The Killing Floor

The Killing Floor

A new documentary on the assassination.

https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-killing-floor

Vinny wrote:

The Killing Floor

A new documentary on the assassination.

https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-killing-floor

Vinny, maybe you (or someone) could give us a review? doesn't have to be in-depth, just a quick overview?

greg_parker wrote:

Vinny wrote:

The Killing Floor

A new documentary on the assassination.

https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-killing-floor

Vinny, maybe you (or someone) could give us a review? doesn't have to be in-depth, just a quick overview?

https://youtu.be/JtF1mM9gcW4

I thought it was really good. It's a roll-your-own cinematic effort and well done at that. My amateur take is that it was kind of refreshing to see quality content like you find in a Oliver Stone work presented in a more down to earth, more deeply diving researcher's style. Nice production value, a terrific, credible primer with plenty to offer and a surprise ending to boot (at least to me).

The only flaw from my view is the notion that LHO would have gone back up from lunch and p.parade on the 1st to get a coke on the 2nd especially when he said he got the coke first, then had lunch (like a normal human being would do). I guess it's just too shocking to come out and state the 2FE was the utter hogwash that it was. He had enough on his plate with how he proved the fabrication and dissembling that the WC did in the matter of Vicki Adams. That was excellent. So, I would ask, if they would do it with what did and did not happen on the stairs, wouldn't they do it to with what did and did not happen in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room? Why yes, they most certainly would.

greg_parker wrote:

Vinny wrote:

The Killing Floor

A new documentary on the assassination.

https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-killing-floor

Vinny, maybe you (or someone) could give us a review? doesn't have to be in-depth, just a quick overview?

 I haven't watched it yet.

Jake_Sykes wrote:I thought it was really good. It's a roll-your-own cinematic effort and well done at that. My amateur take is that it was kind of refreshing to see quality content like you find in a Oliver Stone work presented in a more down to earth, more deeply diving researcher's style. Nice production value, a terrific, credible primer with plenty to offer and a surprise ending to boot (at least to me).

The only flaw from my view is the notion that LHO would have gone back up from lunch and p.parade on the 1st to get a coke on the 2nd especially when he said he got the coke first, then had lunch (like a normal human being would do). I guess it's just too shocking to come out and state the 2FE was the utter hogwash that it was. He had enough on his plate with how he proved the fabrication and dissembling that the WC did in the matter of Vicki Adams. That was excellent. So, I would ask, if they would do it with what did and did not happen on the stairs, wouldn't they do it to with what did and did not happen in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room? Why yes, they most certainly would.

 Thanks for the review, Jake.

Thanks for posting it Vinny. I fixed my error in naming Oliver Stone. Chase me down and slap me.

In maintaining his defense of the WR, DVP on EF finds it necessary to limit the human senses of Dorothy Garner and the rest  to that of sight only so that Oswald may weave his way through the gauntlet of prying eyes undetected on his epic journey to the lunch room. They may not hear his footsteps echo through the noisy tread-way for if they did, well everything gets really stuffed up. It's either that or relieve Oswald of the force of gravity and allow him to rapidly float over said tread-way unheard and of course, unseen as he wends his way downward to the fate that awaits him.

DVP is a WC fundamentalist.

Vinny wrote:DVP is a WC fundamentalist.

WC fundamentalist.

There's probably a few other names which spring to mind as well Vinny.

I'm not going to watch it. So over giving things a pass even though they support key parts of a false narrative.

So without having watched it, these are the areas I have a problem with in this whole lunchtime saga space that accepts the 2nd floor lunchroom crap with variations around it.

1. The obvious. The encounter was part of a false narrative designed to help bury Oswald and his alibi.

2. I do not believe the girls left immediately. Ernest's concentration on Adams is even reflected in the name of the book. He concentrated on her because he could use her version to sell his book. Styles told Sean Murthy she believed it was two or three minutes at least before they left. She also said that Ernest was not interested in talking about that, but questioned her almost exclusively on the layout of the floor. Which I find puzzling. Not sure if the WC published plans of that floor, but even if they did not, why didn't he ask Adams? Could it be that she was not so reliable on that score?  I will post Sean's email exchanges with Styles separately.

3. Thinking more on the Garner claim that she saw Truly and a police officer going up...again, Styles seemed rather dubious about that in her emails. More than that, the letter is dated in June - presumably not too late to call Garner as a witness to the two coming up. Sorely needed since they had no other witnesses. At the very least, they could have requrested the FBI to interview her. After all, who knows what else she may have seen or heard that was potentially important, even if she herself did not think so?  One reason for not calling her or getting her interviewed is that they either ( a ) knew the 2nd floor encounter was bullshit or ( b ) they did have someone talk to her, maybe just by phone initially, or informally face to face, who decided for whatever reason that she was not a good witness.

Mick_Purdy wrote:

Vinny wrote:DVP is a WC fundamentalist.

WC fundamentalist.

There's probably a few other names which spring to mind as well Vinny.

 Indeed. Posner, Roe, Litwin, Myers etc.

Garner *was* interviewed on June 2, Greg, apparently by Martha Stroud Asst US Attorney who helped with the WC "investigation".  That's why the famous Stroud letter says:  "Miss Garner, Miss Adams' supervisor, *stated this morning* that after Miss Adams went downstairs she (Miss Garner) saw Mr. Truly and the policeman come up."

The WC not only tried unsuccessfully to bury the Stroud letter, they destroyed Garner's testimony which obviously destroyed their case.  There remains no record of it.

I haven't seen the Styles-Murphy exchanges (you're going to post them?) but if I had to choose between Styles' and Adam's versions of the timing I'd be a little reluctant to go with Styles.

The WC had a debate among staff about whether or not to use a "pre-interview" technique before the actual, official interview to feel witnesses out and figure out how to get them to say what they wanted them to say.  Pre-interview advocates won the debate.

They obviously knew Adams testimony was a crucial problem for them.  It's clear to me that they would have talked to Styles to try to find a way around it.  If she had contradicted Adams' timing like is claimed now, they would surely have used that to discredit Adams instead of having to change Adams testimony without her knowledge and claim Adams had said she saw Lovelady and Shelly when she reached the first floor.  An obvious lie Adams later exposed.

In that case we might not have even known about Adam's testimony  (The WR record only includes what they wanted us to see).  Oswald, the story goes,  came down the steps while the women were still milling around the window, only to run into Truly on the second floor before Truly continued up the stairs.  Oswald lied in his interrogation. Fits nicely.

I posted a note on EF saying the film was good, except for his acceptance of 2nd floor lunch room fabrication.  It would have been cleaner and stronger with that deleted.  

You should watch it with that in mind.

Garner *was* interviewed on June 2, Greg, apparently by Martha Stroud Asst US Attorney who helped with the WC "investigation".  That's why the famous Stroud letter says:  "Miss Garner, Miss Adams' supervisor, *stated this morning* that after Miss Adams went downstairs she (Miss Garner) saw Mr. Truly and the policeman come up."

Thanks Roger. I know about the letter, but have a different take on it to what you seem to have.

Each witness was given the opportunity to review the transcript of their testimony and make any changes. I think that was the context of the Stroud-Adams meeting. I don't believe that Garner was  interviewed. If she was, there should be a separate document. I think Stroud is reporting an aside from Garner who may have been present when Adams was reviewing her testimony, or else Stroud is reporting hearsay. 

It was up to the WC to then decide if Garner should be formerly deposed, or at least interviewed formerly by the FBI specifically about the alleged sighting. 

My own view is that she saw Jack. No, not Dougherty. Mr. Shit himself. Though Sandra did not quite go that far, she expressed some scepticism about Garner's sighting. 

The WC not only tried unsuccessfully to bury the Stroud letter, they destroyed Garner's testimony which obviously destroyed their case.  There remains no record of it.

Again, I have a different take. They should have jumped at the chance to interview here for one very good reason. Witnesses to Truly going upstairs with a cop were as rare as yits on a bull. They had the belated say-so of Lovelady - which is about as trustworthy as Givens belated say-so that Oswald was on the 6th when he went back to get his cigarettes. 

But they passed on that opportunity to get another witness on record to support their 2nd floor lies. Maybe they realized she was not telling the truth - because they knew their was no 2nd floor encounter and a witness like Garner might do more damage than good if she can't keep a poker face. I really don't understand why you think they tried to bury it. 

They obviously knew Adams testimony was a crucial problem for them.  It's clear to me that they would have talked to Styles to try to find a way around it.  If she had contradicted Adams' timing like is claimed now, they would surely have used that to discredit Adams instead of having to change Adams testimony without her knowledge and claim Adams had said she saw Lovelady and Shelly when she reached the first floor.  An obvious lie Adams later exposed.

When you read the exchanges with Sean, you will understand why she did not contradict Adams. The short version is that Adams was self-assured and confident (which is NOT a reliable indicator of an accurate memory or anything lese) and Styles was as Lennon sang, was "not so self-assured" and she went along with whatever the pushy Adams said. 

I am struggling to get the importance of Adams. My take on her is that she liked the limelight and that Ernest had a compliant witness in her - much like Armstrong found a whole bunch of compliant witnesses. And according to Styles, he lied in  what he claimed she said to him. No, I'll rephrase for accuracy. She didn't accuse him of lying. But she did say she did bot recall saying any of what he claimed she said. 

Ultimately, Oswald only had one alibi and none of these three women have any revelance to it. And we a lot of evidence for that alibi, with one key exception. And it is NOT any alleged hokey-pokey with the  witness transcripts by the WC. As for the tapes - I think theyw were all destroyed, weren't they? 

In that case we might not have even known about Adam's testimony  (The WR record only includes what they wanted us to see).  Oswald, the story goes,  came down the steps while the women were still milling around the window, only to run into Truly on the second floor before Truly continued up the stairs.  Oswald lied in his interrogation. Fits nicely.

We already knew the official story was bullshit and have solid evidence for what really happened. Adams is not needed, nor in my opinion, even welcome. Ultimately she just serves the purpose of those pushing the 2nd floor lunchroom bullshit.

According to Styles, the police were inside when they went down. That means a good 3 or 4 minutes before they made the descent. She did not mention, nor did Sean ask about Shelley and Lovelady, so they may or may not have been there as well. 

I posted a note on EF saying the film was good, except for his acceptance of 2nd floor lunch room fabrication.  It would have been cleaner and stronger with that deleted.  

It would have been cleaner and stronger... and more accurate if it had ditched the whole premise and just focused on the actual alibi. As I said above, this is being pushed by those desparate to keep the 2nd floor fires burning. I won't be watching it. I am  from here on adopting a zero tolerance approach. 
https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t2638-sean-murphy-s-post-girl-on-the-stairs-emails-exchanges-with-sandra-styles

My take.

http://www.prayer-man.com/the-killing-floor/

One niggle.
Eddie Piper... was 5 foot 10 and not exactly a tall negro.
West....was shorter at 5 foot 9
Of course one might say the women were short so then what, everyone is tall... nah.
She states a TALL negro as opposed to the others.

Other black employees she could have met once downstairs:
Carl Edward Jones was downstairs ( mostly out front) and he was a 6 footer.
Bonnie Ray Williams was tall.
Other than that there were no tall negroes at the TSBD, the rest were 5 footers.

I believe this leaves Carl Jones as the tall negro "downstairs".
He doesnt seem memorable except his size.

Thoughts?

barto wrote:My take.

http://www.prayer-man.com/the-killing-floor/

Nice Barto.

Hey by the way, I'm enjoying the discussion on this topic at EF because there is a clear consensus growing over there that the 2nd FE never happened. They reference your work to support the idea and I just think that is pretty damned cool. I know you would credit the others who contributed, especially Sean Murphy, but you deserve huge credit for hammering on it all these years with your website and diligence in promoting the subject. Congratulations dude. You're making a difference.

Congratulations also to Greg and the others here who over the years have also played a huge role in getting this out there and finally cracking through that very thick layer of brainwashing that served so well to cause most everyone to staunchly resist such a 'radical' idea for so many years.

I know Greg won't stump up here - but I'll do it on his behalf. All roads to the 2nd floor encounter BS lead back to GP. Most anyway! If I'm not mistaken it's GP's work which got SM into the game concerning the figure on the steps.

Bart and Co have done an outstanding job in getting the message across.

Before Greg there was "Weisberg, Roffman and a handful others. All this is addressed in my paper.
The fact is that most clowns at EF never bothered to read it, instead they love the sound of their own voice(s). Look at that thread now, completely derailed by a bunch of narrow minded c*nts.
*yawns.

Bart and Co have done an outstanding job in getting the message across.

Absolutely. I was banging on for more than 5 years about it before being contacted by Sean. I never cut through with it. Sean did. 

And Bart has picked it up, finished the work and stormed the Bastille. 

My position is as I stated in the 3 magazines I published on my website and am currently redoing in proper online magazine format. The very first edition has an entire section on Oswald's alibi. 

At the start of the 3 is this:

Thanks to the team at ReopenKennedyCase Forum (ROKC)
Due to the nature of forums and their memberships, it has been decided to skip the usual protocol of naming individual contributors. This has been a team effort from past and present members. https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net


Our thanks also goes to our readers and to all who care about the state of the world as it is and as  it could be.


Citations
These are not always provided. You are instead, encouraged to use this work as a starting point for your own research. The origins of the work and many citations, however, can be found at the ROKC forum. 

I credit myseld in each edition only as "editor".

I do care about proper citations in books because they should hold an air of gravitas and academic standards. And that has certainly been a gripe of mine in the past - the theft of my work off various forums and used in books for the profit of the author and to the detriment of the reader due to the misuse of the research, and the uncited nature of it. This denies proper evaluation of  what they are reading.

In fact, I care so much about this issue,  I am putting myself through torture redoing the citations in my two existing volumes according to the Oxford style guide. This is in prepartion for publishing an updated version with the next volume/s. 

it is not Bart taking any undue credit. He has acknowledged my previous work. 

That said, I do disagree that Weisberg and Roffman covered what I did. Their arguments were based on the belief that Baker and Truly actually went in quicker than claimed - thus making it impossible for Oswald to have gotten from the 6th floor in time. The inference to be drawn from that argument is that Oswald was already in the 2nd floor lunchroom and the encounter happened. In fact, they have Truly as a very honest witnesss and Baker as honest, but a bit of a dope. 

The timing issue of how quickly Baker and Truly went in and how much time Oswald had to descend from 6 to 2 is a completely different argument to one that concludes that the entire story was fabricated. 

Yes, Bernabei does hint at Oswald on the steps but the idea was never really developed and I don't think anything was done to reconcile it with the 2nd floor encounter. Bernabei's work on it overlaps and precedes Sean's PM work, not my 2nd floor lunchroom work. 

The fake 2nd floor encounter debate was evolved in google groups between myself and Don Willis (although I get the impression Don has walked away from  this position. In fact, I'm not entirely sure he even quite got to that same position? And I more or less quit google groups when the EF came along). This was all  somewhere in the 2001 to 2004 period.  It was just bouncing shit around and eliminating thoughts/evidence and adding other thoughts/evidence. Then around 2007, Sean contacted. By this time, I was fairly close to where I am now as far as the main points go, though the evolution of the idea certainly continued - especially after I started this forum.  But it as I said, it really only took off with Sean's input - and is now all but mainstream thanks to Bart.  

If others give Bart credit as the originator, it is not him seeking it. He is in any case, the originator of his own version of it - a version which has added much of value. It's all good. The work has not been abused or misued and is still aimed at my original goal.  That's what matters to me the most here.

Carry on!

The irony was also the thing that made a fake 2FE so difficult for people to accept, and that was how CT'rs were forever trying to prove it couldn't have happened in the way it supposedly happened while believing that it did in fact happen. After all, faking it would have involved just too many lies. Well, it seems people have come to realize the degree to which they underestimated the people they were up against and the degree to which those people could manipulate things. People in general that is, the GP's, BK's. SM's, and others of the world had the same ability to see in retrospect what the framing artists could see on the fly.

Another topic just dripping in irony


Jake wrote;


CT'rs were forever trying to prove it couldn't have happened in the way it supposedly happened while believing that it did in fact happen. 


A fine example of another official timeline afforded to Oswald which was impossible. Sixth to second wasn't on in the time frame allowed - never was. Not for Oswald, not for the fudged FBI time trials, nor anyone else.
Sheesh, it's a strange breed of people this case attracts.

Mick_Purdy wrote:Another topic just dripping in irony


Jake wrote;


CT'rs were forever trying to prove it couldn't have happened in the way it supposedly happened while believing that it did in fact happen. 


A fine example of another official timeline afforded to Oswald which was impossible. Sixth to second wasn't on in the time frame allowed - never was. Not for Oswald, not for the fudged FBI time trials, nor anyone else.
Sheesh, it's a strange breed of people this case attracts.

It all comes back to the successful effort to insert agreement into Oswald's mouth re the 2nd floor encounter. 

Any law enforcement specialist reading Fritz's testimony would immediately realize he was lying about it.

Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
Mr. BALL. Did you ask him what he was doing in the lunchroom?
Mr. FRITZ. He said he was having his lunch. He had a cheese sandwich and a Coca-Cola.

He is stumbling on the 2nd floor bullshit worse than a drunken Kiwi attempting a Haka.  That is a HUGE red flag. 

Even the wording after those stumbles is a dead giveaway "Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right."

"He knew the officer stopped him" is just a  fucking weird way of wording it, but a typical mis-step when lying. What someone not lying would say is "Yes, he admitted that the officer stopped him..." or "he agreed that the officer did stop him as we had been told." or "he never denied being stopped by the officer..."

Fritz is simply trying too hard to convince that Oswald had made guilty admissions.

"It all comes back to the successful effort to insert agreement into Oswald's mouth re the 2nd floor encounter."

Very successful indeed. Even Oliver Stone stated Oswald agreed to being in the lunch room when of course he never did anything of the kind.

I see where Jim D. states on EF that they did not wish to take it on in the JFK Revisited movie. Too complex. It is that, but it does need to be professionally promoted. Maybe Stone could do a follow up piece to set the record straight.