Focus your research on Zapruder, he is the key

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

40 minutes ago, Trygve V. Jensen said:

Hi again, pretty busy atm. Just one remark;

I just reacted on you linking to that video , saying it would make sense of what you're saying. To me it damaged the credibility of what you are saying (not that I have had too much time to read up on it).

I don't see the connection with what you are saying, - and said video. Quite the direct opposite.

According to the guy in the video, the sniper is still aiming, caught in this "quick-split-moment" after the shots (Darnell). While you yourself say it is 30 seconds later.

Two very different things . So you disagree completely with that guy on that. Unless he stood transfixed in this quick-split-moment, - aiming (for 30 seconds) after done shooting.

I disagree that the sniper is still aiming 30-seconds after the assassination.  The person that made the video contends that clip was mere seconds after the assassination.  If Mr. Darnell filmed it, it is impossible as he got off the vehicle that he was in mere seconds after the final shot as he was in the tenth car on the motorcade.  Also, the car seen passing on the Darnell clip is in position 14, a Ford Mercury Station Wagon, that was behind the car that Darnell was in. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/animation.htm

I believe that someone was there.  People there seem to be kneeling down doing something.  Don't know what.

The Darnell clip, however, does not discredit the fact that there is other photographic and film evidence that show assassins in the pergola.  You can see it in the Mary Moorman photograph and in the Nix film.

Edited April 4, 2018 by Keyvan Shahrdar

[Trygve V. Jensen]

Thanks for clearing that up .

2 minutes ago, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

I disagree that the sniper is still aiming 30-seconds after the assassination.  The person that made the video contends that clip was mere seconds after the assassination.  If Mr. Darnell filmed it, it is impossible as he got off the vehicle that he was in mere seconds after the final shot as he was in the tenth car on the motorcade. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/animation.htm

I believe that someone was there.  People there seem to be kneeling down doing something.  Don't know what.

The Darnell clip, however, does not discredit the fact that there is other photographic and film evidence that show assassins in the pergola.  You can see it in the Mary Moorman photograph and in the Nix film.

Whether there were assassins in the shelter or not, - I with my eyes, can not see them in neither the Moorman - photo, nor the Nix - film.  But that's just my perception.

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

2 minutes ago, Trygve V. Jensen said:

Thanks for clearing that up .

Whether there were assassins in the shelter or not, - I with my eyes, can not see them in neither the Moorman - photo, nor the Nix - film.  But that's just my perception.

Trygve,

Let me ask you, where do you think the head shot that blew JFK's head came from?

[Trygve V. Jensen]

I am a nitpicker, - and have trouble allowing myself to make assertions, - without being 100 % certain of something. As impossible/contradictory that in itself is/may sound.

One of many negative characteristics I have, - I guess. 

So I simply don't feel I have enough to go on. The answer is; I do not know. (I had opinion(s) in the past, - but I'd like to keep those to myself)

Edited April 4, 2018 by Trygve V. Jensen

[Mark Wilson]

On 3/22/2018 at 4:56 PM, David Von Pein said:

 

The film that David Josephs spoke of (if it exists at all) is undoubtedly a re-creation that was filmed in Dealey Plaza for a movie. There have been several of these type of re-creations done for films and mini-series, such as the scene below (which was filmed for the 3-hour TV movie "The Trial Of Lee Harvey Oswald" in 1977). But to think that a REAL (11/22/63) film exists that shows the things David Josephs mentioned is laughable. No "real" film of that nature exists. And it's humorous to think that anyone could possibly think it does.

 

Mr. Von Pein....You're my favorite lone nutterist and I sincerely appreciate all of your videos,ect...now, generally,you don't contradict your position with any videos you put out there.In the JFK research community.The term "other film" does not apply to the recreation video you posted.I am saddened that this thread has went 5 more pages from your initial postage and no one else has adressed this error on your part...For clarification....the "other film" describes a movie shot from a similar location as Zapruder but tells a different story than the Zapruder Film of the murder of JFK...I  know of 2 researchers on the record that have seen the "other film".The late Rich Dellarosa and Greg Burnham,both have Youtube videos out there describing what they observered on the "other film".Both of their descriptions were consistent with one another.While Greg is evasive about the circumstance which he viewed the film,Rich,who i believe,viewed it on multiple times years apart,initially saw this movie at the University of Maryland.Mr. Dellarosa also wrote an appendix in one of Dr. Fetzer's books that was identical to his Youtube testimony of the "other film".Rich Dellarosa and Greg Burnham,imo, both have unimpeccable character/ honesty and are my heroes and legends in the JFK community.

[Ron Ecker]

25 minutes ago, Mark Wilson said:

Mr. Von Pein....You're my favorite lone nutterist and I sincerely appreciate all of your videos,ect...now, generally,you don't contradict your position with any videos you put out there.In the JFK research community.The term "other film" does not apply to the recreation video you posted.I am saddened that this thread has went 5 more pages from your initial postage and no one else has adressed this error on your part.

I'll address it. DVP did not claim the video he posted was the "the other film." He posted the video as an example of recreations that have been filmed which someone might mistake for the real thing.

While Greg is evasive about the circumstance which he viewed the film,Rich,who i believe,viewed it on multiple times years apart,initially saw this movie at the University of Maryland.

It's maddening that Rich could see "the other film" multiple times over the years, including at an American university, while the rest of us (besides Greg and whoever else say they have already seen it), have no idea where to look for it or whom to ask to for a peek. The other film is akin to Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster. Some folks have seen it, but I'll believe it when I see it too. Which at this late date I doubt is going to happen.

 

 

 

Edited April 4, 2018 by Ron Ecker

[Trygve V. Jensen]

3 hours ago, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

Trygve,

There is no good explanation why people did not see those people in the shelter as assassins.  People must have been confused and did not know how to make sense of what they saw.

Did any of the countless witnesses , state they saw two men together , - with rifles in their hands --- inside the shelter / Pergola , or anywhere closeby,  - in the immediate aftermath of the shots ? Wouldn't someone had done so ?

It is undeniable that there where two shots from the shelter.  The Mary Moreman photograph shows a figure there even if you do not colorize it.  All versions of the Nix film shows that there was a shot from the third window from the bottom of the shelter and a shot from the pathway.

The pathway; behind the pergola where the anomaly in the Nix - film was , discovered in 2006 ?

You should read the WC testimony of Ms. Sitzman. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/sitzman.htm

Then watch the Mark Bell film.  Something does not add up. - Look at her actions.  - She does state that she met an FBI man in the pergola! 

So many things do not add up, when considering witness - testimonies, --- compared to what is shown in films/recorded/concluded, etc.  Recollections that change over time as well. Some people stated they heard shots 1 - 5 minutes (!) after the first shot for instance. "JFK's ear was shot off" , etc. etc. Sitzman said she ran down the hill, met some men that she thought were CIA/Secret Service, - before going back up the hill, encountering the FBI - man.

Lee Bowers was not allowed to say on the record that he saw three men running from the triple underpass to a boxcar.  Neither was he allowed to be told that he saw flashes of lights from the area around the pergola.

There is dispute about the whole Lee Bowers - issue. Mark Lane interviewed him, - and marked an X (at the corner of the fence (north side - parking lot) - where he supposedly placed the "unusual commotion" he saw, - but the transcript of the Lane - interview, could be interpreted differently. Just from memory, - - - it could also elsewhere, --- be interpreted that this commotion (flash of light, - smoke etc.) - he witnessed, --- was in (from his view) direct line towards the overpass. In the parking lot. I have not seen/heard a version, that he witnessed this, in the location of around the Pergola.

Even his death is regarded as suspicious by some, - but regardless; if there was an assassin, or several - in any of those areas, -- he would be the one to see him/she/them. He or perhaps Edna Case which I think someone mentioned, - who was looking out of the window from the Depository (westwards) -- but for some reason did not hear any shots. (!)

From Robin Unger's excellent collection:

https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/displayimage.php?pid=147&fullsize=1

https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/displayimage.php?pid=12520&fullsize=1

If an assassin was shooting from where you say, - this shooter must have been seriously tall, (unless there is an actual elevated platform or similar inside the shelter I do not know about) - even if standing on a "human-table" - which is described in the video you linked.

Even taller than the man described by Philip Ben Hathaway perhaps:

Edited April 4, 2018 by Trygve V. Jensen

[Mark Wilson]

23 minutes ago, Ron Ecker said:

 

The film that David Josephs spoke of (if it exists at all) is undoubtedly a re-creation that was filmed in Dealey Plaza for a movie.......DVP

 

Hey Ron....When i posted this response,i thought of you.You've been here longer than me and certainly can remember the good ol' days when the content of threads had substance.Are calling out Rich and Greg's testimony's as viewing a re-creation? Rich and Greg have and had forgotten more about the JFK assassination than I'll ever know.Not looking to get into a pissing match but to your credit,i have to think you've been aware the "other film" you call bigfoot for quite a few years....?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ron Ecker]

29 minutes ago, Mark Wilson said:

Hey Ron....When i posted this response,i thought of you.You've been here longer than me and certainly can remember the good ol' days when the content of threads had substance.Are calling out Rich and Greg's testimony's as viewing a re-creation? Rich and Greg have and had forgotten more about the JFK assassination than I'll ever know.Not looking to get into a pissing match but to your credit,i have to think you've been aware the "other film" you call bigfoot for quite a few years....?

 

I'm not "calling out" Rich and Greg about anything. I don't know what they saw. But compare "the other film" to a scientific theory. A theory to be valid is supposed to be testable. It has to be subject to verification. Well, a film that is claimed to show certain things has to be viewable. It matters little if some people viewed it at some time in the past. What if they're mistaken about what they saw? If no one can view the film in question to verify what it shows, the notion of what it shows can't be tested. The existence of the film itself can't be tested if no one even knows where it is. It seems to have just gone poof.

 

 

 

[Michael Clark]

Rodney's link is broken.

This one works. It's a Twilight Zone episode with good re-enactment scene.

 

[Mark Wilson]

13 hours ago, Ron Ecker said:

I'm not "calling out" Rich and Greg about anything. I don't know what they saw. But compare "the other film" to a scientific theory. A theory to be valid is supposed to be testable. It has to be subject to verification. Well, a film that is claimed to show certain things has to be viewable. It matters little if some people viewed it at some time in the past. What if they're mistaken about what they saw? If no one can view the film in question to verify what it shows, the notion of what it shows can't be tested. The existence of the film itself can't be tested if no one even knows where it is. It seems to have just gone poof.

 

 

 

I'd love to view the "other film".I read that as many as 7 researchers have observed the film we"re discussing.Let's be honest,the Zapruder film fits with the official government explanation with the exception of "back and to the left",imo.There are dozens of witnesses that claimed the limo stopped,not seen in Zapruder.The descriptions of the "other film" both estimate a 2-4 second stop or extreme slowing,before the fatal headshot, which fits more with the witnesses' comments that were there.

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

16 hours ago, Trygve V. Jensen said:

From Robin Unger's excellent collection:

https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/displayimage.php?pid=147&fullsize=1

https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/displayimage.php?pid=12520&fullsize=1

If an assassin was shooting from where you say, - this shooter must have been seriously tall, (unless there is an actual elevated platform or similar inside the shelter I do not know about) - even if standing on a "human-table" - which is described in the video you linked.

Even taller than the man described by Philip Ben Hathaway perhaps:

 

 

All I can tell you is follow the photographic and film evidence, everything else is a false narrative.

[Ty Carpenter]

4 minutes ago, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

All I can tell you is follow the photographic and film evidence, everything else is a false narrative.

If people would watch the video and explore the guys Youtube a bit, it would at least give them something to really think about. One issue I am having trouble with is what does he believe the motive to be for shooting Connally separately or specifically targeting him?

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

1 minute ago, Ty Carpenter said:

If people would watch the video and explore the guys Youtube a bit, it would at least give them something to really think about. One issue I am having trouble with is what does he believe the motive to be for shooting Connally separately or specifically targeting him?

Hi Ty,

What does that matter if a shooter shot at Connally?  You should question if JFK was assassinated because of a lone nut or because of a conspiracy.  Film and photographic evidence show that there where assassins in the pergola, thus there is a conspiracy to assassinate JFK.

Opinion, take this with a grain of salt - Assassin where placed there to kill.  Their job was to kill JFK, I doubt that there was an order to be careful and not shoot the governor or Mrs. Kennedy.  Mrs. Kennedy was lucky to survive that assassination so was the Governor.

[Ron Ecker]

15 minutes ago, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

Film and photographic evidence show that there where assassins in the pergola, thus there is a conspiracy to assassinate JFK.

 

Why would assassins shoot from in the pergola? Wouldn't that be one of the worst positions they could choose? They would be shooting from the side at a moving target, instead of at a target at least moving toward them (as in a position behind the fence, in the storm drain at the end, or in the south knoll area). And in fact any assassins who shot from in the pergola missed the target, didn't they?

 

 

 

Edited April 5, 2018 by Ron Ecker