Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10
71
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: A question for John Corbett
« Last post by John Corbett on Yesterday at 03:42:25 PM »
You apparently refuse to look at Bennett and Hickey in several consecutive Zapruder frames from about 145-on, or a good-quality copy of the Zapruder film played in slow motion.

https://assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/

The Costella/Zapruder frame collection has long been my primary source for looking at individual frames. Unfortunately, they don't provide much clarity in their unenhanced form. What is needed is enlarged frames to determine individual movements from one frame to the next. In the unenhanced format, movements from one frame to the next are just too minute.
72

Let's take this thread to the next level: Who ARE the consensus nutcases here? Should we just start naming names, or would it be better to do a poll?

Maybe we should hand out gold, silver, and bronze medals.
73
If one is unable to grasp the obvious fact that her observation that JFK had passed by where she was standing BEFORE the first shot is evidence that the first shot did not miss, one shouldn’t be accusing others of being bad at analyzing evidence.

Keep convincing yourself of nonsense. That way you will never be able to figure out something that is really, really obvious.
74
I doubt all the witnesses agree on what the accepted narrative is.

In this instance, the accepted narrative is obviously three shots. Two-shot witnesses tend to "get with the program." Not inevitably, but very often. This is especially likely to be true when all that is required to get with the program is to accept a noise that sounded sorta-kinda like a shot but didn't hit anything.
75
   In addition to the position of JFK's hands, this clear still frame displays how cramped Gov Connally was in that jump seat. No MAN normally holds their Stetson Hat like a woman clutching a baby to her chest. The dipping of the (R) shoulder is being done to permit Connally making his (R) turnaround in these very cramped conditions. There is extremely little space between the Jump Seat and the side of the car. This was made obvious when Connally was seated in the JFK Limo at Love Field. They had to be careful when closing that rear passenger door and Not banging Connally's (R) leg with that door. In order to turn and face JFK in the backseat behind him, Connally had to manipulate his (R) Arm to make that turn around. The dipping of the (R) shoulder permitted Connally to turn around and face JFK.   

What you are seeing is JBC flipping his arm upward in an involuntary reflexive response to being shot in the wrist. That up and down arm flip began at Z226 and lasted 9 frames. It is the strongest indication we have of the validity of the SBT as it shows JFK and JBC reacting reflexively at the same instant.
76
OK, instead of me being in the Woodward debate I'll start a credibility thread and leave those guys to it.
I'll start with CIA employee Dino Brugioni who was the first expert to analyse the film in the CIA National Photographic Interpretation Center 24th November 1963.
This youtube video shows the interview with Dino as well as the chain of custody being discussed.
77
I doubt all the witnesses agree on what the accepted narrative is.
78
Ann Donaldson said there were three shots in her Sixth Floor Oral History - the relevant parts are around the 20:00 minute mark.  She said there was a loud noise - the first shot - and then two more shots. 

You shouldn't believe everything you read in newspapers. Sometimes reporters get things wrong.
But as even the WC noted, and as Jack analyzes in Phantom Shot, witnesses tend to evolve in the direction of the "accepted narrative" - sometimes within mere hours or days. By the time of the Sixth Floor Museum interviews, witnesses may have convinced themselves that the "accepted narrative" is what they actually experienced.

I also find it kind of bizarre that anyone would call Nellie Connally's credibility into question for saying JFK clutched at his throat. To any real-world observer who isn't analyzing enhanced Z-film frames with a magnifying glass, that's exactly what it looks like. The Connallys strike me as fantastic witnesses.
79
    The woman did Not even know where SHE Was inside Dealey Plaza.  This glaring deficiency in her 11/22/63 account taints everything she says.
She was writing a story about the assassination. How does it matter whether they ate their lunch on the grassy slope or on the sidewalk? We know where they were standing. How could she not know where she was standing?
80
Your spin on her observations are not evidence. You're entitled to believe she got it wrong, but then you can't turn around and tell us what she said she saw is evidence. That's called impeaching your own witness.
This is so laughable. You are telling us her observation that the first shot didn't hit anybody is evidence JFK was hit by the first shot. That's comical.
Your take on her observations are evidence you are really, really bad at analyzing evidence.
If one is unable to grasp the obvious fact that her observation that JFK had passed by where she was standing BEFORE the first shot is evidence that the first shot did not miss, one shouldn’t be accusing others of being bad at analyzing evidence.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10