just want all of you to be aware of the photographic, film, and written testimony evidence that is out there.
Mr. Zapruder's testimony
Mr. LIEBELER - Yes.
Mr. ZAPRUDER - Yes--after the shots--yes, some of them were motorcycle cops--I guess they left their motorcycles running and they were running right behind me, of course, in the line of the shooting. I guess they thought it came from right behind me.
Mr. LIEBELER - Did you have any impression as to the direction from which these shots came?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - No, I also thought it came from back of me. Of course, you can't tell when something is in line it could come from anywhere, but being I was here and he was hit on this line and he was hit right in the head--I saw it right around here, so it looked like it came from here and it could come from there.
Mr. LIEBELER - All right, as you stood here on the abutment and looked down into Elm Street, you saw the President hit on the right side of the head and you thought perhaps the shots had come from behind you?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - Well, yes.
Mr. LIEBELER - From the direction behind you?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - Yes, actually--I couldn't say what I thought at the moment, where they came from--after the impact of the tragedy was really what I saw and I started and I said--yelling, "They've killed him"--I assumed that they came from there, because as the police started running back of me, it looked like it came from the back of me.
Mr. LIEBELER - But you didn't form any opinion at that time as to what direction the shots did come from actually?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - No.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/zapruder.htm
Testimony Of Abraham Zapruder. The testimony of Abraham Zapruder was taken at 1 p.m., on July 22, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.
https://www.jfk.org/the-collections/abraham-zapruder-film/zapruder-interview-transcript/
Zapruder Interview Transcript - The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza - The Sixth Floor Museum - The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey PlazaThe Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza | The Sixth Floor Museum
Here is Mr. Bill Newman's testimony:
Q: How many shots did you hear?
A: I heard at least three. I often thought of four, but I can't clearly say there were four shots; I can clearly say there were three.
Q: Do you have any impression as to the direction from which the shots came?
A: Yes, sir. From the sound of the shots, the report of the rifle or whatever it was, it sounded like they were coming directly behind from where I was standing.
Q: Now would you push the microphone aside and step down to the aerial photograph and identify that general area, just the general area from which the sounds came.
A: In my opinion, the sounds of the shots sounded as if they had come from directly behind me (indicating). I was standing near this light standard here, and I thought the shots were coming from back here, and apparently, everybody else did because they all ran in that direction.
http://www.jfk-online.com/wnewmanshaw.html
Mary Moorman photo - NBC source -
(https://www.today.com/news/jfk-grassy-knoll-photo-fails-sell-auction-2D11599940)
JFK 'grassy knoll' photo fails to sell at auction - TODAY.com
A pivotal piece of American history went on sale Friday morning ? but did not sell. The item ? a Polaroid photo snapped in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963, the day of President John F. Kennedy?s ...
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Hxx8TafILG4/UpJmJiQvswI/AAAAAAAAl5s/5ixp9qutulw/s1600/s_500_opednews_com_0_mary-moorman-polaroid-jpg_89485_20131121-894.gif)
Look in the shelter, there are people there to the back of Mr. Zapruder.
Nix
Film -
Look at the shelter around the 5-second mark. A shot is fired from the third window and there is another shot fired from the walkway behind Mr. Zapruder and Ms. Sitzman.
Play the video in slow motion, you will see a shot from the third window and a smoke trail from the walkway behind Mr. Zapruder. -
How to view the video is slow motion -
In Mr. Zapruder's original statements, he thought he was in the direct line of fire, the shots came from behind him.
This information is hard to grasp, but there is no denying the truth of photographic and film evidence. I am not asking you to change your opinion, I just want you to know the truth.
Know? How can you possibly know for sure when no hard credible proof of such has come forward in 55 years? Let?s be reasonable. You may believe he was killed by a conspiracy. Belief is something one has in the absence of actual evidence. People believe Bigfoot exists. Actual evidence? None. You?re no different than those people. That?s scary huh?
My job? What world of distorted reality are you living in? The key to YOUR position is HARD and CREDIBLE proof. Do you not understand the definition? Indisputable. You people are astounding in your ignorance. Right now, you don?t belong at the table of even serious conspiracy wackos. Embarrassing.Be fair Paul: He does deserve to be "under the table".
My job? What world of distorted reality are you living in? The key to YOUR position is HARD and CREDIBLE proof. Do you not understand the definition? Indisputable. You people are astounding in your ignorance. Right now, you don?t belong at the table of even serious conspiracy wackos. Embarrassing.
Correct. There is nothing to discuss.Apparently so, I thought you would be the person to try to discredit my research. Unfortunately, I was wrong. You can't prove or disprove anything, you just know how to base your conclusions based on I don't know what.
1. The Mary Moorman photo shows a person behind Mr. Zapruder.
2. The Nix film shows a smoke trail from a person behind Mr. Zapruder.
3. Mr. Zapruder said in an interview and testimony that he thought the shots came right from behind him.
4. Mr. Newman said in an interview and in his testimony that he thought the shots came from the shelter behind him.
Your job is to prove either of 1, 2, 3, or 4 wrong. Prove that these undeniable facts are not true.
Research? You jest. If your ?research? determined your conclusions, you need to find a different way to pass your time. The crap you posted has been discredited over 55 years numerous times. This is but one more example of a wacko CT sticking to his personal favorite theory despite the absence of hard and credible evidence. Do you believe your theory is based on hard, credible evidence? If yes, explain to the forum members your ?research? proving so.Obviously, you want more after you said you have had enough.
Obviously, you want more after you said you have had enough.
Show proof that what I have provided has been discredited over 55 years numerous times. As I said, a barking dog has no bite.
1. The Mary Moorman photo shows a person behind Mr. Zapruder.
2. The Nix film shows a smoke trail from a person behind Mr. Zapruder.
3. Mr. Zapruder said in an interview and testimony that he thought the shots came right from behind him.
4. Mr. Newman said in an interview and in his testimony that he thought the shots came from the shelter behind him.
Your job is to prove either of 1, 2, 3, or 4 wrong. Prove that these undeniable facts are not true.
#4) Bill Newman: He had no idea where the shot came from.
Here you go:
[Excerpt]
Fagin homed in on how some researchers and authors selectively interpret the Newmans? descriptions of what they heard. The third shot that the Newmans said came from ?behind? them, he pointed out, has been used ?as evidence that you heard a shot from the grassy knoll."
And that?s simply not the case, said Bill Newman.
?It was the visual impact [of the fatal shot] that made me think the shot came down over our head,? he said. ?In all honesty, I have no idea where the shot came from.?---Bill Newman
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/news/2012/11/09/couple-who-witnessed-jfk-assassination-recall-infamous-day-the-shots-rang-out
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/underpass/wiegmansmoke-lines.jpg) | (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lightbox/z400-z486/z445.jpg) |
(https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/jfk-final-minutes-05.jpg) | (https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/jfk-final-minutes-06.jpg) |
Hard photographic in the Mary Moorman photo and video evidence in the Nix film, plus the initial testimonies of Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman. It is all there for you to interpret whichever way you want.
Why don't you prove the evidence wrong! Show supporting information on why the Mary Moorman photo and Nix film evidence is wrong and show evidence that Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman never meant to say what they said minutes after the assassination.
You are Borrowing quite a bit from the Blevins presentations over on You Tube. This would include Blevins having Altered/Colorized the Moorman Photo. Do we really know ALL that he has done to the Moorman Photo? Do NOT rely on Altered Images to corroborate your position/opinion. Blevins is Now claiming that the Babushka Woman was actually Abe Zapruder's wife and she was signaling the shooters in the shelter behind Zapruder with the camera flash attachment on her camera. Choosing to tag-team with someone such as Blevins damages your position/opinion. Using Testimony and Un-Altered Images to proffer an opinion is A-OK. Also employing the props of someone with the track record of Blevins taints all the good research work you have done.
Is using the Mary Moorman photo from NBC News / Today Show altered? Is using an image of remnant smoke from the shooters guns from a sourced location such as the San Diego Free Press altered? Stop bringing someone else into the fray with images that are sourced from National sources.
If you have information that can change our opinion on these images and accompanying interviews and testimonies, bring it forward.
Are you Denying using the Blevins Colorized Photo to corroborate shooter(s) inside the Shelter behind Zapruder? The use of this Altered Photo taints your other good sources. Buttressing your Smoke Photo with eyewitness Sam Holland would be wise.I don't know who the colored picture if from, but it corroborates the sourced image of the Mary Moorman photo from NBC News / Today Show. This image does not taint any other good sources. But since you bring it up, I am getting a colorization company to make one for me.
I don't know who the colored picture if from, but it corroborates the sourced image of the Mary Moorman photo from NBC News / Today Show. This image does not taint any other good sources. But since you bring it up, I am getting a colorization company to make one for me.
The colorized Moorman Photo you have posted is the work of Blevins. The shooters inside the Shelter behind Zapruder = an opinion that Blevins has been putting out on You Tube for at least 3+ years. Blevins uses his colorized Moorman Photo to prove his shooters in the shelter opinion. The major problem with this theory is that both Zapruder and Sitzman would have to be part of the assassination to Never have reported rifle fire within mere feet of their Perch Position. Zapruder got $150,000 for his film = a possible pay off IF he were part of the conspiracy. I am unaware of Sitzman ever getting anything/$$$.
Know? How can you possibly know for sure when no hard credible proof of such has come forward in 55 years? Let?s be reasonable. You may believe he was killed by a conspiracy. Belief is something one has in the absence of actual evidence. People believe Bigfoot exists. Actual evidence? None. You?re no different than those people. That?s scary huh?
My dear Mr May.... It's possible to know something without absolute proof.... I know there is a God.... Can I prove it to an atheist? No probably not. I know there was a conspiracy to murder President Kennedy and cover up the crime...It doesn't take a genius to see through the smoke and lies.....
I don't know who the colored picture if from, but it corroborates the sourced image of the Mary Moorman photo from NBC News / Today Show. This image does not taint any other good sources. But since you bring it up, I am getting a colorization company to make one for me.
The non colourised/doctored Moorman does not show people in the pergola as far as I can see. Some random blobs have been coloured in, nothing more.
Proof that the Moorman photo from NBC News is doctored instead of just voicing your opinion, or is your opinion all you have?
I was referring to the colourised photo as being doctored. The original shows no people in the pergola in my view.
"You can't force someone to see the truth, just like you can't force a blind man to see." - Marilyn Manson wrote this quote. It perfectly personifies you.
In your opinion. Is that all you have?
There is nothing more for me to have. I have provided the hard evidence that is undeniable that there is proof JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy.
If you choose to be blind to the truth, there is nothing to talk about.
I choose to be blind. Nothing I can do.
Typo - You choose to be blind, nothing I can do.
Not an opinion, there is a photograph with a shooter behind Zapruder, there is the Nix film that shows a gunshot with a smoke trail from the same area where a person can be seen in the Mary Moorman photo. You have Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman stating that they thought the gunshots came from right behind them. You have police officers in the Warren Commission stating that the shots came from that direction. You have film evidence of gun smoke floating in the same area. You have a Senator stating that he smelled gun smoke in the area.
Not my opinion, it is hard and undeniable evidence that there was a shooter from the pergola.
If you choose to be blind and ignorant to these facts, that is your choice.
As I said, we have sourced information that Zapruder knew the shots came from right behind him in the form of a TV interview minutes right after the assassination and his Warren Commission testimony. This thread is not about Mr. Blevins or what you think about Mr. Blevins. This thread is about proof that JFL was killed as a result of a conspiracy. I have hard evidence that shows a gunman in the pergola "shelter".
Do you have a comment on this evidence?
Nope, it is your opinion that the Moorman photo shows a shooter behind Zapruder. It is not a fact no matter how strongly you believe it.
Nope, you are blind to the obvious.
There is no altered Mary Moorman photo. Do you have proof that it is altered? Since you keep harping about it, it must be true. Since it is true, do you have proof that it is altered?
Taking a B/W Image and Colorizing it = ALTERED. Cropping an Image = ALTERED.
In your opinion.I don't have an opinion, just facts. You have opinions without providing facts.
Strong personal beliefs are not knowing.How do you know that? Knowledge is defined by Webster's as...
facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject.Knowledge is acquired by an adversarial process. As Walt stated...there is God or there isn't. It is foolish to state that there is no God when no one can possibly demonstrate this. There is climate change [global warming] or there isn't. It is adversely argued that while there may be climate change, it is not caused by people. On the other hand, it can be argued that CFCs, coal, fossil fuel and other pollutants could be doing the atmosphere no benefit at all.
How do you know that? Knowledge is defined by Webster's as...
Knowledge is acquired by an adversarial process. As Walt stated...there is God or there isn't. It is foolish to state that there is no God when no one can possibly demonstrate this. There is climate change [global warming] or there isn't. It is adversely argued that while there may be climate change, it is not caused by people. On the other hand, it can be argued that CFCs, coal, fossil fuel and other pollutants could be doing the atmosphere no benefit at all.
The Warren Commission Report approached the JFK assassination from only one direction. There was no consideration of any conclusion other than Oswald was the sole assassin. It was a blatant choice..extremely obvious and it remains so. Reasonable doubt did not take a back seat in the so called investigation ...it was not even along for the ride. For the authorities to not arrive at the conclusion that it ultimately did [right or wrong] was just simply unacceptable.
Nope, it is your opinion that the Moorman photo shows a shooter behind Zapruder. It is not a fact no matter how strongly you believe it.
In your opinion.
It is a fact that Zapruder testified that a shot came from behind him no matter how much you ignore it.
Bill Newman does not discredit his initial thoughts of where he thought his shots came from in this interview that is 49 years after the fact. He just does not know. His initial reaction is that the shots came from the shelter.
His initial interview says that the shots came from the shelter and is corroborated by Mr. Zakpruder's first interview and Warren Commission testimony.
Mr. Zapruder, in 1966 changed his story and agreed with the Warren Commission findings in this interview. I don't know why he changed his mind, but his initial interview and testimony is corroborated by Mr. Newman.
There is photographic evidence of a person behind Mr. Zapruder, there is film evidence in the Nix Film of a shot being fired, there are the two initial testimony of Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman.
There is a photograph that shows what is most likely gunpowder smoke in Dealey Plaza right after the assassination from the San Diego Free Press
(https://i0.wp.com/obrag.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/JFK-assass-smokegrsyknol.jpg)
There is also testimony from law enforcement officers and secret service officers pointing to shots coming from the right front in the Warren Commission - https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/pdf/WH18_CE_1024.pdf
Secret Service man - Paul E. Landis - "My immediate thought was that the President could not possibly be alive after being hit like he was. I still am not certain from which direction the second shot came, but my reaction at the time was the shot came from somewhere towards the front right-hand side of the road."
Deputy Sherriff - Harold Elkins - "I immediately ran to the area from which it sounded like the shots had been fired. This is an area between the railroad and the Texas School Book Depository which is east of the railroad."
And my opinion.
I was addressing point #4 and yet you felt a need to include the other three. Why is that?
As far as Newman goes, he clearly recounts what made him think the shot came from over his head ?It was the visual impact [of the fatal shot] that made me think the shot came down over our head,? he said. ?In all honesty, I have no idea where the shot came from.?---Bill Newman
I'll address your claim of seeing smoke a little later; although Jerry has already shown that the shape your smoke is actually a tree.
'I know there was a conspiracy to murder President Kennedy and cover up the crime.' is a statement of personal belief not a statement of knowledge. It is not a fact but a belief.A belief that it is a fact. What is the difference? It is obvious to the discerning mind that there was a cover-up and so it is not just a theory.
The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.Nicholas Katzenbach Asst Attorney General November 25 1963, the day of the Kennedy funeral.
Those are your opinions not facts. You are taking what he said 49 years later as gospel.
Mr. Newman's initial statement on TV (a couple hours after the assassination) is that the shots came from the shelter (pergola). This is an undeniable fact. He said so. It is further validated by Mr. Zapruder's initial statement in the same TV newscast that the bullets came from behind him. Also an undeniable fact. The Mary Moorman photo shows someone behind him, an undeniable fact.
The following has been proven: 1. Mr. Zapruder said a shot came from behind him. 2. Mr. Newman said a shot came from the shelter, 3. A person is shown in the Mary Moorman photo behind Mr. Zapruder and Ms. Sitsman, 4. The Nix film shows a shot being fired from the shelter, and 5. Photographs show clouds of gunsmoke seconds after the assassination.
There is further proof of a shot from the shelter from testimony said in the Warren Commission by police officers and secret service men.
The five points and the statements of the Warren Commission as a collective show strong evidence of a shot from the pergola and thus strong proof that JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy.
Bill, you clearly show a disdain for facts. Why is that?
Nomenclature will get you I guess. He states in his TV interview the shots came from behind. He further said from the mall on top of the hill. It still all the same thing, It came from behind him.
Fact is a fact.
A couple of questions.
Were the shots fired from the pergola suppressed?
Are you familiar with sound of firing a weapon from a cement enclosure?
Did any witnesses report seeing a person or people leaving the pergola with their hands over their ears?
A couple of questions.
Were the shots fired from the pergola suppressed?
Are you familiar with sound of firing a weapon from a cement enclosure?
Did any witnesses report seeing a person or people leaving the pergola with their hands over their ears?
Its a fact that he said he thought it came from behind him. Its not a fact that it did.
Who cares. Still an opinion.
I have not heard of such.
The closest that I have read and heard is from Lee Bowers on his interview with Mark Lane. He stated that he saw two men, a flash of light or smoke, the immediate area of the embankment.
Regardless, if you are trying to say that the shots from there would be too loud, I would like for you to show proof instead of your opinion.
How would you like the proof presented to you?
You want charts of data?
A video?
Db levels of firearms both outside and within enclosures such as 12 x 12 rooms/Cement barricades?
How about testimony from former law enforcement personnel with over 1000 hours of shooting firearms?
How would you like the proof presented to you?
You want charts of data?
A video?
Db levels of firearms both outside and within enclosures such as 12 x 12 rooms/Cement barricades?
How about testimony from former law enforcement personnel with over 1000 hours of shooting firearms?
Bottom line is IF you believe shot(s) were fired from within the Pergola behind Zapruder and Sitzman, both Zapruder and Sitzman would also have to be involved in at least the cover-up. They both would have heard shot(s) fired from within mere feet of them vs Never having reported this. I am Not even going to get into their conduct After allegedly having been within feet of the assassins/fired shots.
That is up to you. Whatever proof you have, it should be comparable to the shelter in the grassy knoll, with similar temperature and similar wind, wind speed, and the bullets and rifles should be the same.
You have never been so wrong in your life.
1) Are you stating that Mr. Zapruder, who was there and stated that a shot came from behind him is wrong?
2) Are you stating that Mr. Newman, who was there and stated that a shot came from behind him is wrong?
3) Are you stating that the Mary Moorman photo from NBC News is a fake? NBC News is in a conspiracy to provide fake images from Mary Moorman.
4) Are you stating that the Nix Film has been altered to show gunshots from the very place that Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman said they heard shots from and the Mary Moreman photo shows a man standing there?
If you believe that 1-4 are fabricated, that is your opinion, show proof that they are fabricated.
5) What type of enclosure are those guns fired in? Are they fired in an open pergola similar to the one at the grassy knoll? Can you share in this forum the type of enclosure being used and certify that those tests were done in that enclosure?
You have never been so wrong in your life.
;) oh boy.
1) Are you stating that Mr. Zapruder, who was there and stated that a shot came from behind him is wrong?
Where did I mention Zapruder?
2) Are you stating that Mr. Newman, who was there and stated that a shot came from behind him is wrong?
Where did I mention Newman?
3) Are you stating that the Mary Moorman photo from NBC News is a fake? NBC News is in a conspiracy to provide fake images from Mary Moorman.
No , but that colorized POS with the insinuated human forms is pure crap.
4) Are you stating that the Nix Film has been altered to show gunshots from the very place that Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman said they heard shots from and the Mary Moreman photo shows a man standing there?
Did I mention Nix?
If you believe that 1-4 are fabricated, that is your opinion, show proof that they are fabricated.
So your opinions have more weight than my opinions? I'm speaking about real life professional experience. All this other kook speak is you playing detective then offering up your inexperienced opinion.
5) What type of enclosure are those guns fired in? Are they fired in an open pergola similar to the one at the grassy knoll? Can you share in this forum the type of enclosure being used and certify that those tests were done in that enclosure?
See the answer to number 4.
"So either your shooter(s) had a suppressed firearm , was wearing hearing protection or nobody fired anything from the pergola as per that phony doctored up Moorman photo that you proffered up as evidence showed." - These are your words, not mine, what else could you be insinuating here? If you are talking about the colored portion of the picture, show proof that it is different from the original besides that fact that it is colorized. Who are you kidding, you are just basing your conclusion on your opinion. Show proof!
You have 30 years experience, act like it! - Just cause you are consumed with another belief does not mean it is so.
A belief that it is a fact. What is the difference? It is obvious to the discerning mind that there was a cover-up and so it is not just a theory.
Nicholas Katzenbach Asst Attorney General November 25 1963, the day of the Kennedy funeral.
You may have the last word there Mr Turner, but it probably won't mean too much in the long range scope of things. Cheers
Says the guy who offers his unsupported opinion all the time. Who cares indeed?
If he was the only one to say this then it would be open to debate, but he wasn't. The majority of witnesses in DP said that shots originated where Zapruder said.
If you are talking about the colored portion of the picture, show proof that it is different from the original besides that fact that it is colorized. Who are you kidding, you are just basing your conclusion on your opinion.
No I'm basing my opinion on experience with shooting firearms. Your presenting crap from Blevins that is supported by that lunatic of lunatics Ralph Cinque. Your credibility is in question. You're silly.
Bottom line is I don't believe on anything JFK unless I can see proof. I see proof of shots being fired from the pergola. Whether Zapruder or Sitzman are involved, that is a different thread. I am not concerned about their actions in this thread.
BTW - Mr. Zapruder did report that he heard shots fired from right behind him. He reported as such in the form of a TV interview minutes after the assassination and his Warren Commission testimony.
Since you have 30-years law enforcement experience, give me a nationally respected crime lab that I can use to analyze the Mary Moorman picture.
P.S. - I am not presenting anything from anyone else. The facts are the facts, and you have not debunked this fact.
You claim to want PROOF, and now You are misquoting Abe Zapruder right after You misquoted Bill Newman. Zapruder did Not say he heard shots fired from "RIGHT Behind Him". Zapruder did WC Testify to DPD motorcycle cops being Right behind him, but he did Not claim the shots fired were "RIGHT Behind Him".
Fact?
Bottom line is I don't believe on anything JFK unless I can see proof. I see proof of shots being fired from the pergola. Whether Zapruder or Sitzman are involved, that is a different thread. I am not concerned about their actions in this thread.
BTW - Mr. Zapruder did report that he heard shots fired from right behind him. He reported as such in the form of a TV interview minutes after the assassination and his Warren Commission testimony.
Bump regarding YOU claiming, "Mr Zapruder did report that he heard shots fired from RIGHT BEHIND HIM". Of course this claim of Yours = FALSE
It is a fact that Zapruder testified that a shot came from behind him no matter how much you ignore it.
Trolling......
Facts are facts... You can try to change the facts whichever way you want, that does not make it so.
In the TV interview minutes after the JFK assassination, he said he thought he was in the line of fire, to paraphrase him. In his Warren Commission testimony, he stated that they came from behind him, to paraphrase him.
What is a respected crime lab that I can use?
A private one, the FBI will not talk to me.
Facts are facts... You can try to change the facts whichever way you want, that does not make it so.
In the TV interview minutes after the JFK assassination, he said he thought he was in the line of fire, to paraphrase him. In his Warren Commission testimony, he stated that they came from behind him, to paraphrase him.
That's what you think.
Lner's like Chappie often refer to the testimonies of the witnesses. Those testimonials were often quite different and in many cases in direct conflict with what the witness said on the day of the coup d e'tat.
Why don't you submit the image to the FBI and ask them if there is someone behind Zapruder? And to colorize the image?
Why don't you post the colorized version of Moorman and we'll take the forum members honest assessment of how exaggerated your perceived human forms are inside the pergola.
How tall is the guy peering out of the top open slat.
Why their heads are twice the size of Zapruders and Sitzmans even though their 12 feet behind them.
A simple eyeball test.
Zapruder and the Newmans in their first day interviews describe a head explosion exactly as seen in Zapruder's film which shows matter going forward and away from Oswald's rifle and this same wound location is seen in the Autopsy photos and the Xrays. Why is this still even being discussed?
...
Besides the total absurdity of having a shooter out in full 360? public view who could be easily seen or photographed by a plethora of cameras in Dealey Plaza, then you try to setup a Patsy who was directly behind and 6 stories up? If it was me then I would pepper the upper floors of the buildings behind with snipers but putting a sniper in front or wherever at ground level in full view of anyone who cared to look is totally illogical and simply would never happen.
JohnM
Opinions and more opinions coming from you.
Show me facts and debunk this undeniable evidence that there is proof JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy.
You are spinning like a top. You haven't advanced your argument even one inch since your original post. You are the one making ridiculous claims so how about you produce your evidence. You have nothing but wishful thinking.
Zapruder and the Newmans in their first day interviews describe a head explosion exactly as seen in Zapruder's film which shows matter going forward and away from Oswald's rifle and this same wound location is seen in the Autopsy photos and the Xrays. Why is this still even being discussed?
(https://i.postimg.cc/NG53ppNy/Dealey-Plaza-Eyewitnesses2-zpsc1d78c8b.gif)
Kennedy's head moves forward.
(https://i.postimg.cc/jS1DG8HD/z31234l-1.gif)
The back of Kennedy's head shows a bullet entrance.
(https://s15.postimg.cc/a828j7ufv/JFKBOH.gif)
Besides the total absurdity of having a shooter out in full 360? public view who could be easily seen or photographed by a plethora of cameras in Dealey Plaza, then you try to setup a Patsy who was directly behind and 6 stories up? If it was me then I would pepper the upper floors of the buildings behind with snipers but putting a sniper in front or wherever at ground level in full view of anyone who cared to look is totally illogical and simply would never happen.
(https://i.postimg.cc/MpR3gLRT/Dealey-Plaza-aerial.jpg)
JohnM
A private one, the FBI will not talk to me.
Gee, I wonder why?
Homeland Security and the FBI keep track of crackpots like you... but don't worry; Trumpty-Dumpty will pardon you. Not so sure about Duncan though.
Mr. LIEBELER - Did you have any impression as to the direction from which these shots came?As close as the codless shmoe came to owning up.
Mr. ZAPRUDER - No, I also thought it came from back of me.
He can't be a Lner anymore with this proof. Chappie, you will accept the truth, won't you?
As close as the codless shmoe came to owning up.
Mytton's graphics might just illustrate that Kennedy was shot in the head twice explaining the pa-pow that some claim they heard.
Why don't you submit the image to the FBI and ask them if there is someone behind Zapruder? And to colorize the image?
My point is, which you have clearly missed, is that I and others are expressing opinions. I don't claim them to be facts unlike some.
Could you give a citation which shows this to be true please.
I got the point. ALL you do is express opinions. You never cite any evidence to support your opinions, and yet, you constantly call out people who believe that a conspiracy took place.
Why don't you start using the evidence?
Sure. Unlike you I use the evidence. In my "Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions" series I did a six posts like this. Here is the first one.
***********************************************
It's a fact that Zapruder did not conclude that he knew where the shot came from, no matter how much you want to ignore the influences of others in the heat of the moment.
Mr. ZAPRUDER - Yes, actually--I couldn't say what I thought at the moment, where they came from--after the impact of the tragedy was really what I saw and I started and I said--yelling, "They've killed him"--I assumed that they came from there, because as the police started running back of me, it looked like it came from the back of me.
Mr. LIEBELER - But you didn't form any opinion at that time as to what direction the shots did come from actually?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - No.
I have explained this before to you and don't intend doing so again. I'll post how I choose and you accept that or not. I really don't mind because I'm not seeking your approval.
The question was could you show evidence to support your statement that the majority of witnesses in DP said that shots originated where Zapruder said. I accept that some people said they thought that but was it a majority?
Undeniable evidence? You need to learn what evidence actually is. This entire thread is a joke. 55 years and the conspiracy ?community? is still pushing this kind of crap. Remarkable.
Why don't you post the colorized version of Moorman and we'll take the forum members honest assessment of how exaggerated your perceived human forms are inside the pergola.
How tall is the guy peering out of the top open slat.
Why their heads are twice the size of Zapruders and Sitzmans even though their 12 feet behind them.
A simple eyeball test.
Just want all of you to be aware of the photographic, film, and written testimony evidence that is out there.
Mr. Zapruder's testimony
Mr. LIEBELER - Yes.
Mr. ZAPRUDER - Yes--after the shots--yes, some of them were motorcycle cops--I guess they left their motorcycles running and they were running right behind me, of course, in the line of the shooting. I guess they thought it came from right behind me.
Mr. LIEBELER - Did you have any impression as to the direction from which these shots came?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - No, I also thought it came from back of me. Of course, you can't tell when something is in line it could come from anywhere, but being I was here and he was hit on this line and he was hit right in the head--I saw it right around here, so it looked like it came from here and it could come from there.
Mr. LIEBELER - All right, as you stood here on the abutment and looked down into Elm Street, you saw the President hit on the right side of the head and you thought perhaps the shots had come from behind you?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - Well, yes.
Mr. LIEBELER - From the direction behind you?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - Yes, actually--I couldn't say what I thought at the moment, where they came from--after the impact of the tragedy was really what I saw and I started and I said--yelling, "They've killed him"--I assumed that they came from there, because as the police started running back of me, it looked like it came from the back of me.
Mr. LIEBELER - But you didn't form any opinion at that time as to what direction the shots did come from actually?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - No.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/zapruder.htm
Testimony Of Abraham Zapruder. The testimony of Abraham Zapruder was taken at 1 p.m., on July 22, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.
https://www.jfk.org/the-collections/abraham-zapruder-film/zapruder-interview-transcript/
Zapruder Interview Transcript - The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza - The Sixth Floor Museum - The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey PlazaThe Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza | The Sixth Floor Museum
Here is Mr. Bill Newman's testimony:
Q: How many shots did you hear?
A: I heard at least three. I often thought of four, but I can't clearly say there were four shots; I can clearly say there were three.
Q: Do you have any impression as to the direction from which the shots came?
A: Yes, sir. From the sound of the shots, the report of the rifle or whatever it was, it sounded like they were coming directly behind from where I was standing.
Q: Now would you push the microphone aside and step down to the aerial photograph and identify that general area, just the general area from which the sounds came.
A: In my opinion, the sounds of the shots sounded as if they had come from directly behind me (indicating). I was standing near this light standard here, and I thought the shots were coming from back here, and apparently, everybody else did because they all ran in that direction.
http://www.jfk-online.com/wnewmanshaw.html
Mary Moorman photo - NBC source -
(https://media4.s-nbcnews.com/j/streams/2013/November/131115/2D9692239-today-moorman-polaroid-jfk-assassination-131114-tz.fit-760w.jpg)
JFK 'grassy knoll' photo fails to sell at auction - TODAY.com
A pivotal piece of American history went on sale Friday morning ? but did not sell. The item ? a Polaroid photo snapped in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963, the day of President John F. Kennedy?s ...
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Hxx8TafILG4/UpJmJiQvswI/AAAAAAAAl5s/5ixp9qutulw/s1600/s_500_opednews_com_0_mary-moorman-polaroid-jpg_89485_20131121-894.gif)
Look in the shelter, there are people there to the back of Mr. Zapruder.
Nix
Film -
Look at the shelter around the 5-second mark. A shot is fired from the third window and there is another shot fired from the walkway behind Mr. Zapruder and Ms. Sitzman.
Play the video in slow motion, you will see a shot from the third window and a smoke trail from the walkway behind Mr. Zapruder. -
How to view the video is slow motion -
In Mr. Zapruder's original statements, he thought he was in the direct line of fire, the shots came from behind him.
In Mr. Newman's original statements, he thought the shots came from the pergola.
This information is hard to grasp, but there is no denying the truth of photographic and film evidence. I am not asking you to change your opinion, I just want you to know the truth.
Walt- We do Not know everything that has possibly been done to this Colorized Moorman Pic. Why are you buying into a Theory which is based on what we Know is an Altered Image?
Your colored Moorman photo.
Ok let's not bother the forum members. How about you answering these two questions:
How tall is the guy peering out of the top open slat?
Why their heads are twice the size of Zapruders and Sitzmans even though their 12 feet behind them?
The reason I'm asking is because you've done all the research and all. I know you must have the original specs of the pergolas to answer these buzzing gnat type questions.
Then after you swat away these questions with your facts explain how in the Betzner and Willis photos taken seconds before your colorized photo there isn't a hint of any human in that pavilion. Just looking to see if you have any clue as to how they got in there and where they came from.
Walt- We do Not know everything that has possibly been done to this Colorized Moorman Pic. Why are you buying into a Theory which is based on what we Know is an Altered Image?
There you go again with your opinions. Show proof of what you said. If the Altgen image has been modified, show proof. Where do you get all these conspiratorial theories from?
Who said anything about an ALTGENS Image? Blevins colorized the MOORMAN Pic. This is Altering an image by definition.
Let's be honest, you are trying to correct yourself after you said that the colorized Moorman photo has been altered because it is altered. You are trying to believe that and are having a hard time. What in the colorized version is different from the NBC News copy of the Moorman photo beside the fact that it is colored?
You are spreading conspiracies theory when you speak that way. Show proof. Fact is fact, that is what has been presented. If you want to debunk this, do so with facts, not opinions.
The Moorman Photo is a B/W Photo. Colorizing that Photo makes it ALTERED by definition. This is Not complicated. And again, what does Altgens have to do with this discussion?
Let's be honest, you are trying to correct yourself after you said that the colorized Moorman photo has been altered because it is altered. You are trying to believe that and are having a hard time. What in the colorized version is different from the NBC News copy of the Moorman photo beside the fact that it is colored?
You are spreading conspiracies theory when you speak that way. Show proof. Fact is fact, that is what has been presented. If you want to debunk this, do so with facts, not opinions.
(https://i.postimg.cc/LXgJ626j/moorman-c.gif)
(https://i.postimg.cc/5t0HT8h7/faces-ambushedbuilding-zps9cd34cd0-1.jpg)
JohnM
What you have posted above is "Who's On 1st ?" worthy. 1st you inadvertently reference Altgens, and now the nonsensical gibberish above. Slow yourself down and think things through.
There's nothing that amuses me more than watching an argument within the conspiracy crowd. They make the Keystone Cops look like a highly organized crime busting outfit.
Keep up the great work guys. Thumb1:
One can always expect a great deal of (unintentional) mirth from these rank amateurs at CT Comedy Central.
In this particular instance, apparently perspective and proper size relationships (Re placement of people in a scene) don't matter in the CT Twilight Zone.
In that vein, the guy apparently in sun glasses--- let's call him 'StumpyMan'-- has a noggin on him at least twice the size of Sitzman/Zap heads. Additionally, the giant to our left--- let me suggest 'Saskquatch' as an arguably accurate descriptive moniker, given the massive watermelon-sized gourd which dwarfs even that of StumpyMan.
Sluggo's 'truths' basically go up in smoke (so-to-speak) and in more ways than one.
Know? How can you possibly know for sure when no hard credible proof of such has come forward in 55 years? Let?s be reasonable. You may believe he was killed by a conspiracy. Belief is something one has in the absence of actual evidence. People believe Bigfoot exists. Actual evidence? None. You?re no different than those people. That?s scary huh?
1. The Mary Moorman photo shows a person behind Mr. Zapruder.On each of these 4 points the evidence of Bigfoot is more convincing than for the evidence of Bigfoot. More convincing until one contemplates the existence of an animal that always avoids being shot or run over or even leaving being a few hairs, like all other real animals do, over a wide area, decade after decade.
2. The Nix film shows a smoke trail from a person behind Mr. Zapruder.
3. Mr. Zapruder said in an interview and testimony that he thought the shots came right from behind him.
4. Mr. Newman said in an interview and in his testimony that he thought the shots came from the shelter behind him.
Your job is to prove either of 1, 2, 3, or 4 wrong. Prove that these undeniable facts are not true.
On each of these 4 points the evidence of Bigfoot is more convincing than for the evidence of Bigfoot. More convincing until one contemplates the existence of an animal that always avoids being shot or run over or even leaving being a few hairs, like all other real animals do, over a wide area, decade after decade.
If one believes in the JFK assassination conspiracy, one should feel no embarrassment over believing in Bigfoot or UFOs.
Keyvan, Keyvan, Keyvan. You speak falsehoods. I am not a conspiracy theorist at all.
Does the Nix film really show more proof of conspiracy than the Patterson film of Bigfoot? Does not Moorman photograph show more proof of conspiracy than various still pictures of Bigfoot? My point is, the evidence of a JFK assassination conspiracy does not even rise to the level of the very dubious evidence of Bigfoot.
You are pushing conspiracy theories with your opinions of what you think is going on in the picture. How about show proof. Facts, you have heard of it.
If there's a conspiracy regarding the population of the pergola, blame Mother Nature
The proof is revealed by eye. No conspiracy required: Just knowledge of perspective. Or just the realization that as a figure moves further back in the picture plane, it diminishes it size.
JohnM's combo now/then pergola image shows the man in the now-pergola on the far right (in black shirt/blue pants/black shoes) in proper perspective in relation to Sitzman/Zapruder. Additionally, the demonstrated floor level of the pergola clearly reveals the need of either a talent for levitation or access to ladders on the part of your giant-headed shooters.
You are asking me to answer your opinions. It is very simple, the Mary Moorman photo shows that there is a person begins Mr. Zapruder. Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman stated that they believed the shots came behind them. The Nix Film shows shots fired from that location. There is testimony from Police Officers and Secret Service men in the Warren Commission about shots coming from that area. There is film evidence of smoke floating in the area.
The above is proven by photo, film, interview, and testimony from 1st hand sources.
Accept the truth, it is as simple as that.
You are pushing more conspiracy theories. Show proof. You objectifying what you see with your eye is not proof. Fact is fact. If you have a problem with these facts, show actual proof that is fact, Chappie! Blame mother nature, really!
Oh I've accepted the truth.
Here's the facts:
1. You can't answer my questions.
2. You've been exposed as a Trash Peddler
3. You don't know the actual meaning of what research is.
If you want any more truth , give me a holler.
Keep up the distractions from the undeniable facts. You are a peddler of opinions that make no sense.
'Mother Nature' re the laws thereof
'God' if you prefer
How are the laws of nature a conspiracy theory
You have addressed neither the technical demonstration from JohnM regarding the floor level, nor the giant head sizes of your heavily-tanned shooters
Run away Fraud.
You have no facts.
You have trash.
Grow a set and answer the questions.
C'mon Mr. Researcher.
Ha ha ha! You can't take the truth! Why can't you accept facts? It does not conform to your truth?
"Fraud includes the pretense of knowledge when knowledge there is none." - Benjamin Nathan Cardozo.
You, sir, have no knowledge and you are a fraud if I ever read about one.
How tall is the guy peering out of the top open slat?
Why are their heads twice the size of Zapruders and Sitzmans even though their 12 feet behind them?
The reason I'm asking is because you've done all the research and all. I know you must have the original specs of the pergolas to answer these buzzing gnat type questions.
Then after you swat away these questions with your facts explain how in the Betzner and Willis photos taken seconds before your colorized photo there isn't a hint of any human in that pavilion. Just looking to see if you have any clue as to how they got in there and where they came from.
Again, those are questions that you have. You need to answer them, not me. All I know is that shots were fired from there from the photo, film, interview, and testimonies. You want answers to those questions, it is up to you to find out, not me. All I know is where the factual evidence that I can see takes me.
I can't remember where I read it years ago, but it said that there was a manhole inside the concrete structure.
Can anyone who has been there confirm or deny this? Thanks.
That's it run away. Keep running. Don't trip on that tail between your legs. The least you could do is to install one of these when you back up to unload your trash:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=6&v=0JH825sGa44
I see that you modified your answer. Why?
How about you show a technical demonstration regarding the floor level, and you show proof of the giant head sizes of the heavily-tanned shooters. You are discussing that somehow an NBC News copy of the Mary Moorman picture is showing giant heads, well, show proof that is the fact. Your perspective is worthless here, a proof is not.
Why do you have a problem with facts?
Clearly your home-schooling has failed you.
I edit in order to clarify what I mean.... and you clearly didn't get the obvious (to educated folks, at least) reference first around. So I spelled it out for you... clearly what you need to have applied to your other claims.
The only B/W Moorman photo I've seen shows no figure or head. Just blobs of congealed pixels.
The colourized version presented here shows the sudden appearance of two giant-sized sunburnt noggins.
"The hated man is the result of his hater's pride rather than his hater's conscience." - Criss Jami
I guess your pride is hurt! Learn to accept the truth and you will be a better person.
No answers to simple questions.
?Fear of ridicule begets the worst cowardice.?
― Andr? Gide
Simple questions that you should research and get the answer.Trust me I've "researched" . I have the original specs of the pergolas. You're all wet. A fraud . You've been peddling this trash on here since March. You should be ashamed of yourself. You can't answer the questions because you're inept at best or you know the answers which proves you're a fraud.
Trust me I've "researched" . I have the original specs of the pergolas. You're all wet. A fraud . You've been peddling this trash on here since March. You should be ashamed of yourself. You can't answer the questions because you're inept at best or you know the answers which proves you're a fraud.
Oh, so you have "researched". You have the specs of the pergolas.
It is time that you share your "research" with us here.
Put up or shut up. What are the specs of the pergolas?
Just as I said , you're inept at best. Do your own research. Fraud.
If anybody wants them , PM me.
Ha ha ha! You don't want to share?
Whoever PM's Steve, PM me afterward with his research. Feel free to write that you won't send me the information, but send it to me anyways.
Just because you can't handle the truth, does not make you right.
I'm 100% sure this place will accept you. You probably qualify for a scholarship.
https://www.clowninstitute.com/clown-college.html
Fact is fact, all your childish remarks won't change the truth, JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy.Who is debating whether Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy? Nice trick attempting to pull away from the task you failed at. All I asked you was two questions. Pal, I've interrogated the scum of the earth. Your tactics are minor league.
Who is debating whether Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy? Nice trick attempting to pull away from the task you failed at. All I asked you was two questions. Pal, I've interrogated the scum of the earth. Your tactics are minor league.
And I have told you, do your own research for your questions. It will make you smarter.
Look at the thread on the subject, this thread is about proof JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy. You want to prove otherwise, bring evidence that shows what I have shown in wrong. You have not.
All you have done is state your opinions, ask for additional research, and thrown insults.
Are you as dense as you portray to be? One last time , answer the questions put to you or STFU. You posted trash from Blevins , you were called on it, you were shown how much of a fraud you are, you were asked three simple questions. You refuse to answer a single one and you keep repeating the same regurgitated response. Stop being a coward.
You don't want to accept the truth and you are asking questions that you should research yourself.
I am not posting anything from anyone else. I am posting information that I have researched. You want answers to your questions, research them and let everyone here know your findings.
The only fraud is you that refuses to share the 'research' you have done about the pergola and you keep throwing insults at me because what I have shared here does not agree with your findings. Come clean and accept the truth.
Pretty pathetic. Your OP was kind of funny . Now you shun all inquiries about your keen detective work :D . As I've said before your evasive tactics are really lame. I'll leave you alone now . I never made fun of the kids on small school bus, I'm too old to start now. Later, fraud.
Again, those are questions that you have. You need to answer them, not me. All I know is that shots were fired from there from the photo, film, interview, and testimonies. You want answers to those questions, it is up to you to find out, not me. All I know is where the factual evidence that I can see takes me.
Yeah, Keyvan Shahrdar ...go back and find that smoking gun--that is 55 years old and now that everybody's dead :-[
..... you are doing nothing but blowing smoke.
Yeah, Keyvan Shahrdar ...go back and find that smoking gun--that is 55 years old and now that everybody's dead :-[He, like you, like all other CTers have had up to 55 years to show the smoking gun. It's a bit rich to suggest that because people are dying (of old age related issues) it makes the case harder to prove when there's been no proof during the 55 years anyway. There's not even general agreement between CTers on what the conspiracy involved. Was it CIA, SS, FBI, Big Oil, The Family, the Russians, the Cubans? The only person in the whole of the USA who has been ruled out is Oswald. That fixation that he wasn't knowingly involved is what trips CTers up at every turn.
He, like you, like all other CTers .......Stop right there. I am a skeptic. Find one post where I claim any conspiracy theory.
Stop right there. I am a skeptic. Find one post where I claim any conspiracy theory.
Show us where Zap confirmed that shots definitely came from behind. You lot are quick to cherrypick while ignoring the rest of the Zapruder testimony: In short, he assumed those people and the cop running up the knoll knew where the shots came from.
Until you can provide cited information that anyone else but the prime suspect knew there was to be an attempt made on Kennedy that day, by all means post it.
Otherwise, you are doing nothing but blowing smoke.
Yeah, Keyvan Shahrdar ...go back and find that smoking gun--that is 55 years old and now that everybody's dead :-[And what are you trying to say?
He, like you, like all other CTers have had up to 55 years to show the smoking gun. It's a bit rich to suggest that because people are dying (of old age related issues) it makes the case harder to prove when there's been no proof during the 55 years anyway. There's not even general agreement between CTers on what the conspiracy involved. Was it CIA, SS, FBI, Big Oil, The Family, the Russians, the Cubans? The only person in the whole of the USA who has been ruled out is Oswald. That fixation that he wasn't knowingly involved is what trips CTers up at every turn.
I'd like to hear from a CTer who says that Oswald was deeply and knowingly involved but that he was just one player in a conspiracy. That might stimulate an interesting discussion.
Steve, this thread is about proof JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy. I showed you proof. What are you trying to say?
Do you like to read facts about the assassination of JFK? If you do, this thread is for you.
Go peddle you BS somewhere else. Surely there's a JFK For Juniors forum you could start up.
Go peddle you BS somewhere else. Surely there's a JFK For Juniors forum you could start up.
I do Not blame him for wanting to avoid being Tar Babied to the entire Blevins Theory. Problem is, when he posts the Blevins Colorized/Altered Moorman Photo he then must also accept the Babushka Lady nonsense that comes with it.
Accept the facts Royell. JFK was shot at from the Pergola. There is a fact to back it up.
You have a problem with facts.
Shots being fired from inside the Shelter would then also indict Zapruder and Sitzman as being involved in at least a cover-up. Zapruder received $150K for his film = a possible remuneration for his Not reporting alleged rifle fire coming from mere feet behind him. What Evidence is there that Sitzman ever received anything for Not reporting alleged rifle fire coming from just feet behind her?
You are a conspiracy theorist. If you have a conspiracy to peddle, start your own thread. This thread is about proof JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy. There is hard undeniable evidence that proves so. Again, there is a man behind Zapruder in the Mary Moorman photo, eyewitness interviews and testimonies of Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman state the shots came from behind them. The Nix film shows shots fired from behind Mr. Zapruder. There is WC testimony from Secret Service men and Police officers that shots came from the pergola.
Fact is fact, and that is what readers have been presented herewith.
Alleged shots coming "from the PERGOLA" are NOT corroboration of your contention that shots were fired Specifically from Inside The SHELTER directly behind Zapruder and Sitzman. Very simple
Facts are facts. They cannot be changed. Their testimony is further validated by the Mary Moorman photo and the Nix film. Facts are facts.
Accept the facts Royell. JFK was shot at from the Pergola. There is a fact to back it up.
You have a problem with facts.
The above is Non-Responsive regarding the vast difference between the PERGOLA vs SHELTER locations.
Are any of the wounds on the victims compatible with a shot from the Pergola? .... I don't think so....
I do believe that JFK was caught in a crossfire and two or three shoots were fired from behind the stockade fence, But the Pergola seems to be be too far to the right hand side of the Lincoln to be the location of a sniper.
My impression was that you subscribe to many theories...You are not a very good impressionist.
Steve Howsley...Let's draw the line at demanding a member leave the forum just because you disagree with them. I mean who would you have to argue with?
Go peddle you BS somewhere else. Surely there's a JFK For Juniors forum you could start up.
And what are you trying to say?You understand Howsley's posts but didn't mine? He just enjoined you to the leave the forum.... and I just stuck up for you. Go figure ::)
You understand Howsley's posts but didn't mine? He just enjoined you to the leave the forum.... and I just stuck up for you. Go figure ::)Jerry, you wrote "Yeah, Keyvan Shahrdar ...go back and find that smoking gun--that is 55 years old and now that everybody's dead :-["
Steve Howsley...Let's draw the line at demanding a member leave the forum just because you disagree with them. I mean who would you have to argue with?I haven't demanded anything. I'm in no position to do so.
I haven't demanded anything.Really? Start reviewing what you post.
Go peddle you BS somewhere else.Seems like direct instruction to go away to me.
Posted by: Steve Howsley
? on: Today at 07:42:59 PM ? Really? Start reviewing what you post.
Posted by: Steve Howsley link=topic=1416.msg38388#msg38388 date=1543725306] Seems like direct instruction to go away to me.
My reply would be, there is film and photographic evidence as well as supporting interviews and testimonies from people from 55-years ago that proves the fact that shots were fired from the pergola. I don't know why this has not been brought up 55-years ago.
Stop right there. I am a skeptic.
The reply should be...
...there is film and photographic evidence as well as supporting interviews and testimonies from people from 55-years ago that indicates a shot or shots were probably fired from behind the wooden fence on the Grassy Knoll. It was brought up the day of the assassination. It was also confirmed [rather half-heartedly] by the House Committee in 1978.
By now you should know that there are people here who close their eyes ..put their hands over their ears ...stick their head in the sand and sense everything else with their backside.
I am curious. What is it you are skeptical of?
The reply should be...
...there is film and photographic evidence as well as supporting interviews and testimonies from people from 55-years ago that indicates a shot or shots were probably fired from behind the wooden fence on the Grassy Knoll. It was brought up the day of the assassination. It was also confirmed [rather half-heartedly] by the House Committee in 1978.
By now you should know that there are people here who close their eyes ..put their hands over their ears ...stick their head in the sand and sense everything else with their backside.
You seem to have a problem with facts and the truth. Why?Tell you what...I'm going to turn you back over to Chapman and Howsley you guys all deserve each other. You will again all ask me why? And I will reply now...you just do.
Tell you what...I'm going to turn you back over to Chapman and Howsley you guys all deserve each other. You will again all ask me why? And I will reply now...you just do.
Tell you what...I'm going to turn you back over to Chapman and Howsley you guys all deserve each other. You will again all ask me why? And I will reply now...you just do.
The reply should be...
...there is film and photographic evidence as well as supporting interviews and testimonies from people from 55-years ago that indicates a shot or shots were probably fired from behind the wooden fence on the Grassy Knoll. It was brought up the day of the assassination. It was also confirmed [rather half-heartedly] by the House Committee in 1978.
By now you should know that there are people here who close their eyes ..put their hands over their ears ...stick their head in the sand and sense everything else with their backside.
In order to conform to what is regarded in the western world as a person who can function within acceptable norms of behavior the reply should be...
According to some nutcakes and fruitloops there is film and photographic evidence, as well as supporting interviews and testimonies from people 55 years ago that indicate that a shot (or shots) were probably fired from places other than the 6th floor SE corner window of the TSBD. Acoustics test done at the later stages of the HSCA investigations that indicated a shot was fired (but missed) from behind a wooden fence in the Grassy Knoll was accepted by a close majority of the conspiracy minded panelist who wrote the final report. This misguided acoustic report led to the HSCA concluding that there probably was a conspiracy in the assassination of JFK but could find no connection that led directly to the man the HSCA agreed fired three shots from the snipers nest in the TSBD, Lee Harvey Oswald. This acoustic report the majority of the tin foil hat wearering members of the HSCA panel was soon discredited by a real scientific analysis done by a "distinguished panel of tweleve scientist" for the National Academy of Sciences. The Ramsey Panel (named after the panels chairman, professor Norman Ramsey of Harvard) concluded that the HSCA was way off base and should be ashamed for an eternity for accepting such a flawed report as that provided by Mark Weiss and Ernest Aschkenasy and for concluding that motorcycle policeman H. B. McLain's motorcycle microphone had been the source Weiss and Aschkenasy had based their study on.
Oscar, is there a problem with factual evidence that I reported here? Do you have a problem with facts?
Keyvan, you're confusing was is factual with an interpretation of a photograph that has been altered and of using selected witness testimony to buttress a conclusion. A wrong one at that. Moorman's photograph is a fact. In it's original state there's nothing in that photo that shows two guys behind the pagoda shooting at anybody. Relying on an altered version of that photograph as proof there were two shooters behind the pagoda is a fools errand, but this has already been pointed out to you by numerous posters numerous times. Still, if you want to insist that the altered photo shows what you claim there's really nothing more to be said. You know the old saying "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink".
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-A5csLv48i1g/VLYnEt9nmII/AAAAAAABCxk/P4MR_ak7Lpc/s800/Dealey-Plaza-May-24-1964.jpg) | (http://i63.tinypic.com/2md5i6b.jpg) |
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-A5csLv48i1g/VLYnEt9nmII/AAAAAAABCxk/P4MR_ak7Lpc/s800/Dealey-Plaza-May-24-1964.jpg) (http://i63.tinypic.com/2md5i6b.jpg)
You are stating your opinion on whether any of the wounds on the victims are compatible with a shot from the pergola. This is another thread. All I know is that JFK was shot at from the pergola, that is what the undeniable facts state.
Are you Now attempting to slither away from your original claim that shot(s) were fired from the SHELTER behind Zapruder? There is a Vast difference between that claim and your claim above of shot(s) being fired "from the PERGOLA".
Oscar, I am not confusing any type of interpretation. There is a person behind Mr. Zapruder. You are obviously talking about the colored version of the Mary Moorman photo. What is different in the colored version of the Moorman photo? If there is a difference besides the fact that it is colored, please let me know, I would like to know and so would everyone on this board.
On top of the Moorman photo showing a person there, the Nix film shows a smoke trail from a gunshot from the same exact place where there is a person behind Mr. Zapruder. Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman both stated in their interview minutes after the assassination that they thought the gunshots came from the pergola. There is film evidence of what looks like smoke in the area. Police Officers and Secret Service men testified in the WC that shots came from the area.
This is not my interpretations, these are factual verifiable events that occurred 55 years ago.
So, you are discounting 1) The Moorman photo, 2) The gunshot in the Nix Film, 3) The interview and testimony of Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman, 4) The testimony of police officers and secret service men in the WC, and 5) Film of gunsmoke floating around. To you, even though there is evidence that shows a shot from the pergola, it is somehow not there, because all the evidence is somehow wrong.
If the evidence is wrong, show proof instead of your opinion.
You have an issue with facts, why?
I believe that you've just confirmed that you also see the figure of a man in the pergola, to the left rear, of Zapruder
Keyvan.... you have made your point that there appears to be the figure of a man bin the pergola behind Zapruder. I believe that you're right on that observation, but how you conclude that he was a sniper who shot JFK is beyond my comprehension.
Walt,
On top of the Moorman photo showing a person there, the Nix film shows a smoke trail from a gunshot from the same exact place where there is a person behind Mr. Zapruder. Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman both stated in their interview minutes after the assassination that they thought the gunshots came from the pergola. There is film evidence of what looks like smoke in the area. Police Officers and Secret Service men testified in the WC that shots came from the area.
Have you looked at the Nix film, it is better to watch in slow motion. In the third window of the pergola, you can see a shot then right after, you can see another shot with a smoke trail from the spot where there is a person standing behind Mr. Zapruder on the Moorman photo. At about the 5-second mark, start looking at the pergola. You may need to watch it a couple of times to see it. It is better if you can slow down the film to .25 seconds.
To slow down a movie on YouTube, watch this video:
What are you seeing in the Nix film you are interpreting as shots?I believe the reference is to 0:20 in that video. That image is nowhere near the pergola windows. It is halfway down the steps from the pergola. Were anyone there, they would have been easily seen.
What are you seeing in the Nix film you are interpreting as shots?
I believe the reference is to 0:20 in that video. That image is nowhere near the pergola windows. It is halfway down the steps from the pergola. Were anyone there, they would have been easily seen.
It has been studied for years.... and years ago determined to be freaky looking shadows.
If it were a person..they would have to be 3 feet high or less and have a bean shooter not a rifle. Compare with Zapruder and friend who towered over the image.
Perhaps it was a really short aborigines Amazonian with a poison dart but it was not a rifle sniper.
Notice in the video the image does not change shape. Were it a shooter it most certainly would have.
View this video from Mr Nix himself. At 2:20 he tells were he believed the shots came from.....
Are you looking at the pergola starting at the 5-sec mark of the video? Do you see it?
I believe the reference is to 0:20 in that video. That image is nowhere near the pergola windows. It is halfway down the steps from the pergola. Were anyone there, they would have been easily seen.
It has been studied for years.... and years ago determined to be freaky looking shadows.
If it were a person..they would have to be 3 feet high or less and have a bean shooter not a rifle. Compare with Zapruder and friend who towered over the image.
Perhaps it was a really short aborigines Amazonian with a poison dart but it was not a rifle sniper.
Notice in the video the image does not change shape. Were it a shooter it most certainly would have.
View this video from Mr Nix himself. At 2:20 he tells were he believed the shots came from.....
Yes I was looking at the 5 second mark. As I just posted, there are a couple of white streaks, is that what you mean? There are a couple of horizontal white streaks at the very start of the film, what are they? There are other streaks and blobs in the film.
Typical response from you, I wouldn't expect anything else from you. It is there, you know it, you just don't want to accept it. You can't hide from the truth or the facts.
Why won't you discuss things, this is a discussion forum isn't it? Is it the white streaks you are referring to? Do you see the earlier horizontal streaks? What do you think they are?
Why don't you get the truth and fact glasses, you might see it then. You can't hide from the truth, the fact is fact.
So you don't want to discuss it?
Nothing to discuss that has already been discussed.
Accept the truth and facts. JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy.
I presume you meant hasn't already been discussed. If so, why are you posting? What do you want to achieve?
Why are you asking? What do you want to achieve?
A discussion. You?
It is just burning you up that there is evidence of a conspiracy,
I can understand that you have believed otherwise for such a long time,
....but you have to accept the facts, and the facts are that shots were fired from the pergola towards JFK. There is proof JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy.
You want a discussion, bring it on...
Its really not.
Its been a long time since I gave it any thought.
If those were the facts I would except them, but they aren't and just repeating that they are doesn't make it so.
Are you referring to the white streaks at 5 seconds in? Do you see horizontal white streaks earlier in the film? What are they?
It is burning you up and you don't know how to deal with it. Can't help you there.
For the video, keep watching it over and over again until you finally accept that you see the gunshots. If you can't do that, you have a serious problem with fact and truth.
Is that your idea of a discussion? You said 'bring it on' after all.
Why don't you answer the questions if the answers are so obvious?
It is just burning you up that there is evidence of a conspiracy, I can understand that you have believed otherwise for such a long time, but you have to accept the facts, and the facts are that shots were fired from the pergola towards JFK. There is proof JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy.
You want a discussion, bring it on...
With "bring it on" in mind, just how does Zapruder and Sitzman fit into these alleged shots being fired Only feet behind them? They have Never said they heard shots being fired that close to them. Tink Thompson Q/A'd Sitzman regarding someone firing a rifle in close proximity to her when he interviewed her for "Six Seconds In Dallas". She denied HEARING/seeing anyone firing a gun in that general area around her and Zapruder.
With "bring it on" in mind, just how does Zapruder and Sitzman fit into these alleged shots being fired Only feet behind them? They have Never said they heard shots being fired that close to them. Tink Thompson Q/A'd Sitzman regarding someone firing a rifle in close proximity to her when he interviewed her for "Six Seconds In Dallas". She denied HEARING/seeing anyone firing a gun in that general area around her and Zapruder.
Again, for the nth time, Zapruder heard shots as he thought he was in direct line of fire in his TV interview. He even went further in his WC testimony that the shots came from behind him. This is what is verifiable. As for your other questions, you are probably better off asking a psychologist about why Mrs. Sitzman did not hear anything except for a really loud report caused by a soda pop bottle that a black couple had and that no-one can verify. She also says that after she got off the pedestal, she went down near the street and spoke to someone, when the Bell film shows that she never did go down to the street level. Yep, a psychologist might be able to help. I am not a psychologist, so I can't help.
If the figure that appears to be a man in the pergola behind Sitzman and Z had been a man with a rifle he would have had to have fired the rifle from his left shoulder...Very few rifles are made for left hand shooters....and the firing of a right hand rifle is awkward for a south paw.
We are having a discussion about how you have an issue with fact and truth. Bring it on...
I know that's what you want it to be about but its not, as far as I'm concerned, but rather about your claim of obvious gunshots being seen in the Nix film originating from the pergola. Don't you want to discuss that?
We are discussing this, I have told you to keep looking at the film starting at the 5-sec mark, for you prob at the 4-sec mark. You need to put on some truth or factual glasses so you can see them because you already stated that you don't see them. You are misleading.
Telling me to look at the film, when I have, is not having a discussion. I have not stated that I do not see them, I have asked whether you are referring to the white streaks, if you see the earlier horizontal white streaks and if so what you think they are.
You are misleading. You can't argue with facts. Why don't you announce to all that you see the shots? You won't do it, because you have an issue with facts.
I also do Not see any sign of gun fire coming out of the Shelter on the Nix Film.Someone who would be inside the covered pergola would be trapped and would be seen exiting...simple as that. Here is an aerial view showing this.....
You are misleading. You can't argue with facts. Why don't you announce to all that you see the shots? You won't do it, because you have an issue with facts.
Someone who would be inside the covered pergola would be trapped and would be seen exiting...simple as that. Here is an aerial view showing this.....
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-T26-8cCEQX4/ULO8TLk5dJI/AAAAAAAAASU/YcOpMo64B2E/s800/Dealey-Plaza-Dallas-Texas-Circa-1967.jpg)
Those are all police cars parked behind. That was quite the secure area wouldn't you think?
Questions, please: If all of the shots were fired by a shooter located behind the Pergola then how did JFK and JC get shot in their backs?
And if the shooter was located there, where is the conspiracy? You have one shooter and not two. That is, if you believe Zapruder and Newman's account that all of the shots they heard sounded like they came from a location behind them?
And what about the witnesses who said the shots sounded like they came from the TSBD? What about Brennan? Norman, Jarman, Williams et al.?
Walt,
Maybe so, but that is an opinion of what the gunmen did. What's if a left-hand rifle was provided, that is opinion as well. Nobody knows, the only thing that we know, because there is factual evidence, is that shots were fired from the pergola towards JFK.
Jerry, you are injecting your opinions ...Steve,Keyvan...you are a terrible analyst. You should quit while you are behind.
I don't know, this thread deals with the shots from the pergola toward JFK. I do however believe that there were multiple shooters, with two being in the pergola.
Keyvan...you are a terrible analyst. You should quit while you are behind.
An opinion would be like this...There are, as you claim [which is an opinion] two gunmen within the covered pergola. One has a rifle and the other must be standing upon his shoulders with a rifle which they fire at the limo. They escape down a scuttle hole in that pergola corner which they had dug previously and disguised with a fake concrete lid and tunneled then to a sewer pipe. ---That sir is an opinion and as and silly as it might seem, this is what you seem to propose.
You are misleading. You can't argue with facts. Why don't you announce to all that you see the shots? You won't do it, because you have an issue with facts.
Keyvan, What has happened in the Lincoln at the 5 second point? Has Jackie already responded to JFK 's distress?
Keyvan...you are a terrible analyst. You should quit while you are behind.
An opinion would be like this...There are, as you claim [which is an opinion] two gunmen within the covered pergola. One has a rifle and the other must be standing upon his shoulders with a rifle which they fire at the limo. They escape down a scuttle hole in that pergola corner which they had dug previously and disguised with a fake concrete lid and tunneled then to a sewer pipe. ---That sir is an opinion and as and silly as it might seem, this is what you seem to propose.
I don't have an issue with facts, but what you are claiming are not facts. You have been shown facts which you are ignoring, such as the fact that someone in the position shown in the colourised Moorman image would be unrealistically tall or on a step ladder, that it is not possible to exit the shelter from the rear so any people in there would have had to exit from the front, that there are other white streaks seen in the Nix film. It is you who has the problem with facts and won't discuss or answer any questions asked. You're on your own on this one and I will leave you to your beliefs now rather than waste anymore of my time.
He borrowed the bulk of this Hokum from Blevins without doing his own research to verify the Blevins BS: Now he looks ridiculous trying to defend an utterly nonsensical scenario. Unless Zapruder and Sitzman are in on this half baked scheme, it immediately goes the banana peel route.
Keyvan, What has happened in the Lincoln at the 5 second point? Has Jackie already responded to JFK 's distress?
Fact is fact, you want to change facts to fit your narrative. Who knows what happened where we cannot see. I doubt that there is a person that is 9'6", but the facts are facts, there are shots from the third window and then there is a shot from the breezeway. You can't change those facts.
Yeah. So a shooter Looks out of the 4th Shelter Window but fires/levels his rifle out of the 3rd Window? Chuck Connors/"The Rifleman" had better things to do on 11/22/63.
What are you talking about, more opinions and new conspiracy?
Your Windows, Your Problem. Plus, you continue to run away from having Zapruder and Sitzman actively playing a part in this scene right out of, "It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad, World". For whatever reason you have chosen to tie yourself to the mast of this Ship amidst it going down for the 4th time. It ain't even Your ship! It has been skippered by Blevins dating back 2+ years.
You can't argue with facts about the shots in the Nix Film, the Mary Moorman photo, nor can you argue about the interviews and testimonies of Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman. You have nothing but personal attacks. What a pity. I really thought you would add value here. How disappointing.
Keep them coming though, I want everyone to see what you are.
Nothing personal at all. You are relatively new on this Forum and right out of the box you are destroying your own credibility. You have made a mistake by following the Pied Piper of Blevins. Basing an opinion on an ALTERED JFK Assassination Image has lead to your being embarrassingly wrong. Next time, do your own in-depth investigative research Before distributing the Theory of someone else. You got game but you're green. That green has led to your getting bamboozled. Walk away Now and regard your lumps as a lesson learned.
Nothing personal at all. You are relatively new on this Forum and right out of the box you are destroying your own credibility. You have made a mistake by following the Pied Piper of Blevins. Basing an opinion on an ALTERED JFK Assassination Image has lead to your being embarrassingly wrong. Next time, do your own in-depth investigative research Before distributing the Theory of someone else. You got game but you're green. That green has led to your getting bamboozled. Walk away Now and regard your lumps as a lesson learned.
This Kevyan character is a classic Internet troll
Don't take the bait
Yeah. So a shooter Looks out of the 4th Shelter Window but fires/levels his rifle out of the 3rd Window? Chuck Connors/"The Rifleman" had better things to do on 11/22/63.
Re: "The Rifleman".... Did you know that Whitey Bulger the convict who was murdered in prison last month was known as "The Rifleman" in mafia circles? Bulger was a amoral killer and a crack shot with a rifle.... He was given the moniker " The Rifleman" after the murder of JFK....
Is there a connection?.... I don't know.
This Kevyan character is a classic Internet troll
Don't take the bait
That's good advice Bill.
One thing that's a plus out of this garbage is that on several occasions I've found myself in serious agreement with Walt and Royell.
I am not a troll, this is classic Chappie telling everyone that does not agree with his warped, unvetted, without any fact theories.
You can't argue with facts Chappie, you just can't.
That's good advice Bill.
One thing that's a plus out of this garbage is that on several occasions I've found myself in serious agreement with Walt and Royell.
That won't last
;)
That's good advice Bill.
One thing that's a plus out of this garbage is that on several occasions I've found myself in serious agreement with Walt and Royell.
You create your own. Not a good plan in any walk of life. In you, the 'fake news' era has claimed yet another victim. Even CT trolls here don't believe you.
You will eventually crash & burn here, and of your own accord.
You create your own [facts]. Not a good plan in any walk of life. In you, the 'fake news' era has claimed yet another victim. Even CT trolls here don't believe you. You will eventually crash & burn here, and of your own accord.Quote from: Keyvan Shahrdar link=topic=1416.msg38628#msg38628 date=1543972033]
Fake news is you. Fact after fact after fact, that is what has been presented to you. You have a serious problem with facts. Why?
Quote from: Bill Chapman on December 04, 2018, 11:34:10 PMQuote from: Keyvan Shahrdar link=topic=1416.msg38628#msg38628 date=1543972033]
Like I stated earlier...you guys really deserve each other. Now kiss and make up :-*
Word on the street is that Blevins passed away on 11/30/2018