and lead the cover up.

I believe that Oswald was a secret service agent working for the Priory of Sion.

[boc...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, March 8, 2007 2:48:38 AM UTC-5, David Von Pein wrote:

David Von Pein, you are simply an idiot. You were proabably gung ho on Bushs WMD propaganda shit .

[georgeis...@gmail.com]

Hey jackass,let me guess it had nothing to do with trafficante nor invading Cuba which JFK was dead against??? Nor did hickey fire the fatal shot that took off the back of the untied states of Americas presidents head,yet it was lee Harvey Oswald whom acted alone and he wasn't in the movie theater waiting for his contact ***** ********* whom was to meet him there and provide him with the ride??? Yep...right on there fella Oswald just woke up on the wrong side of the bed and said I THINK IM GOING TO SHOOT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! And this is the reason why the secret service HAD INFACT confiscated photos from the emergency room along with all detailed notes??? Or is this all a theory also in your pathetic simple minded democrat way of thinking? I guess these guys are correct and were all wrong here seeing as how the CIA and secret service destroyed all documented evidence of the ENTIRE JFK ASSASSINATION ALL BECAUSE IN THEROY LEE HARVEY OSWALD ACTED ALONE..there we have it boys these fellas sure showed us! For your information my eldest sister is very high up in the us government and I know more then you and 90% of your KOOKS defending you on this thread will ever know about government corruption and conspiracies.

[rexo...@gmail.com]

After weighing all the evidence & facts, I believe without a doubt that George Hickey was the shooter that blew JFK's skull almost completely away. With the way the Secret Service handled the events following the death of Kennedy at the hospital there in Dallas and then the same characteristics at the Maryland hospital....you'll never make me believe otherwise. What were the odds of the Titanic hitting the one iceberg in the Atlantic that fateful night that sank her to the depths of the ocean....the same odds that Agent Hickey had of accidentally firing off a round from his AR-15 and striking the president of the United States in the head, but it happened.

[felixxxa...@gmail.com]

Thank you Rexo, finally someone with a bit of sense... I guess no one likes to consider ballistics... Plus no one seems to want to talk about the SS odd behavior & the stealing of all the photos at the autopsy, the trajectory of the fatal bullet wound, and the smell of gunpowder all the way at the overpass...lets not forget the picture that clear as day shows Hickey with a gun in his hand...love the titanic comparison too ...genius!

[azma...@msn.com]

That sure was alot of typing for nothing. You sir are another SHEEP

[mac...@gmail.com]

http://forum.jfkmurdersolved.com/viewtopic.php?p=32060


Von Pein is a former KFC franchise owner and hardly has the credentials to assimilate a reasonable judgment of facts..

http://forum.jfkmurdersolved.com/viewtopic.php?p=32060

[jdat...@gmail.com]

Wow. This thread has been a fascinating read. I just want to add two things. First, "Mortal Error" concludes only that an accidental discharge from Agent Hickey's AR 15 was responsible for JFK's head wound. The book clearly accepts the medical evidence that the neck wound inflicted by Oswald would in and of itself have been fatal. If you're going to criticize the book, you should read it first. Second, I've been in law enforcement for over forty years, and I'm here to tell you that things like this happen. Those who find the probability of Hickey's accidental head shot too improbable to have really happened are doing nothing but demonstrating their ignorance of the real world as it relates to unintended discharges of firearms. You might think this was improbable but I've seen gun accidents that make Hickey's look preplanned. Forget special committees and congressional inquiries. They're politicians who are ego based and wouldn't understand the truth if it jumped up and bit hem on the ass. Howard Donahue was the first researcher to extrapolate a conclusion based upon the facts and the evidence. So if you've never seen, heard, caused, or been in the vicinity of an accidental discharge, your opinions are lacking a crucial element of understanding.

[john....@gmail.com]

On Monday, November 11, 2013 9:18:24 PM UTC-5, jdat...@gmail.com wrote:
> Wow. This thread has been a fascinating read. I just want to add two things. First, "Mortal Error" concludes only that an accidental discharge from Agent Hickey's AR 15 was responsible for JFK's head wound. The book clearly accepts the medical evidence that the neck wound inflicted by Oswald would in and of itself have been fatal. If you're going to criticize the book, you should read it first. Second, I've been in law enforcement for over forty years, and I'm here to tell you that things like this happen. Those who find the probability of Hickey's accidental head shot too improbable to have really happened are doing nothing but demonstrating their ignorance of the real world as it relates to unintended discharges of firearms. You might think this was improbable but I've seen gun accidents that make Hickey's look preplanned. Forget special committees and congressional inquiries. They're politicians who are ego based and wouldn't understand the truth if it jumped up and bit hem on the ass. Howard Donahue was the first researcher to extrapolate a conclusion based upon the facts and the evidence. So if you've never seen, heard, caused, or been in the vicinity of an accidental discharge, your opinions are lacking a crucial element of understanding.

There is no credible evidence to support the claim that George Hickey shot

Kennedy. Mr. Hickey sued and won an undisclosed amount of money.

[john....@gmail.com]

Hickey sued the publisher St. Martin’s Press, and Simon and Schuster (which published an audio version of the book), and the case was litigated and settled.
The publisher apologized.

[gorelic...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, November 10, 2013 6:54:23 PM UTC-8, georgeis...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hey jackass,let me guess it had nothing to do with trafficante nor invading Cuba which JFK was dead against??? Nor did hickey fire the fatal shot that took off the back of the untied states of Americas presidents head,yet it was lee Harvey Oswald whom acted alone and he wasn't in the movie theater waiting for his contact ***** ********* whom was to meet him there and provide him with the ride??? Yep...right on there fella Oswald just woke up on the wrong side of the bed and said I THINK IM GOING TO SHOOT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! And this is the reason why the secret service HAD INFACT confiscated photos from the emergency room along with all detailed notes??? Or is this all a theory also in your pathetic simple minded democrat way of thinking? I guess these guys are correct and were all wrong here seeing as how the CIA and secret service destroyed all documented evidence of the ENTIRE JFK ASSASSINATION ALL BECAUSE IN THEROY LEE HARVEY OSWALD ACTED ALONE..there we have it boys these fellas sure showed us! For your information my eldest sister is very high up in the us government and I know more then you and 90% of your KOOKS defending you on this thread will ever know about government corruption and conspiracies.

You are illiterate.

[patrick.j...@gmail.com]

[Thomas J Rossley]

> ===================================================

Of Course Hickey shot Kennedy you stupid bastard. It's not in the 26 volumes, but you haven't read them you bastard.

[tom...@cox.net]

==========================================================================
"OVERWHELMING IS A CIA WORD I THEIR INSTRUCTIONS TO CIA ASSETS ON HOW TO
HANDLE CONVERSATIONS COVERING THE ASSASSINATION ! ! !
> >I SEE YOU'RE SPENDING TIME TOUTING THE CI "LINE" SO, YOU MUST HAVE FOUND
> >BIGFOOT OR CAPTURED AN ALIEN FROM A FLYING SAUCER ! !
===========================================================================
==========

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

[boogerq...@gmail.com]

Two different bullets.
No way around it.
shot lines up perfectly for hickey.
It would blown his face off if it was from lho gun .

[Vincent Bugliosi]

I captured Big Foot Silva and the UFO turned out to be a weather balloon.

[jdat...@gmail.com]

Hey Vince,
Did you read the book? The whole book?

[Vincent Bugliosi]

On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:05:08 PM UTC-5, jdat...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hey Vince,
>
> Did you read the book? The whole book?

Yes.

[aber...@yahoo.com]

The round the hit JFK in the skull broke into over 40 fragments as shown by X-rays. The full metal jack round that went through JFK and Connelly, through bone and emerged almost undamaged would have gone through his skull with little damage as well. This is proven by experiences of WWII soldiers hit by similar rounds from the same gun in the head. The round did not fragment. The .223 Rem had recently been issued to the Secret Service for use with their AR-15 rifles. This bullet would cause extensive internal damage as it fragmented yet almost eliminate the possibility of collateral damage, a perfect choice for the situation. Hickey had a clear shot since the other Secret Service agents had conveniently been order not to ride the back of the limo. Also, against training procedures, the limo slowed down after the first two shots. Why Powers or O'Donnell (also in Hickey's car) did not notice Hickey taking the shot might be explained by the confusion and noise caused by the first two shots. Also, the gun may have been fitted with a silencer. Another interesting fact is that the brain of JFK, which would contain definitive evidence that the headshot did not come from the Carcano, disappeared while under the care of the Secret Service.

[chili...@gmail.com]

On Monday, November 4, 2013 1:42:04 AM UTC-5, nathanw...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hickey killed jfk by accident you dont have to be a good shot from 15 feet away to lose your balance and pull the trigger and hit something was it a accident yes ..like they say a bullent does not have a name just a destination if hickey would have not took the safty off the ar 15 than jfk would be alive

I have seen the smoking gun documentary 3 or 4 times so far and I think nobody believes it because it its to simple. several people testified they smelled gunpowder on street level no way they could smell that from the 6th floor to the street.

[Jason Burke]

On 11/22/2013 7:20 PM, chili...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, November 4, 2013 1:42:04 AM UTC-5, nathanw...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Hickey killed jfk by accident you dont have to be a good shot from 15 feet away to lose your balance and pull the trigger and hit something was it a accident yes ..like they say a bullent does not have a name just a destination if hickey would have not took the safty off the ar 15 than jfk would be alive

Yeah, let's listen to a retard who can't compose a coherent sentence.

That MUST be what happened!

[OI...@verizon.net]

> ===================================================

"There's not a photo in existence that shows Agent Hickey with a rifle in his hands while riding through Dealey Plaza." Oh yes there is and that's just one of your misunderstandings.

[lius...@yahoo.com]

[1955bla...@gmail.com]

get real and LOOK AT THE WEAPONS FORENSICS

[flyn...@gmail.com]

Dear Sir,
I think it is ridiculous too. Do you think this photo is a fake Sir.

Respectfully Requesting your response

Jim

http://media.philly.com/images/20131113_JFK_secretservice_600.jpg



http://stashpit.com/upload/big/2013/11/05/52796e34ed993.PNG

[cabel...@gmail.com]

the fatal last shot came from hickeys ar 15 rifle.

[DR DUKE WARREN]

BULLSHIT

[moxh...@gmail.com]

Well one things for sure you can not believe that Hinkey did it and at the same time be a conspiracy theory nut since believing it was a accident rules out conspiracy.

[eliotm...@gmail.com]

Very interesting. In my opinion if hickey did fire that fatal shot in front of other agents, I think it's likely they would protect each other and not snitch on their own.

[alan...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, March 7, 2007 at 11:48:38 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> THE "HICKEY SHOT KENNEDY" THEORY DOESN'T HOLD ANY WATER WHEN WEIGHED
> AGAINST THE EVIDENCE THAT'S TELLING THE WORLD IT NEVER COULD HAVE
> HAPPENED
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Did you slip and bump your Head?
Are you working for the CIA?
Are you related to George Hickey or to Warren who was suppose to work for America instead of the CIA?
Remember this, If it looks like a duck, Quacks like a duck , Its a duck.
Any one working for The CIA is now labeled as Liars until they come clean.
How in the world does any law enforcement agency expect the public to respect any law enforcement agency if they can't even wipe the shit off their own asses?