JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: David Dickson on November 06, 2018, 04:21:38 PM
-
Hi,
Sorry if his has been asked before.
Has anybody studied all of the assassination films and analysed whether they corroborate one another?
It should be possible using modern technology to have each person in each film fixed at a moment in time and space relative to one another and to fixed landmarks.
They could then be compared with each assassination film to check whether they still maintain the same fixed point in time and space.
Every bystander should be present in each of the films and in the same location, were that not to be the case it would clearly show where the films have been altered if indeed they have.
Cheers
-
Hi,
Sorry if his has been asked before.
Has anybody studied all of the assassination films and analysed whether they corroborate one another?
It should be possible using modern technology to have each person in each film fixed at a moment in time and space relative to one another and to fixed landmarks.
They could then be compared with each assassination film to check whether they still maintain the same fixed point in time and space.
Every bystander should be present in each of the films and in the same location, were that not to be the case it would clearly show where the films have been altered if indeed they have.
Cheers
Dale Myers has synchronized each film.
-
The films have been scrutinized by many and they are consistent. There are claims that certain witness' show up in Z but not Nix. In every case I have seen the issue goes away when you take their line of sight into account. Another popular claim is that Jackie is farther back on the trunk in the Nix film but it can be explained too.
-
Hi,
Sorry if his has been asked before.
Has anybody studied all of the assassination films and analysed whether they corroborate one another?
Yes they do and that pretty much rules out any films or photos being faked as part of a vast plot.
-
The films have been scrutinized by many and they are consistent. There are claims that certain witness' show up in Z but not Nix. In every case I have seen the issue goes away when you take their line of sight into account. Another popular claim is that Jackie is farther back on the trunk in the Nix film but it can be explained too.
There is Nothing consistent regarding the Current Zapruder Film and the Sudden appearance of the JFK Limo on Elm St. At No time did Zapruder testify that he stopped and started his filming of the JFK Motorcade. In fact, Sitzman when interviewed by Tink Thompson for his groundbreaking "Six Seconds In Dallas", revealed that their high ground position/the perch permitted them to see the JFK Limo coming down Houston St and then turning onto Elm St.
-
Yes they do and that pretty much rules out any films or photos being faked as part of a vast plot.
Hardly. The Z film was definitely edited in several places, which has nothing to do with the synchronization of a few seconds of film from 2 sources. Why did the FBI keep the original film, why haven't they pulled it out and proved that it was not faked as part of a vast plot, and where is the film now? It sure as hell isn't behind glass at the Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza. That's a copy.
The FBI could have settled all this 55 years ago by returning the original film to Zapruder instead of a copy. The original film would tell all, which is why they hid it from us. The only reason to hide the original Z film and put a forgery in its place is to cover up the truth. The only logical conclusion one can reach is that the Z film was tampered with to remove all evidence of a conspiracy and to support the lone gunman narrative.
-
Hardly. The Z film was definitely edited in several places, which has nothing to do with the synchronization of a few seconds of film from 2 sources. Why did the FBI keep the original film, why haven't they pulled it out and proved that it was not faked as part of a vast plot, and where is the film now? It sure as hell isn't behind glass at the Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza. That's a copy.
The FBI could have settled all this 55 years ago by returning the original film to Zapruder instead of a copy. The original film would tell all, which is why they hid it from us. The only reason to hide the original Z film and put a forgery in its place is to cover up the truth. The only logical conclusion one can reach is that the Z film was tampered with to remove all evidence of a conspiracy and to support the lone gunman narrative.
Or you could conclude that the original is being preserved as an historic item, having been damaged in the past remember. Future technology may be able to restore and improve it to enable even more information to be found which would be lost if the original is damaged further or even destroyed.
-
Or you could conclude that the original is being preserved as an historic item, having been damaged in the past remember. Future technology may be able to restore and improve it to enable even more information to be found which would be lost if the original is damaged further or even destroyed.
"Future technology" is Exactly why the Z Film was Locked inside a Vault for its' initial 12 years of existence. Over the course of 54+ years the Z Film has had More "Nips-N-Tucks" than Jane Fonda has.
-
"In fact, Sitzman when interviewed by Tink Thompson for his groundbreaking "Six Seconds In Dallas", revealed that their high ground position/the perch permitted them to see the JFK Limo coming down Houston St and then turning onto Elm St."
That isn't the same as saying Z was filming at that time . . . it's merely a statement that they could see the limo approach.
-
"In fact, Sitzman when interviewed by Tink Thompson for his groundbreaking "Six Seconds In Dallas", revealed that their high ground position/the perch permitted them to see the JFK Limo coming down Houston St and then turning onto Elm St."
That isn't the same as saying Z was filming at that time . . . it's merely a statement that they could see the limo approach.
On the Current Z Film we see the Lead DPD Motorcycle Cops turning onto Elm St ahead of the JFK Limo. Sitzman having told Tink Thompson that she and Zapruder could see the JFK Limo coming down Houston St and turning onto Elm clearly shows there was No Reason to film the DPD Cops, (who Zapruder was Not there to film), and then stop the film only to Suddenly re-start the film with the Limo already traveling down Elm St. This start/stop/start gap on the Z Film is totally illogical being that Zapruder and Sitzman could clearly see/follow the progress of the Limo traveling down Houston St and then turning onto Elm St.
-
There is Nothing consistent regarding the Current Zapruder Film and the Sudden appearance of the JFK Limo on Elm St. At No time did Zapruder testify that he stopped and started his filming of the JFK Motorcade.
Did Mr. Zapruder ever state that he did not start filming, stop and resume filming at Elm Street?
In fact, Sitzman when interviewed by Tink Thompson for his groundbreaking "Six Seconds In Dallas", revealed that their high ground position/the perch permitted them to see the JFK Limo coming down Houston St and then turning onto Elm St.
Really. Well, perhaps you can help identify some cars that were on Houston Street at the time of Zapruder frame 200 for me in the following picture:
(https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z200.jpg)
Which one was Camera car number 1? Which one was Camera car number 2? Which one was Camera car number 3?
I?m having some trouble making them out? Oh, I get it, I can?t make them out because None of them are visible because most of Houston street is blocked by the North Reflecting Pool structure.
And from the following:
(https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z132.jpg)
We can see that the Presidential limousine was still not visible when Mr. Zapruder stopped his camera.
This is a classic example as to why eyewitness testimony should not be accepted without question. It doesn?t matter if Ms. Sitzman said she could see the entire motorcade and all the way to Oklahoma from their high position if film and photographs from that position show that she is mistaken.
-
Did Mr. Zapruder ever state that he did not start filming, stop and resume filming at Elm Street?
Really. Well, perhaps you can help identify some cars that were on Houston Street at the time of Zapruder frame 200 for me in the following picture:
(https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z200.jpg)
Which one was Camera car number 1? Which one was Camera car number 2? Which one was Camera car number 3?
I?m having some trouble making them out? Oh, I get it, I can?t make them out because None of them are visible because most of Houston street is blocked by the North Reflecting Pool structure.
And from the following:
(https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z132.jpg)
We can see that the Presidential limousine was still not visible when Mr. Zapruder stopped his camera.
This is a classic example as to why eyewitness testimony should not be accepted without question. It doesn?t matter if Ms. Sitzman said she could see the entire motorcade and all the way to Oklahoma from their high position if film and photographs from that position show that she is mistaken.
Z Frame #133 is when the JFK Limo first POPS into the film. At that point Zapruder filmed the Queen Mary behind the Limo, as well as the LBJ Convertible beginning to make the turn onto Elm and the SS Follow-Up Car on Houston St. Frame 133 even shows Brennan seated atop the brick wall facing Houston St. This is what was visible through the view finder of Zapruder's camera. The Unrestricted view of the Naked Eyes of Zapruder and Sitzman would reveal even more. Sitzman was Not "mistaken". Try reviewing the Entire Zapruder Film.
-
Did Mr. Zapruder ever state that he did not start filming, stop and resume filming at Elm Street?
No but he did say this.
"Mr. ZAPRUDER - That's correct. I started shooting--when the motorcade started coming in, I believe I started and wanted to get it coming in from Houston Street."
As he didn't succeed in what he wanted to do, explain why.
-
Z Frame #133 is when the JFK Limo first POPS into the film. At that point Zapruder filmed the Queen Mary behind the Limo, as well as the LBJ Convertible beginning to make the turn onto Elm and the SS Follow-Up Car on Houston St. Frame 133 even shows Brennan seated atop the brick wall facing Houston St. This is what was visible through the view finder of Zapruder's camera. The Unrestricted view of the Naked Eyes of Zapruder and Sitzman would reveal even more. Sitzman was Not "mistaken". Try reviewing the Entire Zapruder Film.
Zapruder and Sitzman can only see vehicles along a short stretch of Houston Street, just before it turns on to Elm Street. They could not see the Presidential limousine along most of Houston Street until just before it turned onto Elm Street.
-
No but he did say this.
"Mr. ZAPRUDER - That's correct. I started shooting--when the motorcade started coming in, I believe I started and wanted to get it coming in from Houston Street."
As he didn't succeed in what he wanted to do, explain why.
Simple. He wasted 132 frames, about 7 seconds of film, expecting and hoping the limousine would come into view at any second. Film cameras in those days could only shoot for a minute or two before running out of film. And he had already used many seconds of film of his family and grandchildren. So, he came up with a new plan, to wait for the presidential limousine to get close to insure he does not run out of film just before the limousine gets closest to him.
-
Simple. He wasted 132 frames, about 7 seconds of film, expecting and hoping the limousine would come into view at any second. Film cameras in those days could only shoot for a minute or two before running out of film. And he had already used many seconds of film of his family and grandchildren. So, he came up with a new plan, to wait for the presidential limousine to get close to insure he does not run out of film just before the limousine gets closest to him.
He never said anything about stopping to save film. He said he wanted to get the procession coming into the street. It is only your conclusion, that he stopped filming. Not quite simple.
-
He never said anything about stopping to save film. He said he wanted to get the procession coming into the street. It is only your conclusion, that he stopped filming. Not quite simple.
Mr. Zapruder never said anything about stopping to save film. He never said anything about loading the film into the camera. Or anything about removing the lens cap. But we can make logical deductions about what must have happened.
In the early 1960?s, inexpensive cameras could only film for a minute or two. And the film was expensive. We see the other films of Dealey Plaza typically just run for a few seconds and stop and then resume a few seconds later. There was a clear need to be thrifty with film. It is logical to assume that Mr. Zapruder felt the same.
One can imagine the conclusions you would come to if you used consistent logic.
You could conclude that there was no government conspiracy because no one in the government said they gave instructions to Oswald that were related to the assassination. You would conclude that Oswald was not being directed by a conspiracy because he made no statements saying that he brought a long package into work because he was directed to do so. Or that he went to the Texas Theater because he was directed to do so. You make all kinds of assumptions.
The difference between your assumptions and mine are that mine are reasonable. When I hear hoofs, I think horses. When you hear hoofs you think zebras, or even unicorns.
-
Zapruder and Sitzman can only see vehicles along a short stretch of Houston Street, just before it turns on to Elm Street. They could not see the Presidential limousine along most of Houston Street until just before it turned onto Elm Street.
Well, right off the bat You are NOW Admitting Zapruder and Sitzman could see down Houston St. This is progress. You have absolutely No Idea as to how far down Houston St they could see with their Naked Eyes. You are Now relying Only on what Zapruder's camera was Directly aimed at and captured through the restricted view of the view finder. Sitzman when interviewed by Tink Thompson clearly said they could see down Houston St as the motorcade approached. The Z Film with the restricted view supplied by the view finder shows us Brennan seated atop the wall that encircled the water pool. Brennan's seated position atop that wall was Down Houston Street. Brennan being captured on the Restricted view of the Z Film tells us the Naked Eye would permit an even greater view down Houston St. This corroborates Sitzman.
-
Mr. Zapruder never said anything about stopping to save film. He never said anything about loading the film into the camera. Or anything about removing the lens cap. But we can make logical deductions about what must have happened.
Typical Lone nutter straw man argument.
In the early 1960?s, inexpensive cameras could only film for a minute or two. And the film was expensive. We see the other films of Dealey Plaza typically just run for a few seconds and stop and then resume a few seconds later. There was a clear need to be thrifty with film. It is logical to assume that Mr. Zapruder felt the same.
Only in your Lone nutter logic. The film didn't last just for a minute or two.
One can imagine the conclusions you would come to if you used consistent logic.
You could conclude that there was no government conspiracy because no one in the government said they gave instructions to Oswald that were related to the assassination. You would conclude that Oswald was not being directed by a conspiracy because he made no statements saying that he brought a long package into work because he was directed to do so. Or that he went to the Texas Theater because he was directed to do so. You make all kinds of assumptions.
You can conclude whatever you wish, Joe, and you will so long as it backs your position.
The difference between your assumptions and mine are that mine are reasonable. When I hear hoofs, I think horses. When you hear hoofs you think zebras, or even unicorns.
Methinks it is you who sees unicorns. You believe other fairy stories, like the Warren Report, why not them?
"Mr. LIEBELER - And it proceeded then down Elm Street toward the triple underpass; is that correct?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - That's correct. I started shooting - when the motorcade started coming in, I believe I started and wanted to get it coming in from Houston Street.
Mr. LIEBELER - Tell us what happened as you took these pictures.
Mr. ZAPRUDER - Well, as the car came in line almost - I believe it was almost in line. I was standing up here and I was shooting through a telephoto lens, which is a zoom lens and as it reached about - I imagine it was around here - I heard the first shot and I saw the President lean over and grab himself like this (holding his left chest area)."
If he as he stated, he wanted to get the motorcade coming in from Houston Street, why on earth would he stop filming?
And proof he didn't stop filming is that there is no underexposure of frame 133 which would have happened if he had started and restarted the camera at that point.
-
Look at the big picture, NOT just the Zapruder frames.
Exactly how far ahead of the limo were the three mororcycles. ?
Once the three motorcycles turned from Houston on to Elm, how long after would Zapruder have to wait before the limo arrived. ?
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/Motorcade_image_compilation.jpg)
-
Bothun 1
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/BOTHUN1.jpg)
Bothun 2
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/bothun2.jpg)
-
Bothun did the same thing as Zapruder.
First he snapped a photo of the three motorcycles, then he waited until the Limo arrived before snapping his second photo.
-
This is one of the better, if not the best, sync of Nix and Zapruder showing that they match up perfectly. To the original OP here and for the umpteenth time, the films were not faked.
People in bizarro land think that the Bad Guys could magically create all kinds of special effects to hide or fake something in these films but they couldn't...and didn't.
-
"Future technology" is Exactly why the Z Film was Locked inside a Vault for its' initial 12 years of existence. Over the course of 54+ years the Z Film has had More "Nips-N-Tucks" than Jane Fonda has.
:D Good one
-
Bothun did the same thing as Zapruder.
First he snapped a photo of the three motorcycles, then he waited until the Limo arrived before snapping his second photo.
Bronson and Nix both using Movie Cameras to film the JFK Limo on Elm St did Not follow the alleged Zapruder filming scenario you are laying out. The Zapruder Start/Stop/Start Scenario is Pure Unadulterated Conjecture. This is another of the numerous JFK Urban Legends that the Old Guard wing of the JFK Assassination research community continues to perpetuate.
-
This is one of the better, if not the best, sync of Nix and Zapruder showing that they match up perfectly. To the original OP here and for the umpteenth time, the films were not faked.
The Nix and Zapruder cameras had different frame rates. So somebody made them match up.
-
This is one of the better, if not the best, sync of Nix and Zapruder showing that they match up perfectly. To the original OP here and for the umpteenth time, the films were not faked.
People in bizarro land think that the Bad Guys could magically create all kinds of special effects to hide or fake something in these films but they couldn't...and didn't.
You say somebody is "matching up": (1) a film which was Locked Up inside a Vault for its' initial 12 years of existence, with (2) A film which the Original Copy has Completely Disappeared. BS:
-
You say somebody is "matching up": (1) a film which was Locked Up inside a Vault for its' initial 12 years of existence, with (2) A film which the Original Copy has Completely Disappeared. BS:
Totally not true, Storing. Bootleg copies of the film were circulating in 1969. The film was also shown during the Garrison trial, so your claim holds zero weight.
-
The Nix and Zapruder cameras had different frame rates. So somebody made them match up.
This is necessarily true because no two cameras [due to their wind up drives] ran exactly the same frame by frame.
-
Totally not true, Storing. Bootleg copies of the film were circulating in 1969. The film was also shown during the Garrison trial, so your claim holds zero weight.
(1) An alleged "bootleg" Copy of anything holds absolutely No Evidentiary Value what-so-ever. (2) Zapruder did Not view the Original Zapruder Film during the Clay-Shaw Trial. In FACT, Zapruder was unable to verify that the film he was viewing inside that courtroom had not been ALTERED.
Q - "Is the COPY you have here today Identical to the original or are there any Plates Missing out of This COPY?"
Zapruder - "I couldn't say."
-
(1) An alleged "bootleg" Copy of anything holds absolutely No Evidentiary Value what-so-ever. (2) Zapruder did Not view the Original Zapruder Film during the Clay-Shaw Trial. In FACT, Zapruder was unable to verify that the film he was viewing inside that courtroom had not been ALTERED.
Q - "Is the COPY you have here today Identical to the original or are there any Plates Missing out of This COPY?"
Zapruder - "I couldn't say."
Give it up, Storing. You, as usual, have nothing. Abraham was not a stupid man, and he didn't know the film in detail the way researchers and students of the assassination did/do.
His answer to the question...you can twist that into whatever you want, but it proves nothing because we know that Zapruder didn't want anything to do with the film and didn't even want a copy of the film because it horrified him. That you take three words and try to mold them into something to fit your agenda is just more proof of exactly how desperate you are!
-
Give it up, Storing. You, as usual, have nothing. Abraham was not a stupid man, and he didn't know the film in detail the way researchers and students of the assassination did/do.
His answer to the question...you can twist that into whatever you want, but it proves nothing because we know that Zapruder didn't want anything to do with the film and didn't even want a copy of the film because it horrified him. That you take three words and try to mold them into something to fit your agenda is just more proof of exactly how desperate you are!
He was horrified 150,000 ways.
-
This is necessarily true because no two cameras [due to their wind up drives] ran exactly the same frame by frame.
This may provide details about older movies and their projection times.....
https://gizmodo.com/why-frame-rate-matters-1675153198
-
He was horrified 150,000 ways.
Not nearly as many as conspiracy-author profiteers... 55 years and (still) 'counting'
-
Not nearly as many as conspiracy-author profiteers... 55 years and (still) 'counting'
Which author profiteer got the million dollar advance? I'll give you a hint: your favorite cut-and-paste-without-attribution target.
-
Give it up, Storing. You, as usual, have nothing. Abraham was not a stupid man, and he didn't know the film in detail the way researchers and students of the assassination did/do.
His answer to the question...you can twist that into whatever you want, but it proves nothing because we know that Zapruder didn't want anything to do with the film and didn't even want a copy of the film because it horrified him. That you take three words and try to mold them into something to fit your agenda is just more proof of exactly how desperate you are!
During his Clay-Shaw testimony Zapruder also testified that he could see the JFK Motorcade coming down Houston and then turning onto Elm. This corroborates Sitzman telling Tink Thompson likewise during her being interviewed for his groundbreaking "Six Seconds In Dallas". The JFK Limo suddenly POPPING into the Z Film and already traveling down Elm St flies in the face of the Zapruder testimony and the Sitzman interview = Alteration.
-
During his Clay-Shaw testimony Zapruder also testified that he could see the JFK Motorcade coming down Houston and then turning onto Elm. This corroborates Sitzman telling Tink Thompson likewise during her being interviewed for his groundbreaking "Six Seconds In Dallas". The JFK Limo suddenly POPPING into the Z Film and already traveling down Elm St flies in the face of the Zapruder testimony and the Sitzman interview = Alteration.
The one and only thing altered here is your brain. You say the stupidest things, Storing. Its how you kill so many threads in here!
-
During his Clay-Shaw testimony Zapruder also testified that he could see the JFK Motorcade coming down Houston and then turning onto Elm.
He was just not experienced with the camera. It was amazing that he filmed anything at all without completely choking the technique of viewing while pressing the shutter button. So, he could 'see the car as it turned' but did he film the car as it turned? Did he say that? Or was it simply a case of low self esteem because he forgot to start filming the movie at the onset?
-
He was just not experienced with the camera. It was amazing that he filmed anything at all without completely choking the technique of viewing while pressing the shutter button. So, he could 'see the car as it turned' but did he film the car as it turned? Did he say that? Or was it simply a case of low self esteem because he forgot to start filming the movie at the onset?
One of the numerous JFK Assassination Urban Legends is that Zapruder did Not See/Know where the JFK Limo was as it traveled down Houston St and then turned onto Elm St. This explains why Zapruder allegedly Started/Stopped/Re-Started his filming resulting in the JFK Limo Suddenly POPPING into the Current Zapruder Film traveling down Elm St. The Zapruder Testimony during the Clay-Shaw trial corroborated the Sitzman interview conducted by Tink Thompson. Both Zapruder and Sitzman said they could see the JFK Motorcade coming down Houston St and turning onto Elm St.
-
If Zapruder stopped the camera during the turn onto Elm then the "1st frame overexposure effect" would have been evident, but it wasn't. Face it LNers. there was "stuff" edited from the Z-film during the turn onto Elm when Oswald should have taken the 1st shot. This proves that the Z-film was tampered with, which is why the original film has been with-held from the public. You LNers need to stop being shills for the bastages that killed JFK and wake up! :-*
-
The Nix and Zapruder cameras had different frame rates. So somebody made them match up.
John, what you don't seem to understand is that if you have two different cameras capturing the exact same scene and each one is running at a different frame rate, you can't [edited] change what's actually being recorded just because one or the other has more frames going through the gate.
The NZ sync video I posted proves that.
But for argument's sake, let's say that in Z for example, some frames were removed. What exactly was removed...in other words, what was so dastardly that some frames needed to be removed? No one for the past 55 years has ever been able to answer this question.
To be honest, I'm really surprised that you brought this up, John. You seem like one of the more level-headed ones around here.
-
John, what you don't seem to understand is that if you have two different cameras capturing the exact same scene and each one is running at a different frame rate, you can't [edited] change what's actually being recorded just because one or the other has more frames going through the gate.
The NZ sync video I posted proves that.
But for argument's sake, let's say that in Z for example, some frames were removed. What exactly was removed...in other words, what was so dastardly that some frames needed to be removed? No one for the past 55 years has ever been able to answer this question.
To be honest, I'm really surprised that you brought this up, John. You seem like one of the more level-headed ones around here.
Z frame(s) might have been removed due to their revealing a 4th shot striking the street, curb, grass, etc. This evidence of another shot having been fired would Prove at least 1 additional shooter = Conspiracy. The filming of the JFK Limo as it turned onto and proceeded down Elm St would have revealed the Records Bld at that point in time. Also, remember the shallow bullet hole in the back of JFK. The shallow depth of this wound would be indicative of either a deflected bullet, fragment, and or a shot fired from more of a Horizontal Position vs the Height of the TSBD 6th floor. Again, this would Prove at least 1 additional shooter.
-
Z frame(s) might have been removed due to their revealing a 4th shot striking the street, curb, grass, etc. This evidence of another shot having been fired would Prove at least 1 additional shooter = Conspiracy. The filming of the JFK Limo as it turned onto and proceeded down Elm St would have revealed the Records Bld at that point in time. Also, remember the shallow bullet hole in the back of JFK. The shallow depth of this wound would be indicative of either a deflected bullet, fragment, and or a shot fired from more of a Horizontal Position vs the Height of the TSBD 6th floor. Again, this would Prove at least 1 additional shooter.
In this day and age of 20 megapixel cameras, you'd never be able to see something like that in a 8mm 1960's era film, Royell. Watch the Z film and note that yes, you can recognize the people in the car, but hardly. The size of an 8mm frame of film is the size of your pinky nail. Do you really think that a spark or a puff of crushed concrete from a ricochet would be noticed?
Of course not. What many "researchers" fail to understand is that the unaltered "as it happened" Z film *proves* conspiracy. There is no way Oswald would have been able to get the shots they said he pulled off using a piece of junk rifle in 5.8 seconds. Which is why the film was suppressed from the public until 1975 and it's also why Dan Rather - a reporter who's supposed to tell it like it is - lied to the public on Sunday night 11/25 "describing" what he say in the film.
Think about it - if there was an honest and vigorous pursuit of the truth in this case by all involved, the media would have shown the film coast to coast the minute they'd have been able to and then let the chips fall where they may. But as we all know, that's not what happened.
-
In this day and age of 20 megapixel cameras, you'd never be able to see something like that in a 8mm 1960's era film, Royell. Watch the Z film and note that yes, you can recognize the people in the car, but hardly. The size of an 8mm frame of film is the size of your pinky nail. Do you really think that a spark or a puff of crushed concrete from a ricochet would be noticed?
Of course not. What many "researchers" fail to understand is that the unaltered "as it happened" Z film *proves* conspiracy. There is no way Oswald would have been able to get the shots they said he pulled off using a piece of junk rifle in 5.8 seconds. Which is why the film was suppressed from the public until 1975 and it's also why Dan Rather - a reporter who's supposed to tell it like it is - lied to the public on Sunday night 11/25 "describing" what he say in the film.
Think about it - if there was an honest and vigorous pursuit of the truth in this case by all involved, the media would have shown the film coast to coast the minute they'd have been able to and then let the chips fall where they may. But as we all know, that's not what happened.
I do Not know what you are viewing the Current Z Film through. If you can see the Glint of the Sun off of numerous objects all around Dealey Plaza, there is a better than good chance you would also see the result of a Bullet or a Fragment striking/bouncing off the street, curb, etc. The Image reproduction in this case continues to improve as does the means by which arm chair investigators can view these images at home.
You and I agree on many aspects of this case
-
But for argument's sake, let's say that in Z for example, some frames were removed. What exactly was removed...in other words, what was so dastardly that some frames needed to be removed? No one for the past 55 years has ever been able to answer this question.
This question has been answered years ago. If frames were removed it was to speed up the limo. The question no LNer has been able to answer is why Greer slowed down the limo to a near stop at Z313, the Turkey Shoot Point, after he knew shots had been fired? Where is that rule in the SS handbook?
-
This question has been answered years ago. If frames were removed it was to speed up the limo. The question no LNer has been able to answer is why Greer slowed down the limo to a near stop at Z313, the Turkey Shoot Point, after he knew shots had been fired? Where is that rule in the SS handbook?
Dear Doctor Daffy,
He took his foot off the accelerator while the limo was in low gear when he turned around to look at the commotion in the back seat. Stop adding foolish conspiracy crap to something so simple. Jesus Christ you friggin wackos just love to hatch these stupid-ass theories. The guy was inept at his duties simple as that.
-
This question has been answered years ago. If frames were removed it was to speed up the limo. The question no LNer has been able to answer is why Greer slowed down the limo to a near stop at Z313, the Turkey Shoot Point, after he knew shots had been fired? Where is that rule in the SS handbook?
Would you get involved in a plot that required you to drive the car that was about to be fired upon?
THINK, man.
-
Would you get involved in a plot that required you to drive the car that was about to be fired upon?
THINK, man.
Yeah. That's as crazy as believing someone would get involved in a plot that required: (1) You Smuggle Your Rifle into Your place of employment, (2) You Shoot the POTUS using Your Rifle, and (3) You Leave Your Rifle behind and Flee Your place of employment.
-
In this day and age of 20 megapixel cameras, you'd never be able to see something like that in a 8mm 1960's era film, Royell. Watch the Z film and note that yes, you can recognize the people in the car, but hardly. The size of an 8mm frame of film is the size of your pinky nail. Do you really think that a spark or a puff of crushed concrete from a ricochet would be noticed?
Of course not. What many "researchers" fail to understand is that the unaltered "as it happened" Z film *proves* conspiracy. There is no way Oswald would have been able to get the shots they said he pulled off using a piece of junk rifle in 5.8 seconds. Which is why the film was suppressed from the public until 1975 and it's also why Dan Rather - a reporter who's supposed to tell it like it is - lied to the public on Sunday night 11/25 "describing" what he say in the film.
Think about it - if there was an honest and vigorous pursuit of the truth in this case by all involved, the media would have shown the film coast to coast the minute they'd have been able to and then let the chips fall where they may. But as we all know, that's not what happened.
Of course not. What many "researchers" fail to understand is that the unaltered "as it happened" Z film *proves* conspiracy. There is no way Oswald would have been able to get the shots they said he pulled off using a piece of junk rifle in 5.8 seconds. Which is why the film was suppressed from the public until 1975 and it's also why Dan Rather - a reporter who's supposed to tell it like it is - lied to the public on Sunday night 11/25 "describing" what he say in the film.
"They" being the Warren Commission, I suppose. If that's the case here's what the conclusion the WC arrived at as to time span of shots
"Since the preponderance of the evidence indicated that three shots were fired, the Commission concluded that one shot probably missed the Presidential limousine and it's occupants, and that the three shots were fired in a time period ranging from approximately 4.8 to in excess of 7 seconds".
The only reason to come up with the time sapn of from 4.8 to 5.6 seconds was if the second shot had missed with the first shot hitting both JFK and Connally between frames 210 and 225 and the third shot the obvious hit to JFK's head at frame 313. So the alleged 5.8 seconds that's supposed to be set in stone isn't, wasn't and has never been except only in the minds of ignorant CTers.
In 1967 CBS showed a special on the Warren Commission Report and arrived at the conclusion that time span of shots could have reached over 8 seconds by using Luis Alvarez jiggle effect theory and a test done with 5 identical Bell and Howell cameras like that used by Zapruder which demonstrated that 18.3 fps was faster than the average of the fps of the five cameras.
-
I believe there is good synergy with the films as per OP. That doesn't mean there wasn't major editing within each one, removal of frames or scenes which you were not meant to see. I have looked at the Zapruder film as the base film and then tried to see how the others match it. They all seem to correlate well on the timeline IMHO. What I find interesting is what each shows that the other doesn't when you combine the details.
No one captures any frontal limo shots. We do see the ducking reaction of Bill Ready at about Z329 and also the girl (afro hair cut) running on the lawn changing direction at about that same instant. We also never see the position of the lead car - only ever see it waiting in the safety of the triple overpass. it remains there and allows the limousine to pass it on the way to the hospital. It was never captured in the Zapruder film either. As it was after the motorcycles at film beginning, it certainly should have been the cue to have Zapruder turn his camera on. For some reason, this car never captured on film or video!
Bill Ready's reaction would indicate he saw something more than what he testified and that it was in front of him - not behind.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/Sa-ready.htm (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/Sa-ready.htm)
"I was about 25-30 feet from President Kennedy who was located in the right rear seat. I heard what appeared to be fire crackers going off from my position. I immediately turned to my right rear trying to locate the source but was not able to determine the exact location.
At this time the U.S. Secret Service follow-up car seemed to slow and I heard someone from inside this car say: ''he's shot". I left the follow-up car in the direction of the President's car but was recalled by ATSAIC Emory Roberts (Secret Service) as the cars increased their speeds. I got back on the car and seated myself beside Mr. Roberts in the right front seat. The cars proceeded to the hospital several miles distance."
He was never interviewed by Warren Commission - only gave a statement. Film shows he saw something happen - he ducked. It was never evident that he looked behind him as he watched the assassination. Again, ducking movement which could imply a frontal assault that he saw unfold, grassy knoll or otherwise. This does not support LNer theory though!
Also interesting synergy with the afro girl who in the Nix Film, changes direction to move sideways away from limousine position at that same time. There is good synergy in Zapruder Film in the "cogs". I don't think she was ever interviewed but she would have an interesting aspect to share. Jean Hill and Mary Moorman were stationary during the entire filming and showed no visible reaction.
The other man that had a very complex reaction was the man labelled as Malcom Summers. He never turned up for 25 years for TV interview but did make a bit of a statement. He was noncommittal during a lengthy interview 25 years later as to where he actually was. He didn't want to say he was on the "island" (area between Elm Street and Main Street) and he avoided answering that during the interview. If he was the man rolling into the grass, he surely must have been a key witness and saw something to give a reaction like that. His testimony on that day is unclear and was deemed unimportant. He said he heard two shots but saw nothing - he may have been 15 feet away, closer than even Altgens! However, this man rolling and then crawling in the grass was the biggest action character in the film other than Clint Hill and Jacqueline. (No one else ducked or flinched!)
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/summers.htm (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/summers.htm)
"Yesterday, November 23, 1963, I was standing on the terrace of the small park on Elm Street to watch the President's motorcade..... Then all of the people started running up the terrace[/i] away from the President's car and I got up and started running also, not realizing what had happened...."[/b]
Was the terrace the island or the grassy knoll? Also, why would you mess up the date as being November 23 and not November 22? I guess these little details are not important when taking statements! A little white lie there possibly to protect you by entering in the wrong date.
Real Conspiracy? You merely have to mention the fact that LHO, the LNer was a highly qualified assassin and decided to mix his cartridge loads. One bullet was frangible and the other was hardcore that is fact. That evidence in and of itself is enough proof that it had to be more than one shooter.
Can you imagine LHO making the decision......? "Well,.... I think I will put the hard core bullet in the clip first, then I will follow that up with a frangible, then another frangible, no wait let me think about that, I will load 2 hard bullets in and then the frangible. Yes, that is it. It will allow me to adjust for wind in case I miss the car altogether. I think I will only have 3 bullets in the clip, that should be enough! I wonder if there could be someone to help me spot? If only they would slow the car down for me. Yes, three mixed bullets will be perfect. Maybe I should just randomize them and if they hit they hit!!!!"
Ridiculous arguments don't you think?
-
Of course not. What many "researchers" fail to understand is that the unaltered "as it happened" Z film *proves* conspiracy. There is no way Oswald would have been able to get the shots they said he pulled off using a piece of junk rifle in 5.8 seconds. Which is why the film was suppressed from the public until 1975 and it's also why Dan Rather - a reporter who's supposed to tell it like it is - lied to the public on Sunday night 11/25 "describing" what he say in the film.
"They" being the Warren Commission, I suppose. If that's the case here's what the conclusion the WC arrived at as to time span of shots
"Since the preponderance of the evidence indicated that three shots were fired, the Commission concluded that one shot probably missed the Presidential limousine and it's occupants, and that the three shots were fired in a time period ranging from approximately 4.8 to in excess of 7 seconds".
The only reason to come up with the time sapn of from 4.8 to 5.6 seconds was if the second shot had missed with the first shot hitting both JFK and Connally between frames 210 and 225 and the third shot the obvious hit to JFK's head at frame 313. So the alleged 5.8 seconds that's supposed to be set in stone isn't, wasn't and has never been except only in the minds of ignorant CTers.
In 1967 CBS showed a special on the Warren Commission Report and arrived at the conclusion that time span of shots could have reached over 8 seconds by using Luis Alvarez jiggle effect theory and a test done with 5 identical Bell and Howell cameras like that used by Zapruder which demonstrated that 18.3 fps was faster than the average of the fps of the five cameras.
The WC, HSCA, or ARRB Never swore in Dave Wiegman for obvious reasons. Wiegman was filming Down Elm St, Up the Knoll, Across the Knoll, Down the Knoll, and Up Elm St shortly after the shots were fired. He also is alleged to have filmed the JFK Limo going under the Triple Underpass. Plus, Wiegman claims to have run into SA Lem Johns UP on the Knoll. Of course, the Govt has always claimed that No Agents were on the Knoll that day. With it eventually coming to light that Wiegman did Not conduct his filming continuously, the time line of his film and it capturing the JFK Limo going under the Triple Underpass becomes problematic with regard to the current timeline assigned to the shots being fired as well as the JFK Limo physically being on Elm St/East of the Triple Underpass. The longer the JFK Limo was East of the Triple Underpass = the greater the probability of a Limo STOP. This also calls into question why this STOP is missing from the holier-than-holy Zapruder Film. To corroborate this mythical Shots Fired/JFK Limo on Elm timeline, it was allegedly documented that Wiegman was on the ground roughly 3 seconds Before the 3rd shot was fired. This alleged "documentation" even had the name Gary Mack attached to it to seal-the-deal. Yet, if you listen to Dave Wiegman on the "Unsolved History" DVD, he clearly tells of still being inside Camera Car #1 when the 3rd shot was fired. On top of that, Wiegman details feeling the "compression" of that 3rd shot whizzing by his face. Wiegman's story on "Unsolved History" destroys the currently accepted JFK Limo on Elm St timeline as well as putting a serious dent in the credibility of the Current Z Film. Wiegman also detailing his feeling the "compression" of the 3rd shot while sitting inside/atop convertible Camera Car #1 also lends credence to a 2nd shooter firing from close to street level.
-
Dear Doctor Daffy,
He took his foot off the accelerator while the limo was in low gear when he turned around to look at the commotion in the back seat. Stop adding foolish conspiracy crap to something so simple. Jesus Christ you friggin wackos just love to hatch these stupid-ass theories. The guy was inept at his duties simple as that.
Dear Proctoboy (Assman's sidekick),
I never said he hit the brakes dufus. I said he slowed down when he should have sped up. Sure Greer may have just been incompetent, but it sure seemed real coincidental-like that he slowed the limo down right at the Turkey Shoot Point, frame Z313. Just sayin'. :)
-
Would you get involved in a plot that required you to drive the car that was about to be fired upon?
THINK, man.
Somebody had to do it. Greer didn't need to know anything more than he was expected to slow the limo down, period. Otherwise, do some thinking yourself and explan why he did what he did? But don't hurt yourself coming up with some twisted excuse. It just further hurts your case.
-
Somebody had to do it. Greer didn't need to know anything more than he was expected to slow the limo down, period. Otherwise, do some thinking yourself and explan why he did what he did? But don't hurt yourself coming up with some twisted excuse. It just further hurts your case.
LOL. Everything coming from LNers seem like 'excuses' to you lot. And that we are sheep-dipped lemmings.
You seem to be speaking for Greer. How do you know what he would or wouldn't 'need to know'?
My take on the Greer thing has always been based on what most of us would do naturally: look back to see what WTH is going on behind us. And in doing so, most of us would arguably pause our foreward movement... and in Greer's case there would be no way of knowing from which direction any shots were coming from, including the overpass.
-
Would you get involved in a plot that required you to drive the car that was about to be fired upon?
THINK, man.
Why not? I certainly wouldn't want to get involved if I knew it was a Carcano LNer taking shots at me in a moving car that is for sure. If I was part of the plot and LHO was just the patsy, I would pay careful attention to slow the car down just as instructed to minimize my own possible demise! It appears to me that when the head shot came in, Greer had his head moved from upright to that of a closer position to the windshield - thereby minimizing glass shard spray in his face. At same time, Kellerman was ducked down below the "dash" for a few frames around Z329. The reality is, to get a sunglare off of his black suit coat enters the twilight zone of impossibility. One can draw the parallel to the motorcyclist "windshield glare" around frames at Z326 and on. Something happened at Z329 and Z330 to create the front windshield anomaly - something such as glass spray in sunlight reflection perhaps. There are no changes in recorded sunlight whilst looking at the motorcycle windshield area in the cogs to illustrate a coincidental change in lighting.
(https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lightbox/z300-z349/z326.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lightbox/z300-z349/z330.jpg)
Unfortunately can't get the significant parts to show up in lightbox frames! You have to examine them individually yourself! Costella's don't show it as good!
https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z326.jpg (https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z326.jpg)
(https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z326.jpg)
https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z330.jpg (https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z330.jpg)
(https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z330.jpg)
There were way too many initial witnesses that said the car slowed down, almost to a stop. If it slowed down, it means you are not taking proper evasive action to protect the President from further damage. I don't know of any instances where someone would slow down when you are being shot at. Seeing the President grab his throat, 2 or more seconds earlier and hearing "firecrackers" go off should be enough evidence to get the car out of there ASAP. The car certainly had slowed down without a doubt because Clint Hill was able to run between the cars and jump onto the back of the limousine. That means the cars were traveling at a slower pace than what a man can run! It looks like Greer watched the President constantly from just after the neck shot on. He even was watching during frames Z312/Z313. He never returned his gaze to the front until Z320.
However, if you actually did an evasive maneuver knowing full well the plot, you would be putting yourself at grave risk. Slowing down was the best thing he could do to make sure all shots were made without botching the assassination attempt and no one else got hurt.
It also looks like the visors are flipped up at the front of the windshield. If that is correct, it certainly means that a frontal assault was allowing anyone from the front to have an unobstructed shot at the President. Clearly, the case when you look at visor positions!
(https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lightbox/z300-z349/z312.jpg)
Costella's frame so you can see it in the post:
https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z312.jpg (https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z312.jpg)
(https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z312.jpg)
Furthermore, if you look back at earlier frames, you can see the partially closed window beside Nellie Connally. Just high enough to offer some protection and yet low enough that an elevated President could still be hit in the neck! Again, note the deliberate position of sun visors! It certainly wasn't there to keep the sun glare out of the driver's eyes!!!
(https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lightbox/z250-z299/z264.jpg)
Costella's frame:
https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z264.jpg (https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z264.jpg)
(https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z264.jpg)
-
LOL. Everything coming from LNers seem like 'excuses' to you lot. And that we are sheep-dipped lemmings.
You seem to be speaking for Greer. How do you know what he would or wouldn't 'need to know'?
My take on the Greer thing has always been based on what most of us would do naturally: look back to see what WTH is going on behind us. And in doing so, most of us would arguably pause our foreward movement... and in Greer's case there would be no way of knowing from which direction any shots were coming from, including the overpass.
LOL. Everything coming from LNers seem like 'excuses' to you lot. And that we are sheep-dipped lemmings.
That's because you (and your ilk) make it look that way every time. The biggest credibility problem the LNs have (IMO) is that they will never concede even the smallest point, thus ignoring the simple fact that no story ever told is 100% spot on. If LNs want to be taken seriously, perhaps they should consider a new strategy where they admit that there are problems with the evidence instead of blindly defending it with stupid and sometimes pathetic claims.
-
LOL. Everything coming from LNers seem like 'excuses' to you lot. And that we are sheep-dipped lemmings.
That's because you (and your ilk) make it look that way every time. The biggest credibility problem the LNs have (IMO) is that they will never concede even the smallest point, thus ignoring the simple fact that no story ever told is 100% spot on. If LNs want to be taken seriously, perhaps they should consider a new strategy where they admit that there are problems with the evidence instead of blindly defending it with stupid and sometimes pathetic claims.
Your opinion
Geez, I hope the Reptilians don't have a taste for Lemming meat.
-
Your opinion
Geez, I hope the Reptilians don't have a taste for Lemming meat.
Thanks for proving my point
-
LOL. Everything coming from LNers seem like 'excuses' to you lot. And that we are sheep-dipped lemmings.
Only the patsy gets sheep-dipped. You're just a shill with a twist of lemming.
You seem to be speaking for Greer. How do you know what he would or wouldn't 'need to know'?
I assume Greer's primary duty would have been to protect the POTUS at all cost, which meant fleeing the area after hearing shots fired. At least that's how it works in any movie I've ever seen about an assault on the POTUS.
My take on the Greer thing has always been based on what most of us would do naturally: look back to see what WTH is going on behind us. And in doing so, most of us would arguably pause our foreward movement... and in Greer's case there would be no way of knowing from which direction any shots were coming from, including the overpass.
The SS are trained to escort the POTUS away from any potential danger ASAP. That means Greer should have sped up as soon as he heard the 1st shot and certainly by the 2nd shot. Instead, after the 2nd shot he slowed the limo down to a near stop, turned back to see if JFK had been hit, watched JFK's head explode, then turned face front and waited for Hill to climb aboard and Jackie to climb onto the trunk before stepping on the gas.
Now see if you can turn face front in less than the blink of an eye like Greer did. Kellerman almost does a face plant in the dash from Greer braking. This could have been where a few alternate frames were removed to help speed up the limo. The following GIF is in real time at 18 fps.
(http://www.readclip.com/images/Z317_Z320.gif)
-
My take on the Greer thing has always been based on what most of us would do naturally: look back to see what WTH is going on behind us. And in doing so, most of us would arguably pause our foreward movement... and in Greer's case there would be no way of knowing from which direction any shots were coming from, including the overpass.
You mean the shot from the overpass that blew out the back of JFK's head like this...
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/TrainOverpassTurkeyShoot.jpg)
-
Thanks for proving my point
Your Haugtiness, your point fails given that veteran LNers have always allowed that a CYA operation re FBI Dallas was likely at play.
Everybody knows there are loose-ends in many if not most major crimes. FFS though.. Fifty five years and still no evidence that would let prime suspect Oswald off the hook, as far as I know.
Hey, keep in touch and don't be shy about posting more CT claims to mock.
-
Your Haugtiness, your point fails given that veteran LNers have always allowed that a CYA operation re FBI Dallas was likely at play.
Everybody knows there are loose-ends in many if not most major crimes. FFS though.. Fifty five years and still no evidence that would let prime suspect Oswald off the hook, as far as I know.
Hey, keep in touch and don't be shy about posting more CT claims to mock.
Your Haugtiness, your point fails given that veteran LNers have always allowed that a CYA operation re FBI Dallas was likely at play.
Could it be that so far I have not had the pleasure of dealing with "veteran LNers" then? Or maybe it's simply that the LNs I do know have an uneasy relationship with the truth?
Btw the CYA operation re FBI Dallas wasn't what I was talking about, but do tell?.. what evidence is problematic as a result of that FBI shenanigans?
Everybody knows there are loose-ends in many if not most major crimes.
Sure, but loose-ends is something different than contradictory evidence.
FFS though.. Fifty five years and still no evidence that would let prime suspect Oswald off the hook, as far as I know.
FFS, I haven't spend a second of my life with anything that would get Oswald off the hook. As it stands I am far more interested in finding out about the evidence that puts him on that hook to begin with.
-
You mean the shot from the overpass that blew out the back of JFK's head like this...
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/TrainOverpassTurkeyShoot.jpg)
Or a shot from the guy rolling into the grass beside Altgens (with the head obscured on lightbox frame 347) - through windshield! I don't know why that frame shows up different between Lightbox and Costella. Maybe 2 different films examined? Arms and face both scrubbed!
https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lightbox/z300-z349/z347.jpg (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lightbox/z300-z349/z347.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lightbox/z300-z349/z347.jpg)
https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z347.jpg (https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z347.jpg)
(https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z347.jpg)
-
FFS, I haven't spend a second of my life with anything that would get Oswald off the hook. As it stands I am far more interested in finding out about the evidence that puts him on that hook to begin with.
Chapman thinks it's sufficient to just declare him the "prime suspect".