The Assassination was Sloppy and Amateurish

[Royell Storing]

To be honest, Royell, you should really know that there were no "other films" shot from the north side of Elm Street. The only film that captured the moment of the assassination shot from the north side was the Zapruder film. It's quite shocking that you are not aware of such a basic fact.
The point I was making was that there were "other films" that captured the moment of the assassination. I should be surprised that you are not aware of the Nix film or the Muchmore film or the Bronson film. But I'm not surprised. Your ignorance regarding the assassination of JFK is quite profound as you've demonstrated time and time and time again.

 
Royell has spoken!!
The man regarded by some as the world's leading expert on Kodachrome II "is Not worth mentioning"!
The man who was one of the leading members of the team that invented Kodachrome II "is Not worth mentioning"!
You are so ignorant about the work of Roland Zavada it's funny.
You don't have the first clue.
Do some research for a change. Read the Zavada Report. Do some work.

But before you do that, please point everyone to the Dan Rather interview where he states that the film he saw was different from the Z-film we see today.
Where does Dan Rather explain the difference between his initial report of the Zapruder film and the Zapruder film we see today?
Now, I have to warn you...this is a trick question that you will not be able to answer without making yourself look foolish.
But go for it anyway.

  You need to find a sense of humor. With respect to Zavada, he's a "Homer". A "Ringer". He + KODAK.

[Tom Graves]

[...]

Storing,

Do you agree with Rather that JFK was struck by a bullet when he was about 35 yards from the base of the TSBD and his right hand was brushing his hair back or scratching his eyebrow?

[Dan O'meara]

  You need to find a sense of humor. With respect to Zavada, he's a "Homer". A "Ringer". He + KODAK.

Now you're just lying, Royell.
The last resort of the ignorant.
You know nothing about him or his work so you just start lying. It's shameful, really.

Oh, you've forgotten to point us to the Dan Rather interview where he describes the film he saw as being different from the Z-film we see today. Where does Rather state this? And no lying, please.

[Royell Storing]

Now you're just lying, Royell.
The last resort of the ignorant.
You know nothing about him or his work so you just start lying. It's shameful, really.

Oh, you've forgotten to point us to the Dan Rather interview where he describes the film he saw as being different from the Z-film we see today. Where does Rather state this? And no lying, please.

    You do know that "Viva Zavada" worked for KODAK?  Retired while working for KODAK?  And please refrain from the "Lying" and "Ignorant" slanders. That does nothing to further this discussion.

[Zeon Mason]

A professional would have used a suppressed rifle and shot JFK when he was a totally exposed stationary target, like standing up on a podium making a speech.

So a professional shooter choosing to shoot at a moving target from high up window of a building ( making it more difficult due to accelerating vehicle and ever changing vertical plane angle ) would seem to be a sloppy method chosen by the shooter.

That MC rifle found on the 6th floor TSBD at 1:20pm is the biggest problem for a CT because if the rifle was not actually fired, then it was either pre planted by conspirator shooter or it was post planted by conspirator member of Fritz  team or by FBI.

If the conspirator shooter intent was to set up Oswald, then using the MC rifle which had paper  trail to Oswald, would be the more convincing option than the shooter just pre planting  the MC rifle and the shooter using some other rifle , risking leaving different type shells behind and different type bullets that might be recovered from JFK and JC.

The desire of the conspirator shooter to set up Oswald, therefore, is the reason  why an otherwise professional shooter would choose a sloppier method of A: using a poor quality MC rifle with misaligned scope( or at least preplanting it) and B: choosing to shoot from the TSBD 6th floor 72 ft up and having to adjust lead for changing vertical angle and an accelerating limo moving away at ground level, as well as having to contend with traffic light and  tree branches in the way.

[John Mytton]

A professional would have used a suppressed rifle and shot JFK when he was a totally exposed stationary target, like standing up on a podium making a speech.

Exactly Zeon, it's like the guy who took a shot at Trump, the sniper chose a time when Trump was standing relatively still on a podium giving a speech.







The main reason Oswald took the chance to assassinate Kennedy while Kennedy was in a moving vehicle was because it was his only opportunity, sure Oswald could have taken a risk at Love Field but where would Oswald have positioned himself? And as for indoor at the most probably unfamiliar Trade Mart that was also filled with uncertainty. And it's common knowledge at this point that supposed unbiased experienced sniper's have collectively said that shooting a moving target would be very difficult. And knowing the difficulty, those oh so wise conspirators set up a lone Patsy with additional snipers firing from multiple directions, even in front! You can't make this up. LOL!



JohnM

[Dan O'meara]

    You do know that "Viva Zavada" worked for KODAK?  Retired while working for KODAK?  And please refrain from the "Lying" and "Ignorant" slanders. That does nothing to further this discussion.

 You do know that "Viva Zavada" worked for KODAK?  Retired while working for KODAK?

Of course he worked for Kodak!!
Where do you think the "world's leading expert" on Kodachrome II is going to work?
The Post Office?
What a ridiculous point to make.

As you know absolutely nothing about Roland Zavada and his work, I'll get you started with his biography:

Mr. Zavada retired, as a Standards Director for Imaging Technologies, from Eastman Kodak in March 1990. His past responsibilities included coordinating the activities of the Consumer Video and Broadcast Telecine Television Evaluation Laboratories, a product engineer on reversal motion picture films, and as a principal member of the teams that introduced Kodachrome II, Ektachrome Commercial and Kodachrome int Film and that developed the Super 8 system.

He has a BS from Purdue University, a degree in Photo Science from the Rochester Institute of Technology, and a MBA from the University of Rochester.

He began his standards activity with the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) in 1962. In 1966, he assumed responsibility for the National and International Standardization of the Super 8 system, becoming chair of the SMPTE's 16mm and 8mm Technology Committee, chair of the Super 8 Technology Committee of the ISO TC-36, and subsequently became chairman of several national and international committees including leader of the United States delegation to ISO-TC36 - Cinematography. Work with the Society culminated with four terms as the Society's Engineering Vice President, 1976-1983.

Mr. Zavada received recognition for his technical contributions by receiving Fellowships from the SMPTE, the British Kinematographic Sound and Television Society, the Audio Engineering Society, and the Rochester Engineering Society.

In 1985, Mr. Zavada received the SMPTE Progress Medal for Technical Achievement and was awarded the Leo East Award as Rochester's 1985 Engineer of the Year. In 1986, he received the SMPTE Agfa Gevaert Gold Medal for outstanding Achievement in film and video imaging interface.

In 1994, Mr. Zavada was elected as a Life member of the Foundation of Motion Picture Pioneers Inc.

In 1995, The Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers conferred its highest award and greatest distinction of Honorary Membership to Mr. Zavada.

"...a principal member of the teams that introduced Kodachrome II, Ektachrome Commercial and Kodachrome int Film and that developed the Super 8 system." Who better to examine the most famous Kodachrome II film ever taken?

And please refrain from the "Lying" and "Ignorant" slanders

When you invent falsehoods what shall we call it if not Lying?
Out of thin air you accuse Zavada of being a "ringer". This is something you've made up because you're losing the argument.
What shall we call that?
As you don't like the word Lying, shall we call it Untruthing?
'When Royell claims Roland Zavada is a ringer he is untruthing'.
Do you prefer that?
And when someone doesn't have the first clue about a particular subject don't we say they are Ignorant regarding that subject?
You know zero about the work of Zavada, doesn't that make you Ignorant about it?
If you don't like that word why don't we say you are displaying your Know-Nothingness about Zavada's work.
And slander?
When you accuse Zavada of being a Ringer you are questioning his honesty and integrity, based on nothing more than your Untruthing and Know-Nothingness - isn't that slander?
How come you get to slander someone for no reason other than you can't hold your argument together, yet start crying when you feel the same thing is being done to you?

That does nothing to further this discussion.

Neither does your constant untruthing and know-nothingness.
And you've yet to explain why Dan Rather has never said he saw a different version of the Z-film than the one we see today.
Why has he never done that, Royell?
Is he a Ringer too?