Allen Lowe

I’m so glad you finally found someone who actually agrees with you on all of these, David. Oh, wait….

I think the idiot Greer slowed down to see what was happening, assuming he wasn’t a conspirator, which is questionable. And it just doesn’t matter if the limousine didn’t come to a complete stop, as many witnesses have said it just slowed down, and honestly to people in the shock of the moment slowing down to a near stop is going to feel like a stop.

Well nobody seems to agree with me, but I’ve watched the film 30 times, and if you look at the grass to the left of the car, you can see the slow down to the near stop. It’s pretty obvious

that's exactly my point; I will say: 1) if you view it at a slower speed, it is still correct in relative terms; when it visibly comes to a stop, slowing it down hasn't created that stop, it just made it easier to discern. It is still a stop. 2) But you can disregard #1 because even at regular speed I can see the slow, slow, slowing down of the car. I can see it, and I've had surgery around my eyes. LOOK AT THE GROUND ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CAR. You can tell it stops.

sorry Dave; you not only missed the original point but you missed the next point which is, as someone said earlier, Oswald wouldn't be making plans to move if he was also planning to murder the president. With friends like you, the LN'ers are in deep trouble.

David you’re kind of missing the point. If Oswald was planning to murder the president, he would think about escaping the area not moving to a new apartment. On the other hand, if you believe that’s true, thank you for the assistance as you’ve helped prove that he was not a participant in the presidents murder.

Well we obviously don’t rule out crackpots occasionally telling the truth. Hence we allow a few LNers here.

Pat I always worry when, on this subject, my perception is different from yours because you have so much more comprehensive knowledge of the subject. But in the Zapruder film that I have seen the car stops just before the headshot. Or comes almost to a stop. Now this wouldn’t be the first time I have hallucinated, but I don’t think I am.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the CIA have the original? And even if Timelife had it, why would they have to surrender it? They were quite willing to remain silent as they did until Geraldo showed it on TV. All they had to do was keep quiet. As for me being naïve about the culture of the times, I have a pretty detailed knowledge of the history, politics, and culture of the 1960s.

Here; at about .43 in this; it is brief, but the car stops briefly and has clearly been slowing down prior to this: you have to follow several links;

I’m sorry but that makes no sense because if they had destroyed it they never would’ve had to release it. I’ve read all the interviews with Brugoni; and there’s very little there there. And I’ve watched the film over and over and the car slows down significantly. It’s hard to see because the angle changes. But it’s there.

You are absolutely wrong about the slowing of the limousine as is everyone else who seems to think it’s a sign of alteration that it’s not stopping. It’s pretty obvious. What you’re missing is that the perspective changes at that moment, we have a close-up of the car and not the rest of the road. But if you look right behind the car you can see the slowing of it. This has really gotten to be quite silly, and is much ado about literally nothing. You are too smart to be wasting your time on this part of the assassination. Instead of cutting a few frames or some other nonexistent alteration, they would simply have destroyed the film. Because this particular thing is unmissable and obvious.

If you look at the Zapruder film the car comes to a near stop just before the headshot. I seem to recall Senator Yarborough saying the same thing, that it slowed down but did not stop. And every time I see it I see this and wonder why everyone claims it didn’t happen. And it’s easy to see how at this moment of shock witnesses thought the car came to a complete stop, because it was a pause in the action.

It’s about time someone said how good the Vietnam war was. I mean we only killed millions of Vietnamese for a war that we knew was useless, so what do they matter?

Actually if you look at the film you can see that the car almost comes to a stop. It’s pretty clear.

“”if the Secret Service had returned a Zapruder film to NPIC Sunday night that had the same image content as the film viewed Saturday night, there would have been no need for a compartmentalized operation at NPIC. “ This is one of those “authoritative” statements that’s actually the opposite, makes no sense in terms of what he is trying to say, and does not constitute any evidence whatsoever. This is the effin’ CIA we are talking about, where everyone seems to be on a need to know basis. Who Knows what they were up to? To Use this as a proof of alteration is fraudulent. It proves nothing. and by the way the car does come to a stop in the extant Zapruder film. It’s quick and it’s brief but it happens, just before the fatal shot.

You’ve obviously never witnessed a shooting, which I have. Things freeze up, fear takes over, snd certain kinds of actions are exaggerated. In the Z film You can clearly see that the limo slows down. The affect of that slowing down plus the altered state of panic likely produced the sense that everything had stopped.

Most of that, if any, is not evidence. Half of it is guesswork, as in “Gee if that happened here it shoulda happened elsewhere.” People split tickets and have for years and years. You know that’s nonsense to cite as proof of fraud. As for the mismatched signatures, I honestly do not believe it. The Trumpies lie about everything, reflexively. Show me the money, show me one signature that doesn’t match.

When people say to me that no one could’ve kept a secret that long, first thing I ask is: OK, who killed Jimmy Hoffa? And the reality of course is that we have much more information on who killed JFK than who killed Hoffa.

You are kind of missing point. I agree that they didn’t know to what end, but they were handling Oswald. And when it happened, they knew immediately that it was part of a deeper plot. So they are accessories, and all the more evil for failing to acknowledged what they know. And Mrs. Paine continued, after the assassination, to help frame Oswald. Which not only implies some deeper knowledge of the plot, but which makes her all the more despicable.

That’s just all nonsense. The January 6 hearings were detailed and complicated and well planned and presented like a really fine prosecutors brief. Try watching it next time. Of course there was some hearsay. But there was tons of first person firsthand testimony. Read the transcript.

I am not sure of your point relative to my post. Many congressional hearings have been quite substantial and evidential, from the Army-McCarthy hearings to the Church Committee. Also, January 6; and even the HSCA hearings, when all was released (well, not all but a lot), were revelatory.

nope. That's not the way it was back then. It would have all faded into oblivion. I know this shoots to smithereens the whole "altered Zapruder film" thing, but your position makes absolutely no sense. That kid's pictures of the RFK assassination disappeared, and no one has squeaked a word about what they probably showed. And you seem to have forgotten that the Zapruder was suppressed for 12 years anyway. Tell me, who in that time saw this as evidence of conspiracy? Did the whole nation use this as evidence of conspiracy? Cite one source (and yes, I know that many people thought the assassination was a conspiracy, but NOT because of the withholding of the film). As a matter of fact, with the showing of the film on Geraldo all hell broke loose. It was really the beginning of a new chapter in terms of examining the assassination. All enabled by the FILM. I guess they didn't do a good enough job of editing.

The thing to remember about this nonsense about election fraud is that it makes no sense, because if the Dems cooked the results in the presidential, why did they not do the same to make sure they had an impenetrable majority in the Senate? This is starting to sound like claims of Zapruder fakery, which ignore the basic logic that if they wanted to suppress the images they would have destroyed the film, not let it come out in ways which convinced the rest of the world that there was a conspiracy.

For such an astute observer, Michael, you’re surprisingly nearsighted. The Democrats never claimed the Russians stole the elections but that they tampered with the election. There is a difference. But even the fact that you’re comparing the Democrats complaints to the Republican complaints shows how myopic you are in this whole subject. I’m sorry to say this because you’ve done some very good writing on the assassination. But if you can’t even recognize Trump’s brand of very American fascism, embodied by his attempted coup, then we have very little more to discuss here. And Mueller did nothing of a kind. There was a subtlety to Russian misbehavior that has apparently alluded you; according to Time magazine: “Mueller spent almost 200 pages describing “numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign.” He found that “a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.” He also found that “a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations” against the Clinton campaign and then released stolen documents.”