Is this how it was done?

[Bill Miller]

And the typographic bible, the Chicago Manual of Style, supports all the above.

If you want any more private tutoring in public, feel free to lip off at me again. I'll gladly accommodate you.

It's a shame that you don't put as much time and effort in the JFK case as you do concerning yourself with why someone uses bold letters in their post. I think if you do a search that you will see that I stated long ago why I use such lettering.

A forum search on "Trask" and your name sure turns up lots of hits. I'm not going to run out and buy it. If you have it, is there anything preventing you from just presenting the image or images from Trask that you keep referring to?

Ashton Gray

Yes there is a reason why I cannot post such photos from Trask book, Ashton .... as I have said several times in recent days - I am in the mountains of British Columbia and do not have that book with me, but for those so-called serious researchers ... you might be able to find a copy in your public library and if not ... I bet they can get it 'on loan' from another library and you can check it out for free. Maybe even one of you other serious researches that does have the book with them can accomodate you?

Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

Bill, makes no difference what's obvious to you, so there is NO identifying photo of Abe on the pedestal, yes?

We also have had this dicussion before, as well. It is like saying there is no identifiable photo of Brehm standing along Elm Street ... it could be him, then it could be someone who looks like him. Is that really Toni Foster in the Zapruder film? How about Bill newman or Emmett Hudson, how do we know that is really them in the assassintion films and photos? But unlike Brehm and Foster, Newman, or Hudson, Zapruder can be followed by cross referencing the films and photos from his entering the shelter having just left the pedestal right through to his truning around so Rickerby could take his photo of Mr. Z's face so one day Trask could put it in his book.

Further, "that man" this, "that man" that, (I find that curious, why not say Zapruder?) -- are you trying to make a conspiracy argument out of the simple comment: there is NO photo identifying Abe Zapruder or Marily Sitzman standing on the pedestal?

I am glad that you noticed my referencing process, David. I used the term 'that man' because as you say - we cannot see enough of him to identify him in the assassination images taken before he turns around so Rickerby can capture a photo of his face - at that point he went from being 'that man' to being Abraham Zapruder. And this is why I kept the name Zapruder out of my statement until the appropriate time. I hope I made that clear enough for you.

Bill Miller

[Ashton Gray]

I think if you do a search that you will see that I stated long ago why I use such lettering.

You already gave a "reason" in this thread, and I'm not going off on a search to find another excuse that won't be any better.

You just go right on being right about it, okay?

And if I ever feel a need for somebody to tell me how to spend my time, I'll ask somebody who doesn't feel the need to put everything they write in boldface. Thanks for the application, though.

Ashton

[Bill Miller]

Few more follow-up questions: 1] When did San Francisco's Monaco Labs do the work and 2] was the finished Zapruder film product utilized by Dale Myers (16mm or 35mm film) for ABC's documentary?

Monaco did the work in late 2001/early 2002 and turned over the results to NARA in March 2002.

Bill Miller

You already gave a "reason" in this thread, and I'm not going off on a search to find another excuse that won't be any better. You just go right on being right about it, okay?

The reason I posted a year or two ago is the same reason I gave you. It is not a matter of right or wrong, but rather the way I opted to post on these forums.

And if I ever feel a need for somebody to tell me how to spend my time, I'll ask somebody who doesn't feel the need to put everything they write in boldface. Thanks for the application, though.

Ashton

I didn't tell you how to post ... I said it is a shame that you don't spend your time on more important things concerning JFK's murder.

Bill Miller

Edited July 28, 2006 by Bill Miller

[J. Raymond Carroll]

And if I ever feel a need for somebody to tell me how to spend my time, I'll ask somebody who doesn't feel the need to put everything they write in boldface. Thanks for the application, though.

Ashton

I didn't tell you how to post ... I said it is a shame that you don't spend your time on more important things concerning JFK's murder.

Bill Miller

Hey, Bill, I for one have never had a problem with your use of boldface type. I think you have probably guessed by now that Ashton Gray has no real knowledge of, or interest in, JFK's assassination.

[Ashton Gray]

The reason I posted a year or two ago is the same reason I gave you. It is not a matter of right or wrong, but rather the way I opted to post on these forums.

[Brendan Slattery]

And if I ever feel a need for somebody to tell me how to spend my time, I'll ask somebody who doesn't feel the need to put everything they write in boldface. Thanks for the application, though.

Ashton

I didn't tell you how to post ... I said it is a shame that you don't spend your time on more important things concerning JFK's murder.

Bill Miller

Hey, Bill, I for one have never had a problem with your use of boldface type. I think you have probably guessed by now that Ashton Gray has no real knowledge of, or interest in, JFK's assassination.

He seems to be more interested in being Slattery-lite with his withering comments.

Thank you for noting that he's a pale imitation of me. Much appreciated.

[Jack White]

Bill...you have lots of contacts at NARA...how about getting them

to answer these questions? As public servants, I am sure they

will be eager to answer questions from the public.

Hi Jack. While waiting for One-Who-Yells-With-Bold-Codes to get back from NARA, and as dispassionately as possible:

1. What is the overview regarding the film, Cecile B. DeZapruder, and the changeling Sitzman?

2. How does it fit in with who put Kennedy in the shooting gallery and cover-up thereof?

3. What do you feel was/is the purpose of the Zapruder film (in any form)?

4. Referencing the black-and-white medium-CU of Sitzman you use for scarf reference, and other images you have displayed to prove (not to my satisfaction) that her bag was on the pedastal at any and all relevant times, why do you then say she/they weren't on the pedestal shooting a movie?

5. If Zapruder/Sitzman didn't shoot a movie from that angle, who did?

6. What is the role of One-Who-Yells-With-Bold-Codes in regard to all the above?

These are not challenges. This is an attempt to understand the underlying issues.

Ashton

Ashton...your questions, my answers in caps:

1. What is the overview regarding the film, Cecile B. DeZapruder, and the changeling Sitzman?

MY OPINION, BASED ON YEARS OF STUDY OF THE IMAGES AND FACTS, IS THAT

THE EXTANT Z FILM IS AN ANIMATION BASED ON SEVERAL FILMS, PERHAPS

EVEN ONE SHOT FROM THE PEDESTAL. I THINK A "GUIDE FILM" FOR THE ANIMATORS

WAS SHOT ABOUT 15 MINUTES BEFORE JFK ARRIVED; THEN ANOTHER FILM WAS

TAKEN FROM THE PEDESTAL DURING THE MOTORCADE, AND THESE WERE COMBINED

TO SUPPORT THE OFFICIAL STORY. I THINK THAT CHANCES ARE THAT ZAPPY AND SITZY

WERE PERHAPS UNWITTING PARTICIPANTS IN AN EVENT OF MUCH GREATER MAGNITUDE

THAN THEY HAD BEEN LED TO BELIEVE. I BELIEVE IT IS LIKELY THAT NEITHER OF THEM

WAS ON THE PEDESTAL, AS THE WIEGMAN FILM SHOWS.

2. How does it fit in with who put Kennedy in the shooting gallery and cover-up thereof?

I THINK ZAPPY WAS DRAWN INTO THE ACTION BY A BENIGN-SOUNDING REQUEST

THAT HE FILM "A DEMONSTRATION IN THE PLAZA". THE INCLUSION OF SITZY MAY

HAVE BEEN "ACCIDENTAL". AFTER THE FACT, ZAPPY IN EFFECT BLACKMAILED THE

CONSPIRATORS ABOUT HIS RECRUITMENT INTO THE PLOT, EVENTUALLY RESULTING

IN A $16,000,000 BLACKMAIL PAYMENT. FOR HER INVOLVEMENT, I BELIEVE SITZY

DIED AT A VERY YOUNG AGE.

3. What do you feel was/is the purpose of the Zapruder film (in any form)?

TO SUPPORT THE OFFICIAL STORY BY DOING THINGS LIKE REMOVING THE LIMO

STOP AND OTHER THINGS, LIKE SHOTS STRIKING AND WHEN THEY STRUCK.

4. Referencing the black-and-white medium-CU of Sitzman you use for scarf reference, and other images you have displayed to prove (not to my satisfaction) that her bag was on the pedastal at any and all relevant times, why do you then say she/they weren't on the pedestal shooting a movie?

SITZMAN'S PURSE IS SEEN IN ALL RELEVANT PEDESTAL PHOTOS, SITTING ON

THE LEFT REAR OF THE TOP. IT CLEARLY IS A LARGE PURSE, NOT A CAMERA BAG.

5. If Zapruder/Sitzman didn't shoot a movie from that angle, who did?

IF I KNEW THAT, THE CASE WOULD BE SOLVED, WOULDN'T IT? I SUSPECT THAT

A PROFESSIONAL PHOTOGRAPHER WAS ON THE PEDESTAL...NOT AN AMATEUR.

IN PHOTOS, THIS PERSON WAS REMOVED AND ZAPPY AND SITZY REPLACED HIM.

THE PLOTTERS WANTED A TROPHY FILM, AND THEY WANTED IT DONE RIGHT. THEY

WOULD NOT CHOOSE ZAPRUDER TO GET WHAT THEY WANTED (A SOUVENIR FOR

LBJ AND CIA).

6. What is the role of One-Who-Yells-With-Bold-Codes in regard to all the above?

I ASSUME YOU MEAN THE GUY WHO CALLS HIMSELF "MILLER". HIS ASSIGNMENT

SEEMS TO PROTECT THE "OFFICIAL ZAPRUDER FILM" WHILE PRETENDING TO BE A

SERIOUS JFK RESEARCHER. IF YOU HAD RECEIVED NEARLY A MILLION DOLLARS

IN AN INSURANCE SETTLEMENT, WOULD YOU BE WASTING YOUR TIME TROLLING

THE INTERNET PROTECTING THE OFFICIAL STORY? I WOULDN'T.

THANKS FOR YOUR INTEREST.

JACK

Edited July 28, 2006 by Jack White

[Bill Miller]

Hey, Bill, I for one have never had a problem with your use of boldface type. I think you have probably guessed by now that Ashton Gray has no real knowledge of, or interest in, JFK's assassination.

You are right! Ashton's childish post #36 is little more than laughing at the purpose of this forum. I suspect that it is his way of substituting his lack of knowledge of the case with playing the role of the forum idiot. Am I supposed to now counter with some sort of asinine response ... its not happening. We'll see how he reacts to Jack's use of "caps" in his response.

Bill Miller

Edited July 28, 2006 by Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

Jack, do you recall my saying how some people cannot see the forest because of the trees ... I believe I referenced you when I said this. I am not going to waste time addressing all the ridiculous things you said, but I will point out a couple of things that shows that your head is so messed up that you cannot comprehend the simplest of observations. You said this about Zapruder and Sitzman and the photographical record showing them on the pedestal ...

"....... I THINK THAT CHANCES ARE THAT ZAPPY AND SITZY

WERE PERHAPS UNWITTING PARTICIPANTS IN AN EVENT OF MUCH GREATER MAGNITUDE

THAN THEY HAD BEEN LED TO BELIEVE. I BELIEVE IT IS LIKELY THAT NEITHER OF THEM

WAS ON THE PEDESTAL, AS THE WIEGMAN FILM SHOWS."

We have discussed over and over again how B&W images have limited color tone and we have discussed motion blur, so what didn't you understand that would keep you from realizing that the Wiegman film has both? You would ignore each and every film and photo showing Zapruder and Sitzman ... you offer no witness statements saying they were seen anywhere else, and you ignore that it was Zapruder who showed up back at the office with is film of the assassination immediately following the shooting. You even ignore Sitzman and Zapruder's own statements as to where they were during the assassination. You even ignore Moorman's photo showing Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal, which was still in her possession after the shooting when filmed and broadcast on NBC. Instead, you embrace an unreliable piece of blurry B&W footage just so you can make an alteration claim. You give no thought to the idea that had Zapruder and Sitzman not been on that pedestal, then when were they filmed standing next to one another in such fashion? Your brain seems to be so warpped that you don't seem to care about even looking for a logical reason for Zapruder and Sitzman not being detectable in Wiegman's film before implying the extreme. Below is Zapruder and Sitzman as seen in the Betzner photo which is also B&W. With limited color tones and a touch of motion blur like that on the Wiegman film they seem to have vanished from the pedestal, so what does that tell you?

I ASSUME YOU MEAN THE GUY WHO CALLS HIMSELF "MILLER". HIS ASSIGNMENT

SEEMS TO PROTECT THE "OFFICIAL ZAPRUDER FILM" WHILE PRETENDING TO BE A

SERIOUS JFK RESEARCHER. IF YOU HAD RECEIVED NEARLY A MILLION DOLLARS

IN AN INSURANCE SETTLEMENT, WOULD YOU BE WASTING YOUR TIME TROLLING

THE INTERNET PROTECTING THE OFFICIAL STORY? I WOULDN'T.

Jack, is the best you can come up with? My lawyers took over half of my settlement, so is less than half a million dollars worth you giving up your interest in the JFK assassination, which by the way ... my interest in the assassination dates back over a quarter of a century before I recieved a penny.

Next is the other stupid thing you said and that is that I try to protect the Zapruder film. I'll have you know that I have used the Zapruder film to show that JFK was not shot from behind, but rather from the front. Once again you have posted about something that you know nothing about and did it with "caps" ... we'll sit back and see what Ashton has to say now about the matter.

Bill Miller

Edited July 28, 2006 by Bill Miller

[David G. Healy]

'Bill Miller' wrote:

[...]

Jack, is the best you can come up with? My lawyers took over half of my settlement, so is less than half a million dollars worth you giving up your interest in the JFK assassination, which by the way ... my interest in the assassination dates back over a quarter of a century before I recieved a penny.

Next is the other stupid thing you said and that is that I try to protect the Zapruder film. I'll have you know that I have used the Zapruder film to show that JFK was not shot from behind, but rather from the front. Once again you have posted about something that you know nothing about and did it with "caps" ... we'll sit back and see what Ashton has to say now about the matter.

Bill Miller

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

Perhaps Ashton will be kind enough to ask his questions after you answer the ones here regarding the new-improved, fully washed and dusted Zapruder Film....

my earlier [this thread] follow-up questions: 1) When did San Francisco's Monaco Labs do the Zapruder film work and 2) was the finished Zapruder film product utilized by Dale Myers (16mm or 35mm film) for ABC's documentary (in short did DMeyers get to use the upgraded film, or individual digitized FRAMES from same, in his 3D Lightwave animation of DP events)? The same documentary he, Myers won a Emmy for?

Edited July 28, 2006 by David G. Healy

[Bill Miller]

Perhaps Ashton will be kind enough to ask his questions after you answer the ones here regarding the new-improved, fully washed and dusted Zapruder Film....

my earlier [this thread] follow-up questions: 1) When did San Francisco's Monaco Labs do the Zapruder film work and

David, do you not read the responses before making additional post? The answer to this question was given to you in response #34 and it said, "Monaco did the work in late 2001/early 2002 and turned over the results to NARA in March 2002." NARA should be able to give you a history of the work they had done upon request.

was the finished Zapruder film product utilized by Dale Myers (16mm or 35mm film) for ABC's documentary (in short did DMeyers get to use the upgraded film, or individual digitized FRAMES from same, in his 3D Lightwave animation of DP events)? The same documentary he, Myers won a Emmy for?

I cannot say for sure what Dale specifically did without going back and researching the evidence pertaining to his work. It would seem to me that the logical thing to do is for you to email Dale Myers and ask him straight out this question. I don't know Dale's email address because I don't remember ever emailing him, but I am sure you can find it on his web site. I recall something said about the ABC stuff on Dale's cite, but I canot quote it at this time. See .... http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/faq.htm

Bill Miller

Edited July 28, 2006 by Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

"....... I THINK THAT CHANCES ARE THAT ZAPPY AND SITZY

WERE PERHAPS UNWITTING PARTICIPANTS IN AN EVENT OF MUCH GREATER MAGNITUDE

THAN THEY HAD BEEN LED TO BELIEVE. I BELIEVE IT IS LIKELY THAT NEITHER OF THEM

WAS ON THE PEDESTAL, AS THE WIEGMAN FILM SHOWS."

I would like to point something out that I believe is very important and Jack or anyone else is invited to respond if they wish ....

Jack seems to think that Zapruder and Sitzman were somehow inserted onto the pedestal in all the assassination films and photos that show the two during the President's ride down Elm Street. This means that the Betzner photo, the Willis photo, the Moorman photo, the Bronson slide and film, and the Nix film all had these two people inserted onto the pedestal in their images. This idea is so far off the scale that it means that Zapruder and Sitzman would had to of been filmed together before the assassination from no less than from five different angles so that each picture would correspond to the angle needed to match them up with the Dealey Plaza filming locations of the said photographers. That's right ... you heard me correctly. Somehow, someone would have had to of gotten this five different views of these two assasination witnesses and they would have needed advanced knowledge of where each photographer would have been standing in Dealey Plaza when JFK came to Dallas. In other words, Willis for instance could not have been standing out on the south pasture and still have a photo showing a view of JFK taken from near the curb at the upper end of Elm Street. Bronson could not have been standing on the ground and have his images show an elevated view of the assassination. All these assassination images show the correct profiles of Sitzman and Zapruder to support their statements of being on the pedestal during the shooting, so how could someone have gotten such views of Zapruder and Sitzman in order to make them match what is needed to support the photographical record?

Now if the above and its problems don't seem insane enough, the Nix film shows Zapruder tracking the President's car with his camera and body, so maybe someone can tell me how did anyone get a film of Zapruder and Sitzman together while Abe filmed something unrelated to JFK's murder that would match the tracking speed of the limo as it came down Elm Street on 11/22/63? As clearly demonstrated, anyone can think up wild off-the-wall claims, but being able to make them appear to be well thought out so to seem plausible is another matter altogether.

Bill Miller

Edited July 28, 2006 by Bill Miller

[David G. Healy]

'Bill Miller' wrote:

[...]

was the finished Zapruder film product utilized by Dale Myers (16mm or 35mm film) for ABC's documentary (in short did DMeyers get to use the upgraded film, or individual digitized FRAMES from same, in his 3D Lightwave animation of DP events)? The same documentary he, Myers won a Emmy for?

I cannot say for sure what Dale specifically did without going back and researching the evidence pertaining to his work. It would seem to me that the logical thing to do is for you to email Dale Myers and ask him straight out this question. I don't know Dale's email address because I don't remember ever emailing him, but I am sure you can find it on his web site. I recall something said about the ABC stuff on Dale's cite, but I canot quote it at this time. See .... http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/faq.htm

Bill Miller

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

"evidence pertaining to his work...." ? ? ? Eidence of Dale's WORK, wtf?

Let me spell this out for you, clearly. 'I expect no direct response from the 6th Floor Museum (Gary Mack), nor DMyers'.

having said THAT, was permission granted and usage fees paid to the Zapruder trust, for the inclusion of Z-film segments in the ABC documentary that included DMyers DP/Elm St. animation? The 6th Floor Museum knows such things, correct?

1) was the Z-film in-camera original (housed at NARA) used for the new and improved version done by Monaco? (Excellent, no P R I S T I N E quality by-the-way -- kinda makes you wonder what the in-camera original actually looks like.

2) Did Myers pay a Z-film usage fee, or did ABC pick up that tab?

3) Did DMyers use Monaco's, newly created Z-film digital representations of the frames (for his TOASTER/Lightwave animation), if so, what digital image file format, frame dimension and size?

Gary speaks through you Bill, you're the defacto *internet board* voice for the 6th floor when it comes to the films and photos under their care -- If you Bill can't get this info [or won't].....

Gary, if you will, email me the answers please, I'll post them to this thread

David Healy

shake_aeffects@yahoo.com

Edited July 28, 2006 by David G. Healy

[Bill Miller]

"evidence pertaining to his work...." ? ? ? Eidence of Dale's WORK, wtf?

Let me spell this out for you, clearly. 'I expect no direct response from the 6th Floor Museum (Gary Mack), nor DMyers'.

David, let me make this equally clear ... if you do not seek information from the Museum or NARA, then you certainly won't get a response. I asked Gary during a phone conversation recently just how many people from this forum have called to get data pertaining to these subjects and I think he told me that no one had. So what you are doing can be compared to someone wanting to know who is calling you, but you won't bother to pick up the phone and answer it to find out.

having said THAT, was permission granted and usage fees paid to the Zapruder trust, for the inclusion of Z-film segments in the ABC documentary that included DMyers DP/Elm St. animation? The 6th Floor Museum knows such things, correct?

The Museum is better able to answer that question for they have the copyrights to the Zapruder film. I would think however, that because the Zapruder family gave their interest in the copyrights to the film away, then they no longer recieve any monies for its use.

Gary speaks through you Bill, you're the defacto *internet board* voice for the 6th floor when it comes to the films and photos under their care -- If you Bill can't get this info [or won't].....

Gary, if you will, email me the answers please, I'll post them to this thread

David Healy

David, I have tried to make this very clear and I do not know if I am not saying it well enough or if a select few are purposely ignoring the facts, but I am not the voice for the Museum. I use the Museum like I would a library because it is one of the top resources for acrhived information on the Kennedy assassination. One would not say that because you go to the library on a regular basis to seek information on a certain subject that you have become the voice for the library.

Bill Miller