The Assassination was Sloppy and Amateurish

[John Mytton]

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.

 

JohnM

[Royell Storing]

How much misinformation can you pack into 1 paragraph? You old timer CT's should know better!

1. Life Magazine in the 60's would never post any Zapruder frames showing the headshot or even the immediate following frames.
2. The two frames Z314 and Z315 that were printed out of order were contained within CE885 from the Warren Commission's Volume 18.
3. These two frames are identical to the Zapruder film we have today, therefore the order they were printed is irrelevant.
4. The acronym CGI comes from Computer Generated Imagery and the most powerful computers at the time were woefully inadequate for computer graphics. Decades later photorealistic computer images were still impossible and even today you'd be hard pressed to pass off CGI as real.
5. The state of the art in 1963 and up until the 90's was all done with multiple runs through optical printers which introduced layers of excessive film grain, whereas the Zapruder Film grain is identical to a straight from the camera original.
6. Gee Whiz, Top Secret "Hawkeye Works" could do anything except hide the most significant feature of the Zapruder film, Kennedy's back and to the left? LOL!

JohnM

   
  Hey John! Good to hear from you.

  (1) Where Exactly do you think the images for CE885 came from? "LIFE". Everyone drinking from the same poisoned well gets sick.

  (3)  2 Frames do Not qualify as the entire "Film". What makes it "irrelevent" after getting caught pulling a FRAUD on the public?  Lifton busted this FRAUD wide open. Nobody stepped forward prior to Lifton blowing the whistle.

  (4) + (5) You obviously know little about the film/motion picture industry. The 1st full length Talkie/ "The Jazz Singer" was done in 1927. The original CGI PACKED "King Kong" was done in 1933. Only 6 yrs between dialogue being in a film from start-finish and the Special Effects loaded "King Kong". This is how lightning fast that film technology moved forward. You are treating 1963 film technology, (30 yrs after "King Kong"), like it was "fractured flicker" time. (I reference "CGI" anytime any level of Special Effects are used. CGI is quicker to type and everybody knows immediately what I am talking about).

  (6) You seem to have forgotten the Gaping Hole in the Back of JFK's head as seen by  SA Clint Hill and the Parkland Hospital Dr's. That HOLE is corroborated by the Blood Stain on the very TOP of the Limo Backrest. JFK's head NEVER came into contact with the TOP of the Backrest. The CGI Team failed to remove that Blood Stain from the TOP of the Backrest. Obviously, there is No such thing as a Perfect Crime. The ever improving detail that Technology is now revealing in the JFK assassination images is making this clear.

[Royell Storing]

JohnM

   Why are you posting images showing Main St and Houston St? Or, are You going Max Holland and further extending the elapsed firing time to include Main St and Houston St? 

[Tom Graves]

  How about we STOP dealing in your world of "probably's"?

Why was Rather only about 60% correct in his description of what's in the film? Did the bad guys alter 40% of it?

[Royell Storing]

Why was Rather only about 60% correct in his description of what's in the film? Did the bad guys alter 40% of it?

    I have never claimed that, "Rather only about 60% Correct in his description of what's in the film". Rather's original broadcasts the weekend of the assassination are available to see/hear on You Tube. Plus, Rather at 93 yrs old is still alive. If those telecasts were not as Rather remembers them, he could have easily set the record straight.

[Tom Graves]

I have never claimed that "Rather is only about 60% Correct in his description of what's in the film". Rather's original broadcasts the weekend of the assassination are available to see/hear on You Tube. Plus, Rather at 93 yrs old is still alive. If those telecasts were not as Rather remembers them, he could have easily set the record straight.

You make no sense, Storing.

Of course you didn't say, "Rather is only about 60% correct in his description of what's in the film." I said it, and it's the truth.

I've already watched the broadcasts on YouTube. FWIW, they differ.

You wrote: "If those telecasts were not as Rather remembers them, he could have easily set the record straight."

What are you even talking about?

It's not that those weekend-of-the-assassination telecasts are or are not as Rather remembers them, it's that his depiction in those telecasts of what is in the Zapruder film is only about 60% correct.

D'oh.

[Royell Storing]

You make no sense, Storing.

Of course you didn't say, "Rather is only about 60% correct in his description of what's in the film." I said it, and it's the truth.

I've already watched the broadcasts on YouTube. FWIW, they differ.

You wrote: "If those telecasts were not as Rather remembers them, he could have easily set the record straight."

What are you even talking about?

It's not that those weekend-of-the-assassination telecasts are or are not as Rather remembers them, it's that his depiction in those telecasts of what is in the Zapruder film is only about 60% correct.

D'oh.

   Your sentence currently under discussion was Not a declarative statement. It ended with a ?
   So now you want to inform this Forum what Rather remembers? "Carnac The Magnificent" you ain't.
   You are basing your 60% scoring of the Rather 1963 description of the Zapruder Film vs the Current Zapruder Film that we frequently view today. You really do Not know with certainty that Rather viewed the same/identical Z Film that we view today. You're assuming, and we all know what happens when making an assumption.

[Tom Graves]

Now you want to inform this Forum what Rather remembers?

Not what he remembers (present tense), Storing, but what he mis-remembered (past tense) timing-wise and sequence-wise, etc, a few hours after viewing it. Whether Rather watched the Zapruder film one time or five times (I'm leaning towards the former), he was able to remember only about 60% of it correctly when he told the nation about it that weekend.

You are basing your 60% scoring of the Rather 1963 description of the Zapruder Film vs the current Zapruder film that we frequently view today.

Do you really think the bad guys altered about 40% of the film?