1+1+1=6

[Bill Chapman]

Kellerman's testimony re 'flurry of shells'

"... a flurry of shells come into the car"

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh2/html/WC_Vol2_0041b.htm

[Matt Grantham]

If you really wish to waste the time, go ahead and point out anything I stated which you feel I should be embarrassed about.

You guys confused a "flurry of shells" with a flurry of shots.  That is nothing for me to be embarrassed over.

 First off I mentioned in an earlier post that I missed your distinction I do have to wonder what your thought process is on this quote. Maybe you had a grudge about someone making a literal translation of some earlier quote that you thought was absolutely ridiculous and this was your way of getting back? Your continuing  refusal to even address whether you actually believe Kellerman  meant the literal translation you are insisting upon, also raises serious questions about what your intention is in this matter

 And now, thanks to Rob, I come to find out you are actually incorrect. At least in claiming there was no quote from Kelleraman saying a flurry of shots Now it may be there was a separate quote of flurry of shots but that is not what you were arguing So your wrong plain and simple. I was browsing around a bit and came across a quote that you always admit you are wrong when it is shown to you. I am not into apologies, if someone admits that they were wrong is generally good enough for me

[Steve Logan]

First off I mentioned in an earlier post that I missed your distinction I do have to wonder what your thought process is on this quote. Maybe you had a grudge about someone making a literal translation of some earlier quote that you thought was absolutely ridiculous and this was your way of getting back? And rather than addressing whether you actually believe Kellerman actually meant the literal translation you are insisting upon

 And now, thanks to Rob, I come to find out you are actually incorrect. Man your going to come up with a whooper absurdity and it is not even true. I am not into apologies, if someone admits that they were wrong is generally good enough for me

 This was a classic scenario for Bill Chapman would clearly rise in the defense of

Kellerman was full of XXXX The only thing that there was a flurry of was bullet fragments, brain matter and bone. He threw Greer under the bus. He made up a story about Kennedy saying something in a Boston accent. Why you waste time on crap like this only solidifies the fact that you're a sorry argumentative whinebag.

[Matt Grantham]

Kellerman was full of sh*t. The only thing that there was a flurry of was bullet fragments, brain matter and bone. He threw Greer under the bus. He made up a story about Kennedy saying something in a Boston accent. Why you waste time on crap like this only solidifies the fact that you're a sorry argumentative whinebag.

 Usually when you want to discredit a quote one either implies the person being quoted has a flawed personal history, or would have had a motivation to lie You demonstrated neither

[Matt Grantham]

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/forum/126-jfk-assassination-debate/

 What am I supposed to be finding?

[Steve Logan]

What am I supposed to be finding?

A new home.

[Matt Grantham]

A new home.

 Clever I guess Certainly a well played distraction from your problems

[Bill Brown]

Aah, what's this?

Mr. KELLERMAN. But after the flurry of shots, I recall her saying, "What are they doing to you?" Now again, of course, my comparison of the voice of her speech--certainly, I have heard it many times, and in the car there was conversation she was carrying on through shock, I am sure.

Are you being dishonest again?

The portion of Kellerman's testimony which was relevant to Walt Cakebread's post (the post which started this whole thing) has Kellerman saying "flurry of shells".

Later in his testimony, when referring to something he heard Jackie say just after the shooting, Kellerman does say "flurry of shots".

In a conversation I had with Bob Harris years ago, he and I were discussing Kellerman's testimony and his reference to a "flurry of shells".

Earlier in this thread when I claimed that Kellerman did not say a flurry of shots, I was going by memory, knowing that he said "a flurry of shells".  Obviously I should have read Kellerman's entire testimony before claiming that he never used the phrase "a flurry of shots".

While I believe that the relevant portion of his testimony which applied to Cakebread's post (which I was replying to) has him saying "a flurry of shells", Kellerman does later say "a flurry of shots" and therefore, I was incorrect in claiming that Kellerman never said "flurry of shots".

[John Mytton]

Kellerman's SS report a week later.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/sa-kelle.htm

One shot.

We were still traveling at the normal rate of speed of from 12 to 15 miles per hour when I heard a noise, similar to a firecracker, exploding in the area to the rear of the car, about 12:30 p.m.

And two more.

Immediately I heard what I firmly believe was the President's voice, "My God, I'm hit!" I turned around to find out what happened when two additional shots rang out, and the President slumped into Mrs. Kennedy's lap and Governor Connally fell_to Mrs. Connally's lap. I heard Mrs. Kennedy shout, "What are they doing to you?"

Equals three!



JohnM

[Allan Fritzke]

For a SS man, Kellerman is a shockingly poor witness.

A close reading of his testimony indicates that he thinks Kennedy is hit by the first 'firecracker' sounding shot and that the 'flurry' of shots came 'instantaneously' afterwards.

Yet somehow after the first shot Kellerman has time to turn and see JFK is hit, get on the radio to tell Lawson 'we are hit, get to a hospital', before the flurry of shots that supposedly came 'instantaneously' after the firecracker sound.

Makes no sense.

IMO, Kellerman only got on the radio after the fatal headshot, not before.

In any event, we can be sure that the elapsed time between JFK being wounded and his head being blown off is not 'instantaneous'.

Additionally, Kellerman seemingly assumes that the '4 wounds' to JFK couldn't have been caused by two bullets (each causing an entry and exit wound) and that Connally's '3 wounds' couldn't have been the result of one bullet.

Kellerman should know better.

When Kellerman is pressed to describe the 'flurry' of shots, it turns out he is actually describing a 'double bang' or the sound of something breaking the sound barrier.

Having said all that, the bottom line is Kellerman still won't commit to hearing more than 3 shots.

So the question remains, if there were 6 shots fired, why did most people only hear three ?

So far the answer seems to be one conspirator firing unmuted diversionary shots while the real snipers were firing away using rifles with silencers.

Remember also that the lead car "waits" in the "tunnel" for the whole event to unfold - a nice safe distance by the looks of it.    They waited there and allowed the JFK limo to pass them on the way to the hospital according to what you see in the late stages of the Zapruder film.   I don't see much point in believing anything Kellerman said - especially when he is ducked in the front seat and the driver has his head placed close to the windshield to avoid the glass spray from the bullets coming from the front at a 1/2 second interval.  Glass spray certainly will show up in the sunlight which is exactly what it did and what you would expect!

There are also 2 other interesting events to look at.   You see the righthandside (RHS) Secret Service (SS) man (passenger side) in the follow up car on the running boards duck in another footage.   No one else does - so he saw something unusual andmay have had the line of sight of the gunfire coming towards him is my take!   Again adds up to the guy rolling in the grass and sitting there, winded after the event!

You also note the person with the "black afro" freeze in her tracks at Z322 and go the other way away from the scene.   This can be verified with the other vantage point footage.    She saw something going down as well.  Who is she?  That is half a second after Z313!  Zapruder's camera shakes and blurs coincidentally with Z330 "light event" and the absence of Kellerman upright in the seat during those frames.   Zapruder saw its unforgettable damage and heard the unmistakable shot ring out!  The blur and change in the President from before and after these few frames cannot go unnoticed.    Jacqueline reacts thereafter as well and decides to flee the scene thinking she maybe next! 

Its pretty simple if you don't believe a number of concocted and fabricated stories to cover up the whole scene.  However, it was required that our Carcano bolt action sniper rifle held by none other than the quickly deceased LHO wears it.  Failure to buy his "neck shot" and head shot means there is a large number of people involved and not just a lone gunman.   There is a reason information is withheld for 50 years - otherwise why not let the truth reveal itself to the people immediately.   Always told it is a matter of national security.  You bet it is if it would be found to be an inside job.  Can you trust the organizations that don't report to congress and are not held accountable to the people?   Your best shots that don't miss come from very close, point blank and directly in line if the target is moving!

Reminds me of modern day shooter Paddock in Las Vegas.  He supposedly committed suicide, they had his body cremated already and there is no autopsy report yet.   That is in public interest?     Why not have a normal investigation and not quickly cover things up if what they tell you is the truth?  Who benefits from these delays?    That smells of rotten fish too!  Just my opinion!