JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
The Assassination was Sloppy and Amateurish
Royell Storing:
In 1963, people in large population areas received maybe 7 total TV channels. And 3 of those were the Network channels. If a reporter was on a Network National News Broadcast, it was a very Big Deal. Rather knew this. He described what he saw on the Zapruder Film to a nation that at that time, had no idea what the Zapruder Film was. Rather also described seeing an agent in the front seat of the JFK Limo holding a telephone. If Rather was making stuff up, why would he mess around with including inconsequential information such as this? He wouldn't.
John Mytton:
--- Quote from: Royell Storing on July 07, 2025, 03:55:57 PM ---The Z Film was privately owned and under lock-n-key for 12 years. As evidence it is worthless.
--- End quote ---
The following week the most important key frames(besides the headshot) were published in LIFE magazine and allowing for production and distribution, the amount of time to alter these frames all of which can be perfectly slotted back into the original, was only a few days, and is simply was not enough time but don't believe me go and ask any older SFX specialist and ask them exactly what could be done with 8mm film or any film for that matter and then ask if your ideas are actually plausible.
Another problem for you is that all the individual elements that you think were edited all have their own specific properties as in lighting, motion blur, directional shadows and angles and etc, and if you cut something out and stick it somewhere else then it's a guarantee that the moved object will be out of place with the surroundings.
The following year The Warren Commission published every single frame from Z171 though to Z334 and they are all the Full Frames that included the ghost images between the sprockets, they also included the graphic head shot.
And every frame is exactly what we saw published in Life Magazine a week later and up until what we see today.
JohnM
Dan O'meara:
--- Quote from: John Mytton on July 08, 2025, 07:57:57 AM ---The following week the most important key frames(besides the headshot) were published in LIFE magazine and allowing for production and distribution, the amount of time to alter these frames all of which can be perfectly slotted back into the original, was only a few days, and is simply was not enough time but don't believe me go and ask any older SFX specialist and ask them exactly what could be done with 8mm film or any film for that matter and then ask if your ideas are actually plausible.
Another problem for you is that all the individual elements that you think were edited all have their own specific properties as in lighting, motion blur, directional shadows and angles and etc, and if you cut something out and stick it somewhere else then it's a guarantee that the moved object will be out of place with the surroundings.
The following year The Warren Commission published every single frame from Z171 though to Z334 and they are all the Full Frames that included the ghost images between the sprockets, they also included the graphic head shot.
And every frame is exactly what we saw published in Life Magazine a week later and up until what we see today.
JohnM
--- End quote ---
On top of that, all other films and photos relating to the assassination would have to have been similarly altered within the same time-frame, so as to perfectly match any alterations made to the Z-film.
Let's just assume this is impossible.
On top of which Zavada, the "worlds leading expert" on Kodachrome II authenticated the original.
Josiah Thompson wrote a good essay highlighting the abject failure of those arguing for alterations to the Z-film - https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-_Bedrock_Evidence_in_the_Kennedy_Assassination.html
"One way of looking at this continuing argument is to see it as a gigantic waste of time, as a prime example of junk science from educated people who ought to know better. It may have amusement value in some chronicle of "silly science," but, in terms of knowledge about the Kennedy assassination, it has produced literally nothing."
Tom Graves:
--- Quote from: Royell Storing on July 08, 2025, 06:56:00 AM ---Rather described seeing an agent in the front seat of the JFK limo holding a telephone. If Rather was making stuff up, why would he mess around with including inconsequential information such as this? He wouldn't.
--- End quote ---
Storing,
Poor Dan Rather was probably shown the Zapruder film only once, because he was only about 60% correct in his description of what's visible in it. He made up the bit about watching the limo actually turn onto Elm Street (in one of the videos I watched, but not in the other), but it's not a big deal that he did so except to fringe JFKA film-alteration conspiracy theorists like you.
He didn't make up the important bit about seeing Kellerman holding the microphone, however. (He mistakenly thought it was a telephone -- maybe it was shaped like one!) In case you didn't know, Kellerman testified to the Warren Commission that he had grabbed it to communicate with Secret Service Lawson in the lead car.
Question: Why did Kellerman start turning his head so far to his right in Z-148?
As a conscious reaction to the sounds of Oswald's first, missing everything shot at hypothetical "Z-124," or to check out the pretty women JFK had just finished waving to?
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTdQzXuoXgU
Dan O'meara:
--- Quote from: Royell Storing on July 08, 2025, 06:56:00 AM --- In 1963, people in large population areas received maybe 7 total TV channels. And 3 of those were the Network channels. If a reporter was on a Network National News Broadcast, it was a very Big Deal. Rather knew this. He described what he saw on the Zapruder Film to a nation that at that time, had no idea what the Zapruder Film was. Rather also described seeing an agent in the front seat of the JFK Limo holding a telephone. If Rather was making stuff up, why would he mess around with including inconsequential information such as this? He wouldn't.
--- End quote ---
The amount of incorrect information being pumped out on TV and in the newspapers in the hours and days after the assassination was amazing.
The emphasis was on getting the story out quickly, before anyone else. So many mistakes were made.
Reports were coming in that a Secret Service agent was killed during the assassination. Someone like you would jump all over this insisting that no responsible reporter/journalist would say such a thing therefore it must have happened and was covered up. But it was just a mistake.
Rather made a mistake. That's all.
The Zavada Report proves the authenticity of the film but you know better. The points John makes about the impossibility of faking the Z-film in the time given are just ignored. As is the point that all other films and photographs would have to be accordingly faked, making the whole thing just a wild fantasy. Mistake after mistake was made by the media in their rush to get the stories out but you just ignore all of this.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version