Looking for Zapruder

[Len Colby]

Todays mystery: The assassination occurred on 11/22/63 ... what year was it that Jack started seeing a waltzing Sitzman and how many strokes did he have to get to that point?

The single most shameful and contemptible post I've yet seen on an assassination website.

I admit that was in bad taste but was it really worse than when Jack accused Bill, me and others of being accesories to the assassination or when he labels his opponents goons? Jack is hardly a saint.

[Bernice Moore]

quote name='Bill Miller' date='Jan 29 2007, 10:44 PM' post='91623']

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

It's even worse than that, the Lady has lost her purse, it was taken away from her somewhere

along the film..now that is a disaster..........??????????

B

Bernice, I was kind enough to point out Sitzman's purse to you in each of the three photos below, so how about you being kind enough to post the larger image with the two white arrows on it - one pointing to Sitzman. And do it without cropping over her shoes! I would love to see those flats you said she wore.

Bill

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

Bill:

Excuse me, the photo with the inserts, was not my work, someone posted it on the web....as it appeared.....I do not know whom at present, but thank them..

But I have found the same photo, without their inserts...Bill, there was no need to post any other photos of Marilyn with a purse, we are very aware she had one..

that appears to disappear within Zapruders pre-assassination film...

As I also was kind enough to previously post photos of her having such..that was and is a given..

As you well know, as you do seem to remind us so often, about what photos are within the Trask books, and what they show....when I saw the photo in Trask's book, there is a motorcycle in front of her, and you cannot see her shoes.....

But in looking at the photo with the inserts that someone had provided, that I did post, previously, the top front of the motorcycle screen could be seen .

showing on the left....but I am sure seeing that you have all of Trasks books,and which in fact others do have as well, you are

fully aware of that fact...but chose not to mention that information in your post..

I was out of photo attachment space, and have adjusted all, to provide what you want, that you already have.... but seem to need, the view of the motorcycle

hiding her shoes, that you do have at present in your copy of the Trask book..

Now about the Gif..the subject of my previous post..

Peoples please watch Marilyn Sitzmans

left arm.

Her purse disappears from her left arm as she turns full front, they have deleted, or somehow, lost Marilyns

purse from this clip of the Zapruder film... ??

The clip of the Zapruder's film that he took of Marilyn and the Hesters, previous to the motorcade arriving as he was just trying out his camera..

The frame below showing the three, Beatrice, Marilyn and Chares Hester, is from the pre-assassination Zapruder fim.

B

Edited January 30, 2007 by Bernice Moore

[Guest Mark Valenti]

Bernice,

As Sitzman turns toward the camera, she is also turning toward the sun. I believe it's possible that the sunlight washes out the darkness of her purse in that brief moment.

[Bill Miller]

But in looking at the photo with the inserts that someone had provided, that I did post, previously, the top front of the motorcycle screen could be seen .

showing on the left....but I am sure seeing that you have all of Trasks books,and which in fact others do have as well, you are

fully aware of that fact...but chose not to mention that information in your post..

Bernice, assuming too much is what gets people into trouble. My copy of Trask book is at my other place in Canada, so I didn't have it so to look for the images. Besides, the images looked to be too good to be scans from Trask book ... I was thinking that the stills came from a film which would show more of Sitzman.

Bill

[Bill Miller]

Yes, I sure do believe this cr--p has been altered.

Please prove what colored dress she is wearing in your supplied Bronson photo. post2

I have asked over and over for Bill to post his quality stuff so there is no doubt about what we are seeing.

I guess what he supplied in post2 is his quality stuff.

chris

It is one thing to believe the films and photos are altered, but making moronic errered observations by way of the poorer quailty images to choose from makes you look incompetent. For instance, what kind of ridiculous statement was that you made about proving what colored dress Sitzman wore in the Bronson slide which shows the woman in deep shadow due to the angle at which she was photographed in relation to the sun? Do you know that you can take a photo of the same person from the same location with two cameras and have their clothing to appear to be different colors just because of the difference in film stock that they used? Let me offer a proof of alteration using your logic ... In sunlight the limo is blue, but in shadow while passing through the underpass it is black ... this must mean the film has been altered! How more silly can one be about it!

Edited January 30, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Jack White]

Todays mystery: The assassination occurred on 11/22/63 ... what year was it that Jack started seeing a waltzing Sitzman and how many strokes did he have to get to that point?

The single most shameful and contemptible post I've yet seen on an assassination website.

I admit that was in bad taste but was it really worse than when Jack accused Bill, me and others of being accesories to the assassination or when he labels his opponents goons? Jack is hardly a saint.

Please produce a statement where I name any persons as such. I recall saying

that those who promote the official WC account of the assassination are what

Sylvia Meagher called them...ACCESSORIES AFTER THE FACT. And that is a

fact. But I named no names. Defenders of the Warren Report ARE accessories

to the crime.

As for GOONS, I have said that those who make personal attacks on researchers

instead of presenting evidence ARE goons. If you see yourself as a goon, so be it.

I do not name names when pointing to the goon squad here, but if you admit it,

do not ascribe it to me.

I have never claimed to be a saint. I do research. I do not initiate personal attacks.

There is a goon squad here who does nothing but that.

Jack

[Jack White]

Bernice,

As Sitzman turns toward the camera, she is also turning toward the sun. I believe it's possible that the sunlight washes out the darkness of her purse in that brief moment.

Sunlight DOES NOT WASH OUT BLACK. In case of any overexposure, BLACK IS THE LAST

TO WASH OUT. In an overexposed picture, every shade ligher that black will disappear

before black disappears.

Jack

[Craig Lamson]

I have never claimed to be a saint. I do research. I do not initiate personal attacks.

There is a goon squad here who does nothing but that.

Jack

Yea right...ROFLMAO!

In her unsurpassed 1967 ACCESSORIES AFTER THE FACT, only

three years after the assassination, Sylvia Meagher correctly

pointed out that those who knowingly help killers escape justice

are also culpable...the lesser CRIMINAL charges of obstruction of

justice and accessories after the fact.

Let's say "Brendan" robs a 7-11 and kills the clerk, a clear case

of capital murder. He runs to the getaway car, driven by "Craig".

In the law, both "Brendan" and "Craig" are equally guilty of

capital murder. They drive to the house of "Len" and plead,

"we've just killed a guy, and you gotta hide us!" In complying,

"Len" becomes an accessory after the fact and a part of the

criminal act. "Len" phones his friend "Bill" and says, "You gotta

help clear these guys, put out phony stories that help clear

them." I am not an attorney, but that is the law, simplified.

All of these guys would be convicted of CRIMINAL ACTS

when brought to trial. Some are murderers, and some are

accessories after the fact...but all are guilty.

(In the above "scenario", all names are fictitious, and any resemblance

to actual persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.)

Sound familiar? On this forum, there are several who knowingly

obstruct justice by helping the true murderers of the president

escape. This is a criminal act. A day of justice will come.

Jack

[Bill Miller]

Please produce a statement where I name any persons as such. I recall saying

that those who promote the official WC account of the assassination are what

Sylvia Meagher called them...ACCESSORIES AFTER THE FACT. And that is a

fact. But I named no names. Defenders of the Warren Report ARE accessories

to the crime.

Jack, you call people defenders of the WC who do not defend the WC report and believe there was a conspiracy in JFK's murder. Not everything in the WCR is in error, but you and a few others have taken on the mindset that anyone who doesn't agree with one of your stuid unsupported claims must be a WCR supporter. One could easily say that someone like yourself who continually makes ridiculous unfounded claims is a WCR supporter for you make it appear that all CT's are insane.

As for GOONS, I have said that those who make personal attacks on researchers

instead of presenting evidence ARE goons. If you see yourself as a goon, so be it.

I do not name names when pointing to the goon squad here, but if you admit it,

do not ascribe it to me.

Once again I am going to show you to be a double talking ignorant man, Jack. I will personally take the time to start compiling post where you came right out calling people names. Hell, in one instance you started a thread by saying that the anti-alterationist had been quiet, thus they must agree with your garbage. I'll find it and post it just to show who the Godfather of Goon's really is.

I have never claimed to be a saint. I do research. I do not initiate personal attacks.

There is a goon squad here who does nothing but that.

Jack

This is a Jack White lie and I will prove it, which will not be hard seeing how it has come up more than once on this forum.

[Craig Lamson]

Bernice,

As Sitzman turns toward the camera, she is also turning toward the sun. I believe it's possible that the sunlight washes out the darkness of her purse in that brief moment.

Sunlight DOES NOT WASH OUT BLACK. In case of any overexposure, BLACK IS THE LAST

TO WASH OUT. In an overexposed picture, every shade ligher that black will disappear

before black disappears.

Jack

Sheesh Jack, and you claim to be a PHOTOGRAPHER! Have you EVER HEARD OF GLARE? What a maroon.

[Jack White]

Todays mystery: The assassination occurred on 11/22/63 ... what year was it that Jack started seeing a waltzing Sitzman and how many strokes did he have to get to that point?

The single most shameful and contemptible post I've yet seen on an assassination website.

Paul, what it means is that Jack didn't look at the Bronson slide and start misreading it 30 to 40 years ago. All this started when he went on some sort of 'alteration witch hunt'. I also see that Chris is following suit. What kind of joker looks at Sitzman in deep shadow and says that she is now wearing a different colored dress than what she wore in the Zapruder film before the motorcades arrival? We are consistently seeing a few people who are asking things like why can't we see something in a poor image that we see in a good one ... well dah!!!

Another lie...the pedestal is NOT IN DEEP SHADOW. The Bronson slide shows a complete shadow

of the pedestal. The ground around the pedestal is in full sunlight. It is basic that if the SUN CREATES

A SHADOW ON THE GROUND OF AN OBJECT, THE OBJECT IS IN FULL SUNLIGHT. This guy has

absolutely NO credibility. His sycophants are in the same category.

Jack

[Jack White]

Bernice,

As Sitzman turns toward the camera, she is also turning toward the sun. I believe it's possible that the sunlight washes out the darkness of her purse in that brief moment.

Sunlight DOES NOT WASH OUT BLACK. In case of any overexposure, BLACK IS THE LAST

TO WASH OUT. In an overexposed picture, every shade ligher that black will disappear

before black disappears.

Jack

Sheesh Jack, and you claim to be a PHOTOGRAPHER! Have you EVER HEARD OF GLARE? What a maroon.

Show us a photo of Sitzman's BLACK purse and the GLARE THAT MADE THE ENTIRE PURSE DISAPPEAR.

Can't do it? I thought so.

[Craig Lamson]

Yes, I sure do believe this cr--p has been altered.

Please prove what colored dress she is wearing in your supplied Bronson photo. post2

I have asked over and over for Bill to post his quality stuff so there is no doubt about what we are seeing.

I guess what he supplied in post2 is his quality stuff.

chris

It is one thing to believe the films and photos are altered, but making moronic errered observations by way of the poorer quailty images to choose from makes you look incompetent. For instance, what kind of ridiculous statement was that you made about proving what colored dress Sitzman wore in the Bronson slide which shows the woman in deep shadow due to the angle at which she was photographed in relation to the sun? Do you know that you can take a photo of the same person from the same location with two cameras and have their clothing to appear to be different colors just because of the difference in film stock that they used? Let me offer a proof of alteration using your logic ... In sunlight the limo is blue, but in shadow while passing through the underpass it is black ... this must mean the film has been altered! How more silly can one be about it!

Bill could you please post a full frame of the Bronson slide in question? Also I need to clear up a little history about the Bronson slide. IIRC is it correct that the original slide was quite under-exposed? Did someone create a lightened dupelicate slide?

Thanks

[Craig Lamson]

Bernice,

As Sitzman turns toward the camera, she is also turning toward the sun. I believe it's possible that the sunlight washes out the darkness of her purse in that brief moment.

Sunlight DOES NOT WASH OUT BLACK. In case of any overexposure, BLACK IS THE LAST

TO WASH OUT. In an overexposed picture, every shade ligher that black will disappear

before black disappears.

Jack

Sheesh Jack, and you claim to be a PHOTOGRAPHER! Have you EVER HEARD OF GLARE? What a maroon.

Show us a photo of Sitzman's BLACK purse and the GLARE THAT MADE THE ENTIRE PURSE DISAPPEAR.

Can't do it? I thought so.

Hey jack... I don't need to show HER PURSE. Is it your considered "professional" (yea I know thats a joke) opinion that glare could not cause a black purse to photography very light or even white. Please remember your status as a "professional" (yea I know there is that joke line again) is at stake here. Oh wait never mind that, you threw away any pretext that you understood photography with your continued insistance that the Armstong Apollo shadow is impossible....

Edited January 30, 2007 by Craig Lamson

[Bill Miller]

I have never claimed to be a saint. I do research. I do not initiate personal attacks.

There is a goon squad here who does nothing but that.

Jack

In response to Baghdad Bob Jack White's remarks:

"The provocateurs make much of the "harmony" of all the other

movies with Zapruder.

Maybe they forgot to look at Z380 and N90, which are "officially"

at the same instant.

Please explain the "harmony" of these two frames.

Only facts, please. No personal attacks, please.

If these frames do not match, please post the Z frame which

matches N90.

Failure to meet this challenge proves the provocateurs DO NOT

HAVE A CLUE and are only here to PROVOKE.

Have fun.

Jack "

Reply: There is one problem with Jack's claim that is worth noting before doing anything else .... Jack used the MPI Z380 and didn't account for MPI's misnumbering of the frames. Below is the MPI frame Jack used against the correct frame created by Costella. It was Gary Mack who pointed out MPI's numbering mistake long ago and I assume that Jack was aware of it, but simply had forgotten about it. I would however, recommend to Jack that before making any more alteration claims that he at least makes sure that his information is correct before starting!

Another time Jack didn't resort to personal attacks:

Jack said, "Miller obviously is ignorant of how movies are made!

It is IGNORANT to suggest that the Zfilm alteration was DONE DIRECTLY ON KODACHROME!

Nobody but a dunce would think that!"

Here is yet another post by Jack that didn't deal with any facts as he claims that he always does. Instead, Jack tried to mae a case for Craig being able to post at the times that he does.

Jack: "Duane...I have dealt with dozens of good pro photographers, and most of

them were extremely busy with photo shoots. Check the times of Lamson's

postings...all day long...he must have no clients at all...just sits around

posting infantile crap on this forum. A successful photographer is usually

in great demand, but he has no work apparently. But he must have an

income from some source. Maybe he gets residual pay for taking those

Apollo studio shots. Many of them are so good they went undetected for

years. Good lighting (for studio work)."

Jack "

There are many more ... how much overkill do you want to see, Jack?