Post by claviger Post by mainframetech Post by claviger Post by mainframetech Post by John McAdams Post by mainframetech Post by claviger
My understanding was that Gordon Arnold was NOT standing next to the
pergola, but in front of the fence.
Well . . . since he wasn't really there, it's kind of a moot question.
But in a 1978 article in the DALLAS MORNING NEWS, he placed himself in
front of the fence.
But there was a problem: plenty of photos show that place during the
shooting, and there is no Gordon Arnold there.
So in "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" he places himself behind the
Retaining Wall, which is conveniently in shade.
Sure seems odd that any photographers were pointing at the fence when
the president was rolling past in the street and before any bullets were
fired. Maybe they pointed that way just AFTER the bullets started flying
from the fence area? But that would have had Gordon Arnold flat on the
ground in front of the fence by then, since he says the bullets were
flying over his shoulder.
And most of the photos I've seen from across Elm Street were taken
AFTER the firing of guns, or were photos of a moving limo which might fuzz
up some of the background.
But we must face the fact that anyone that has made a statement
suggesting multiple shooters or conspiracy is descended upon by LNs, who
can't bear that possibility.
Where is GArnold
You mean you haven't got the brains to see that JFK is already hit,
meaning that Gordon Arnold would be on the ground after 'hitting the dirt'
due to bullets flying over his shoulder?
So you don't the brains to know the President was not hit until the 2nd
LOL! So you don't have the brains to see that JFK might have been hit
by the first shot fired somewhere in Dealey Plaza from other than Oswald's
rifle? And that there were multiple shooters as proven by the bullet
strikes in the plaza?
Post by claviger
Arnold said he hit the ground on the first shot and heard more
shots passing over him. Why would the pretend snipers behind the fence
need a camera with no sound?
I didn't say any "snipers" or even shooters were after any camera,
since they all piled into a car and got out of there when they finished
shooting at the motorcade. If anyone, it would be a cover person to
gather evidence that could cause the wrong persons to be caught.
Post by claviger
Several people were using home movie cameras
so why would GArnold's matter to them? Why would they move from hiding
behind the fence to in front of it where several witnesses can now see
them and then steal a guy's camera with several people watching from
across the street?
I never said that anyone moved from behind the fence to be in front of
it. That's straight from your imagination! And not too many were
watching from across the street, since the midfield was almost bare of
people. And I think they would be watching the limo pulling out and
racing away, or the police running here and there. Not some guy on the
ground like other people were.
Post by claviger
In fact there were several onlookers with cameras
across the street. You and GArnold want us to believe they blew their
cover for that silly camera with no sound?
"Blew their cover"? What in the world does that mean? Were they under
cover? I seem to remember they were all strung out here and there in
midfield. Not too much cover there.