Was Muchmore’s film shown on WNEW-TV, New York, on November 26, 1963?

[Paul Rigby]

False memory (or memory merge) can happen. For years I merged two events, one in

1944 and one in 1949, both concerning the same location. As a result, I remembered

a person being there in 1944 who was not; he was not employed there till 1947...but I

would have sworn he was there in '44, until once someone proved my memory wrong.

Jack

Entirely True!

Not too many years back I was discussing with Barbara various events which actually transpired in Vietnam in early 68.

In my "mind" for many a year, events of two seperate and different encounters with NVA forces, had been combined into a single encounter/firefight.

Barbara, who had received letters from me, stated that I was incorrect and that it was two separate events, to which I protested.

She then showed me the letters written on the subject, which, as she had stated, was two distiinct and seperate events.

Being the "doubting Thomas", I thereafter dug out my diary which was written at the time of the events, and it too stated that this was too separate events with totally seperate dates.

To this day, my "memory" still has these events combined into a single combat event, yet I know beyond any doubt that the memory is incorrect as the letters and diary were written at the time of occurence.

Therefore, when one places their faith in "memory" alone, then they are on quite shaky ground.

And the older one gets, the worse it also appears to be.

Guess one should be thankful that they can remember anything!

Jack, Tom, I sympathise with – and share – the proclivity to conflate memories. So let us thank the lucky stars that Mark Lane committed his (television viewing) to paper, just as Tom did in his diary, so contemporaneously:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...rt=#entry148026

The following extract is from the expanded – eight-page pamphlet version – of Mark Lane’s original article on the case, “Lane’s Defense Brief for Oswald,” published by the National Guardian, 19 December 1963:

“A motion picture taken of the President just before, during, and after the shooting, and demonstrated on television showed that the President was looking directly ahead when the first shot, which entered his throat, was fired. A series of still pictures taken from the motion picture and published in Life magazine on Nov. 29 show exactly the same situation.”

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/The_critics/L...l_Guardian.html

Note the order: Lane first saw the film was on television, then a few stills from it in Life’s first post-assassination issue of November 29.

Paul

Lane was telling the truth in his original defense brief (aka the newspaper despatch from UPI which Gary Mack doesn't want you to read):

The Valley Independent, (Monessen, Pennsylvania), Tuesday, November 26, 1963, Page 5

Film Showing Assassination Is Released

NEW YORK (UPI) — United Press International Newsfilm early today was first on the air with exclusive film showing the assassination of President Kennedy.

The film is 16mm enlarged from 8mm. It was shown on a New York City television station.

The sequence, shot by an amateur photographer in Dallas Friday, begins with motorcycle police coming around the corner followed by the Kennedy motorcade.

The President is then seen leaning over when the bullets strike. Mrs. Kennedy puts her right arm around the President and he slumps out of view. The film then shows a Secret Service agent running toward the car.

The film was shown in slow motion and also stopped at key points in the assassination. The scene was shown four times at different speeds and under different magnifications.

Copies have been rushed to United Press Newsfilm clients all over the world.

Will the truth set us free? Probably not, but it's always a very useful place to begin.

[Bill Miller]

Will the truth set us free? Probably not, but it's always a very useful place to begin.

The truth must first be sought to even begin to find it.

Bill Miller

[Paul Rigby]

Will the truth set us free? Probably not, but it's always a very useful place to begin.

The truth must first be sought to even begin to find it.

Bill Miller

Still time to start, Bill - better late than never.

Paul

[David G. Healy]

But since Mack made the claim that he'd seen something in a newspaper, it should be incumbent upon MACK to either produce the information--or a link thereto--or retract his [heretofore] unproven [unprovable?] assertion. That's the way the world works, Miller: if you make a claim, it's up to you to either back it up or back off. You don't seem to have a problem with this approach when dealing with Healy and others on the film alteration topic; so why are the rules different where Mack is involved?

First of all, if Mack didn't say anything, then he'd be equal to Healy. I assume we are talking about 'I have not seen proof of alteration' Healy. You could add all his post together for the year and not find any JFK assassination data in them.

Mack had told me where he recalled seeing the article and left it up to me to find it. To date, I had never gotten around to doing it ... mostly because of opportunity when the idea had crossed my mind. I cannot fault Mack for my lack of effort.

While I'll always be thankful for his suggestions, I still think that Gary Mack needs to decidse whether he's "above" these discussions or not. If he is, then he needs to abstain from using the ventriloquism act to circumvent his position. If he's not, then he needs to speak for himself. For Mack to continue to employ "sock puppets" is ridiculous.

It appears that comprehension is not one of your strong qualities. Mack can and will discuss most anything to anyone who contacts him personally so to stay within the guidelines of his employment. Then one can relay what they learned from Mack to any interested parties ... such as on an Education Forum such as this. Many of us cite quotes from books and yet no one complains that we do it, so what difference does it make if we cite something Mack has said to us??? I personally see such complaining about it as meaningless rebuttal.

By the way ... no time to go to your local library to look for the article I take it.

Bill Miller

a real pathetic dance, wild Bill! Ya make a claim then run from it, typical Lone Nut tactic!

Edited August 2, 2008 by David G. Healy

[Bill Miller]

a real pathetic dance, wild Bill! Ya make a claim then run from it, typical Lone Nut tactic!

I see you and I are on the same page concerning your last response, David. It seems that neither one of us knows what you're talking about.

By the way, have you submitted that all important request for you to examine those historical films and photos so to put all this alteration nonsense to rest or have you decided to keep the dream alive???

Bill Miller

Edited August 2, 2008 by Bill Miller

[Paul Rigby]

The Valley Independent, (Monessen, Pennsylvania), Tuesday, November 26, 1963, Page 5

Film Showing Assassination Is Released

NEW YORK (UPI) — United Press International Newsfilm early today was first on the air with exclusive film showing the assassination of President Kennedy.

The film is 16mm enlarged from 8mm. It was shown on a New York City television station.

The sequence, shot by an amateur photographer in Dallas Friday, begins with motorcycle police coming around the corner followed by the Kennedy motorcade.

The President is then seen leaning over when the bullets strike. Mrs. Kennedy puts her right arm around the President and he slumps out of view. The film then shows a Secret Service agent running toward the car.

The film was shown in slow motion and also stopped at key points in the assassination. The scene was shown four times at different speeds and under different magnifications.

Copies have been rushed to United Press Newsfilm clients all over the world.

Anyone desirous of checking the source of this piece should click on the following link and follow the instructions beneath it:

http://www.kennedyassassinationarchive.com/Home.aspx

Click on “Advanced Search” tab

In the “exact phrase” search box, type “exclusive film” (without the quotes)

Under “Publication Date,” select “exact date” & specify “1963, November, 26”

Up should pop the example I’ve cited in this thread.

Oh – and these additional copies, albeit with slightly different titles:

1. “Exclusive Films Show Shooting of Kennedy in Dallas,” Logansport Pharos-Tribune, (Logansport, Indiana), Tuesday, November 26, 1963, Page 2

2. “UPI Newsfilm First On Air With Exclusive,” Great Bend Daily Tribune, (Great Bend, Kansas), Tuesday, November 26, 1963, Page 9

3. “UPI Newsfilm Has Shooting On Film,” Humboldt Standard, (Eureka, California), Tuesday, November 26, 1963, p.2

Paul

[Paul Rigby]

“The evening of November 25 the Secret Service contacted the FBI requesting that the FBI-lent first-generation copy be returned to the Dallas Secret Service, as it was needed the next morning. The film was put upon a Braniff Airlines fight scheduled to arrive in Dallas at 3:21 a.m. By 9:00 a.m., the film was delivered by an FBI agent back into the hands of Secret Service Inspector Kelley,”

Richard Trask. National Nightmare on six feet of film: Mr. Zapruder’s home movie and the murder of President Kennedy (Danvers, MA: Yeoman Press, 2005), p.122.

What, I wonder, rendered waiting until the morning to return the FBI "first-generation" copy so out of the question? What compelled this hasty nocturnal journey?

One very obvious answer: The appearance of Life magazine, dated 29 November, but distributed from late on the 25th onward.

If the hypothesis is correct, we have a still frame sequence in Life's first post-assassination edition at variance with the film circulating in Dallas, and shown on Russian TV late on November 25, then WNEW-TV, NY (among other locations) early on the 26th.

This dickering with the prearranged narrative should come as no surprise: Angelton's SIG unit seems to have been engaged in subverting the preparation, never mind the cover-up, of the assassination.

A really significant breakthrough would be to find links between Angelton's core coup team, and the handlng of the Z fraud. A very fascinating story it promises to be.

Paul

[Paul Rigby]

Lane was telling the truth in his original defense brief (aka the newspaper despatch from UPI which Gary Mack doesn't want you to read):

The Valley Independent, (Monessen, Pennsylvania), Tuesday, November 26, 1963, Page 5

Film Showing Assassination Is Released

NEW YORK (UPI) — United Press International Newsfilm early today was first on the air with exclusive film showing the assassination of President Kennedy.

The film is 16mm enlarged from 8mm. It was shown on a New York City television station.

The sequence, shot by an amateur photographer in Dallas Friday, begins with motorcycle police coming around the corner followed by the Kennedy motorcade.

The President is then seen leaning over when the bullets strike. Mrs. Kennedy puts her right arm around the President and he slumps out of view. The film then shows a Secret Service agent running toward the car.

The film was shown in slow motion and also stopped at key points in the assassination. The scene was shown four times at different speeds and under different magnifications.

Copies have been rushed to United Press Newsfilm clients all over the world.

Will the truth set us free? Probably not, but it's always a very useful place to begin.

New Society (1) was a weekly founded in 1962 to cater for the burgeoning – and increasingly advertising-rich – UK bureaucracies of the “social sciences.” It was uniformly regarded as “left of centre,” and thus a potentially perfect vehicle for establishment disinformation.

In its edition of 13 October 1966, it devoted five pages to extracts from a paper delivered to that year’s “meeting of the American Sociological Association” by the somewhat improbably named Ruth Love Leeds, of the Bureau of Applied Social Research, Columbia University. Her paper that was “part of a wider study of the topic being undertaken” by her own employer in conjunction with the “Morse Communications Research Centre, Brandeis University” (2).

The New Society extract was grandly entitled “Television and the Kennedy Assassination.” Its great achievement was to omit the minor facts that a) film of the assassination had been shown on US television in the early hours (Eastern Standard Time) of Tuesday, 26 November; and had drawn complaints on the grounds of taste (3). In lieu of the truth, Britain’s social workers were offered the following, the kind of flannel more normally encountered in a bathroom:

“To broadcast material that deviates from expected behaviour, does not accord with prevalent standards of taste and morality, or puts favoured persons in a bad light is to detract from the overall tastefulness and appropriateness of the coverage. Such material would not only be offensive to public sentiment but to professional satisfaction, for the broadcasters pride themselves almost as much on producing tasteful coverage as they do a comprehensive news coverage.”

Still, on the bright side, it was doubtless the kind of work undertaken by the Bureau of Applied Social Research at Columbia which merited all those generous CIA grants (4).

Notes

1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Society_(magazine)

2) Ruth Love Leeds, “Television and the Kennedy Assassination,” New Society, 13 October 1966, pp.567-571.

3) Rick Freedman, “Pictures of Assassination Fall to Amateurs on Street,” Editor & Publisher, November 30, 1963, p.67: “By Tuesday, numerous pictures, both still and movie, were being offered to news media. At least one television station was besieged with protests after it had shown scenes of the President’s motorcade at the moment of the shooting. Many viewers considered them to be too gruesome.”

4) http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=-A9zzGX...1&ct=result

It bought other lies, too. According to our awesome researcher Leeds, “Correspondents refrained from describing Kennedy’s wounds…” (Ruth Love Leeds, “Television and the Kennedy Assassination,” New Society, 13 October 1966, p.568).

It was, I think, Sir Lewis Namier who opined that the problem with amateur historians is that they think more about themselves than their subjects. To which a suitably offended amateur might well reply that the problem with the pros is that they go in seach of grants and tenure, not the truth.

[Paul Rigby]

Lane was telling the truth in his original defense brief (aka the newspaper despatch from UPI which Gary Mack doesn't want you to read):

The Valley Independent, (Monessen, Pennsylvania), Tuesday, November 26, 1963, Page 5

Film Showing Assassination Is Released

NEW YORK (UPI) — United Press International Newsfilm early today was first on the air with exclusive film showing the assassination of President Kennedy.

The film is 16mm enlarged from 8mm. It was shown on a New York City television station.

The sequence, shot by an amateur photographer in Dallas Friday, begins with motorcycle police coming around the corner followed by the Kennedy motorcade.

The President is then seen leaning over when the bullets strike. Mrs. Kennedy puts her right arm around the President and he slumps out of view. The film then shows a Secret Service agent running toward the car.

The film was shown in slow motion and also stopped at key points in the assassination. The scene was shown four times at different speeds and under different magnifications.

Copies have been rushed to United Press Newsfilm clients all over the world.

Will the truth set us free? Probably not, but it's always a very useful place to begin.

New Society (1) was a weekly founded in 1962 to cater for the burgeoning – and increasingly advertising-rich – UK bureaucracies of the “social sciences.” It was uniformly regarded as “left of centre,” and thus a potentially perfect vehicle for establishment disinformation.

In its edition of 13 October 1966, it devoted five pages to extracts from a paper delivered to that year’s “meeting of the American Sociological Association” by the somewhat improbably named Ruth Love Leeds, of the Bureau of Applied Social Research, Columbia University. Her paper that was “part of a wider study of the topic being undertaken” by her own employer in conjunction with the “Morse Communications Research Centre, Brandeis University” (2).

The New Society extract was grandly entitled “Television and the Kennedy Assassination.” Its great achievement was to omit the minor facts that a) film of the assassination had been shown on US television in the early hours (Eastern Standard Time) of Tuesday, 26 November; and had drawn complaints on the grounds of taste (3). In lieu of the truth, Britain’s social workers were offered the following, the kind of flannel more normally encountered in a bathroom:

“To broadcast material that deviates from expected behaviour, does not accord with prevalent standards of taste and morality, or puts favoured persons in a bad light is to detract from the overall tastefulness and appropriateness of the coverage. Such material would not only be offensive to public sentiment but to professional satisfaction, for the broadcasters pride themselves almost as much on producing tasteful coverage as they do a comprehensive news coverage.”

Still, on the bright side, it was doubtless the kind of work undertaken by the Bureau of Applied Social Research at Columbia which merited all those generous CIA grants (4).

Notes

1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Society_(magazine)

2) Ruth Love Leeds, “Television and the Kennedy Assassination,” New Society, 13 October 1966, pp.567-571.

3) Rick Freedman, “Pictures of Assassination Fall to Amateurs on Street,” Editor & Publisher, November 30, 1963, p.67: “By Tuesday, numerous pictures, both still and movie, were being offered to news media. At least one television station was besieged with protests after it had shown scenes of the President’s motorcade at the moment of the shooting. Many viewers considered them to be too gruesome.”

4) http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=-A9zzGX...1&ct=result

It bought other lies, too. According to our awesome researcher Leeds, “Correspondents refrained from describing Kennedy’s wounds…” (Ruth Love Leeds, “Television and the Kennedy Assassination,” New Society, 13 October 1966, p.568).

It was, I think, Sir Lewis Namier who opined that the problem with amateur historians is that they think more about themselves than their subjects. To which a suitably offended amateur might well reply that the problem with the pros is that they go in seach of grants and tenure, not the truth.

The most impressive case of amnesia, however, belonged to UPI itself.

In early October 1964, UPI execs took their seats in Keith’s Theatre – “a short block from the White House” – to witness the debut of David Wolper’s “Four Days in November,” a documentary made “in cooperation with United Press International,” and boasting a “narrative script” which “was read for accuracy by [the] Warren Commission counsel,” no less.

In the highlighted sentences of the report below, we find that UPI had neglected to tell Wolper that in the early hours of November 26 (EST), WNEW-TV, NY, using a film supplied by the same UPI, had shown footage of the presidential limousine turning the corner from Houston on to Elm.

The omission permitted the introduction of a shot sound effect which just happened to dovetail with the print campaign, waged in late November and early December 1963 (see earlier posts in this thread), designed to suggest a shot at or just beyond the taking of the Houston/Elm turn.

http://www.kennedyassassinationarchive.com...esult=5¤tPage=0

Kingsport News (Tennessee), 8 October 1964, p.19

JFK Assassination Film Holds Guests Spellbound

Marlyn E. Aycock (UPI)

WASHINGTON (UPI) – Four days in November numbed an unbelieving world last year.

Tuesday night, the premiere of a film on President John F. Kennedy's assassination had almost the same hypnotic effect on 1,600 invited guests.

The first showing of "Four Days in November" was at Keith's Theater here, a short block from the While House which figured so prominently in the two-hour documentary. Producer David L. Wolper combined a skillful blend of newsfilm, still photographs, amateur movies and recreated scenes into a searing record of those four days.

The United States and much of the world lived those days as they unfolded on television and in print. Wolper's production, in cooperation with United Press International, brought those tragic events back in a chronological, cohesive account for the first time.

Drama Increased

The assassination came near the midway point. For an hour, the drama built up until the presidential car turned a Dallas street corner and a shot rang out. The screen went blank for several seconds, symbolizing the inability of the mind to grasp what had happened. Then the camera recaptured the frenzy in the Dallas streets — Mrs. Kennedy pulling the Secret Service agent onto the rear of the car, the dash to Parkland Hospital, the blind man’s buff search for a culprit. And then the grief.

The following days of nation al sorrow in Washington were interrupted by sudden switches to the confusion in the halls of the Dallas police station and the incredible murder of Lee Harvey Oswald. The film made no attempt to interpret Oswald's motives. It assumed his guilt on the evidence available just as the Warren Commission did 10 days ago in concluding that Oswald acted for reasons known to him alone and without help.

Audible Effect

The affect of reliving those four days was clearly audible among the guests from the White House staff, executive UPI Editors and Conference here. None of the Kennedy family was present although a number of the late President's friends accepted invitations. The film was being released today for world-wide exhibition. Wolper and his associates edited some 2 million feet of film, much of it not shown publicly before, into the 120-minute final product. The narrative script was read for accuracy by the Warren Commission counsel. And in spite of the emotional drain the film creates it surely must rank among the most valuable historical documents ever put together.

[Paul Rigby]

So, let me see if I have this element of the anti-alterationist story straight: UPI had footage of the actual shooting of President Kennedy but withheld news of its existence from the FBI, the very organisation assigned the lead role in the official investigation, for a period of, what, two to three weeks?

Curious.

In addition, no one at WNEW-TV bothered to mention it to the FBI, nor any viewer.

Curiouser, and curiouser.

It gets stranger.

Here’s an extract from David R. Wrone’s The Zapruder Film: Reframing JFK’s Assassination (University Press of Kansas, 2003), pp.150-152:

“At nine o’clock on the morning of November 25, 1963, three days after the murder of President Kennedy – but early on the first working day after the murder – Walter Bent, sales service manager of the Eastman Kodak Company, the same firm that had developed Zapruder’s film, telephoned the Dallas FBI office and spoke to FBI special agent Milton L. Newsom (41). His company had just received film from Charles Bronson to be developed. In his package Bronson had included a note advising Kodak that the film may be of the assassin as he fired the shots. Would the FBI, said Bent, be interested in viewing the film? (42)

Newsom’s memorandum of the conversation reads as follows:

Mr. WALTER BENT, Sales Service Manager, Eastman Kodak Company, Processing Division, 3131 Manor Way, telephone FL 7-4654, Dallas, telephonically advised his company had received two rolls of 8 milimeter [sic] Kodachrome and one roll of 35 milimeter [sic] film in a package from Mr. CHARLES BRONSON, Chief Engineer, Zarel Mfg. Company, 9230 Denton Drive, Dallas, Texas.

Mr. BRONSON enclosed a letter with his film, stating that the film had been taken at the instant President KENNEDY was assassinated. BRONSON also advised in the letter that from the position he was stationed when he took the film, he feels quite certain the Texas School Book Depository Building was clearly photographed and he feels that the window from which the shots were fired will be depicted on the film. He stated for this reason he believes he may have a picture of the assassin, as he fired the shots.

Mr. BENT stated Mr. BRONSON’s letter indicated he desired to be cooperative regarding the film with proper authorities and BENT is of the opinion that BRONSON will have no objection to turning the film over to proper authorities in the event it is of value to the investigation.

Mr. BENT stated that he would make arrangements with Mr. BRONSON to view the film at the Kodak Processing Centre and would arrange this so that FBI agents could be present and at the same time interview BRONSON concerning his film of the scene.

Mr. BENT assured his full cooperation regarding all film received of a like nature that may possibly be connected with this matter and arrangements were made with him to immediately notify SA NEWSOM of any film of possible value.

The Eastman Kodak Processing Service Division receives all color film made by 8 milimeter [sic] Kodachrome in this area and also most other film for the area is processed by this division. Mr. BENT explained that his employees have not worked since Saturday and they are due back to work at 11:30 P.M., 11/25/63. When processing of recent film orders begins, he expects other films taken at the approximate time of President’s assassination.

He said that BRONSON’s film should be processed and ready for viewing by 3:00 P.M. He was told that SA NEWSOM would meet him at that time (43).

Bent then phoned Bronson and set up a meeting at the Kodak plant for 3:00 P.M.

At 3:00 Special Agents Milton Newsom and Emory Norton appeared at the plant and together with Bronson watched the films (44). Afterwards they did not ask for copies. When they returned to their office, they wrote up a memorandum on the films...

Notes:

(41) See Trask, Pictures of the Pain; George Lardner Jr., “Film in JFK Assassination Reissued,” Washington Post, November 11, 1978; “New Clue in JFK Slaying,” San Francisco Bulletin, November 26, 1978; Wendell Rawls Jr., “New Film Suggests an Oswald Cohort,” New York Times, November 27, 1978; Earl Golz, “JFK Film May Record Two Gunmen,” Dallas Morning News, November 26, 1978.

(42) FBI Agent Milton Newsom to SAC, 11/25/63, serial 62-109060-456.

(43) Ibid.

(44) Trask, Pictures of the Pain, 278-304, is a history of the film.

According to Richard Trask’s Pictures of the Pain (p.205), citing Maurice Schonfeld’s July-August 1975 Columbia Journalism Review piece, “The Shadow of a Gunman,” Muchmore’s film was developed at the same “Eastman Kodak in Dallas” on the same day as Bronson’s – but entirely unbeknownst, it seems, to Mr. Bent, either at 9am, when he rang the FBI, or at 3pm, when he met with the Bureau’s Newsom and Norton.

Schonfeld’s version of how UPI acquired the film which its alleged taker subsequently denied (to the FBI) contained any footage of the assassination, runs as follows. Burt Reinhardt, by way of explanation, was “general manager of UPI’s newsfilm division, who had flown to Dallas to acquire amateur footage of the assassination” (1):

“Miss Muchmore brought her film to UPI’s Dallas bureau on November 25. The deskman promptly telephoned Burt Reinhardt” who “hurried to the office and set about shaking Miss Muchmore’s confidence in the value of her film by asking if she was positive that she was filming at the very moment of the assassination…UPI would be pleased to develop the film and see if it was any good and then make an offer, Reinhardt said, or, if Miss Muchmore preferred to play it safe, UPI would make a blind cash offer. Miss Muchmore chose to play it safe and accepted a check for $1,000. Reinhardt took the film to the Eastman Kodak lab in Dallas” (2).

As we have seen from SA Newsom’s report on his exchanges with Walter Bent, Eastman Kodak’s Sales Service Manager, Processing Division, on 25 November, Schonfeld’s claim – that UPI took the film to Eastman Kodak in Dallas - was a retrospective fiction, and of a piece with his insistence that the film shown on WNEW-TV at 12:46 a.m. on the morning of Tuesday, 26 November, was the Muchmore film, not the first version of the Zapruder.

Schonfeld was notably coy on the question of when and where this film was first shown. But while evasive on these details, he did at least offer a duration for the sequence seen by, among others, Mark Lane in New York, courtesy of the city’s WNEW-TV, and, in the process, confirmed key details of its presentation, as contained within the UPI despatch of the morning of 26 November:

“At first it seemed that Miss Muchmore had gotten the better of the deal. All we had was a grainy, jerky glimpse of the last seconds of the assassination and the confused aftermath; but back in New York we slowed the picture down, blew it up, zoomed in and stopframed and turned it into two minutes of respectable TV news. By the time we released the edited sequence, however, Jack Ruby had killed Oswald, the president’s funeral had just occurred, and showing the film seemed in such poor taste that most UPI client stations chose not to show it” (3).

Of course, as previously demonstrated, the Muchmore film bore no relation to the film shown on WNEW-TV in the first hour of 26 November, as UPI’s own press release on its New York television debut made clear:

United Press International Newsfilm early today was first on the air with exclusive film showing the assassination of President Kennedy.

The film is 16mm enlarged from 8mm. It was shown on a New York City television station.

The sequence, shot by an amateur photographer in Dallas Friday, begins with motorcycle police coming around the corner followed by the Kennedy motorcade.

The President is then seen leaning over when the bullets strike. Mrs. Kennedy puts her right arm around the President and he slumps out of view. The film then shows a Secret Service agent running toward the car.

The film was shown in slow motion and also stopped at key points in the assassination. The scene was shown four times at different speeds and under different magnifications (4).

Schonfeld, predictably, omitted mention of the fact that UPI Newsfilm was so concerned by the tastefulness of the assassination sequence in question that it had, according to the UPI’s own despatch of 26 November, “rushed” copies “to United Press Newsfilm clients all over the world” (5).

(1) Maurice W. Schonfeld, “The shadow of a gunman,” Columbia Journalism Review, July-August 1975, p.46.

The CJR, it should be noted, was founded by Edward W. Barrett, ex-OSS and Office of War Information (“Edward W. Barrett dies: Started Columbia Journalism Review,” Washington Post, 26 October 1989). According to Christopher Simpson, “Barrett omitted that information from biographical statements published during his lifetime” (Science of Coercion: Communication Research & Psychological Warfare 1945-1960 [NY: Oxford UP, 1996], p.141, n.39.)

(2) Ibid.

(3) Ibid.

(4) UPI (NY), “Film showing assassination is released,” The Valley Independent, (Monessen, Pennsylvania), 26 November 1963, p.5

(5) Ibid.

[Denis Pointing]

Paul, I dont wish to sound unkind but doesn't it tell you something when 92 percent of the post's on this tread are from YOU!! GIVE IT UP.

[Bill Miller]

Paul, I dont wish to sound unkind but doesn't it tell you something when 92 percent of the post's on this tread are from YOU!! GIVE IT UP.

Paul must not be getting attention these days. No mention of him contacting Lane or following up with UPI. Good ol' Paul Rigby~

[Paul Rigby]

Paul, I dont wish to sound unkind but doesn't it tell you something when 92 percent of the post's on this tread are from YOU!! GIVE IT UP.

Always a pleasure to hear from the Alf Garnett of Warren Commission orthodoxy.

PS More work needed on those percentages: But it does explain the sustained excellence of the thread...

[Paul Rigby]

Paul, I dont wish to sound unkind but doesn't it tell you something when 92 percent of the post's on this tread are from YOU!! GIVE IT UP.

Paul must not be getting attention these days. No mention of him contacting Lane or following up with UPI. Good ol' Paul Rigby~

Nor, too, it would appear, of the clipping allegedly lurking in Mack's box. Still looking, Bill, or that another evidentiary promise you can't deliver?

Paul

[Bill Miller]

Paul must not be getting attention these days. No mention of him contacting Lane or following up with UPI. Good ol' Paul Rigby~

Nor, too, it would appear, of the clipping allegedly lurking in Mack's box. Still looking, Bill, or that another evidentiary promise you can't deliver?

Paul

Nothing for me to deliver, Paul .. the newspaper in question is in the Museum. Like Denis said ... you make up 90% of this thread .. a fraction of that time spent looking for the paper in question, contacting Lane, etc., should keep you busy, but it appears that you aren't interested in doing anything that means doing research.