Tuesday, September 27, 2016

JFK ... A last look

As I've mentioned before, there is a lot of confusion/uncertainty about the assassination.  

So many dots that can't be connected. So many things that don't make sense.

Was Oswald even involved?  If he or someone took the shot from the school book depository, why not take an easier shot as the limo approached, rather than firing from behind? What of all the questions about the rifle and its caliber? Why was officer Tippet killed? Was it connected in some way? After all, people say he looked like JFK.

In many ways, we have to go back to the beginning.  What do we actually *know* and what is mere speculation? Or perhaps what are misreported "facts" from news organizations and investigators who were scrambling to understand everything for the first 24-48 hours?

A reader sent me a link to this video that I found to be most enlightening. The person speaking refers to it as how he contributed to some of the confusion by a simple mistake he made. It's worth a look, because it changes the conversation. 

As I've stated, we'll never know the truth, but maybe we can set aside the warren commission findings, and take a fresh look at all the facts.  Put away all the conspiracy theories and just focus on what we know....

Thursday, September 22, 2016

That sounds about right

One of the kids was doing French homework and looked up trompe. Not surprising is It?



Sent from my iPad

Saturday, September 17, 2016

JFK - the Moorman photo

Some things just clatter around in your brain for a while. Here's one about the jfk assassination that bugged me,  Mary Moorman is the person I point to with the yellow arrow. She took the lone photo of the assassination that we have.

She said she was standing on the street as the president passed by, in order to get a better look. But in the zapruder film (the one where she and her friend in red are facing the camera), she is clearly NOT on the street. But there's another problem: other things don't quite line up to the photo.

The still I took from the zapruder film is from about 15 frames before the head wound, so you can see her position. The police are in a different enough position where they couldn't make up the distance in the few seconds that pass.

And then there is the photo from behind Moorman. In this picture, she is in the right place with respect to the police, and IS on the street. But now there's the problem of other things, especially the other lady to the side, and the mystery man who isn't in the zapruder picture. I used arrows to show you everyone.  

Sure, it could all be timing or angles. And again with crappy photos from the 1960s it's hard to get an accurate true depiction of what happened. 

But it goes back to my thought that this is all very, very odd and confusing.

Sunday, August 28, 2016

Who killed the USFL?

I live the 30 for 30 series that appears on ESPN. Every episode I've seen has been well researched and compelling.

But one stands out as especially relevant. In who killed the USFL, Mike
Tolling posits:
"Well, it seems that a certain high-profile and impatient team owner, whose name now adorns towers and hotels and golf courses all over the world, had convinced his colleagues that the league should either move to a fall season and go head-to-head with the NFL, or fold its tents."

You can read the full summary here:
http://www.espn.com/30for30/film?page=small-potatoes-who-killed-the-usfl

Or watch it here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-f5fQo5IkA&sns=em

But in typical Trump fashion, he calls mike dishonest and a loser because he's incredibly thin skinned. You can read about that aspect here:
http://www.foxsports.com/buzzer/story/donald-trump-usfl-letter-on-film-30-for-30-mike-tollin-022216

Thursday, August 4, 2016

Zapruder Film


In my post about JFK, I mentioned the Zapruder film as a key piece of evidence that we have.  But there are some unusual things about the film that have been gnawing at me, so I did a little more sleuthing on this topic.

Some people will tell you its edited.  Some will tell you its a hoax.  Some cling to it.  But there was one guy who caught my attention because the sign for the "Stemmons Freeway" just didn't look right in the film; and it does seem a little odd that its there and covers a lot of area, and lasts for maybe 1/3 of the film.

Also, in a correction of something I said in the JFK post, I heard there was another version of the Zapruder film - but as far as I know, the unedited, original version does not actually exist. 

I was curious where the sign was in relation to Zapruder.  That's when I happened onto about 40 seconds of video that panned around between the crowd and toward the man on the pedestal.  It stops just before the presidents motorcade arrives, not surprisingly, given how there seemed to be a lot of agents collecting film and pictures.

Anyway, what I did was to create a sort of panorama from the video; and then added in the sightline.  Stop and think about this for a moment: guy gets a new camera. He is going to use it to make a film of the president passing by.  He works nearby so he's familiar with the area. He climbs up on a step to get the best shot he can, with an unobstructed view....and then he picks a place where a sign covers a lot of this view. Yeah, I don't think so.  If you look at the sightline I've shown, it seems he would have been almost completely over the sign - it should have appeared in just a small portion at the bottom of the screen.

Weird, right?

But something else caught my attention.  In the short film, the people around the sign itself are cheering.  They're jumping up and down.  They're waving their arms.  And they're all looking expectantly at the first motorcycle, which is just around the corner as the film ends.

Yet in the Zapruder film, they're standing motionless, and don't seem to notice the president passing.  Strange.

Unless it was edited. 

Again, I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it seems odd. 

The main problem comes in actually editing 8mm film.  Its really small, and notoriously hard to work with.  But, I did some editing in the 70s and into the 80s on this format of film. Its hard, but not impossible,  And companies made equipment for these purposes. But making changes to the content of the film, that actually looks otherwise fairly normal?  That seems even more unlikely. 


But if there was another film, in a larger format? Then, maybe. But Zapruder had an 8mm camera and the camera position is about right, generally,

And one last thing about this topic.  Zapruder had used this camera a little, and was familiar with how to shoot a film.  And yet, he captures the limo all the way at the bottom of the frame, so the limo is almost completely out of the field of view.  We see the people, and a large amount of the grass in the plaza.  This can't be the shot he was planning... along the lines of the location he picked, why would he film like this if he went to that much trouble to get an unobstructed view?  It's possible he was caught up in the moment or that he was aware of what was going on and slightly distracted of course.

But who knows?  Its all speculation at this point.  Very strange, unexplainable circumstances.  And answers we will never have, probably.