The Silent Witness, Mary Moorman, Finally Shares Her Story Almost 50 years After The Murder Of JFK

Originally posted by Rising Against
reply to post by ronishia

 

For anyone who isn't aware, the images found in the previous post have seemingly come from the 'Orville Nix film' as shown here:

Anyway, from the descriptions given, I have no idea what image you guys are thinking of exactly. I've seen a lot of images myself as well and nothing's come to mind. It's a bit of a mystery.

If this is the (a) shooter, why doesn't he move? He appears tobe in the same position after the motorcade passes what would be his line of sight.

There are way to many videos to even consider watching them.

The cover up of who was involved and why he and his brother were both marked for elimination is mind boggling.

It was actually retribution for what their father had done in his life and who he had made enemies with.

Many factions of different interests all conspired to take him out.

I could add some information that even the best investigative journalist does not even know.

But I will not attempt to discus it here.

This post will probably not even be read,but I will give you who do, some bread crumbs to follow.

Where in California did Joe Kennedy have a secret love nest?

Where in California did G.W.H. Bush live with his young family for a period of time?

Where in California did Robert Kennedy campaign at on his last day on this earth?

Where in California did Sirhan B. Sirhan work as a stable boy?

I will give you a hint.

Where is Ronald Reagan's Presidential library located at?

reply to post by IamJustanAmerican

There are way to many videos to even consider watching them.

There's 7 10 minute videos. How is that too many?

Look under each video and you can see the main areas of discussion also. Just watch what interests you if needs be.

Edit to add:

I could add some information that even the best investigative journalist does not even know.

But I will not attempt to discus it here.

You should start a new thread then, I for one would love to hear what you have to say.

reply to post by missvicky


I agree with you to be honest. He seems to be too much "in view" as well, so much so that someone surely would have spotted him even prior to the shots being fired. I think if anything, this may just be pareidolia at work here - this being the reason we can see what appears to be a sniper taking aim.

The most likely shooting position however, as can be seen in the Moorman photo, is around this area here:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a8508c994c7e.jpg[/atsimg]

Reason being, here is an advanced image of what we can see upon zooming into this particular area:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/150912dcceea.jpg[/atsimg]

The man to the far left is called Gordon Arnold and he's not under suspicion as far as I'm concerned. Here's an interesting source discussing him and what he saw in fact:

While walking by the Grassy Knoll he was stopped by a man claiming to be a member of the Secret Service. He later told Jim Marrs: "I was walking along behind this picket fence when a man in a light-colored suit came up to me and said I shouldn't be up there. I was young and cocky and I said, "Why not?" And he showed me a badge and said he was with the Secret Service and that he didn't want anyone up there. I said all right and started walking back along the fence. I could feel that he was following me and we had a few more words. I walked around to the front of the fence and found a little mound of dirt to stand on to see the motorcade."

Arnold claimed that the first shot was fired from behind him. After the firing had finished, Arnold claimed that a policeman with a gun forced him to hand over the film in his camera. Arnold returned to Fort Wainwright and was never interviewed by the Warren Commission or the House Select Committee on Assassinations about what he had seen on 22nd November, 1963.

(Source)

If you've ever watched the series "The Men Who Killed Kennedy", you'lll see an interview where Arnold discusses this.

Anyway, badgemen in the middle, this being the man whom allegedly took the film away from Arnold perhaps, on the other hand appears to be taking aim in the above image. I suspect this isn't a police officer at all like many suspect him to be, more so a man in disguise in fact. The man next to him appears to be with him also.

Here's an interesting snippet from Lee Bowers discussing these 2 men - this claim by Bowers also backs up the theory this alleged police officer (or man in disguise) fired a gun:

Bowers also reported seeing two men standing near the picket fence on the Grassy Knoll. He added: "These men were the only two strangers in the area. The others were workers whom I knew." Bowers said the two men were there while the shots were fired.

Mark Lane interviewed Bowers for his book Rush to Judgment (1966): "At the time of the shooting, in the vicinity of where the two men I have described were, there was a flash of light or, as far as I am concerned, something I could not identify, but there was something which occurred which caught my eye in this immediate area on the embankment. Now, what this was, I could not state at that time and at this time I could not identify it, other than there was some unusual occurrence - a flash of light or smoke or something which caused me to feel like something out of the ordinary had occurred there."

(Source)

Here is this interview:

reply to post by lonegurkha

You know it's been driving me nuts too. I can't seem to remember where I saw that picture. I've spent several hours searching for it.

Is this the picture you've been searching for?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a379f25bc088.jpg[/atsimg]



Edit to add: Or is this it?:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a52f4e172498.jpg[/atsimg]

Here he is zoomed in:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2afc6f2f8db9.jpg[/atsimg]

Thanks for this thread. I usually end up bookmarking your threads RisingAgainst as JFK is one of my favorite research topics. I thought the interview was interesting and a bit odd. I don't think Ms. Moorman is a conspiracy theorist at all. hehe It seems like she was trying to dispel most theories surrounding the assassination. At any rate, I wanted to stop by and thank you for your work.

reply to post by glitchinthematrix


Thanks for the very kind words.

In regards to Mary Moorman and her interview though.. well, I'm not so sure I agree that she was trying to dispel any conspiracy theories or anything. I mean take the fact she said the car slowed to an almost stop for example - this being a huge point of debate over the years and it's also something that is denied by those in a position to deny such things and yet here we have Mary confirming it did in fact happen.

We also have confirmation that more than one head shot struck it seems, not forgetting the 3 bullets Mary heard were completely inconsistent with the claims made by the WC and at the same time were fully consistent with many other witnesses.

It was an interesting interview I felt and one that answered questions if only if it was for me personally.

Anyway, thanks for your post glitchinthematrix.

Your "close up" photos look ridiculous.

Just needed to say it.

reply to post by Aeons


2 Points here:

1.) If that's your idea of "debate", you might need to try harder..

And 2.) What are you talking about exactly? The close-up's of 'Badgeman' and the other 2 individuals?

You do realize the above close-up has been enhanced for easier viewing and also has color added to it, don't you?

I am not debating you. I don't care. Man who pissed off Mafia, being the head of the Irish Mafia's son got himself shot. Not a big fracking mystery.

Mafia son became president. Never occurs to people that they also had family members of other mafia groups in the CIA, the FBI, police and the Military? Seriously, people are so ridiculous.

I could add to a picture colours and "enhance" it to see Barney The Dinosaur too. The "enhancements" look utterly ridiculous.

reply to post by Aeons

I am not debating you. I don't care.

Clearly..

I could add to a picture colours and "enhance" it to see Barney The Dinosaur too. The "enhancements" look utterly ridiculous.

Ok, from that response, I don't think you quite "get it". This being so, here's the original picture:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a8508c994c7e.jpg[/atsimg]

The round circle is where these 3 gentleman can be seen. Upon zooming in a great deal, here is what we can see exactly:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f5229fa57968.jpg[/atsimg]

From further enhancements, this is what we can now see:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/150912dcceea.jpg[/atsimg]

The point is, there isn't any debate about "something" or "someone" being here, which is what you seem to think. This is actual fact. The debate lays on whether these are potential shooters or not.

Also, the man to the far left in the above image is in front of the fence. His name is Gordon Arnold, here's a snippet about him which I showed in an earlier post:

While walking by the Grassy Knoll he was stopped by a man claiming to be a member of the Secret Service. He later told Jim Marrs: "I was walking along behind this picket fence when a man in a light-colored suit came up to me and said I shouldn't be up there. I was young and cocky and I said, "Why not?" And he showed me a badge and said he was with the Secret Service and that he didn't want anyone up there. I said all right and started walking back along the fence. I could feel that he was following me and we had a few more words. I walked around to the front of the fence and found a little mound of dirt to stand on to see the motorcade."

Arnold claimed that the first shot was fired from behind him. After the firing had finished, Arnold claimed that a policeman with a gun forced him to hand over the film in his camera. Arnold returned to Fort Wainwright and was never interviewed by the Warren Commission or the House Select Committee on Assassinations about what he had seen on 22nd November, 1963.

(Source)

The other 2 men, these 2 men seen by witness Lee Bowers who was situated behind the grassy knoll, are currently unknown.

The "colour enchancement" is ridiculous looking still. Sorry. I could make the "guy" blobl on the left look like Admiral Ackbar from Star Wars.

reply to post by Aeons


In case you wasn't aware, Arnold was holding a camera to his face - this is why we can't make out any facial features.

Originally posted by Rising Against
reply to post by Aeons

 

In case you wasn't aware, Arnold was holding a camera to his face - this is why we can't make out any facial features.

Admiral Akbar was standing right next to the shooter! Amazing. Then, why is this still a mystery to people?

reply to post by Aeons


Can you stop trolling and start acting like an intelligent adult now? You can act like one can't you? I'm here to learn about this case, not act like an idiot...

Anyway, when you can, I'll be here to debate...

reply to post by Aeons


Perhaps you have a sight issue? It appears to clear up the image for me compared to the black and white. The middle guy is considerably clearer for me, as is the one on the right. May I suggest you find your five minutes of trolling fame elsewhere and take your "hillarious" admiral akbar comments to a BTS star wars thread.

nvm

reply to post by Rising Against


Debate what? Fuzzy photos "enchanced" like one adding faces to clouds?

The best thing to learn from all the people looking at the teeny tiny details of this event, is that you can distract some people by pointing them endlessly at details which can be made to fit anything like tea leaves.

I mostly look at this stuff of see if there is anything interesting that pops up. But every now and then, I do indeed like to point out just how distracted by tea leaves people are. Willing to go to the mattresses to defend your interpretation of tea leaves, and in the mean time you actually miss everything that might be important about it.

There is nothing to debate. You want me to debate that your rendition of Admiral Ackbar and the out-of-place WWI solider are somehow important? Why would I do that?

I feel totally okay pointing out that your picture enchancement sucks, just like Mr.I-See-Animals-and-Aliens on the Mars Rover picture guys photo "enhancement" blows.

Tea Leaves and Clouds.

reply to post by Rising Against


Not everyone finds Arnold's statements convincing, for example he also said:

And what happened was that, while I was laying on the ground, it seem like a gentleman came from this particular direction and I thought he was a police officer cause he had the uniform of a police officer. But he didn't wear a hat and he had dirty hands but that didn't realy matter much at that time because, with him crying like he was, and with him shaking when he had the weapon in his hand, I think I'd gave him almost anything except the camera cause that was my mothers. And litteraly what the man did was kick, kick me, and ask me if I was taking a picture. I told him that I was, and when I looked at the weapon it was about that big around (Gordon Arnold shows the size of a hand gun between his hands) I decided let them go ahead and and have the film. I gave it to him and than he went back off in this direction (Gordon Arnold points with his left arm half way behind him). I went off in this direction (Gordon Arnold points left with his left arm). And three days later I was on Alaska and I didn't come back to the United States for about 18 months"

Source: mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

So with everyone rushing up to the Grassy Knoll, no one saw this cop kicking and crying over Arnold? Although I don't personally believe it, some conspiracy theorists say Arnold had a handgun concealed in the camera and may have been a more "active" participant.

Great thread by the way, I haven't seen some of these photos before.

reply to post by Aeons

There is nothing to debate.

Yeah, because It's not like we've exchanged posts back and forth over this issue or anything.

Maybe you need to look up the definition of debate perhaps?

Anyway, and whether you like it or not, this is a zoomed in image from the grassy knoll as seen in the Moorman photo:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f5229fa57968.jpg[/atsimg]

If you can't see it, even without any enhancements (which are shown in previous posts), you might wish to look a bit harder because It's actually not that difficult to see. Witness Lee Bowers also confirms seeing the 2 individuals to the right as shown here:

"These men were the only two strangers in the area. The others were workers whom I knew." Bowers said the two men were there while the shots were fired.

Mark Lane interviewed Bowers for his book Rush to Judgment (1966): "At the time of the shooting, in the vicinity of where the two men I have described were, there was a flash of light or, as far as I am concerned, something I could not identify, but there was something which occurred which caught my eye in this immediate area on the embankment. Now, what this was, I could not state at that time and at this time I could not identify it, other than there was some unusual occurrence - a flash of light or smoke or something which caused me to feel like something out of the ordinary had occurred there."

(Source)

Whether you like it or not, Bowers saw people in this area and we also have images showing what appears to be the 2 individuals in the Moorman photo, both even fitting the description of Bowers..Can you really still not see anything.

Here's a previous thread where I discussed Bowers at length.