View Full Version : thoughts on zapruder film
well since almost everyone agrees warren report was whitewash and even house select committe on assasinations (1974 i think) concluded a conspiracy, lets not go there.
but what about zapruder film?
obviously its pretty crummy but i thought cause it was so long ago and low tech.
what do u think? i read where like 50 witnesses (im talking like reporters riding in reporters car, govnmt officials etc.) said they pretty much stopped (ie dead stop) then kennedy was shot then sped up and drove away.
how do u reconcile this with zapruder film which doesnt show jfk car stopping or even slowing down?
anybody ever take the same camera film a recreation to see how it looked? just wondering. i would think it would be on the web somewhere.
obviously i was surfing one of those jfk sites.
but really if only say every other frame was in there then car would appear to be moving much faster, etc.
andyfox
03-11-2003, 03:10 PM
The conspiracy theorists used to claim that the Zapruder film proved the presence of another shooter. Now they claim that the film has been tampered with and covers up the presence of another shooter.
The last time we had a visible meteorite here in California, the local police received many phone calls from people who said they saw heads peering out of the portholes. There are witnesses and there are witnesses.
Parmenides
03-11-2003, 03:45 PM
I guess you believe that the majority of members of the US House of Representatives is filled with conspiracy theorists. Lowell Weicker, Frank Church, Russell Long, the list goes on and on. Robert Crowley ( deputy director of CIA clandestine operations at the time) acknowledged that CIA planned the whole thing.
The film overwhelmingly proves another shooter.
I bet that you believe in magic bullets. I bet that you believe that Jack Ruby never worked for the mob. I bet that you believe that the mob doesn't even exist like Hoover stated for years while he took payoffs at the races from Frank Costello and Johnny Roselli. I bet that you believe that Hoover was a heterosexual.
There are naive fools, and then there is Andy Fox.
John Cole
03-11-2003, 04:30 PM
brad,
Despite what M says about you and your misleading post titles (joking here! but please, brad, you should know any article from townhall.com can't possibly include any sort of non-partisan opinion), I find your posts endlessly fascinating. I imagine you sitting at your computer wearing some sort of ray-blocking helmet, checking yourself periodically for government-implanted microchips. I know, of course, you're infinitely more rational than this which is why I look forward to reading your posts.
With all due respect,
John
Now, how many frames per second was the Zapruder film shot at?
andyfox
03-11-2003, 04:41 PM
brad's post concerned the Zapruder film. There are conspiracy theorists who feel that the Zapruder film proves there was another shooter; you are one of them. There are conspiracy theorists who feel that the Zapruder film has been doctored to conceal the presence of another shooter. The film cannot do both.
I bet I can discuss issues without resorting to immature namecalling, hiding behind a pseudonym.
18.3 i think
you remember last year family got microchipped live on good morning america, right?
'Robert Crowley ( deputy director of CIA clandestine operations at the time) acknowledged that CIA planned the whole thing. '
very interesting. source or link?
btw got to point where watergate linked to jfk killing.
Dynasty
03-11-2003, 05:23 PM
how do u reconcile this with zapruder film which doesnt show jfk car stopping or even slowing down?
It doesn't seem to be well known that there are other films of JFK's assasination. One of those other films was taken by a man named Orville Nix. He shot it from a "reverse angle" when compared to Abraham Zapruder and from a greater distance away. In Nix's film, the break lights are seen to go on- even if just momentarily.
That being said, it should also be noted that the Nix film is also of very poor quality and some people will dispute what is seen in the film (sunlight reflection, etc.).
The slowing down of Kennedy's motorcade is not substantial and could coincide with the partial disapearance behind the road sign.
John Cole
03-11-2003, 05:55 PM
Hey Wiseguy,
So like you think Parmenides ain't his real name? /forums/images/icons/grin.gif
A couple summers ago, we had a long thread on the JFK assasination; most people were decidedly on the conspiracy side; however, Cyrus, Vince Lepore, and I were on the right side. I think this should have settled the matter once and for all.
John
adios
03-11-2003, 06:14 PM
"well since almost everyone agrees warren report was whitewash and even house select committe on assasinations (1974 i think) concluded a conspiracy, lets not go there."
Not everyone does but ok let's not go there. I believe the findings came out in a published document in 1979.
http://www.archives.gov/research_room/jfk/house_select_committee/committee_report_letter.html
"but what about zapruder film?
obviously its pretty crummy but i thought cause it was so long ago and low tech."
I read somewhere where the Zapruder film was being enhanced through modern digital technology.
"what do u think? i read where like 50 witnesses (im talking like reporters riding in reporters car, govnmt officials etc.) said they pretty much stopped (ie dead stop) then kennedy was shot then sped up and drove away."
There are some sources showing break lights going on. I believe the streets are Houston and Elm. One place where the limo had to slow cosiderably was making the turn onto Elm I believe in front of the Depository.
"how do u reconcile this with zapruder film which doesnt show jfk car stopping or even slowing down? "
I'm not sure it didn't slow for a brief moment but it was going fairly slowly to begin with. If not how could a Secret Service agent jump out of the car behind the presidential limo, catch up to the limo on foot and jump in.
adios
03-11-2003, 06:42 PM
"The conspiracy theorists used to claim that the Zapruder film proved the presence of another shooter. Now they claim that the film has been tampered with and covers up the presence of another shooter."
Not sure what you mean but here is my understanding. The Warren Commission used the Zapruder film to establish a time line for the shots being fired. Extensive testing was done with the type of rifle found on the 6th floor of the Depository, a Mannlicher-Carcano. In the time frame established by the Warren Commission, it was found that it was only possible to fire three shots in that time frame (and they would have to fired very, very rapidly without taking careful aim for shots 2 and 3). Since the time frame established by the Warren Commision allowed for only 3 shots to be fired the bullets that wounded Connalley, hit Kennedy, and the bullet that missed and chipped a curb that knicked a bystander had to be accounted for. Well it's easy to account for the bullet that missed completely (finding by the Warren Commission). Another bullet that killed Kennedy is also easily accounted for. That leaves a third bullet causing injuries to both Connally (back, wrist, leg) and Kennedy (throat). The Warren Commission claims a single bullet caused those injuries. A more or less intact bullet was found on a stretcher at Parland hospital and the Warren Commission found that this was the bullet that caused the injuries to Connally and the non-fatal injury to Kennedy. This is the so called "majic bullet." So I'm not sure how the buffs claim that the Zapruder film shows the existance of a conspiracy. The Warren Commission used the Zapruder film to establish a timeline. The buffs say that it's nonsense that Oswald could do that shooting job in the time frame established by the Warren Commission and that a nearly pristine bullet could cause the injuries to Connally and Kennedy (non fatal).
Those buffs that claim that the Zapruder film was tampered with do so for the following reason. On the shot that killed Kennedy it's clear that his body is moving in direction that would indicate a shot from the front of him (back and to the left, back and to the left). However, it's clear that a mass of blood and tissue explodes from Kennedy's head going forward.
BTW the autopsy is the best evidence for establishing shot trajectories as well as entry and exit wounds. The autopsy was hopelessly botched but I'll leave the particulars of that for another time.
Parmenides
03-11-2003, 06:47 PM
Read "Regicide". The book is small and concise. It states that McCone, Angelton, and William Harvey co-ordinated the planning with Sam Giancana. Johnny Roselli then became Giancana's point man with Chiicago and ZR Rifle. The mob (Chuck Nicoletti, Harrelson, Brading, and Roscoe White), ZR Rifle (hired Corsicans) and the Cuban exiles (Patrick Hemmings, Frank Sturgis of Watergate burglary fame,and a few others coordinated by Hunt and David Atlee Phillips) provided shooters. They had 2 teams active and a backup team. Much of this information happens to be cross referenced and confirmed by both Jim Garrison, and in documents presented by Twyman in "Bloody Treason." It's no coincidence that both Sam Giancana and Johnny Roselli were both murderd the week before their scheduled dates with the Church Committee.
http://www.jfk-online.com/films.html
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/59wit.htm
list of everybody who said jfk car stopped.
Ray Zee
03-11-2003, 11:37 PM
we all know the govt. twists facts and reports what it wants for its own benefit. so we may never know what really happened. so who cares. its long over, and we really know giaconno killed kennedy because of marilyn monroe and his dad.
but why cant there be eyes looking out of asteroids. why cant they use them to infiltrate the human race.
and where can you get one of those ray blocking helmets.
I read an essay that won this award, you guys should check it out. It's tilted, "why oswald alone killed kennedy" or something like that. I am no expert but he was. It convincingly debunks many of the fallacies I am reading now.
It's hard to convince me of any conspiracy let alone JFK.
'It's hard to convince me of any conspiracy '
uh, iran-contra?
andyfox
03-12-2003, 01:09 AM
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt.htm
andyfox
03-12-2003, 01:10 AM
Not to mention Watergate. . .
I never said there weren't conspiracies....although I don't equate the Watergate as being on the same level as JFK, but there are many other ungrounded conspiracies than actual ones, thus its hard to convince.
How about the NBA reffing conspiracy...there is a post for you guys.
I honestly thought this post was going to be a movie review (Hollywood Movie).
Anyway, everyone knows that Jerry Jeff Walker killed President Kennedy. He was drunk at the time, which clearly explains speed of shots fired, trajectories, magic bullets etc. Richard Nixon and Ron Ziegler paid him to do it.
-Zeno
adios
03-12-2003, 07:16 AM
The fact that something could have happened makes it likely that it did happen is preposterous. This site in my mind implies that the findings of the autopsy support the conclusions they reach. Too bad the doctors performing the autopsy MISSED the the throat wound in their November 22, 1963 examination of the body. The next day after realizing his incredible gaffe (after talking to Parland hospital doctors I believe), Dr. James Humes BURNED his notes from the November 22, 1963 examination and wrote an autopsy report from scratch (without benefit of having the body of JFK). It was unfortunate that the three autopsy doctors assigned to do the autopsy had little experience in performing them. BTW FWIW all the medical personel at Parkland hospital referred to the throat wound as an entry wound on November 22, 1963. The doctors in the emergency ward were highly experencied in treating gun shot wounds. There's even films of the doctors briefing the press referring to the wound as an entry wound.
Also I sure don't want to pass up an opportunity to trash the Warren Commission. If the "evidence" provided by this site is so clear cut and proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the single bullet theory is right, why is there no such explanation in the Warren Commission Report? The site you posted is on the same level as those who offer proof that the Zapruder film was doctored. There is one truth IMO that is undeniable, the Warren Commission conducted a woefully poor, inept, and inadequate investigation of the crime as their work product is reflected in the report. We don't say someone is guilty in this country without some sort of advesarial process to try to determine the truth. IMO Oswald doesn't get convicted in court of law on the evidence against him. Try using an autopsy report whose doctors missed a wound on the body in the examination of the body, where the original notes were burned, and the report was done from memory the next day as evidence against Oswald. There's a laundry list of other ways to provide reasonable doubt IMO. The Warren Commission was flawed from it's inception as LBJ wanted to put the assassanation quickly behind him so he could get on with his presidency. LBJ put tremendous pressure on the Warren Commission to complete their work as fast as possible. Expediting the matter was more important than finding the truth.
'We don't say someone is guilty in this country without some sort of advesarial process to try to determine the truth. '
well youre way behind the times there. enemy combatant, etc.
btw if the so called patriot 2 act passes (after another attack or emergency or whatever) , you can be 'stripped of your citizenship' if the government can 'infer from your actions' that you have renounced your citizenship. like you gave money to a charity that, unbeknownst to you, had some ties (or probable ties or whatever) to terrorism. hard to believe but true.
seriously though, you dont think LHO would be labelled terroritst enemy combatant and held incognito w/o lawyer and trial and stuff? padilla is right now and he didnt do anything or be caught with any evidence whatsoever. he just got off a plane and thats it.
adios
03-12-2003, 07:52 AM
"seriously though, you dont think LHO would be labelled terroritst enemy combatant and held incognito w/o lawyer and trial and stuff?"
brad I have no doubt that he would be. I don't like the trashing of the Bill of Rights any better than you do. Perhaps you can see how it gets started.
Parmenides
03-12-2003, 03:32 PM
The magic bullet had to cause at least 6 wounds. The lower shoulder blade wound in the back,2. The throat wound (6 inches higher in the throat)Connaly's wrist, his ribs, his thigh, his forearm and his shoulder. Not to mention that Kennedy was first shot in the throat, which is clear in the film.
FBI marksman attempted to reproduce the act. Not one could do it. 5.6 seconds is what is documented. The easiest refutation of the magic bullet is that Connally is still holding his stetson hat a full second after Kennedy was struck in the back. He would have to had been holding it with a a shattered wrist, 2 shattered ribs, and wounds on his arm if the magic bullet theory is viable. Connally himself stated that he (Connally) was shot twice with 2 different bullets.
A Gallup public opininon poll taken 2 years ago showed that 88% of the American public reject the Warren Commission.
Of course, years from now, the press will tell us that George Bush won the 2000 election outright and that Gore lost the popular vote.
Most people already have forgotten that George W.Bush was AWOL from the Texas National Guard for 18 months. He was being brought up on court martial charges. His father intervened to prevent the label of deserter being placed upon his son. Only in America can a deserter become the commander in chief.
Parmenides
03-12-2003, 07:34 PM
The sad truth is that the Bush regime represents pretty much the same people that the Nixon regime had behind it.
The Watergate-Cuban operatives (Sturgis, Hunt, Felix Rodriguez, etc)represent the same geoup of operatives that sabotaged the Dade county voting in 2000. It's not a coincidence that Jeb Bush is Gov of Florida. Prescott Bush was the primary sponsor of a young Richard Nixon. GHW Bush was chairman of the Republican National Committee during Watergate. He was grilled heavily in his CIA confirmation hearings about the laundering of campaign finance dollars through Mexico from CREEP (the committee to reelect) which was money paid directly in hush funds to Hunt-Sturgis et al. The current regime is really no different than the old one. The names have changed a bit. One Bush has replaced another.
very true.
jfk->watergate->iran-contra-> now
David Steele
03-12-2003, 07:50 PM
Some time back I looked at a lot of the details and pretty much concluded there was no evidence of a second gunman although it isn't ruled out either.
However, I don't see why Oswald couldn't have been the only shooter and yet still there is a serious conspiracy.
I suspect the conspiracy was the CIA/cuba-attackers/watergate connection organizing with Oswald somehow ending up the shooter.
In his novel Libra, Don Delillo has it about right.
D.
Parmenides
03-12-2003, 08:01 PM
There are many problems with this. The main one is that nitrate tests conducted on Oswald by the Dallas police department came back negative. He didn't fire a rifle that day. This is clearly in the records. The supposed palm print on the rifle was not found by the FBI lab. It was only found after the FBI returned the rifle to the Dallas Police Dept. The chain of evidence was broken, and the rifle could not have been used in a court of law.
Oswald was a Patsy. He also happened to be a paid informant for the FBI, and had a 201 file listing him as an asset of the ONI.
Even if Oswald did do it (most credible evidence indicates that it was impossible for him to be a lone shooter) then an officer in the US intelligence community committed the murder (Oswald).
It's interesting that Howard Hunt lost his liable suit against a reporter that claimed Hunt was involved with the conspiracy. Hunt worked for the CIA in an offical capacity for 21 years before going to work for Gordon Liddy as one of Nixon's plumbers.
John Cole
03-12-2003, 08:15 PM
David,
I think DeLillo got it good; it's a fine novel. Got it right? Not so sure. I think the cottage conspiracy industry only gets worse when it comes to trying to figure out who wrote Shakespare's plays. Hint: Shakespeare did.
John
David Steele
03-12-2003, 08:34 PM
I am a huge skeptic when it comes to most conspiracy proposals. I would subscribe to the Skeptical Inquirer if I didn't enjoy searching for it on the news-stand each month.
In this particular assasination, there were a lot of suspicious connections. The fact that Oswald was bumped off so early, being the biggest.
There were many different proposals for the conspiracy:
organized by:
1)Russia
2)Castro
3)Cuba
4)The mob
5)CIA/bayofpigs revenge
For me, the Howard Hunt stuff, along with the cuban connections to almost all the players, made me independently leaning to the 5)CIA theory.
With the Delillo book, I just found it to almost exactly match the details of this theory.
I think the problem is that so many conspiracy buffs expected the physical evidence to be sufficient to solve the case and it turned out to be inconclusive at best.
D.
just for the record it seems to me in the zapruder film the car seems to keep a constant speed.
over 50 eyewitnesses (i posted a link in the thread here) including like senator yarborough and others, not including spectators and stuff, testified that after the first shot rang out the car slowed or came to a dead stop (i take it to mean kind of like a 'california roll' or whatever when you come to a stop sign and 'stop', but keep forward momentum and it doesnt come back im sure you know what i mean) and then two more shots and then car sped up.
so it seems to me (also nix tape i think shows eyewitnesses to be correct i think, i posted link in this thread too) that zapruder film, for whatever reason, gives a false impression.
so it seems to me
1) film was altered somehow by 'conspiracy'
2) film was altered but zapruder in on conspiracy (ie, he was planted there to take film, perhaps to distract investigating motives and instead focus on method)
3) film was unaltered but showed kind of an optical illusion perhaps coupled with cameras low technology
4) film was altered but not part of any conspiracy - ie, film was 'cleaned up' for posterity and no ulteriour motives.
5) all the witnesses were wrong.
well it seems to me that #3 is the only one where we can employ the scientific method on. (reproducability)
since the sheer number of witnesses (including like nix tape i think) agree, i feel that
A) if #3 cannot be reproduced or has not been reproduced, then it must be entertained that
B) something is up with the zapruder film, and it is perhaps the biggest 'red herring' in history.
Parmenides
03-12-2003, 11:53 PM
12& of the population.
adios
03-13-2003, 02:41 AM
"The magic bullet had to cause at least 6 wounds. The lower shoulder blade wound in the back,2. The throat wound (6 inches higher in the throat)Connaly's wrist, his ribs, his thigh, his forearm and his shoulder. Not to mention that Kennedy was first shot in the throat, which is clear in the film.
FBI marksman attempted to reproduce the act. Not one could do it. 5.6 seconds is what is documented. The easiest refutation of the magic bullet is that Connally is still holding his stetson hat a full second after Kennedy was struck in the back. He would have to had been holding it with a a shattered wrist, 2 shattered ribs, and wounds on his arm if the magic bullet theory is viable. Connally himself stated that he (Connally) was shot twice with 2 different bullets."
Anybody in their right mind would rate the Warren Commission "single bullet theory" as being extremely unlikely to happen. In all fairness lengthening the time frame for the shooting allows for more shots. That's why someone like Posner has actually more or less had to trash the Warren Commission report himself to conclude that Oswald was the lone assassin. It may not bother a lot of people that an investigation of the poorest and shoddiest nature imaginable was done in the assassination of a President of the United States, an assassination where the murdered president's successor gained the most, but it sure the hell bothers me.
interestingly i read on the internet (ok take with a grain of salt) that peter lawford had told one of those guys who write jfk conspiracy books that after the assasination rfk told the family that it was carried out by cia/military industrial complex , but that there was nothing to be done about it.
otoh what would you expect the kennedys to say among themselves.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.