Sitzman - Did She Shoot The Other Film ?

[David G. Healy]

speaking of being ridiculous -- do you need to post the same post three times? Playing the numbers game, AGAIN?

Yes David ... seems like others have had a similar problem whereas the post just runs and doesn't go through, so we give up and try again and again only to find they all finally got posted. You were probably not paying attention at the time and is why you didn't correlate that to my duplicate post ... no surprise to me.

Bill Miller

well, remove them.... what is no surprise to anyone is: your desire to be the number one poster on this board -- no surprise to me.

[Bill Miller]

Yes David ... seems like others have had a similar problem whereas the post just runs and doesn't go through, so we give up and try again and again only to find they all finally got posted. You were probably not paying attention at the time and is why you didn't correlate that to my duplicate post ... no surprise to me.

Bill Miller

well, remove them.... what is no surprise to anyone is: your desire to be the number one poster on this board -- no surprise to me.

The duplicate post were deleted upon reading your June 12th memo about them. So why are you complaining about them not being removed at the time you wrote this June 13th post which appears to have been written well after their removal??? Sometimes the quickest remark isn't the most intelligent.

Bill Miller

[David G. Healy]

Yes David ... seems like others have had a similar problem whereas the post just runs and doesn't go through, so we give up and try again and again only to find they all finally got posted. You were probably not paying attention at the time and is why you didn't correlate that to my duplicate post ... no surprise to me.

Bill Miller

well, remove them.... what is no surprise to anyone is: your desire to be the number one poster on this board -- no surprise to me.

The duplicate post were deleted upon reading your June 12th memo about them. So why are you complaining about them not being removed at the time you wrote this June 13th post which appears to have been written well after their removal??? Sometimes the quickest remark isn't the most intelligent.

Bill Miller

Miller, you definitely need a job... all this lazzing around has ruined the career path you were on... 10,000+ post to JFK boards and no one knows who you are... fascinating

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Yes David ... seems like others have had a similar problem whereas the post just runs and doesn't go through, so we give up and try again and again only to find they all finally got posted. You were probably not paying attention at the time and is why you didn't correlate that to my duplicate post ... no surprise to me.

Bill Miller

well, remove them.... what is no surprise to anyone is: your desire to be the number one poster on this board -- no surprise to me.

The duplicate post were deleted upon reading your June 12th memo about them. So why are you complaining about them not being removed at the time you wrote this June 13th post which appears to have been written well after their removal??? Sometimes the quickest remark isn't the most intelligent.

Bill Miller

Miller, you definitely need a job... all this lazzing around has ruined the career path you were on... 10,000+ post to JFK boards and no one knows who you are... fascinating

and no one knows who you are

Not true David!

I know who he is:

1. The persons who claims tobe a researcher and so informed me that I was he only person who claimed that the first shot was fired in the Z204/Z206 vicinity.

a. Even though Melvin Eisenberg clearly states the high probability of this.

b. Even though the Time/Life Survey Work of 11/26/63 demonstrates this.

c. Even though the computed distance of 175 feet which Melvin Eisenberg gave to Frazier as well as Simmons, demonstrate this.

d. Even though the "jiggle/blur" analysis demonstrate this.

2. He is also the person who claims to have concentrated on the photographic evidence, yet never recognized that the Altgens re-enactment photo, as taken by the WC, was taken from an entirely different line-of-sight/aka different location than James Altgens was standing.

3. He is also the person who claims to have concentrated on the witness testimonies, yet never came to recognized the number of reliable witnesses who so informed us that the Z313 impact was in fact the second shot fired in the shooting sequence, as well as the fact that a variety of witnesses so informed us as to the physical location of the Presidential Limo at the time of the third shot, as well as having James Altgens clearly describe the impact to the head of JFK of this, the last/third shot fired.

4. He is also the person who attempts to "ride" the wave of those whom he considers as credible individuals.IE:

a. Marathon Key Scout Sniper Al Carrier! (who is an avid follower of Dangerous Dan"

b. Blood Spatter "Experts" who are more in line with BS Experts.

c. Actually purported USMC Scout Snipers who may in fact be a shooter, but are severely lacking in the research department.

So!

I know exactly who BM is!

I am also aware that to my knowledge, he has never contributed a single bit of factual research of his own, here or anywhere else.

Lastly, although I have no problems with the "BM" shoot down BS concept*. One must at some point in time demonsrate that they actually have something worthwhile to contribute to the overall effort.

Otherwise, they are not a "researcher", and are merely someone who wants to be heard.

*With the amount of BS on this subject, we could find many third-graders who can do this!

[Bill Miller]

I know exactly who BM is!

I am also aware that to my knowledge, he has never contributed a single bit of factual research of his own, here or anywhere else.

Lastly, although I have no problems with the "BM" shoot down BS concept*. One must at some point in time demonsrate that they actually have something worthwhile to contribute to the overall effort.

Otherwise, they are not a "researcher", and are merely someone who wants to be heard.

Tom, I honestly do not know what you are talking about. Does it bother you that I shared the following information ...

Hugh Betzner said that he just snapped his photo when the first shot sounded.

Betzner: I took another picture as the President's car was going down the hill on Elm Street. I started to wind my film again and I heard a loud noise. I thought that this noise was either a firecracker or a car had backfired.

Phil Willis said that he heard the first shot and took his photo.

Willis: Then my next shot was taken at the very--in fact, the shot caused me to squeeze the camera shutter, and I got a picture of the President as he was hit with the first shot. So instantaneous, in fact, that the crowd hadn't had time to react.

So here are two witnesses who don't have to guess at what Zapruder frame they took their photos. No interpretations needed from either witness. Its a simple matter of one man (Betzner) knowing that he just took his photo and then heard the first loud shot and the other photographer (Willis) heard the first loud shot which caused him to take his photo. These photos match Z186 (Betzner) and Z202 (Willis). This means that no matter what anyone el;se says when they think the first shot was fired ... they locked it in between their photos.

But one doesn't have to rely on these two witnesses because there is Mary Woodard in her interview in "Breaking the News" where she said the President was turned to his right and waving to her and the women next to her when the first loud shot sounded and hit him. Mary says that at this moment the President stopped his wave and brought his arm inside the car. It just so happens that this too happens between on the Zapruder film between the Betzner and Willis photo. Its the only time that JFK abruptly stops his wave ... is out in front of Woodard ... and coincides with what Betzner and Willis said about when the first shot was fired.

So there is a reason why I have chosen to believe the first shot came between the Betzner and Willis photos. These men were there and knowing if you took a photo and then heard a shot or knowing you heard a shot and then took your photo is not rocket science, but a matter of simple recall that seems to be supported by an unrelated witness who made the observation that JFK was directly out in front of her and waving to her and the women next to her when hit. Of course his reaction would be pretty immediate, thus the sudden stopping of his smiling and waving would be just what I would expect if hit in the throat.

[Paul Rigby]

Phil Willis said that he heard the first shot and took his photo.

Willis: Then my next shot was taken at the very--in fact, the shot caused me to squeeze the camera shutter, and I got a picture of the President as he was hit with the first shot. So instantaneous, in fact, that the crowd hadn't had time to react.

So here are two witnesses who don't have to guess at what Zapruder frame they took their photos. No interpretations needed from either witness. Its a simple matter of one man (Betzner) knowing that he just took his photo and then heard the first loud shot and the other photographer (Willis) heard the first loud shot which caused him to take his photo. These photos match Z186 (Betzner) and Z202 (Willis). This means that no matter what anyone el;se says when they think the first shot was fired ... they locked it in between their photos.

You don't mean this Phil Willis do you, Bill?

Mr. Willis: In slide No. 6, people were still on the ground and I took that picture, knowing that the party had come to a temporary halt before proceeding on to the underpass, and I have an arrow there which shows the back of the Secret Service agent climbing onto the back of the presidential car.

http://www.jfk-assassination.com/warren/wch/vol7/page497.php

No? Thought not. Glad to have helped nip that potential source of confusion in the bud. After all, there ain't no halt in the Zap fake, is there?

Paul

[Paul Rigby]

But one doesn't have to rely on these...witnesses because there is Mary Woodard in her interview in "Breaking the News" where she said the President was turned to his right and waving to her and the women next to her when the first loud shot sounded and hit him. Mary says that at this moment the President stopped his wave and brought his arm inside the car. It just so happens that this too happens between on the Zapruder film between the Betzner and Willis photo. Its the only time that JFK abruptly stops his wave ... is out in front of Woodard ... and coincides with what Betzner and Willis said about when the first shot was fired.

And not this Mary Woodward, surely?

“The cars behind stopped and several men – Secret Service men, I suppose – got out and started rushing forward, obstructing our view of the President’s car.”

“Witness From the News Describes Assassination,” Dallas Morning News, 23 November 1963, section 1, page 3.

Funny how you never reference this earliest print appearance of Woodward's observations. Again, can't think why!

Paul

[Bill Miller]

You don't mean this Phil Willis do you, Bill?

Mr. Willis: In slide No. 6, people were still on the ground and I took that picture, knowing that the party had come to a temporary halt before proceeding on to the underpass, and I have an arrow there which shows the back of the Secret Service agent climbing onto the back of the presidential car.

No? Thought not. Glad to have helped nip that potential source of confusion in the bud. After all, there ain't no halt in the Zap fake, is there?

Paul

Paul, Is it your purpose to just post things as if you've really researched the facts in hopes no one else has seen that stuff. This is what I see ......................

True, Willis 6 was taken when the motorcade stopped – the BACK end of the motorcade starting with camera car #2 and #3. Both the Couch and Darnell films taken from #3 show their vehicle had stopped at the Elm-Houston intersection. All three buses, of course, were behind the camera cars.

Willis 6 shows the first press bus right after it started up again. The front of the motorcade, with JFK and LBJ, of course, had long since departed. So Willis 6 shows exactly what Phil described.

Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

And not this Mary Woodward, surely?

“The cars behind stopped and several men – Secret Service men, I suppose – got out and started rushing forward, obstructing our view of the President’s car.”

“Witness From the News Describes Assassination,” Dallas Morning News, 23 November 1963, section 1, page 3.

Funny how you never reference this earliest print appearance of Woodward's observations. Again, can't think why!

Paul

I don't reckon' that it ever dawned on you that this woman who saw men jumping from cars following the VP SS car could be thought to also be SS agents. Even Mary wasn't sure and made that clear when she used the words 'I SUPPOSE'. Again you assume something so to fit your paranoid way of seeing things. Its that paranoia that makes you blind to the fact that Woodard knows more about what she thought and saw than you do. In that filmed interview ... Mary broke it down and elaborated. So now are you going to say that Woodard is CIA so to try keep in time with this sinister 'every thing's altered' theory you push ... I just am not buying it. I prefer to try and consider a rational explanation before jumping to conclusions.

Bill Miller

Edited June 19, 2008 by Bill Miller