Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumJosiah Thompson: The Untrue Fact About The JFK Assassination
Josiah Thompson, author or Six Seconds in Dallas, admits he made a critical error in his analysis of the Zapruder film back in the '60s.
The audio is frustratingly out of synch with the video, especially considering the importance of the acoustical sync with the Zapruder film. Still interesting.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
rwsanders
(2,598 posts)Covers why.
Archae
(46,327 posts)What exactly does he say?
Was his error with the Zapruder film the fact that the film shows only one shooter?
deutsey
(20,166 posts)He was with Time/Life and concluded JFK's head went forward with the fatal head shot in the mid-'60s.
He was one of the few who saw the film before it was made public in the mid-'70s.
He shows why he now thinks his analysis was wrong.
I recommend listening to what he says and evaluating it for yourself.
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)I still think LBJ and Poppy Bush along with J. Edgar Hoover all had a hand in this. It sickens me when the blurry Bush picture at the depository isn't measured forensically to see if it really is him. IMO it is him. Same hair line, same stance, same hand in pocket. And it happened in their backyard, Texas. Too convenient for me.
bucolic_frolic
(43,146 posts)First I've ever heard of it .....
SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)tom flocco will help
INdemo
(6,994 posts)the Koch Bros Father, Fred Koch being involved in some way. He hated the Kennedys. he was co-founder of the John Birch Society of which many believe had something to do with the killing.
There are just too many questions. We could sit here for a very long time with all sorts of theory's but will we ever know?
zeemike
(18,998 posts)And shows why he was wrong...and shows why the brains and blood went back and to the left consistent with a frontal shot, and there were 4 shots on the audio tape, two coming very close togather...impossable for one shooter with a bolt action gun.
But don't watch it if you want to believe...
SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)Motorcycle cops back and on the left splattered with blood and brain...
deutsey
(20,166 posts)after being among the few to watch the Zapruder film.
"His head could be seen to move violently forward."
Sorry, Dan. You must've been watching something else.
KurtNYC
(14,549 posts)which creates the opposite effect, the head going forward. Hoover called this a printing error. I have read that Life magazine also reversed the frames after the headshot but have been unable to confirm that.
Btw, Dan Rather in this clip is clear that it was a different bullet which hits Connally than the one which hits the President. Connally and his wife also believed that he was not struck by the same bullet (aka the magic bullet) but rather by a separate one fired about half a second after the one which strikes JFK's throat.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zapruder_film#Subsequent_history
CANDO
(2,068 posts)From it, I came away convinced that the Warren report got it right. I don't get what Rather describes as a "violently forward" movement. It is almost imperceptible movement forward. But, and here is where this man's presentation has pointed out; the oh so slight movement forward really didn't happen! It was movement by the camera, as Mr. Zapruder obviously was startled by the gun fire, which caused the images to blur and hence the perception of ever so slight forward motion. And I might add, as I'm watching him explain the measurements between Kennedy and fixed points on the car, I'm thinking about the angle of view being changed simply by the forward movement of the car. That would absolutely change the measurements in and of itself. Why would he not take that into consideration? So now I'm back in the fog and open to more than one gunman arguments. There also was clearly 4 shots heard on the police recording. The last two coming not even a second apart from each other and it appeared as though the very last shot was the head shot killing Kennedy.
DiverDave
(4,886 posts)CNN lied there collective asses off.
The warren report was so much trash.
Tell me, since you think the report was 'right on' how can a ballistic object stop in mid-flight turn and then resume its speed?
Oh, and the bullet that just magically appeared on the gurney that had ZERO firing marks on it, no rifling marks no scratches at all. As if it was never fired.
And your 'report' says that that was the bullet that did the magic trick.
Peoples testimony was changed, signatures were forged, yeah, a peach of a 'report'
The warren report was part of the coverup.
Garrison was RIGHT, else why would the feds try so hard to discredit him?
Follow the MONEY, who profited from the escalation of Vietnam?
And that freak hoover HATED both of the Kennedy's, and aint it funny they both died?
The people who ordered and carried out the hit are still alive, oh some my have died but I bet there are a bunch still laughing.
Makes me want to hope there is a hell just so they can suffer for eternity.
CANDO
(2,068 posts)I don't think you watched the CNN 2 hour show or even read my entire post. If you didn't do both, don't talk to me until you have. 1st of all, CNN didn't express any editorial position. All they did was interview most of the living people who were either directly involved in covering the assassination or wrote books questioning the Warren conclusions. "CNN lied their collective asses off"? Really? Now I know you didn't watch the show. "CNN" didn't offer anything but an historical look back and interviewed people, that's it. They didn't posit an opinion at all. That they dared interview people who support the WC report surely can't be construed as CNN "lying". They also presented many opinions supporting various other conclusions. I thought it was well rounded and gave all sides a chance to air it out.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)The bullet recovered from the gurney wasn't unfired, the tail end was flattened. And re-enactments of the shooting, in both real life and 3D computer analysis, with Kennedy and Connally in their ACTUAL positions show the bullet could likely have hit both men. Connally's seat was several inches inboard, and several inches lower than Kennedy's. Also, Connally turned to the right before that shot, probably a reaction to hearing the first shot, and shifted his rear a little more inboard yet.
To make their claim, CTers always place Connally directly in front of Kennedy, at the same height, with both facing forward. That is clearly impossible, since the seats weren't located that way.
rwsanders
(2,598 posts)when they compiled their report.
Just finished L. Fletcher Prouty's book. Funny he doesn't even bother with many of the details of the report because it is so fundamentally flawed.
It pointed out one thing I didn't know before, that the shot that missed and pieces of the round hit a bystander hit a curb. That section of concrete was removed the next day. He points out that if it had come from the SBD, it would have been a wild shot, but if it was from another shooter who was directly behind Kennedy, that shot would have passed through an 18 inch circle around his head.
Very interesting book.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Really!
marble falls
(57,080 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)zeemike
(18,998 posts)they have their story and are sticking with it.
But when I first saw the Zapruder film there was no doubt in my mind the shot came from the fornt...but they will bullshit us to death and never change the story...and who will you believe, them or your lying eyes?
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)zeemike
(18,998 posts)As a denier it is your duty is it not?
rwsanders
(2,598 posts)started comparing them to Holocaust deniers. Seems to be the same mindset.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)But it can be universally applied to anyone who questions the official story on anything.
It is a wonderful tool for them.
amcgrath
(397 posts)The lack of synch makes this pretty useless as a demonstration, and while the speaker points to a mistake he made, he ignores another mistake that is commonly cited as evidence of whether Oswald acted alone by referring to the "six seconds".
This is a very basic piece of math, but according to the official government report Oswald fired three shots in six seconds. The possibility /impossibility of this gets argued a lot. But if Oswald acted alone, he fired two shots in six seconds. The first shot simply became the starting point of the following six seconds.
It is the same as the puzzle, "if you are given three pills and told to take one every half hour how long does it take to finish them". The majority of people will tell you that it is an hour and a half.
Much of the assassination is argued based on such misunderstanding and flawed logic.
All you really need to know is that the government "got their man" and they have the evidence to prove it - but 50 years later the evidence files proving they were right, remain sealed.
fasttense
(17,301 posts)Co-written by Thom Hartmann, explains how the mob arranged for JFK's, MLK's and Bobby Kennedy's murders. This book is filled with evidence and I have yet to see anyone dispute the books' findings and evidence. It always amazed me that very few people, when discussing JFK's murder, look at the bigger picture and question the 3 murders that took place almost back to back.
Anyway, here is an interview on Democracy Now about the book and upcoming movie.
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/11/12/as_john_kerry_questions_official_story
Anyone who is truly interested in JFK's murder should read the book. It is so full of historical data and evidence, you wonder why no one has seen this before.
KurtNYC
(14,549 posts)If Oswald is under the control of Bannister and part of the anti-Castro activities in New Orleans and Lake Pontchetrain then he simply becomes the cut-out in this assassination.
Jack Ruby is the only player with any connection to mafia, Carlos Marcello specifically, but Ruby is more closely tied in to the Dallas PD. The Dallas PD, not the mafia, create the opportunity for Ruby to shoot Oswald.
Similarly, the mafia don't have the power to change the parade route, lose JFK's brain, destroy the notes from Oswald's interrogation or to put Dulles in charge of the investigation. The mafia is a red herring.
From the days before the Fairness Doctrine was truck down...
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)His case was preposterous, and witnesses completely unbelievable.
KurtNYC
(14,549 posts)Some told him they believed that Garrison had proved a conspiracy to kill JFK but he had not effectively tied Clay Shaw to it.
Source: Plausible Denial: Was the CIA Involved in the Assassination of JFK?, (New York: Thunder's Mouth Press, 1991), p. 221.
In subsequent years this picture of Oswald and David Ferrie came out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ciravolo.jpg
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)was plotting to kill Kennedy as a teenager in 1956? He only attended a few of the CAP gatherings, there is no evidence Ferrie and he ever stayed in touch over the next 8 years.
Nor is their any evidence of either Ferrie or Shaw plotting to kill Kennedy, which is why the Jury laughed Garrison out of court, rendering a not guilty verdict in an hour.
My impression is that Garrison was either a homophobe, or figured gays would make an easy target...perhaps counting on a homophobic jury. Garrison's witnesses' testimony was simply not believable. He had no case.
CanSocDem
(3,286 posts)...in crucial parts of the plot and unmistakeable motive.
Kennedy wouldn't move against Castro who was taking ownership of all of the mafias cash cows.
.
KurtNYC
(14,549 posts)If Trafficante's issue was with Castro then it would seem easier to just assassinate Castro. The way the theory is laid out in your post, Trafficante would have had to expect Kennedy to oust Castro and then give the casinos back to him (?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santo_Trafficante,_Jr.#Cuba
The mafia(s) can shoot people but they couldn't change the parade route or make JFK's brain disappear.
GreatCaesarsGhost
(8,584 posts)and handed over to RFK very unceremoniously?
KurtNYC
(14,549 posts)claiming that RFK "stole the brain." Not sure what Lane wrote though.
Btw I just did a quick study on Mark Lane and his life would make an epic movie -- NY State Assemblyman, NYC campaign manager for JFK's 1960 run, arrested Freedom Rider, tried to represent Oswald legally, critique of the Warren Commission, MLK, Vietnam, and then he is at Jonestown when the massacre occurs and one of the few survivors. What a life! (and still going):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Lane_%28author%29
fasttense
(17,301 posts)
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)… namely, documents that have been withheld through the courts. I suggest listening and reading as if it mattered because it does. Here's another credible person (also, please visit Creative Speculation here to see the video I will link associated with this link):
JFKfacts.org
For those who care that the Kennedy assassination has not been solved and who do not feel the Warren Commission ever paid attention to testimony during its 800 pages, there are many records still withheld of operational files imperative to release material showing interesting people who figured in the suppression of information.
Why? I want to know. Meanwhile, for those who read well researched books including 6 Seconds, we should insist that the American people full disclosure to more material from the Church Committee's own questions about who killed Kennedy.
The records that should be seen have been postponed to be released… Why? The CIA has said they won't release material that researches have been going through the courts to acquire. Now, it's not until 2017… But, the CIA can request postponement beyond 2017.
I agree with others here and in the research community that they won't do that if the demands from the public are for the release of this material as soon as possible.
On the 50th anniversary, we should make the case to shed new light on imp dimensions we do not know about now.
KurtNYC
(14,549 posts)you look at the testimony of Abraham Zapruder. He testified twice that he believed the head shot came from behind him (Zapruder).
1964, under oath, one of several mentions:
Mr. ZAPRUDER - I heard the second--after the first shot--I saw him leaning over and after the second shot--it's possible after what I saw, you know, then I started yelling, "They killed him, they killed him," and I just felt that somebody had ganged up on him and I was still shooting the pictures until he got under the underpass--I don't even know how I did it.
And then, I didn't even remember how I got down from that abutment there, but there I was, I guess, and I was walking toward--back toward my office and screaming, "They killed him, they killed him," and the people that I met on the way didn't even know what happened and they kept yelling, "What happened, what happened, what happened?" It seemed that they had heard a shot but they didn't know exactly what had happened as the car sped away, and I kept on just yelling, "They killed him, they killed him, they killed him," and finally got to my office and my secretary--I told her to call the police or the Secret Service--I don't know what she was doing, and that's about all. I was very much upset. Naturally, I couldn't imagine such a thing being done. I just went to my desk and stopped there until the police came and then we were required to get a place to develop the films.
I knew I had something, I figured it might be of some help--I didn't know what.
As to what happened -- I remember the police were running behind me. There were police running right behind me. Of course, they didn't realize yet, I guess, where the shot came from--that it came from that height.
...
Mr. ZAPRUDER - Yes--after the shots--yes, some of them were motorcycle cops--I guess they left their motorcycles running and they were running right behind me, of course, in the line of the shooting. I guess they thought it came from right behind me.
Mr. LIEBELER - Did you have any impression as to the direction from which these shots came?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - No, I also thought it came from back of me. Of course, you can't tell when something is in line it could come from anywhere, but being I was here and he was hit on this line and he was hit right in the head--I saw it right around here, so it looked like it came from here and it could come from there.
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/zapruder.htm
joanbarnes
(1,722 posts)
shebornik
(127 posts)why did he wait for his target, which was coming towards him at a slow parade pace with an unobstructed view, to turn a corner and start heading away down a street with trees partially blocking his view? At least he was smart enough to get arrested in a theater with plenty of witnesses, which gave him a little more time before they found another patsy to do him in.
Thekaspervote
(32,762 posts)Any entry wound from a bullet is always the more surgical precise wound. Shot from the back, the entry wound was small, the exit wound to the front was explosive, as was seen in this case. I saw this first hand, unfortunately over my years in emergency and operating rooms. Don't take my word for it ask any physician that works in emergency medicine
jjewell
(618 posts)JFK: The Smoking Gun. For the first time in 50 years, I believe it supplies for me a satisfactory explanation for what occurred on November 22, 1963 in Dallas.
