Zapruder, Four questions..

[Guest Stephen Turner]

One other thought comes to mind, How do you control all the other Film/photographs taken in D/P that day. It would be physically impossible to confiscate all of them, so how could you possibly know that a day, week, month or year one, or more of them is not going to surface, and blow the faked Z Film out of the water. If you cant exercise total control of the wider environment, you cant be sure of the outcome.

[Len Colby]

The Nix film has been altered.

Jack, You got any evidence to back this assertion?

What about the Muchmore film was that altered too?

[Jack White]

One other thought comes to mind, How do you control all the other Film/photographs taken in D/P that day. It would be physically impossible to confiscate all of them, so how could you possibly know that a day, week, month or year one, or more of them is not going to surface, and blow the faked Z Film out of the water. If you cant exercise total control of the wider environment, you cant be sure of the outcome.

Steve...COMPLETE CONTROL WAS EXERCISED by the govt. All KNOWN films

and photos WERE in their hands for extended periods. They had plenty

of time to attempt making all of them show what was wanted. If you know

of ANY evidence film not in the govt's hands, please let us know.

But there were a few WILD CARDS. Beverly Oliver's film was confiscated

and never resurfaced. Gordon Arnold took a film that was confiscated.

Despite claims of the ignorant, the FBI DID CONDUCT A DRAGNET to

obtain films from individuals as well as ALL processing facilities. I myself

received several of these (see below) but unfortunately did not save them.

Other photographers are seen to be present whose photos never surfaced.

Nix claimed his film was NOT THE SAME when returned to him.

Zapruder's testimony indicates he was not sure that frames shown to him

were from his film. He insisted he filmed the limo turning the corner.

Dan Rather describes having seen a different film than the extant Zfilm.

Altgens indicated that at least two photos attributed to him were not his.

And on and on.

Jack

[Guest Stephen Turner]

One other thought comes to mind, How do you control all the other Film/photographs taken in D/P that day. It would be physically impossible to confiscate all of them, so how could you possibly know that a day, week, month or year one, or more of them is not going to surface, and blow the faked Z Film out of the water. If you cant exercise total control of the wider environment, you cant be sure of the outcome.

Steve...COMPLETE CONTROL WAS EXERCISED by the govt. All KNOWN films

and photos WERE in their hands for extended periods. They had plenty

of time to attempt making all of them show what was wanted. If you know

of ANY evidence film not in the govt's hands, please let us know.

Jack

Jack, my point exactly, all KNOWN films and photo's, but how could the authorities be absolutely certain, as they had to be, that ALL Film/ photos were in their hands to ensure that they agreed with the faked Z film, the short answer? they couldn't, not without a veritable army of men to confiscate ALL camera's, if just one slips through, and shows scenes different to zapruder then the games up. At the very least they are taking a huge risk. Jack I know of no evidence of film not seen by the Gov, but that does not invalidate my point. BTW, what part do you believe Zapruder played in this if he didn't take the film, EG willing accomplice.

[Pat Speer]

Dan Rather describes having seen a different film than the extant Zfilm.

Altgens indicated that at least two photos attributed to him were not his.

And on and on.

Jack

I'm not sure about the Altgens reference but Rather has admitted many times that he simply made a mistake when he described Kennedy's reaction to the shots. He saw Kennedy get hit in the head, fall back onto the seat and fall over on the seat. Rather says he simply forgot about the back-and-to-the-left motion as he ran back to the station. He has never suggested that the film he saw that day was any different than the film as shown today. People make mistakes reporting things. It doesn't mean they are part of any conspiracy.

Since by the time Rather saw the film he wasaware of the gun in the TSBD, and since, unlike Hoover, he had an understanding of the layout of Dealey Plaza, it's possible he'd expected to see evidence for a shot from behind and that this poisoned his ability as an impartial witness.

[Jack White]

Rather said he saw the LIMO TURN the corner. He saw the film several

times. Was he mistaken?

There are at least two images attributed to Altgens which he disavowed.

Most notably the one showing Zapruder and Sitzman leaving the pedestal

(see attached).

Jack

[David G. Healy]

One other thought comes to mind, How do you control all the other Film/photographs taken in D/P that day. It would be physically impossible to confiscate all of them, so how could you possibly know that a day, week, month or year one, or more of them is not going to surface, and blow the faked Z Film out of the water. If you cant exercise total control of the wider environment, you cant be sure of the outcome.

Point well taken, and understood, Stephen. However, prior the Geraldo show screening -- who cared about the contents of the Z-film? Nobody but the Warren Commssion saw the extant camera original Zapruder film run after Feb '64, if that late and IF what THEY saw was the alledged camera original in the first place!

Prints of prints of prints, ad nauseum are what researchers viewed/saw projected when they went to the archives for a "preview" of the film -- No side by side comparisons of ANYTHING (relating to OTHER DP films - not even in question at the time)

All the pissing and moaning by "preservers of Dealey Plaza Photographic history", he-he, if they wanted to deliver a "knock out" punch to the pro-alteration camp, they know whats required... they won't, because they can't. Any, ANY attempt on their part to clean up alledged Z-film/eye witness testimony - discrepancy would create a torrent of questions, most notably bringing the SBT theory (which ALSO drags in the Moorman5 photo and early SS/FBI re-enactments) into question and THAT will NEVER happen -- best they can do is stay below the radar screen (which means have others do your posting for you) and send in pissants, in a attempt to discredit those that question the *DP photographic record 'status quo' along with 6th floor museum endorsements...*

DH

Edited December 26, 2005 by David G. Healy

[David G. Healy]

Pat wrote:

I'm not sure about the Altgens reference but Rather has admitted many times that he simply made a mistake when he described Kennedy's reaction to the shots. He saw Kennedy get hit in the head, fall back onto the seat and fall over on the seat. Rather says he simply forgot about the back-and-to-the-left motion as he ran back to the station. He has never suggested that the film he saw that day was any different than the film as shown today. People make mistakes reporting things. It doesn't mean they are part of any conspiracy.

dgh01: What reason Pat do you suppose he had/has in NOT correcting his error, EARLER. He forgot about viewing the film of the century

Since by the time Rather saw the film he wasaware of the gun in the TSBD, and since, unlike Hoover, he had an understanding of the layout of Dealey Plaza, it's possible he'd expected to see evidence for a shot from behind and that this poisoned his ability as an impartial witness.

dgh01:I proffer; he, Rather knew he blew it; had no intention of standing in front of a national tv/radio audience and admit he made a mistake

Edited December 26, 2005 by David G. Healy

[Len Colby]

Steve...COMPLETE CONTROL WAS EXERCISED by the govt. All KNOWN films

and photos WERE in their hands for extended periods. They had plenty

of time to attempt making all of them show what was wanted. If you know

of ANY evidence film not in the govt's hands, please let us know.

Wasn't the Muchmore film shown on TV before the gov't got its hands on it? It makes sense that the gov't would want to get a hold of all evidence from DP no matter what your think happened that day.

But there were a few WILD CARDS. Beverly Oliver's film was confiscated

and never resurfaced. Gordon Arnold took a film that was confiscated.

I've heard this before what evidence is there that it's so?

Despite claims of the ignorant, the FBI DID CONDUCT A DRAGNET to

obtain films from individuals as well as ALL processing facilities. I myself

received several of these (see below) but unfortunately did not save them.

I'm still waiting for evidence a dragnet. I already mentioned those notices in a previous post. They hardly constitute a dragnet, they in no way compelled people to turn over there photos and films. Just one photo or film could have blown the whole ruse. And what about people from out of town, they wouldn't have gotten these notices. Are you sure they went to every developing joint in and near Dallas?

Other photographers are seen to be present whose photos never surfaced.

But no one said anything? Please show us images of these photographers. Isn't it just possible that their photos showed nothing of interest. Even if it's true how does this back your theory that the Zapruder and Nix films were altered?

Nix claimed his film was NOT THE SAME when returned to him.

Can you back this claim? What did believe had been done to his film?

Zapruder's testimony indicates he was not sure that frames shown to him

were from his film. He insisted he filmed the limo turning the corner.

Jack according to your theory Zapruder was part of the conspiracy. Why would he say this if he was? Please provide a citation. I though he testified at the Shaw trial that the film was the one he shot.

Dan Rather describes having seen a different film than the extant Zfilm.

As Pat explained he could have made a mistake, if Zapruder were part of the plot why would have allowed Rather and other journalists to see 'his' film? It would have made more sense for him to simply turn it over to the FBI or Secret Service. Instead he did the opposite he sought out the media.

Rather said he saw the LIMO TURN the corner. He saw the film several

times. Was he mistaken?

Rather could simply have been mistaken. Witnesses having false memories is well documented. Again why would Zapruder have let rather see the film if he was part of the conspiracy? It doesn't make any sense - show a movie to a journalist before altering it. Why would they have cut the limo turn if the film had already been seen by so many people?

There are at least two images attributed to Altgens which he disavowed.

Most notably the one showing Zapruder and Sitzman leaving the pedestal

I'd like to see a citation for this claim. Even if true it was probably a case of mistaken atribution. If the conspirators wanted to fake a photo why atribute it to a known photographer who wasn't in on the plot. There was another photo of 'Mr. Z' and Stizman near the pedestal. Any evidence that eithe rof those were faked?

[Bernice Moore]

Pat wrote:

I'm not sure about the Altgens reference but Rather has admitted many times that he simply made a mistake when he described Kennedy's reaction to the shots. He saw Kennedy get hit in the head, fall back onto the seat and fall over on the seat. Rather says he simply forgot about the back-and-to-the-left motion as he ran back to the station. He has never suggested that the film he saw that day was any different than the film as shown today. People make mistakes reporting things. It doesn't mean they are part of any conspiracy.

dgh01: What reason Pat do you suppose he had/has in NOT correcting his error, EARLER. He forgot about viewing the film of the century

Since by the time Rather saw the film he wasaware of the gun in the TSBD, and since, unlike Hoover, he had an understanding of the layout of Dealey Plaza, it's possible he'd expected to see evidence for a shot from behind and that this poisoned his ability as an impartial witness.

dgh01:I proffer; he, Rather knew he blew it; had no intention of standing in front of a national tv/radio audience and admit he made a mistake

******************************

Further Information on Dan Rather and exactly what he

stated and didn't.....and Nix's information about his film..

From: "Forward with Considerable Violence"..by John Kelin............Link below..

As Rather tells the story, he viewed the film in the office of Abraham Zapruder's lawyer, then dashed several blocks (the exact number is in dispute) to a broadcast facility.

Hughes Rudd: Dick, ah, Dan Rather just came into the studio, ah and we've just been discussing this statement just made by Texas Attorney General Wagoner Carr about a full and complete investigation that is going to be carried out and so on ... what do you have that's new, anything?

Dan Rather: Well I'm not sure that this is the proper context in which to put it ... but as you may know Hughes I, I ... have just returned from seeing a ... a movie ... which clearly shows in some great detail the exact moments preceding, the exact moments of, the President's assassination which clears up some of the points that had been rather vague up until this time. Now may not be the time or the place to discuss that, perhaps Dick uh ...

Richard Hotelett: No I think it is ... uh, Dan ... I think it fits right into the context of what we've been saying.

Dan Rather: Well let me tell you then, give you a word picture of the motion picture that we have just seen. The President's automobile which was proceeded by only one other car containing Secret Service Agents ... the President's open black Lincoln automobile ... made a turn, a left turn off of Houston Street in Dallas onto Elm Street, this was right on the fringe area of the downtown area. This left turn was made right below the window from which the shot was fired ... as the car made the turn completed the turn went below the window from which this shot was fired ... went on past the building keep in mind the window was on the sixth floor ... it got about 35 yards from the base of the building that is if you had dropped a plumb line from the window to the sidewalk to the President's car was around 35 yards from that spot ... President Kennedy had just put his right hand up to the side of his right eye, it appeared that he was perhaps brushing back his hair or rubbing his eyebrow. Mrs. Kennedy was not looking in his direction. In front of them in the jump seat of the Lincoln ... were Governor and Mrs. Connally. The Governor as was the President was on the side of the car of the building in which the assassin was located. Mrs. Kennedy and Mrs. Connally were on the opposite side, two Secret Service men on the front seat. At almost the instant the President put his hand up to his eyebrow ... on the right side of his face, with Mrs. Kennedy looking away ... the President lurched forward just a bit, uh, it was obvious he had been hit in the movie but you had to be looking very closely in order to see it. Mrs. Kennedy did not appear to be aware that he was hit but Governor Connally in the seat just in front of the President ... seemly heard the shot ... or sensed that something was wrong ... Governor Connally whose coat button was open turned in such a way to extend his right hand out towards the President and the Governor seemed to have a look on his face that might say, "What is it? What happened?! and as he turned he exposed his entire shirt front and chest because his coat was unbuttoned ... at that moment a shot very clearly hit the part of the Governor. He was wounded once with a chest shot, this we now know ... uh the Governor fell back in his seat ... Mrs. Connally immediately fell over the Governor, uh, I say fell, she threw herself over the Governor ... and at that instant the second shot the third shot total but the second shot hit President Kennedy and there was no doubt there, his head ... went forward with considerable violence ... Mrs.. Kennedy stood up immediately her mouth wide open ... the President slumped over against Mrs. Kennedy almost toppling her over as she was standing ... Mrs. Kennedy then threw herself out of the back seat of the car onto the trunk of the car almost on all fours stretched out over the trunk of the car ... there was a Secret Service man standing on the back bumper ... it would appear that Mrs. Kennedy was either trying to get herself out of what she knew instinctively was danger or perhaps was trying to grab the Secret Service man and pull him into the back seat of the car for help at any rate Mrs. Kennedy was prone, uh face down on the back of the car on the trunk ... the Secret Service man leaned over put his hands on her shoulders and shoved her back into the car he seemed to be in danger of perhaps rolling or falling off the back. A Secret Service man in the front seat of the car uh was already on the telephone perhaps he had been on the phone all along it was not clear and the car sped away.

Richard Hotelett: The car never stopped did it!

Dan Rather: Thc car never stoppcd, it never paused.

Hughes Rudd: How long did all this take, Dan? In a matter of seconds.

Dan Rather: Well, the complete scene that I just described to you covers exactly 20 seconds that is from the time the car made the turn until the car disappeared onto an underpass.

Richard Hotelett: Is it clear, is it that the President was hit twice ?

Dan Rather: It was very clear that the President was hit twice. He was hit, Governor Connally was hit and the Gov ... uh the President was hit again.

Hughes Rudd: How long a time did the actual three shots take from the first shot until the final shot, Dan?

Dan Rather: Not more than five seconds and I ... am inclined to think slightly less than that perhaps.

Hughes Rudd: There [sic] must have been very grim pictures to watch, especially today.

Richard Hotelett: What was the source of these pictures, Dan?

Dan Rather: An amateur photographer, had an 8 millimeter color uh camera he had positioned himself up off the side walk on an old street lamp base, he was above the heads of the crowd and was facing the automobile.

Richard Hotelett: Of course he was focused on the automobile so there's no indication of where the shots came from.

Dan Rather: No, he was focused on the automobile with his back or side to the window from which the shots came. Only the automobile was shown in the film.

More follows...

http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_i...e/d_rather.html

From Fairplay Magazine..

also interview seen in...Pictures of the Pain, pages 86 to 89)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following article originally appeared in the July 22, 1977 issue of "The Continuing Inquiry."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dan Rather Blinked

by Penn Jones, Jr

The greatest criminal in this nation, we think, is a dishonest newsman. Newsmen have been given the highest gift a nation can give a group: a right. Newsmen have been given this right of freedom of the press and freedom of speech in the expectation they would report the truth as honestly as humanly possible. Ordinary criminals kill individuals, but dishonest newsmen are involved in killing a nation--in this case, this democracy. Which brings us to native Texan Dan Rather, a longtime Houstonian, and his new book, The Camera Never Blinks.

Rather's book is somewhat like Jim Bishop's The Day Kennedy Was Shot. At least a month's work would be required to correct the many errors Jim Bishop and Rather each foist on the readers. We limit our criticisms of the Rather book to the sections dealing with CBS coverage of President Kennedy's visit to Dallas. Rather was chief of the Dallas bureau.

The omissions, errors, distortions, and untruths in Rather's book are just too great and too numerous to be dismissed as unintentional inaccuracies or harmless forgetfulness. Back in Dallas after having been moved from there to New Orleans just a few weeks before President Kennedy's assassination, Rather played a major role that day in all the events for CBS. For a young newsman with such an important assignment on his hands, we find it strange that he would take a side trip that morning. Rather reports he went to Uvalde, Texas for an after-breakfast meeting with former Vice President John Nance Garner at his home there, but he doesn't mention the distances involved. He does not bother to tell his readers it was a six hundred mile round trip and that he was back in Dallas before the President's parade.

That kind of timing would have required a jet, we think. Whose jet, Rather didn't say.

Back in Dallas before noon, Rather says he discovered the most important film drop location on the Dallas motorcade route had been left unmanned. "...so I picked up a yellow grapefruit bag and..." went to the assignment which he says was only four blocks away. Somehow, according to Rather, on return it became five blocks. Actually it was nine blocks from the Dallas Times Herald building which was Rather's headquarters for the day.

It seems to us Rather used tangled logic in picking a spot to catch film from a moving vehicle. Not content with Dealey Plaza where the cars actually slowed to four miles per hour, he opted to be on the opposite side of the Dealey Plaza railroad underpass--just out of the kill area, where he knew the cars would be traveling much faster than in Dealey Plaza. The motorcade was to end the parade at the underpass and speed on out to the Trade Mart which was the luncheon site.

So Rather chose his position to catch this important film, but failed to tell us if he ever got the film. Failed to tell what the film showed.

Rather selected a spot which required that he catch the film from a truck which would be traveling at least forty to fifty miles per hour. He does pause to tell that the press cars were placed well back in the motorcade and that this has subsequently been changed, after the assassination, so the press buses are now close to the President. He neglects to say the vehicles in the Dallas motorcade were jumbled, somehow, from their pre-planned and pre-numbered assignments.[1]

If Rather picked a puzzling location to catch the film, he chose an even stranger route back to the Times Herald Building for which he says he headed "at a full run." Then, "I topped the railroad grading a few yards away and paused long enough to shade my eyes and look for the camera truck. It was nowhere in sight."

The railroad dump is twenty-five feet high and there were then five sets of railroad tracks over that underpass. It seems likely the camera truck could have passed under Rather who was getting up on the tracks. But perhaps that strange detour was not really to search for the camera truck.

We feel Rather's eyewitness information dictated that he run to the railroad yards, even from the opposite side from Dealey Plaza where all the people were located. The railroad tracks behind the picket fence are where people and police ran immediately after the shots were fired. Some people were honest enough to say they found men in the railroad track area who had guns,[2] and that some of the questionable characters flashed Secret Service credentials. The Secret Service has always insisted they had no men in the railroad area.

So Dan Rather waited to catch film just out of the kill area, saw the President's car rush past him, and ran where eyewitnesses told the Warren Commission the gunmen were located. These witnesses were untrained, without notebooks. They simply told what they saw. Rather, the professional, interviewed no one, did not take out his notebook, gave no testimony to the Warren Commission.

He says: "Perhaps I should have stopped and taken out my notebook, grabbing people and asking questions. But I needed only five seconds to make up my mind to hustle back to the station. I ran every step." Bravo.

But the biggest distortion is what he said he saw when he was one of the few persons in the world privileged to see the Abraham Zapruder film that Saturday morning, November 23. In his narration of the film as part of CBS nationwide television coverage, Rather said the President's head "went forward with considerable violence." This narration confirmed the so-called "Oswald position" for the nation, but he said nothing about the violent backward motion of the President's head which would have strongly suggested a second gunman at that early date. Rather does take care to tell us again that he took no notes.

Actually the President's head went forward for about three inches and then was slammed to the left rear--not consistent with a shot being fired from the "Oswald position" from behind President Kennedy.

His book says this about the incident: "At the risk of sounding too defensive, I challenge anyone to watch for the first time a twenty-two second film of devastating impact, run several blocks, then describe what they had seen in its entirety, without notes. Perhaps someone can do it better than I did that day. I only know that I did it as well and as honestly as I could under the conditions.

"But here is where the case gets tricky. Years later, a group of assassination buffs took an audio tape of my description of what I saw in the office of Zapruder's lawyer and laid it over the film as a narration. So the impression was given that Dan Rather was part of a conspiracy. Either that or he was a Communist dupe, or something, how else could he have seen the film, etc. etc."

No one that I know ever thought Rather was a Communist dupe. All I wanted Rather to do was admit his error to the television audience he had misinformed. Grudgingly, he admits the error in his book, but that is not the same as saying so on CBS evening news.

I paid a film company in California to have the voice of Rather synchronized to the action of the Zapruder film. I tried unsuccessfully to show the film to Rather.

My film was shown at the Democratic Convention held in Miami in 1972. Newsmen who saw the film were shocked at what they saw and immediately confronted Rather who reportedly said "No comment." On the tenth anniversary of the President's death we showed the film to Jim Mangrum head of Associated Press for Texas. The showing was in my home. Mangrum was so upset he called Rather, but was unable to reach him until the next day.

Mangrum called me to inform that Rather said he made "an honest error."

Here is how Rather slides by his incorrect description, the only possible narration depicting the actual shooting of the President that the nation had that Saturday: "...Regrettably, it was not without error, in terms of what was unsaid about the movement of the President's head. A few who had tried to sell themselves as assassination experts misused that account to build themselves a false premise.

"It is gruesome even now, and always will be, to talk about this scene, but the single most dramatic piece of the film is the part where the President's head lurches slightly forward, then explodes backward. I described the forward motion of his head. I failed to mention the violent, backward reaction. This was, as some assassination buffs now argue, a major omission. But certainly not deliberate."

All those who have seen the film (and it is now possible for everyone, with no thanks due to LIFE), know the President's head did not go as Rather said, "...forward with considerable violence." The head went backward and to the left with terrific violence. In fact, physicists say the force was so great the bullet must have weighed one pound, or more likely was a round of explosive ammunition.

The handling of the Zapruder film has been dishonest from the beginning. LIFE paid a tremendous price with the stated purpose of withholding the film from the people. This done by a group to whom the people had granted the right of freedom of the press so the people could be informed.

The public first saw the film during the famous 1968 Claw Shaw trial in New Orleans as then District Attorney Jim Garrison got a copy of the film from LIFE by court order. He showed the film at least thirteen times to the jury and to the entire courtroom audience. All were shocked. One of the two rulings made by that jury was that there was a conspiracy that killed President Kennedy. The other jury ruling was that Clay Shaw was not involved. That jury determination would be different in light of 1976 CIA documents revealing Shaw was CIA.

Years later we learned LIFE had delivered to Garrison a copy of the film deliberately made fuzzy or out of focus which hid much of the incriminating evidence. But at the time, no one was able to know LIFE had deliberately withheld this evidence in violation of the Federal courts order.

Only in 1973 when Robert Groden came forward with his clear copy of the famous film did we know of LIFE's contempt for truth, for Garrison and for the Federal courts. The Groden clear copy of the film was stolen directly from the LIFE files and is now available to the public from this writer.

The film convincingly shows the culpability of both LIFE and Dan Rather, and it also indicated the depths of despair the American people now experience because of these men and institutions who have so blatantly violated the sacred right given to them.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the following article Mr. Jones comments further on Mr. Rather. This also first appeared in the July 22, 1977 "Continuing Inquiry."

Pissants Come Cheap

by Penn Jones, Jr

Dan Rather's first introduction to Lyndon Johnson was a 1955 insulting tirade by Johnson at his ranch: "...I damned well don't know who this rude pissant is..."[3] a scene Lyndon loved to stage, followed by a soothing performance by Lady Bird. And if you bought the act, you could join the inner circle.

Rather worked to be inside. His wife was from Smithville, Texas, the home of Cliff Carter, Johnson's top aide after the Walter Jenkins ouster.

Rather was not the only Houstonian who was wooed into the Johnson fold early, with loud unreasoning bellowing and then soft touches. The successful Houston advertising agency headed by Jack Valenti went on the market just a couple of weeks before President Kennedy's ill-fated Texas visit. Valenti told friends in October that he was going to Washington.

As luck would have it then, Valenti was free to join the Presidential party at a Houston stop--then crouched on the platform in Houston while Kennedy was speaking.[4]

Valenti, at the request of Vice President Johnson, joined the party for the Dallas trip and left Dallas as an aide to the new President.

http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_...sue/rather.html

Above also from Fairplay Magazine..

****************************

Dan Rather: Quote..

Keep in mind, it was 25 feet,just up the side to the top of the railroad tracks..

" I ran quickly from where I was the other side of the railroad tracks, back over the railroad tracks and then this incredible scene in Dealey Plaza which is frozen in my mind forever was laid out in front of me..people screaming, Fathers on top of their children police with guns drawn , one policeman shouting words to the effect ""Don't panic." ..In that instant I said ""God ...I don't know what's happened but something really big has happened here.""

"As It Happened"..Frontline Nov.16/93

*******************************

Wrong From The Beginning...from Robert Groden's site..

http://www.jfkmurder.com/news.html

********************

Expert: Dan Rather Exaggerates Military Record

Wes Vernon, NewsMax.com

Wednesday, Jan. 16, 2002

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1213371/posts

**********************

As for The Nix Film....below is what Orville states.....

Orville Nix..From Part two.page 8..

Zapruder Thread..

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...pic=3711&st=105

In the tape, "Rush to Judgement" Mark Lane....there is also an interview of Orville Nix, who also took a film of the assassination that day, he relates that when he received his film back from the authorities, they had damaged and ruined some of the frames within, and others were missing...a frame here and there also...it was not the same as he had given to them.......Orville also states when asked, if he ever looked at the TSBD when the shots were being fired, and he answers NO...he thought they came from the fence area....

Orville Nix was also a very good friend of SS Chief Forrest Sorrels, of Dallas,and that day saw him and spoke with him, after the assassination, and in talking he mentioned that he thought the shots had come from the fence area, and Mr Sorrels, also stated that he did too...

***************************

1 :Dan Rather described the original Zapruder film that he saw, on CBS Radio,in Nov. 63...as being "exactly 20 seconds in length"....that by itself differs, the film in the National Archives is 27 seconds in length..has two splices ,and starts several hundred feet past the corner of Houston and Elm.

2: Rather.."...the President's open black Lincoln automobile....made a turn ,a left turn off of Houston Street onto Elm Street.....This left turn was made right below the window from which the shot was fired......."..This is not shown in the Zapruder film that we see.....the limo already is on Elm St..after it has made it's turn.....

3: Rather describes the Presidents limo as about 35 yards from the base of the building...the....TSBD, and putting his right hand up to the side of his right eye, and perhaps brushing his hair back..or rubbing his eyebrow.....At almost that instant he lurches forward a bit, and it was obvious he had been hit in the movie"..

In the film we see, the President is hit the first time, when he is hidden by the Stemmons Freeway Sign...Rather also does not mention at any time, the limo being hidden behind said sign...

4: Rather.."Mrs. Kennedy did not appear to be aware that he was hit but Governor Connally in the seat just in front of the President ..seemly heard the shot....or senses that something was wrong...Governor Connally whose coat button was open turned in such a way to extend his right hand out towards the President and the Governor seemed to have a look on his face that might say, "what is it? What happened ?" In turning he exposes the entire front of his shirt because his coat was unbuttoned...at that moment a shot hits the Governor.." He was wounded once with a chest shot, this we now know...uh the Governor fell back in his seat..."..We do know now that the Governor was hit by a bullet in the back...the exit wound was his chest...Rather describes the shot to the Governor as he is turned extending his hand to the President.

Nov. 29/63..Phone transcript Pres. Johnson and FBI Director Hoover.that does supports Rather's view...

LBJ: "How did it happen they hit Connally?".

H: "Connally turned to the President when the first shot was fired and I think in that turning it was where he got hit."

LBJ: "If he hadn't turned he probably wouldn't have got hit.?"

H: "I think that is very likely."

LBJ: "Would the President 've got hit ..the second one."

H: " No, the President wasn't hit with the second one."

LBJ: " I say ,if Connally hadn't been in his way?".

H: " Oh yes..yes the President would no doubt have been hit."

LBJ: "He would have been hit three times?"

H: "He would have been hit three times."

5: "Mrs. Connally immediately ...threw herself over the Governor..and at that instant the second shot, the third shot total, but the second shot hit President Kennedy, and there was no doubt his head...went forward with considerable violence ......" The opposite is seen in the Zapuduer film that we have access to....his head goes violently backwards .

6: "Mrs Kennedy stood up immediately......Mrs Kennedy was prone......uh face down on the back on the trunk.....The Secret Service man...( Hill) leaned over put his hands on her shoulders and shoved her back into the car she seemed to be in danger of perhaps rolling off the back..."

This is also corroborated by Clint Hill's testimony ..WC... but this is not what we see in the Zapruder film that is accessible to us..Mr. Hill never touches Mrs. Kennedy in the Zapruder film...

Could it be ?...that the Zapruder film viewed by Mr.Rather, and the Zapruder that is available, is not the same...witnesses state that shots were fired from the front and others also from the back, therefore, it is most likely there were shots from both directions..

Life magazine tried to explain that the film showed the President turning his body far around to the right as he was waving to the crowd..and that his throat was exposed towards the TSBD, just before he clutched it.....

Life..December 6, 1963.....also quoted in Crossfire...page 68..

But that failed also as we know......

Thanks for your time......B

Edited December 27, 2005 by Bernice Moore

[Guest Stephen Turner]

This is probably a stupid

What do alterationists believe Zapruders role was in all this. Because if he did not take the film, he must have been a willing participant to the events. And so, it seems to me, the conspiracy becomes ever larger.

I would really like an answer to this question if possible. Either zapruder was/was not a willing participant in the assassination...

[David G. Healy]

[...]

Dave your link lead to a nice little history lesson, just what is it supposed to prove? No one disputes that optical printers existed for a long time. So the Army got some in WWII. So just when exactly are YOU going to get around to citing a single movie made around the time of or before the assassination that utilized such extensive compositing and doesn't look obviously faked? And since you seem to be implying that the Army's printers were used maybe even a movie made in 1942 or earlier.

dgh03: it's called education for the uninformed, such as yourself -- honestly, you're a 'real' piece of work, aren't you? One only has to perform a few "google' searches and have all pertinent data at you're fingertips -- but not the Gang -- roflmao! They don't read film industry journals, don't read books, don't consult film industry experts, terrified of interviews, they don't need too, they got the Len! ROFLMAO -- can't tell us what RZavada perfected, nor WHEN..... nice try, Gary!

Dave now that I've got you dancing on the end of my string again why don't you reply to my last post on the other thread?

dgh03: oh, Len or whomever you are.... checkout Bernice's contribution in the other thread, regarding the Nix film.....

they have remailers in South America? LOL!

<snipped the rest>

[Jack White]

Colby is not aware that Wiegman, who caught several clear frames

of the pedestal, SHOWS THE PEDESTAL WITH NOBODY ON TOP.

Apparently in the dragnet of films, the govt missed this.

In FULL SUNLIGHT, Wiegman should have shown SOMETHING

on top of the pedestal. Below, Wiegman is compared to Betzner.

Both are in b/w just seconds apart.

Jack

In the Wiegman frame below which shows NOBODY ON THE PEDESTAL,

I have moved the man in the hardhat from the curb to the pedestal

to show what a person in FULL SUNLIGHT would look like.

Jack

[Gerry Hemming]

Colby is not aware that Wiegman, who caught several clear frames

of the pedestal, SHOWS THE PEDESTAL WITH NOBODY ON TOP.

Apparently in the dragnet of films, the govt missed this.

In FULL SUNLIGHT, Wiegman should have shown SOMETHING

on top of the pedestal. Below, Wiegman is compared to Betzner.

Both are in b/w just seconds apart.

Jack

In the Wiegman frame below which shows NOBODY ON THE PEDESTAL,

I have moved the man in the hardhat from the curb to the pedestal

to show what a person in FULL SUNLIGHT would look like.

Jack

------------------------------------

Jack:

As I remember the Pergola area, the Zapruder "pedestal" is farther to the right, and just out of that photo.

_____________________

[Jack White]

Colby is not aware that Wiegman, who caught several clear frames

of the pedestal, SHOWS THE PEDESTAL WITH NOBODY ON TOP.

Apparently in the dragnet of films, the govt missed this.

In FULL SUNLIGHT, Wiegman should have shown SOMETHING

on top of the pedestal. Below, Wiegman is compared to Betzner.

Both are in b/w just seconds apart.

Jack

In the Wiegman frame below which shows NOBODY ON THE PEDESTAL,

I have moved the man in the hardhat from the curb to the pedestal

to show what a person in FULL SUNLIGHT would look like.

Jack

------------------------------------

Jack:

As I remember the Pergola area, the Zapruder "pedestal" is farther to the right, and just out of that photo.

_____________________

Gerry:

Wrong.

Jack