Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

Chris, maybe I missed your point, sorry if this is so, I guess I gave up on showing you how the Hughes film actually disproves WC/R theory and decided to prove it in the manner posted.

Lets review what the occupants of Camera Car #3 claimed as their location upon hearing the first high powered rifle shots, I will underline credible statements that are backed by most probable location of CC#3 at Z-313.

As we made the turn here at the intersection of Elm and Houston I heard first a loud report

was approaching the corner of Houston and Elm Streets

about in the middle of the block or a little bit north of the center of the block

had not approached the corner of Houston and Elm Streets when he heard a noise

just a few feet around the corner and it seems we had slowed a great deal

I would say, uh, 15 or 20 feet from the turn—from off of Main onto Houston

the County Jail entrance when the first shot was fired

The other statements are just improbable and appear to be flippant or a later attempt to conform to WC/R fiction when they realized hearing a shot when they were near the jail house entrance was way, way too late and represented a rifle shot occurring at Z-313.

So even the occupants of CC#3 support the first rifle shot they heard could only have occurred at Z-313.

Does this answer your inquiry?

I agree the correlation of Hughes with Zapruder frames is difficult, but is really unnecessary to understand the assassination.

Are you comprehending that it would be impossible for CC#3 to be located near the jail house entrance if the first rifle shot occurred prior to say Z-255, Z-190 or Z-166? This is the point I am trying to convey.

Occupants in the Mayors vehicle, Press Car and CC#1 corroborate the fact that the first rifle shot heard is at Z-313 and not before. That is the only possible scenario which allows them to be at the locations claimed when they heard the first rifle shot.

Edited by Robert Mady
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 520
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted by Pat Speer is the following Wiegman quote:

"Press car #1

Dave Wiegman, an NBC cameraman, sat on the right side of the front seat, next to Hoefen.

(Pictures of the Pain, p.371-372, Trask interview 3-18-89) “We were in a straight away heading down to what I now know as the Book Depository, and I heard the first report and I thought like everybody else that it was a good sized fire cracker—a cherry bomb. Then when I heard the second one, the adrenaline really started pumping because there was a reaction in the motorcade. I was sitting on the edge of the (car door) frame, which I sometimes did. I keenly remember right after the incident that my feet were on the ground during one of the reports. I don’t think I was fast enough to react to the second, but I think on the third one I was running. The car had slowed down enough for me to jump out…I jumped and I remember running and I heard the third shot … I’d done this before in other motorcades because a lot of times the President will stop and do something …The motorcade has stopped, plus you heard a report. I don’t think I thought on the first or second, but when the third one went off, I really thought I felt the compression on my face.” (Interview on the Discovery Channel program Unsolved History, 2004) “I felt the third shot, actually the compression on my face, knew then it was not any cherry bomb. I decided that I’ve gotta run forward. This car’s not going fast enough, so I swung my other leg out and ran very quickly—fast—and I turned on the camera figuring that the camera could see at least what I’m seeing.”"

---

You want to know the exact location for Camera Car #1 at the time the first high powered rifle shot occurred, it is possible, also keep in mind the first shot sounded, then about 3 seconds later the second and in quick succession a third.

If you watch Wiegman film footage, you will see video proof that CC#1 was turning onto Elm when the first rifle shot occured, same as deduced from witnesses claims.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdRr4KHbhqg

Keep in mind that Wiegman jumps out of CC#1 and starts running by the third shot. This is absolute, irrefutable evidence that the first rifle shot occurred at Z-313 and two more followed in quick succession. It also proves that Wiegman as well as almost every witness in DP did not hear the first 'firecracker' like sound that resulted in the injury to KENNEDYs throat.

Everyone still with me?

Comments would be appreciated.

Do not feel confortable to comment on open Forum, private message to me.

ALSO worth noting, where would WIEGMAN be running towards...the source of the sounds of rifle fire, where else, look where he goes, he films it just for us...do you see?

Edited by Robert Mady
Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert, I think you and Chris are on the same page...and that each of you simply misunderstood the other one for a moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In a press conference in the aftermath of the assassination, Dallas Parkland Hospital’s Dr. Malcolm Perry had referred to “an entrance wound in the neck,” adding “It appeared to be coming at him.” Given that the Texas School Book Depository from which Oswald allegedly fired shots was behind Kennedy, not in front, Perry’s statement presented a dilemma.Mandel’s article offered an answer: “…the 8mm film shows the President turning his body far around to the right as he waves to someone in the crowd. His throat is exposed – toward the sniper’s nest, just before he clutches it.”

Combined with the fact that CONNALLY was not wounded until after Z-313

And the in all likely hood GALYE NEWMAN heard the 'firecracker' sound and three rifle shots, she still mistakenly attributed one of these shots to have wounded CONNALLY prior to the fatal head shot.

WILLIAM NEWMAN makes the opposite claim that the first and second shots struck JFK.

And DAN RATHER dishonorable mention.

I am not sure how near to being on the same page we are and I still believe I understood that he still misunderstood the assassination.

Edited by Robert Mady
Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris, the Zapruder film was altered both prior to Z-313 and after Z-313.

CONNALLY lays back over the top of NELLIE starting about Z-300, this action is mistaken for CONNALLY being wounded as it happens only a split second before the fatal head shot. All three high powered rifle shots are fired within 3 to 3-1/2 seconds, attempting to recall the event might be difficult for some people specially while having to dodge bullets and then recall exactly who was struck by which bullet, also remember afterwards the mind will fill in the blanks, GALYE saw CONNALLY clutching his hat, it may have become clutching his chest and of course there would have been blood.

KENNEDY was fatally wounded at frame Z-313

CONNALLY was wounded at frame Z-325

What frame was between Z-313 and Z-325 ? Z-314-Z-324 plus another 2-3 seconds.

Frames 314 and 323, 1/2 second timing, same as speed of Zapruder Film

324-323_zps2af5d390.gif

Edited by Robert Mady
Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris are you saying that you feel you comprehend the Assassination Four Shot Model and agree with it or you feel you comprehend the Assassination Four Shot Model but do not agree with it?

Can you provide me a synopsis of your theory so I may better understand where you are coming from?

I also do not understand the direction of your questions, there was a number of posts introducing links connecting truths of the assassination, If you understand those links you might also understand how strong the evidence is that the links are absolutely true. It is then realized the real timing of the assassination is at odds with all known myths. It also proves beyond a doubt that there were three rifle shots and another shot that sounded 'firecracker' like, there were four shots. The conspiracy is real and the cover-up is real and your question concerns the altering of the Zapruder film. Do you really get it Chris? They altered everything necessary to maintain the lie.

I have shown you where to peek behind the curtain.

Edited by Robert Mady
Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert,

Let me say, I've always believed there were more than 3 shots. If it is four shots, all the more power to you. Yes, I understand your four shot model.

What I have been working on for some time is the frame count formula used to (as you put it) maintain the lie. And, how they used it to tie all shots back to the TSBD.

The question about Zfilm alteration was put forth as I wasn't quite sure if you believed any had occurred before the extant 313 shot.

chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would guess you have watched Professor Fetzer's symposium concerning the altering of the Zapruder film, Dr. Costella presents a case that the image of the limo was extracted from the original Zapruder film and reframed to retime and eliminate frames.

It would not surprise me to learn there was extensive changes throughout the film or that the only changes occurred after Z-313 to remove the momentary halting or extreme slowing of the limo, as pointed out the movement of the CONNALLYs can not be accounted for unless frames were removed. Based on abundant testimony the real timing of the rifle shots is close to 3 to 3-1/2 seconds so we know KENNEDY is seen to be hit at Z-313 then CONNALLY must be struck about 3 seconds later, there is no other way to explain the CONNALLYS movement anomaly and supporting testimonies unless frames were removed.

As far as altering the film prior to Z-313, I don't believe the film was altered unless it was to remove frames to help even out the flow of the limo to better match the film after Z-313.

They obviously cut the film prior to Z-133 because Z-133 is not a start frame and ZAPRUDER himself claimed to start filming as the motorcade came in and did not stop filming until the limo disappeared.

I think expectations that the film had been altered also stems from the fact that most, if not all researchers have misunderstood the timing of the assassination and could not reconcile what they were observing in the film with preconceived notions of what should have been occurring so the obvious answer albeit incorrect was that the film had been altered.

I believe they removed frames to Z-133 for two purposes;

1) Early on 'they' thought they had to cover up the throat wound entrance that was to the front, they proposed KENNEDY had turned around to wave behind him, this action would not have been depicted in the film, easiest solution, cut the film.

2) They needed to sign the film so the start frame became 1(33) and the frame KENNEDY was killed was (3)(13) this is a stretch but this idea should not be discarded without serious consideration, power groups need to convey to others in the know what has been sanctioned, they do this through numbers and symbols, they can't publicly announce we did this, they can convey a message publicly using numbers and symbols which can be universally recognized by those who know what signs to look for.

obama_satanic_hand_sign_zps1ddd9bc3.jpgpope_ratzinger-satan_sign_zpse92e34bc.jpbushahmadinajadsameteam2_zps9aabc3a1.jpg

Edited by Robert Mady
Link to post
Share on other sites

Brad, I have gone through a long evolution of thought trying to explain the damaged windshield and the damaged chrome strip, it just did not add up to a logical and reasonable explanation. Originally I envisioned the first shot coming through the windshield, but realized that the SSA if not in on the plot would have reacted, also there is no controls as to how a missile would impact the windshield, shatter or leave a small hole and how it could be deflected, way too many variables to have to count on this shot, too risky.

Then I ran across KELLERMANS and GREERS testimony where neither one of these agents were aware of damage to the limo until it was pointed out to them the next day. This could be explained by them being seriously distracted but a hole in the windshield would have been within the vision of GREER, I now doubt that he would have missed it.

My current belief is that this damage was post added to some photographs and was added to the limo after the assassination. The conspirators merely provided more evidence for a shot coming from the rear...what happened to the bullet that passed through KENNEDYS head it shattered in two causing windshield damage and damage to the chrome...adds to the fiction.

I don't believe anything the CONNALLYS claimed.

Mr. SPECTER. Fine. What about the vehicle would you consider relevant in this regard?
Mr. KELLERMAN. The windshield itself, which I observed a day or two after the funeral here, had been hit by a piece of this missile or missiles, whatever it is, shell.
Mr. SPECTER. While you are referring to the windshield, permit me to hand you a photograph marked Commission Exhibit 349 and ask if you can tell us what that photograph depicts?
Mr. KELLERMAN. This photograph is the windshield of the Presidential special automobile that we used in Dallas on November 22. And it depicts a hit by some instrument on the metal railing that covers the windshield.
Mr. SPECTER. In what position is the hit on that metal railing?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Directly to the right of the mirror.
Mr. SPECTER. Is that on the top of the windshield?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is on the top of the windshield. I am sorry; this is not the windshield itself; this is the top of the vehicle. This is the framework.
Mr. SPECTER. Would you draw a red arrow with the pen that you have to the mark which you have just describe? (Mr. Kellerman marked the photograph.)
Mr. SPECTER. Now, when did you first observe that indention?
Mr. KELLERMAN. This was observed a day or two after the funeral, which funeral was the 25th of November; this would be upward of the 27th.
Mr. SPECTER. Where was the automobile at the time you observed that indentation?
Mr. KELLERMAN. At the White House garage, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Was the windshield in the automobile at that time?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir; it was in the automobile.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you observe or notice that indentation in the windshield when you were in Dallas after the shooting occurred?
Mr. KELLERMAN. No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you observe or notice that indentation before the shooting?
Mr. KELLERMAN. No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Are you able to state positively whether or not that indentation was present before the shooting?
Mr. KELLERMAN. No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. So that you observed it on the first occasion when you saw the car in the White House garage on or about November 27; is that correct?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is correct sir
.

Mr. SPECTER. Now calling your attention to a small arrow--
Mr. GREER. Arrow.
Mr. SPECTER. Which points up on what appears to be an indentation, I ask you if you--when was the first time, if at all, that you observed that indentation?
Mr. GREER. I didn't observe that--
Mr. SPECTER. On the car?
Mr. GREER. Until after I got back to Washington, until the car came back to Washington, I saw it at the White House garage. It was the first time I had ever noticed that.
Mr. SPECTER. On what date did you observe that indentation on the car?
Mr. GREER. That was the day after, the 23, would be it. It would be the day after the shooting. We got back from Dallas.
Mr. SPECTER. And what time of the day did you observe the car at the White House garage on that date?
Mr. GREER. It was in the afternoon, I believe. I believe it was in the afternoon, I believe.
Mr. SPECTER. Did anyone call that indentation to your attention at that time?
Mr. GREER. Yes; I was asked if I knew about it.
Mr. SPECTER. Who was it who asked you?
Mr. GREER. I can't remember now who did say that, but I was shown that indentation at the same time I was the break in the glass. I was shown both and asked if I had known but I can't remember who might have asked me.
Mr. SPECTER. Had you ever observed that indentation before the assassination occurred?
Mr. GREER. No, sir. I had never noticed it before at any time. I had never seen it before.
Mr. SPECTER. Had you ever had any occasion to examine closely that metallic area to ascertain whether or not there was such an indentation prior to the assassination?
Mr. GREER. Well, it seems to me I would have prior to that had it been there because I do take care of the car sometimes, and it had never been--I had never noticed it at any previous time.
Mr. SPECTER. I hand you Commission Exhibit 350 and ask you if you are able to state what that depicts?
Mr. GREER. That depicts a break or a shatter in the windshield of it.

Mr. SPECTER. Does that picture accurately represent the status of the windshield on the President's car at sometime?
Mr. GREER. Yes, sir; that windshield looks real familiar to me on the way it--
Mr. SPECTER. At what time, based on your observation, did the windshield of the President's car look like that picture?
Mr. GREER. I had never seen that until the following day after it came back from Dallas.
Mr. SPECTER. But on November 23, did the President's car windshield look like that?
Mr. GREER. Yes, sir; it looked like there was a break that had a diamond, in the windshield whenever I was shown that at the garage, the White House garage.
Mr. SPECTER. Was the size and scope of the crack the same as that which is shown on that exhibit?
Mr. GREER. That I wouldn't remember whether it was quite that large or not. I don't believe it was that big. It might not have been but I wouldn't say for sure.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you observe any crack on the windshield after the time of the shooting on November 22?
Mr. GREER. No, sir; I didn't see it at all. I didn't know anything about it until I came back, until the car came back and I was shown that.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you have any occasion on November 22, after the shooting, to observe closely the windshield?
Mr. GREER. No, sir. The only time I was in the car was going to the hospital and I never--I didn't see the car any more. It was just from the shooting until we got to Parkland that I was with the car. I left the car there and never did see it until it was back at the White House garage.
Mr. SPECTER. Are you able to state with certainty there was no crack in that windshield prior to the shooting on November 22?
Mr. GREER. Yes, sir; I am sure there was nothing wrong with that windshield prior to that because I would have it was almost in front of me and I examined the car, I looked it all over when I got there, I saw it was clean and everything, the windshield. I didn't see this ever at any time previous

Brad, it just makes sense to me that this damage is post assassination and nothing more than an attempt to create evidence to support shots coming from the TSBD.

What would have stopped them from doing this? We know KENNEDYS body was desecrated to conform to their evil doings why would they not alter the limo?

They added the 'pristine' bullet into evidence, at first it appears it was initially a Mauser missile later exchanged for a Carcano missile, Mauser rifle exchanged for Carcano, point is we have evidence of manipulation in many areas, let us also at least consider that damage to the limo had been created also.

TAGUE was injured by mistake, they needed three shots to have been fired from a rifle, the third shot was aimed to be errant and to disappear from evidence, they never considered a ricochet. This was a serious opps because it called into question only three shots having been fired, reasonable thinking people should have said this is enough insanity one bullet could not accomplish the damage attributed to it and remain 'pristine', we crossed over into the twilight zone and many went along with the fiction, sad isn't it?

Edited by Robert Mady
Link to post
Share on other sites

Brad, CONNALLY is wounded at Z-325, shown in this gif, he is crouched down facing forward, CONNALLYS cufflink if effected by the shot is on the floor where he falls.

JCmovement_zpsa59c7764.gif

NELLIE instead of talking about the cufflink should have been asked to explain why JOHN and herself can be seen in this position at Z-325!

Here is a explanation as to when GREERS wild driving toppled them to the floor

WC Testimony from NELLIE CONNALLY

Mrs. CONNALLY. No, he turned away from me. I was pretending that I was him. I never again looked in the back seat of the car after my husband was shot. My concern was for him, and I remember that he turned to the right and then just slumped down into the seat, so that I reached over to pull him toward me. X was trying to get him down and me down. The jump seats were not very roomy, so that there were reports that he slid into the seat of the car, which he did not; that he fell over into my lap, which he did not.
I just pulled him over into my arms because it would have been impossible to get us really both down with me sitting and me holding him. So that I looked out, I mean as he was in my arms, I put my head down over his head so that his head and my head were right together, and all I could see, too, were the people flashing by. I didn't look back any more. The third shot that I heard I felt, it felt like spent buckshot falling all over us, and then, of course, I too could see that it was the matter, brain tissue, or whatever, just human matter, all over the car and both of us.

I thought John had been killed, and then there was some imperceptible movement, just some little something that let me know that there was still some life, and that is when I started saying to him, "It's all right. Be still."

Now, I did hear the Secret Service man say, "Pull out of the motorcade. Take us to the nearest hospital," and then we took out very rapidly to the hospital.
Just before we got to Parkland, we made a right-hand turn, he must have been going very fast, because as he turned the weight of my husband's body almost toppled us both.

Toppling as a result of a Right Hand Turn, really? Where are the published researchers questioning this non-sense and pointing out the gross inconsistencies of the CONNALLYS testimony?

Edited by Robert Mady
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...