This "Other" film fascinates me. The idea that it's floating around out there -- in the hands of French collectors, or CBS News archivists, or rogue intelligence types who showed it around college campuses decades ago just to gauge the reaction -- is unthinkable and yet makes perfect sense at the same time. I find it impossible to imagine that it's another film shot from another camera. It must be the original Zapruder film. What a remarkable thing it would be for it to quietly show up on YouTube on the fiftieth anniversary.
This was a riveting interview with Greg Burnham. His testimony is invaluable in assessing the Z-film and the question of authenticity. The only section that seemed odd to me was Greg's fuzzy recollection of the lurching movements of Jackie and Clint Hill. If Jackie wanted to "escape" the vehicle, she only needed to pivot to her left and jump out of the stationary limousine--not clamber onto the trunk. Is it possible that Greg was focusing on JFK and the horror of the scene, and, consequently, he does not remember as clearly the reactions of Jackie?If Greg could narrate a slow-motion sequence of the extant Z-film, his commentary would help those less familiar with the case to understand the most blatant errors of fabrication, including (a) deleted footage on the turn from Houston to Elm; (b) the phony Stemmons freeway sign; (c) the impossible blurred images in the Dealey Plaza background of the kill zone; (d) the full limousine stop, as indicated by the rapid forward movements of passengers even in the extant Z-film; and (e) the extended distance between Queen Mary and Lincoln limo.Another essential point of Greg's commentary was his revelation that multiple agents emerged from the Queen Mary with rifles drawn. This was a new point never mentioned by Noel Twyman, Rich Della Rosa, or William Reymond. The efforts necessary for those agents to leave their vehicle, race to the front, then return to the Queen Mary, suggests that a substantial perioid of time had elapsed. During this crucial period, enough time was possible for the Dallas motorcycle cop James Chaney to drive past the Lincoln limo on the right side, prior to conferring with the Dallas police chief Jesse Curry in the lead car under the freeway overpass. Of course, this entire sequence has been deleted from the extant Z-film. James Cheney's testimony provided immediately after the assassination and available for viewing on You Tube, may finally be corroborated in the explanation of the alternative Z-film by Greg Burnham.Greg's account helps everything come together to understand (1) why the Z-film required alterations; (2) what were the extent of the film alterations; and (3) what was the sequence of events in the plan to execute JFK. It also provides a plausible explanation that the film described by Greg (or a similar one) was used as a "training" film for political assassinations and viewed by Dan Marvin during his stay in North Carolina as a Green Beret. At some point, Greg needs to reveal the circumstances of his multiple viewings and whether the purpose was also for "training."
This comment has been removed by the author.
By the way...Has anyone else noticed that the door on JFK's right side is not properly closed? The door is not flush with the car'sbodywork. Autrement dit ..the door is not closed "tight".Dum tacet clamat.
" If Jackie wanted to "escape" the vehicle, she only needed to pivot to her left and jump out of the stationary limousine--not clamber onto the trunk....."Excellent point, James! I should go further and say that if Jackie was attempting to flee the vehicle, she had merely to open the door and get out that way. In times of flight, one generally gets out the way one got in - the shortest distance, so to speak. Jackie went over the trunk to retrieve a piece of JFK's head and for no other reason. She was not trying to "escape". It is an insult and a slur to suggest otherwise. Although Jackie herself said (when she viewed the Zapruder film) that she had no recollection of doing what she did i.e. clamber onto and over the trunk.
My report was NEVER intended to slur Jackie in any way. I thought I had made that abundantly clear during the interview, but apparently not. My own personal impression at the time was she appeared to be TERRIFIED and moving away from danger. That was MY interpretation AT THE TIME of viewing. I do not disbelieve her testimony to the contrary. I simply answered a straight forward question with a straight forward answer. I did not claim to "know" what she was doing. I only reported how it appeared to me at the time. Additionally, even IF my interpretation was true (and I am not claiming that it is), who could fault her for such a reaction? Who among us knows how we would react to such a thing? Shock, is the word that comes to mind.Greg Burnham
Hi there, I was really encouraged to uncover this internet site. The purpose becoming that this is these kinds of an useful submit.Genuinely great blog keep it up. dallas limo dallas limousine
Wonderful internet site! I am loving it!! Will be back afterwards to read some much more. I am taking your feeds also dallas party bus dallas airport transportation
I'm amazed, I have to say. Really rarely ever do I face a blog that's equally educative and entertaining, and enable me notify you, you might have hit the nail on the head. Your concept is excellent the issue is something that not sufficient people are talking intelligently about. I am very joyful that I stumbled throughout this in my look for for some thing referring to this. dallas limo dallas limousine dallas party bus
Hi there, I was really inspired to find this internet site. The explanation becoming that this is these kinds of an useful post.Truly wonderful blog hold it up. dallas limousine dallas party bus