Marcel Dehaeseleer Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Mary Moorman Photos - The Men Who Killed Kennedy The video (YouTube): The webpage: Mary Moorman Photos (Camera wrong orientation) No further comment... Kind regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 (edited) Mary Moorman Photos - The Men Who Killed KennedyThe video (YouTube): The webpage: Mary Moorman Photos (Camera wrong orientation) No further comment... Kind regards Hi Marcel. Good to see you back on the forum. Interesting Video. Mary Moorman holding her camera the wrong way in " The Men Who Killed Kennedy " , and then for Oliver Stone to also show the Camera up the wrong way in the film JFK ,seems to be quite a crucial blunder on there part. Edited June 2, 2007 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Marcel i hope i don't side track your thread with this one. Speaking of Blunders. From Groden's " JFK the case for conspiracy " What on earth was Groden and Stone thinking when they dressed Nellie Connally in WHITE instead of RED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Well, the camera apparently works either way. You can take a picture horizontally or vertically. So maybe Mary simply forgot which way she was holding it and when during her photo-taking on 11/22/63. Maybe the actress playing Mary asked Oliver Stone which way the camera is held, and Stone said, "It works either way," or maybe it wasn't even discussed. In any case, I fail to see deliberate "disinformation" here. It would be disinformation if we found out that Polaroid cameras didn't exist in 1963. Or if we found out that Mary was using a Kodak Instamatic that day instead of a Polaroid and thus couldn't have taken the "Moorman Photo." But how is the camera being held vertically instead of horizontally, or vice versa, "disinformation"? What difference does it make to anyone who wasn't aware of this issue? Does it somehow change one's view of the assassinaton? It made no difference to me before, and makes no difference to me now (except that I'm glad she held it horizontally for the wider view of the knoll). What does how Mary held her camera have to do with, say, David Morales or Lyndon Johnson? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Well, the camera apparently works either way. You can take a picture horizontally or vertically. So maybe Mary simply forgot which way she was holding it and when during her photo-taking on 11/22/63. Maybe the actress playing Mary asked Oliver Stone which way the camera is held, and Stone said, "It works either way," or maybe it wasn't even discussed.In any case, I fail to see deliberate "disinformation" here. It would be disinformation if we found out that Polaroid cameras didn't exist in 1963. Or if we found out that Mary was using a Kodak Instamatic that day instead of a Polaroid and thus couldn't have taken the "Moorman Photo." But how is the camera being held vertically instead of horizontally, or vice versa, "disinformation"? What difference does it make to anyone who wasn't aware of this issue? Does it somehow change one's view of the assassinaton? It made no difference to me before, and makes no difference to me now (except that I'm glad she held it horizontally for the wider view of the knoll). What does how Mary held her camera have to do with, say, David Morales or Lyndon Johnson? Hi Ron. If the camera is held vertical it gives the same view as Moorman 1 and 2 photos. If the camera is held horizontal it gives the same view as Moorman 3 and 5 To obtain the Moorman 5 image as it appears, the camera had to have been held horizontal ( Image wider than it is higher ) http://www.copweb.be/Mary%20Moorman%20Photos.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 To obtain the Moorman 5 image as it appears, the camera had to have been held horizontal ( Image wider than it is higher ) Of course. And that's how she held it. If she held it differently in a reactment, I fail to see how this connotes something sinister, or an act of disinformation. For what purpose would she deliberately hold it wrong, or for what purpose would someone put her up to it? I can see her forgetting which way she held it or simply not even thinking about it when posing for the reenactment, since she used the camera both vertically and horizontally while taking pictures on 11/22/63. But I fail to see the point of it as an act of disinformation. Maybe I'm missing something, but to me this just seems to be making a grassy knoll out of a mole hill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted June 2, 2007 Share Posted June 2, 2007 Personally, I happen to love the diversion and distraction away from what is actually of importance in the Moorman photo's. #3 is of considerable importance! And under the assumption that there was in fact a #4, then it would be even more so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now