Altgens 6, a different view

[Bill Miller]

I think I only spoke to his saying that he saw the limo turn onto Elm Street. Rather may have seen the President's car had turned onto Elm Street from viewing the film, but he didn't see the limo actually make the turn onto Elm Street. Rather addressed his error in 1977.

The President was not driven forward with the head shot and Connally didn't fall backwards - Nellie reached out and pulled him back towards her. Those things are mis-interpretations that Rather made.

[Ray Mitcham]

1 hour ago, Bill Miller said:

I think I only spoke to his saying that he saw the limo turn onto Elm Street. Rather may have seen the President's car had turned onto Elm Street from viewing the film, but he didn't see the limo actually make the turn onto Elm Street. Rather addressed his error in 1977.

The President was not driven forward with the head shot and Connally didn't fall backwards - Nellie reached out and pulled him back towards her. Those things are mis-interpretations that Rather made.

"May have seen"

"These things are misinterpretations"

 

Sure Bill.

 

 

 

[Brad Milch]

Bill's on a roll, Ray. Let's recap some of what Bill has told us so far:

1. Dan Rather, upon viewing the Z-film in Zapruder's office, could not tell the difference between some DPD motorcyclists rounding the intersection of Houston & Elm Streets & the presidential touring car & entourage contained inside it. Thus, Rather's description of JFK's 'black limo' rounding the corner of Houston & Elm Streets that he told CBS TV viewers he had seen in the z-film was really a description of some motorcycles. WTF?

2.After  Zapruder went to the trouble to return to his home & fetch his camera for the specific purpose of filming the JFK motorcade in Dealey Plaza, Zapruder got caught up in the excitement & only  'tracked' the JFK limo on Houston Street & turning onto Elm Street instead of holding down the 'record' button on his camera. Zapruder wasn't aware of his mistake as he spoke about what he filmed on WFAA-TV with Jay Watson shortly after the ambush. Poor man got caught up in the excitement. WTF?

3. Zapruder's receptionist (Marilyn Sitzman) was not aware her boss's camera wasn't filming as she clung onto Zapruder in an effort to keep the man from falling off the ornamental pergola block he & Sitzman were both standing on top of (Zapruder suffered from vertigo & having an attractive woman clinging closely onto him probably did not help matters all that much for him [obvious distraction & other obvious dangers when men sometimes get too close to women]. Numerous photos & a couple of amateur films demonstrate how close to each other's heads Zapruder & Sitzman were, yet neither was aware the camera wasn't running during the JFK intersection turn. WTF?

4. (my favorite thus far): It doesn't matter that the Elm Street turn is not in the Z-film because Tina Towner & Robert Hughes both filmed a portion of it. The fact that neither had similar line of sights & caught only portions of the Elm Street turn from different angles is not important; the fact that the intersection was filmed by Towner & Hughes outweighs the absence of the missing Zapruder limo turn that Dan Rather told a global TV audience he viewed in the Z-film.

Holy #@!, Batman! Can you believe all that, Batman?

This can only get better, IMHO, Ray.

Next, Bill might tell us what brand & flavor chewing gum Zapruder chomped on during his filming sequence & whether Abe wore stripes or small red fire trucks on his shorts that morning.

(LOL)

Brad Milch

Edited January 27, 2017 by Brad Milch

[Sandy Larsen]

Where is Zapruder's original? (Well, a copy of it... but his original that stayed in his possession.) I'd like to see it.

 

[Chris Davidson]

5 hours ago, Bill Miller said:

The President was not driven forward with the head shot and Connally didn't fall backwards - Nellie reached out and pulled him back towards her. Those things are mis-interpretations that Rather made.

Bill,

The extant film does show JFK driven forward. 

Head and shoulders.

 

[Michael Walton]

Yes, Chris, but then he's thrown violently backward too.  And please don't say it's the jet effect because I already debunked it in another video elsewhere here. A reporter's job is to report - fully - what they see.  Rather did not.  Bill posted a quote that Rather made years later saying why he did not.  I can't remember word for word but it was pretty lame as to why he didn't mention the backward and to the left.

I've always chalked it up to this is the beginning of the government's disinformation campaign.  You've posted over 2,000 posts on this forum so you have to know on here the many posts and articles that have been made here about how the government was in cahoots with the MSM from day one until now how they want the official story of the WR to be the *only* way it happened, no questions, no rebuttals.

So to use your analogy, it's kind of like you're saying someone like Cyril Wecht would appear on TV and describe what *he* saw and totally eliminate the backward and to the left of JFK after the head shot.  We all know he wouldn't do that because he's describing what he *fully* is seeing, bot subterfuge like Rather did and then make up an excuse for it 35 years later.

And if you don't believe this, all you have to do is look at how LIFE magazine handled *their* coverage of the murder. They at one point were even going to run as part of their coverage that Kennedy and Jackie both turned almost completely around to face the building when the throat shot occurred.  It was another desperate attempt to cover up what really happened.

Edited January 27, 2017 by Michael Walton

[Bill Miller]

5 hours ago, Ray Mitcham said:

"May have seen"

Let us not present what I said out of context ... here is what I said, " Rather may have seen the President's car had turned onto Elm Street from viewing the film ".  Seems obvious to me that Rather knew the limo came down Houston Street and Zapruder's film picks it up just after Tina Towner filmed the non-eventful turn from Houston onto Elm, so that would show the President's car had turned onto Elm Street.

"These things are misinterpretations"

They obviously are unless on misinterpretations on Rather's part unless you want to be one of those people that think all the assassination films were altered so to hide the President moving violently forward upon being hit in the head - - - - - which by the way would support a shot from behind.

Sure Bill

So which is it, Ray - Rather was wrong about the President going violently forward or were all the assassination films altered? 

 

Edited January 27, 2017 by Bill Miller

[Michael Walton]

What I'm really confused about is why in the world are people here like Brad and Ray and others arguing about what Dan Rather saw and then somehow trying to convince themselves that *this* is the reason why the movie was faked?  It's so crazy because the film - without a single amount of alteration - *shows* conspiracy. And there have numerous outstanding articles here that show that the media and the government was doing everything they can to make their "theories" like the SBT be the only it happened.

It's much much easier to control the message and create subterfuge about a house of cards conclusion than it is to fake an 8mm film from 1963.  But instead many members just have to think that *everything* was faked, causing confusion and, yes, truly crazy and outrageous theories like frames being painted in and Zapruder's original film being filmed at 48 FPS and then 67% of the frames being removed...all for...why?

And they still do not tell us - to this very day - WHY these things were done because the Z film we can see now still shows conspiracy!  These geniuses and masterminds that faked the film had to have been the dumbest Bad Guys in world history.

[John Butler]

4. (my favorite thus far): It doesn't matter that the Elm Street turn is not in the Z-film because Tina Towner & Robert Hughes both filmed a portion of it. The fact that neither had similar line of sights & caught only portions of the Elm Street turn from different angles is not important; the fact that the intersection was filmed by Towner & Hughes outweighs the absence of the missing Zapruder limo turn that Dan Rather told a global TV audience he viewed in the Z-film.

Robert Hughes film shows nothing of importance in the intersection due to the crowd blocking the view.  When the president's vehicle is on Houston St. the vehicle is to distant and blurred to make anything out.  Tina Turner is a film that is so bad you might term it an animation.  This is what you don't see when you watch the turner film.  I call it the "hit X" frame.

 

 

[Bill Miller]

2 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Bill,

The extant film does show JFK driven forward. 

Head and shoulders.

 

 

Oh wonderful, Chris!  The head shot occurred in less than 1/18th of a second. It takes stabilized views like these to break down any subsequent moment ....

 

In this slowed down version ... how much of the distance between JFK's back and the seat do you  attribute to the rotation of the limo as it moves across Zapruder's field of view?  Would you give it about as much as Connally's tie and face against Nellie's head in the background? Not much difference that I can tell, so did Connally's tie move violently forward as well .... I mean really? 

Now that we have seen the super slow stabilized version ... Didn't rather watch the film at normal speed. Do you think for one millisecond that Dan Rather could have seen that kind of detail in 1/18th of a second with the film being played in real time and without the use of stabilized magnified frames to scrutinize. If so, then I expect old Dan could count how many times a hummingbird flaps its wings a second. Utter nonsense in my view.

[Bill Miller]

3 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

What I'm really confused about is why in the world are people here like Brad and Ray and others arguing about what Dan Rather saw and then somehow trying to convince themselves that *this* is the reason why the movie was faked?  It's so crazy because the film - without a single amount of alteration - *shows* conspiracy. And there have numerous outstanding articles here that show that the media and the government was doing everything they can to make their "theories" like the SBT be the only it happened.

It's much much easier to control the message and create subterfuge about a house of cards conclusion than it is to fake an 8mm film from 1963.  But instead many members just have to think that *everything* was faked, causing confusion and, yes, truly crazy and outrageous theories like frames being painted in and Zapruder's original film being filmed at 48 FPS and then 67% of the frames being removed...all for...why?

And they still do not tell us - to this very day - WHY these things were done because the Z film we can see now still shows conspiracy!  These geniuses and masterminds that faked the film had to have been the dumbest Bad Guys in world history.

You got that right!

The Zapruder film picks up the limo before the first shot was ever fired. And could you imagine that had Abe's film stopped because the time on the winding he gave it had quit because he used it up filming Elm Street before JFK was on it .... the accusations against Zapruder would be flying like dung through a scatter gun!

Edited January 28, 2017 by Bill Miller

[Chris Davidson]

On 1/22/2017 at 10:14 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Really, would you care to elaborate on this?

 

On 1/22/2017 at 4:57 PM, Michael Walton said:

Further, Z had his lens, which I'm sure was good for the time but not great, set at the widest angle so when we "zoom in" on the Z film you're going to see a closer close up of the footage but you're also going to see dark and light "blobs" and the graininess more.

I

As asked previously,

Michael,

Could you elaborate on how you came to the conclusion that the extant film was shot on the wide-angle setting?

[Michael Walton]

That looks like a well-designed instruction paper that came with a circa-1963 8mm film camera explaining how to set your lens for wide, medium, or zoom.

[Chris Davidson]

Once again,

Here's an easier choice for you.

All shot from a B/H 414

 

[Michael Walton]

Chris, thanks for the correction.  Yes, it looks like Zapruder had the lens setting on zoom that day and not wide angle. I changed the original post.