Tuesday, February 16, 2016

Great! I'm so glad that you agree with me, Ian. I've had many months to ponder this, and it was what I learned directly from Mary Moorman that enabled me to put it together. 

First, she said repeatedly- including to me personally on Facebook. 
  • Ralph Cinque
    6/29, 1:02pm
    Ralph Cinque

    So, it was simultaneous, as you recall. Thank you for that, Mary.
  • Mary Ann Moorman Krahmer
    6/29, 2:30pm
    Mary Ann Moorman Krahmer

    One with the camera to my face, then 2 more, bam, bam...

So, she heard a shot with the camera to her face, and then, after that, she heard 2 more, bam, bam.

But, the Moorman photo wasn't taken until after the last shot. And that is not in dispute. Everybody, including Vincent Bugliosi, says it was taken at the time of Z-315 or Z-316. The fatal head shot was at Z-313. 

And what she said to me above in 2015 is exactly what she said in 1963. She hasn't changed her story. She has been very consistent. And I agree with you, Ian, that Mary is truthful. She is truthful by nature.  She doesn't have a dishonest bone in her body. 

But again, that means she couldn't have taken the Moorman photo because it was taken 1/9 second after the final shot. And, it may have been later than that due to frames being removed from the Zapruder film to hide the slowing and stopping of the limo.  So, unlike most people, I actually listen to Mary Moorman, and I know from what she said- from what she told me personally- that she could not have taken the Moorman photo.

Second, everyone was telling me that the Moorman photo got damaged with the thumbprint when it was wet, and some said that Jim Featherston, the Dallas Times Herald reporter, is the one who did it. But, Mary said otherwise, She said that it was long after that, when the FBI had borrowed it the second time that it got damaged. 

Mary said that the photo was taken away from her for many hours on November 22, and they kept her busy all the while, answering questions, talking to reporters, and treating her like a celebrity. But, that evening it was returned to her, and she went home. But, some hours later, midnight to be exact according to her, the police stormed her house, waking up her and her son, because they needed to get that photo back. Now, why did they need it back when they made a copy and a negative? 

But, it was returned to her- again- a few days later- but not for long. Then, there were a series of borrowings by the FBI, the CIA, and the Secret Service. Then, the FBI borrowed it a second time, and when they returned it, they apologized for the damage done to it, but without telling her who did it and how. She didn't specify exactly when that happened but it sounded to me like it was at least 2 weeks after the shooting, and maybe even 3 or 4 weeks.

It means that there was some imagery in that photo that was extremely damaging to the official story, and finally, a decision was made that they just had to get rid of it- the whole photo. So, they decided to take a frame from Babushka Lady (and I agree that BL must have been a plant) and returned that instead after massively altering it.   They did it because they thought they could get away with it- with Mary. You see, Mary was, and is, too good to think that anybody could be that bad.

Now, why did they have to take Martin out? It's because he wasn't in her picture. At least, not that way.  

I know how he got captured in her picture because I went to Dealey Plaza and stood in her spot and took a picture facing Elm Street directly, meaning perpendicular- just as she did. And I had a Martin surrogate there too. We used a bicycle instead of a motorcycle, but that didn't matter. And this is what we got.

So, that's the BJ Martin surrogate. It was me shooting as Mary did, just facing Elm Street and the limo squarely. As the BJ Martin surrogate entered my camera field, his right hand and forearm became visible before the left.  They're not hugging the bottom of the frame as they are in the Moorman photo, but you see the similarity.

So, they needed to return something to her that had the same arrangement, the same configuration, as her original photo. And remember that they had her photo, and they used it as a model. 

The magnitude of the deception involved in this is staggering. Thanks again. Ralph 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.