14-01-2012, 04:34 PM
HERE IS a part of a thread from i believe Aug 2006, when Rich imo and some others like Greg were being pushed so very hard on the subject of ''the other film some of Rich's comments follow........IMO I KNOW , OR I SHOULD SAY WE, KNOW THERE IS, ARE . WERE OTHER FILMS TAKEN THAT DAY AS MY Hubby, Dad and I Saw ANOTHER ON Canadian telly, not the other film but one taken from the South side,filming towards the fence.taken from down towards the underpass, from the other side of Elm, the view that we caught was of the limo taking off, speeding away ......we did not see it again, and really there was no time for us to zero in on any specifics, but what i am relating is, there was one taken from the south side so i have no doubt there was another film of all taken...and probably others as well...the film we saw was verified some time later on Rich's forum, a man on the alts logged in and spoke of the same or very similar film he had seen from the south side, we tried to get ahold of him, but his email address was no longer in use, and though Rich did try to trace him, we never were able to , but the point being that it had been seen by others.....thanks b....
is predictably calling you and the others who saw it
LIARS.
Could you post a digital copy of your appendix in =
TGZFH
and give me permission to post it on Simkin? (Plus any
additional thoughts)
I am trying to remember all the researchers who saw =
it,
the times and circumstances:
1. DellaRosa
2. Burnham
3. Myers
4. Reymond
5. Marvin
6. Janowitz?
7. others?
Please refresh my memory. Are any of the postings =
still
on the "old forum"?
"Miller" is such a jerk!
Jack=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1350
The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #1 on: August 03, 2006, 06:07 PM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
Yes he is!!
For the record I only recall matching my recollections =
with William Reymond.
I know the others have said they also saw it but I do =
not recall their=20
descriptions if they offered any.
Milicent Cranor also saw the film -- on the premises =
of NBC in NYC.
I will have a scan of mu Appendix E shortly.=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever =
remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1350
The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #2 on: August 03, 2006, 06:22 PM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever =
remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)=20
=20
=20
jack white=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 404
The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #3 on: August 03, 2006, 06:33 PM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks, Rich. Do you remember all those who said=20
they saw it?
jack=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1350
The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #4 on: August 03, 2006, 06:56 PM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
I can't add any except for Mili.=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever =
remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)=20
=20
=20
lee forman=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 164
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #5 on: August 17, 2006, 10:47 AM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
Rich,
How much time elapsed between the first shot to the =
head and the second? Do you recall any other details with respect to =
the foreground? For instance, in the z-footage, it appears that the =
camera 'hops' over the area of the stairs and retaining wall. Does this =
area appear in the other film at all?
- lee=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1350
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #6 on: August 17, 2006, 11:28 AM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lee,
The first thing to realize about analyzing the "other" =
film is that while I
viewed it on 3 occasions, I never had possession of it =
and unlike the Z film
I could not watch it in slo-mo or frame-by-frame. =
Certain things stand out and=20
are etched in my mind, but it has been at least 10 =
years since I last saw it.
The 2 head shots were nearly, but not exactly, =
simultaneous. First the
shot to the rear and then the tangential shot to the =
temple.
I do not recall much about the background as I was =
focused on the main
characters.=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever =
remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)=20
=20
=20
lee forman=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 164
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #7 on: August 17, 2006, 10:11 PM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Rich.
I don't suppose that it appeared to you that the front =
shot may have come from a bit lower than the camera? Just curious. =
Maybe that's another impossible question. Just trying to work something =
out.
- lee
=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
John Delane Williams=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 45
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #8 on: August 21, 2006, 10:59 PM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
I notice an anomaly here. What we have is a few people =
saying they say an alternative Z-like film. I have no reason to oppose =
such a film, but where is the evidence? If you saw the film, it must =
exist (or existed). Seems like there would be good money in releasing =
it. I'll buy a copy. But no information on where the film came from, who =
showed it, and who might have copies today. For those of us who are =
pretty sure we never saw the film, it's haed to say much, except where =
is the evidence?=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1350
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #9 on: August 21, 2006, 11:39 PM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
Try not to be naive. You should ask why the extant Z =
film became
so readily available through numerous outlets and on =
various media.
I would gladly show the film -- but I never possessed =
it. Collectively we
know that at least 2 of the major TV networks have the =
film: CBS and=20
NBC. =20
But don't under-estimate just how dangerous a property =
it is. It is
one piece of evidence which lays the cover-up bare. =
It shows
triangulation of fire; surgically accurate shooting; =
participation of
various co-conspirators; complicity of the Secret =
Service; and
proof positive that the government has been lying =
about the
events for 43 years and counting.
One individual living in Europe allowed a researcher =
the opportunity to
view the film on multiple occasions. That researcher =
set out to
convince that person to allow a copy to be made of it. =
That person
felt his life was in jeopardy over that film. But the =
researcher began
to wear the guy down and he was considering making a =
copy.
A short time later while the researcher was travelling =
abroad the guy
with the film was found murdered. The guy was retired =
from French
Intelligence.
As I stated previously, if you haven't seen the film =
you are well within
your right to reserve judgement until such time that =
you can. But
try not to question its existence. A fair number of =
people have seen
it, some more than once, and no two ever saw it at the =
same time
in the same place.
Everything isn't about money. Sure that film could =
bring a lot of money
but would you risk your life to market it??
You see an anomoly here -- I don't.
=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever =
remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)=20
=20
=20
John Delane Williams=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 45
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #10 on: August 22, 2006, 12:20 AM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Rich,
I'm not going to call you naive. What you don't seem =
to get is that there is an uneven playing field. In effect, you say you =
have seen the film. Yet we get no particulars on who showed the film, =
where it came from what was the camera angle, etc. You imply that giving =
out that information can br too dangerous. Perhaps so. Yet others who =
have brought up evidence that didn't seem to be well enough documented =
have not fared well. Let me give you an innocent example that I would =
guess neither of us gets to involved with. I don't recall her name right =
now, (I'm sure someone, probably you, will know her name, but she wrote =
"The Last Dissenting Witness." She initially reported seeing a toy dog, =
(or something similar) in Jackie's hands in the motorcade, when in fact, =
it was a bouquet of roses. For this misstep, she received a lot of =
wrath, for a simple little mistake. Now, I'm not suggesting that you =
criticised her about this, but many person's, mainly Warren defenders, =
did. In any event, I'm sure you saw something. I'd like to see it too. =
Perhaps that's not presently possible. However for those of us on the =
Forum without this experience, we are kind of expected to either accept =
it, or. I am taking the "or" position. From this perspective, several =
persons claim to have seen such a film, but little documentation thus =
far has been revealed. I don't have any beliefs one way or another about =
the film. It surely could have existed, and may still exist. The anomaly =
is the level of evidence shown thus far, and the treatment that level of =
evidence gets in other topics on this Forum.
John
=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
wstewart=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 13
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #11 on: August 22, 2006, 12:33 AM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from: admin on August 21, 2006, 11:39 PM
Try not to be naive. You should ask why the extant Z =
film became
so readily available through numerous outlets and on =
various media.
I would gladly show the film -- but I never possessed =
it. Collectively we
know that at least 2 of the major TV networks have the =
film: CBS and=20
NBC. =20
But don't under-estimate just how dangerous a property =
it is. It is
one piece of evidence which lays the cover-up bare. =
It shows
triangulation of fire; surgically accurate shooting; =
participation of
various co-conspirators; complicity of the Secret =
Service; and
proof positive that the government has been lying =
about the
events for 43 years and counting.
One individual living in Europe allowed a researcher =
the opportunity to
view the film on multiple occasions. That researcher =
set out to
convince that person to allow a copy to be made of it. =
That person
felt his life was in jeopardy over that film. But the =
researcher began
to wear the guy down and he was considering making a =
copy.
A short time later while the researcher was travelling =
abroad the guy
with the film was found murdered. The guy was retired =
from French
Intelligence.
As I stated previously, if you haven't seen the film =
you are well within
your right to reserve judgement until such time that =
you can. But
try not to question its existence. A fair number of =
people have seen
it, some more than once, and no two ever saw it at the =
same time
in the same place.
Everything isn't about money. Sure that film could =
bring a lot of money
but would you risk your life to market it??
You see an anomoly here -- I don't.
I agree completely, Rich. I would also point out to =
John that this "other film" (as it has come
to be known) is certainly not the only missing =
evidence in the case. What about Beverly Oliver's
or Gordon Arnold's films? What about the Harper =
fragment? Where is that evidence, John?
Did it never exist, because we don't know more about =
it or can't see it? C'mon now! Are
you studying the same case that we are? There's also =
plenty of disappeared evidence in the
RFK case. Why has none of it surfaced? Because it =
was either destroyed, or because it is
being held as souveneirs by very wealthy individuals =
involved either directly or tagentially in those
crimes. Did you ever get to tour H.L.Hunt's mansions =
and view his private collections?
I didn't think so. The sicko's that still possess =
whatever missing evidence still exists don't need
the money. Why would they, when they're running the =
friggin world?!
----
Wayne=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
----
Wayne=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1350
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #12 on: August 22, 2006, 12:35 AM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
That was Jean Hill. The LNers and provocateurs were =
the ones who
gave her grief.
When I and several others described what we saw, I =
gave lots of details --
including the POV and how it differed from the Z film. =
Back in 2002 I had
archived 3 separate posts in which I described all =
that I remembered about
the film. The third one was published by Jim Fetzer =
in his book TGZFH --
it is in every printing of the book as Appendix E and =
it is posted on this
forum.
So how in the world can you write:
Quote
Yet we get no particulars on who showed the film, =
where it came from what was the camera angle, etc.
As for who showed the film, just curious when you go =
to the movies, do you
insist on getting the projectionist's name before you =
watch the film??
Over a number of years I have answered lots of =
questions asked of me
about the film.=20
=20
=AB Last Edit: August 22, 2006, 12:38 AM by =
admin =BB Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever =
remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)=20
=20
=20
wstewart=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 13
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #13 on: August 22, 2006, 12:40 AM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from: admin on August 22, 2006, 12:35 AM
That was Jean Hill. The LNers and provocateurs were =
the ones who
gave her grief.
When I and several others described what we saw, I =
gave lots of details --
including the POV and how it differed from the Z film. =
Back in 2002 I had
archived 3 separate posts in which I described all =
that I remembered about
the film. The third one was published by Jim Fetzer =
in his book TGZFH --
it is in every printing of the book as Appendix E and =
it is posted on this
forum.
So how in the world can you write:
As for who showed the film, just curious when you go =
to the movies, do you
insist on getting the projectionist's name before you =
watch the film??
Over a number of years I have answered lots of =
questions asked of me
Perhaps in another thread we can start listing all the =
evidence that has
disappeared, but for which we have strong evidence =
that it once existed
in the JFK, MLK, and/or RFK cases. I would start off =
with those items that
I listed earlier, but I would not be suprised it we =
could collectively grow that
list to some 50-100 items. So what is the purpose of =
singling out
this other film as being questionable as to its past =
or present existence?
----
Wayne
=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
----
Wayne=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1350
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #14 on: August 22, 2006, 12:47 AM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Not a bad idea Wayne.=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever =
remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)=20
=20
=20
lee forman=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 164
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #15 on: August 22, 2006, 01:08 AM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Rich is right - from my experience. I tried to =
acquire 2 films. It got scary. The idea was that I would publish these =
films. I couldn't even figure out how to go about it. It got even =
weirder and I bailed. I am glad I bailed.
- lee=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
rick janowitz=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 41
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #16 on: August 22, 2006, 07:16 PM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Hello Jack,=20
I have been away from the forum for a while but let me =
respond to your thread and to say hello again. I have not seen the =
other film that i'm aware of. Also, there was a thread on the last =
incarnation of JFK Research that had to do with images in the sproket =
hole (ghost image) area of the Z film. Something about the green tree =
and the image of what looks like a man. As soon as I can get my =
materials back in order i'll post what I think is going on in that =
frame. I hope to be spending some more time in the forum now that I have =
some time.=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
jack white=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 404
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #17 on: August 22, 2006, 10:16 PM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks, Rick. I think you and I discussed THE OTHER =
FILM with
Scott Myers, who had seen it. Maybe that is why I was =
confused
about whether you had seen it.
Jack=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
Nick Bartetzko=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 26
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #18 on: August 23, 2006, 12:49 AM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from: lee forman on August 22, 2006, 01:08 AM
Rich is right - from my experience. I tried to =
acquire 2 films. It got scary. The idea was that I would publish these =
films. I couldn't even figure out how to go about it. It got even =
weirder and I bailed. I am glad I bailed.
- lee
Just curious, Lee. If you are able to say, which films =
did you try to purchase?
Nick=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
David Healy=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 236
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #19 on: August 23, 2006, 12:29 PM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from: rick janowitz on August 22, 2006, 07:16 PM
Hello Jack,=20
I have been away from the forum for a while but let me =
respond to your thread and to say hello again. I have not seen the =
other film that i'm aware of. Also, there was a thread on the last =
incarnation of JFK Research that had to do with images in the sproket =
hole (ghost image) area of the Z film. Something about the green tree =
and the image of what looks like a man. As soon as I can get my =
materials back in order i'll post what I think is going on in that =
frame. I hope to be spending some more time in the forum now that I have =
some time.
there he is! Welcome back Rick, great seeing you =
here...
David=20
=20
=20
--------------------------------------------------
John:
No one is expected as you put it, or asked =
to believe in, or that there is another film......
As no one is expected to believe in =
Judyth's information that there is no documentation for, but you do =
believe in.
People make up their own minds...
There are no rules stating otherwise...
The only people I have seen that do post =
such, are the Bill Miller and Gang team, and they do so repeatedly and =
at every opportunity
on the other boards...
No one on this board says you or anyone =
has to believe anything.........
So ?? No problem...
B.. =20
=20
=20
72.140.157.183 =20
=20
=20
=20
rick janowitz=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 41
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #21 on: August 24, 2006, 06:43 =
PM =BB =20
--------------------------------------------------
Hi Dave,
I'ts good to talk to everyone again. =
Hopefully I'll have something useful to contribute once I get back up to =
speed on what's been happening these last few months (years). I have to =
get used to the new forum now. I'm still fumbling through it now but I'm =
sure it will get easier with time.=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
rick janowitz=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 41
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #22 on: August 24, 2006, 06:58 =
PM =BB =20
--------------------------------------------------
Quote from: jack white on August 22, 2006, =
10:16 PM
Thanks, Rick. I think you and I discussed =
THE OTHER FILM with
Scott Myers, who had seen it. Maybe that =
is why I was confused
about whether you had seen it.
Jack
I remember that too. Scott definitely =
remembers seeing the other film and I was trying to remember if I had =
seen any other footage other than what is now known. The only thing I =
could think of was something Walter Cronkite had shown on TV but that =
must have been after the Geraldo showing. The odd thing is I remember =
seeing it in black and white and I'm pretty sure we had a color TV by =
1970 when Good Night America showed the film we still see today. I'm =
curious if anyone remembers a Walter Cronkite special about the Z film? =
I'm stumped on the year I saw it though. =20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1382
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #23 on: August 24, 2006, 07:04 =
PM =BB =20
--------------------------------------------------
Rick writ:
Quote
I'm pretty sure we had a color TV by 1970 =
when Good Night America=20
showed the film we still see today
Goodnight America aired the Z film in =
1975.=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, =
whatever remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" =
(1887)=20
=20
=20
rick janowitz=20
Members
Offline
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #24 on: August 24, 2006, 08:30 =
PM =BB =20
--------------------------------------------------
Thanks Rich, I stand corrected. I should =
have checked the date a little closer before posting. =20
is predictably calling you and the others who saw it
LIARS.
Could you post a digital copy of your appendix in =
TGZFH
and give me permission to post it on Simkin? (Plus any
additional thoughts)
I am trying to remember all the researchers who saw =
it,
the times and circumstances:
1. DellaRosa
2. Burnham
3. Myers
4. Reymond
5. Marvin
6. Janowitz?
7. others?
Please refresh my memory. Are any of the postings =
still
on the "old forum"?
"Miller" is such a jerk!
Jack=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1350
The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #1 on: August 03, 2006, 06:07 PM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
Yes he is!!
For the record I only recall matching my recollections =
with William Reymond.
I know the others have said they also saw it but I do =
not recall their=20
descriptions if they offered any.
Milicent Cranor also saw the film -- on the premises =
of NBC in NYC.
I will have a scan of mu Appendix E shortly.=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever =
remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1350
The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #2 on: August 03, 2006, 06:22 PM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever =
remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)=20
=20
=20
jack white=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 404
The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #3 on: August 03, 2006, 06:33 PM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks, Rich. Do you remember all those who said=20
they saw it?
jack=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1350
The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #4 on: August 03, 2006, 06:56 PM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
I can't add any except for Mili.=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever =
remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)=20
=20
=20
lee forman=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 164
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #5 on: August 17, 2006, 10:47 AM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
Rich,
How much time elapsed between the first shot to the =
head and the second? Do you recall any other details with respect to =
the foreground? For instance, in the z-footage, it appears that the =
camera 'hops' over the area of the stairs and retaining wall. Does this =
area appear in the other film at all?
- lee=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1350
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #6 on: August 17, 2006, 11:28 AM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lee,
The first thing to realize about analyzing the "other" =
film is that while I
viewed it on 3 occasions, I never had possession of it =
and unlike the Z film
I could not watch it in slo-mo or frame-by-frame. =
Certain things stand out and=20
are etched in my mind, but it has been at least 10 =
years since I last saw it.
The 2 head shots were nearly, but not exactly, =
simultaneous. First the
shot to the rear and then the tangential shot to the =
temple.
I do not recall much about the background as I was =
focused on the main
characters.=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever =
remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)=20
=20
=20
lee forman=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 164
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #7 on: August 17, 2006, 10:11 PM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Rich.
I don't suppose that it appeared to you that the front =
shot may have come from a bit lower than the camera? Just curious. =
Maybe that's another impossible question. Just trying to work something =
out.
- lee
=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
John Delane Williams=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 45
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #8 on: August 21, 2006, 10:59 PM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
I notice an anomaly here. What we have is a few people =
saying they say an alternative Z-like film. I have no reason to oppose =
such a film, but where is the evidence? If you saw the film, it must =
exist (or existed). Seems like there would be good money in releasing =
it. I'll buy a copy. But no information on where the film came from, who =
showed it, and who might have copies today. For those of us who are =
pretty sure we never saw the film, it's haed to say much, except where =
is the evidence?=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1350
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #9 on: August 21, 2006, 11:39 PM =BB =
--------------------------------------------------------------
Try not to be naive. You should ask why the extant Z =
film became
so readily available through numerous outlets and on =
various media.
I would gladly show the film -- but I never possessed =
it. Collectively we
know that at least 2 of the major TV networks have the =
film: CBS and=20
NBC. =20
But don't under-estimate just how dangerous a property =
it is. It is
one piece of evidence which lays the cover-up bare. =
It shows
triangulation of fire; surgically accurate shooting; =
participation of
various co-conspirators; complicity of the Secret =
Service; and
proof positive that the government has been lying =
about the
events for 43 years and counting.
One individual living in Europe allowed a researcher =
the opportunity to
view the film on multiple occasions. That researcher =
set out to
convince that person to allow a copy to be made of it. =
That person
felt his life was in jeopardy over that film. But the =
researcher began
to wear the guy down and he was considering making a =
copy.
A short time later while the researcher was travelling =
abroad the guy
with the film was found murdered. The guy was retired =
from French
Intelligence.
As I stated previously, if you haven't seen the film =
you are well within
your right to reserve judgement until such time that =
you can. But
try not to question its existence. A fair number of =
people have seen
it, some more than once, and no two ever saw it at the =
same time
in the same place.
Everything isn't about money. Sure that film could =
bring a lot of money
but would you risk your life to market it??
You see an anomoly here -- I don't.
=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever =
remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)=20
=20
=20
John Delane Williams=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 45
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #10 on: August 22, 2006, 12:20 AM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Rich,
I'm not going to call you naive. What you don't seem =
to get is that there is an uneven playing field. In effect, you say you =
have seen the film. Yet we get no particulars on who showed the film, =
where it came from what was the camera angle, etc. You imply that giving =
out that information can br too dangerous. Perhaps so. Yet others who =
have brought up evidence that didn't seem to be well enough documented =
have not fared well. Let me give you an innocent example that I would =
guess neither of us gets to involved with. I don't recall her name right =
now, (I'm sure someone, probably you, will know her name, but she wrote =
"The Last Dissenting Witness." She initially reported seeing a toy dog, =
(or something similar) in Jackie's hands in the motorcade, when in fact, =
it was a bouquet of roses. For this misstep, she received a lot of =
wrath, for a simple little mistake. Now, I'm not suggesting that you =
criticised her about this, but many person's, mainly Warren defenders, =
did. In any event, I'm sure you saw something. I'd like to see it too. =
Perhaps that's not presently possible. However for those of us on the =
Forum without this experience, we are kind of expected to either accept =
it, or. I am taking the "or" position. From this perspective, several =
persons claim to have seen such a film, but little documentation thus =
far has been revealed. I don't have any beliefs one way or another about =
the film. It surely could have existed, and may still exist. The anomaly =
is the level of evidence shown thus far, and the treatment that level of =
evidence gets in other topics on this Forum.
John
=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
wstewart=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 13
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #11 on: August 22, 2006, 12:33 AM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from: admin on August 21, 2006, 11:39 PM
Try not to be naive. You should ask why the extant Z =
film became
so readily available through numerous outlets and on =
various media.
I would gladly show the film -- but I never possessed =
it. Collectively we
know that at least 2 of the major TV networks have the =
film: CBS and=20
NBC. =20
But don't under-estimate just how dangerous a property =
it is. It is
one piece of evidence which lays the cover-up bare. =
It shows
triangulation of fire; surgically accurate shooting; =
participation of
various co-conspirators; complicity of the Secret =
Service; and
proof positive that the government has been lying =
about the
events for 43 years and counting.
One individual living in Europe allowed a researcher =
the opportunity to
view the film on multiple occasions. That researcher =
set out to
convince that person to allow a copy to be made of it. =
That person
felt his life was in jeopardy over that film. But the =
researcher began
to wear the guy down and he was considering making a =
copy.
A short time later while the researcher was travelling =
abroad the guy
with the film was found murdered. The guy was retired =
from French
Intelligence.
As I stated previously, if you haven't seen the film =
you are well within
your right to reserve judgement until such time that =
you can. But
try not to question its existence. A fair number of =
people have seen
it, some more than once, and no two ever saw it at the =
same time
in the same place.
Everything isn't about money. Sure that film could =
bring a lot of money
but would you risk your life to market it??
You see an anomoly here -- I don't.
I agree completely, Rich. I would also point out to =
John that this "other film" (as it has come
to be known) is certainly not the only missing =
evidence in the case. What about Beverly Oliver's
or Gordon Arnold's films? What about the Harper =
fragment? Where is that evidence, John?
Did it never exist, because we don't know more about =
it or can't see it? C'mon now! Are
you studying the same case that we are? There's also =
plenty of disappeared evidence in the
RFK case. Why has none of it surfaced? Because it =
was either destroyed, or because it is
being held as souveneirs by very wealthy individuals =
involved either directly or tagentially in those
crimes. Did you ever get to tour H.L.Hunt's mansions =
and view his private collections?
I didn't think so. The sicko's that still possess =
whatever missing evidence still exists don't need
the money. Why would they, when they're running the =
friggin world?!
----
Wayne=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
----
Wayne=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1350
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #12 on: August 22, 2006, 12:35 AM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
That was Jean Hill. The LNers and provocateurs were =
the ones who
gave her grief.
When I and several others described what we saw, I =
gave lots of details --
including the POV and how it differed from the Z film. =
Back in 2002 I had
archived 3 separate posts in which I described all =
that I remembered about
the film. The third one was published by Jim Fetzer =
in his book TGZFH --
it is in every printing of the book as Appendix E and =
it is posted on this
forum.
So how in the world can you write:
Quote
Yet we get no particulars on who showed the film, =
where it came from what was the camera angle, etc.
As for who showed the film, just curious when you go =
to the movies, do you
insist on getting the projectionist's name before you =
watch the film??
Over a number of years I have answered lots of =
questions asked of me
about the film.=20
=20
=AB Last Edit: August 22, 2006, 12:38 AM by =
admin =BB Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever =
remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)=20
=20
=20
wstewart=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 13
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #13 on: August 22, 2006, 12:40 AM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from: admin on August 22, 2006, 12:35 AM
That was Jean Hill. The LNers and provocateurs were =
the ones who
gave her grief.
When I and several others described what we saw, I =
gave lots of details --
including the POV and how it differed from the Z film. =
Back in 2002 I had
archived 3 separate posts in which I described all =
that I remembered about
the film. The third one was published by Jim Fetzer =
in his book TGZFH --
it is in every printing of the book as Appendix E and =
it is posted on this
forum.
So how in the world can you write:
As for who showed the film, just curious when you go =
to the movies, do you
insist on getting the projectionist's name before you =
watch the film??
Over a number of years I have answered lots of =
questions asked of me
Perhaps in another thread we can start listing all the =
evidence that has
disappeared, but for which we have strong evidence =
that it once existed
in the JFK, MLK, and/or RFK cases. I would start off =
with those items that
I listed earlier, but I would not be suprised it we =
could collectively grow that
list to some 50-100 items. So what is the purpose of =
singling out
this other film as being questionable as to its past =
or present existence?
----
Wayne
=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
----
Wayne=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1350
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #14 on: August 22, 2006, 12:47 AM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Not a bad idea Wayne.=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever =
remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)=20
=20
=20
lee forman=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 164
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #15 on: August 22, 2006, 01:08 AM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Rich is right - from my experience. I tried to =
acquire 2 films. It got scary. The idea was that I would publish these =
films. I couldn't even figure out how to go about it. It got even =
weirder and I bailed. I am glad I bailed.
- lee=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
rick janowitz=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 41
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #16 on: August 22, 2006, 07:16 PM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Hello Jack,=20
I have been away from the forum for a while but let me =
respond to your thread and to say hello again. I have not seen the =
other film that i'm aware of. Also, there was a thread on the last =
incarnation of JFK Research that had to do with images in the sproket =
hole (ghost image) area of the Z film. Something about the green tree =
and the image of what looks like a man. As soon as I can get my =
materials back in order i'll post what I think is going on in that =
frame. I hope to be spending some more time in the forum now that I have =
some time.=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
jack white=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 404
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #17 on: August 22, 2006, 10:16 PM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks, Rick. I think you and I discussed THE OTHER =
FILM with
Scott Myers, who had seen it. Maybe that is why I was =
confused
about whether you had seen it.
Jack=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
Nick Bartetzko=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 26
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #18 on: August 23, 2006, 12:49 AM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from: lee forman on August 22, 2006, 01:08 AM
Rich is right - from my experience. I tried to =
acquire 2 films. It got scary. The idea was that I would publish these =
films. I couldn't even figure out how to go about it. It got even =
weirder and I bailed. I am glad I bailed.
- lee
Just curious, Lee. If you are able to say, which films =
did you try to purchase?
Nick=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
David Healy=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 236
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #19 on: August 23, 2006, 12:29 PM =BB =
=20
--------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from: rick janowitz on August 22, 2006, 07:16 PM
Hello Jack,=20
I have been away from the forum for a while but let me =
respond to your thread and to say hello again. I have not seen the =
other film that i'm aware of. Also, there was a thread on the last =
incarnation of JFK Research that had to do with images in the sproket =
hole (ghost image) area of the Z film. Something about the green tree =
and the image of what looks like a man. As soon as I can get my =
materials back in order i'll post what I think is going on in that =
frame. I hope to be spending some more time in the forum now that I have =
some time.
there he is! Welcome back Rick, great seeing you =
here...
David=20
=20
=20
--------------------------------------------------
John:
No one is expected as you put it, or asked =
to believe in, or that there is another film......
As no one is expected to believe in =
Judyth's information that there is no documentation for, but you do =
believe in.
People make up their own minds...
There are no rules stating otherwise...
The only people I have seen that do post =
such, are the Bill Miller and Gang team, and they do so repeatedly and =
at every opportunity
on the other boards...
No one on this board says you or anyone =
has to believe anything.........
So ?? No problem...
B.. =20
=20
=20
72.140.157.183 =20
=20
=20
=20
rick janowitz=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 41
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #21 on: August 24, 2006, 06:43 =
PM =BB =20
--------------------------------------------------
Hi Dave,
I'ts good to talk to everyone again. =
Hopefully I'll have something useful to contribute once I get back up to =
speed on what's been happening these last few months (years). I have to =
get used to the new forum now. I'm still fumbling through it now but I'm =
sure it will get easier with time.=20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
rick janowitz=20
Members
Offline
Posts: 41
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #22 on: August 24, 2006, 06:58 =
PM =BB =20
--------------------------------------------------
Quote from: jack white on August 22, 2006, =
10:16 PM
Thanks, Rick. I think you and I discussed =
THE OTHER FILM with
Scott Myers, who had seen it. Maybe that =
is why I was confused
about whether you had seen it.
Jack
I remember that too. Scott definitely =
remembers seeing the other film and I was trying to remember if I had =
seen any other footage other than what is now known. The only thing I =
could think of was something Walter Cronkite had shown on TV but that =
must have been after the Geraldo showing. The odd thing is I remember =
seeing it in black and white and I'm pretty sure we had a color TV by =
1970 when Good Night America showed the film we still see today. I'm =
curious if anyone remembers a Walter Cronkite special about the Z film? =
I'm stumped on the year I saw it though. =20
=20
Logged =20
=20
=20
=20
admin=20
Administrator
Offline
Posts: 1382
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #23 on: August 24, 2006, 07:04 =
PM =BB =20
--------------------------------------------------
Rick writ:
Quote
I'm pretty sure we had a color TV by 1970 =
when Good Night America=20
showed the film we still see today
Goodnight America aired the Z film in =
1975.=20
=20
Logged =20
--------------------------------------------------
.
__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Rich DellaRosa
Forum Admin
"When you have eliminated the impossible, =
whatever remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" =
(1887)=20
=20
=20
rick janowitz=20
Members
Offline
Re: The OTHER film...=20
=AB Reply #24 on: August 24, 2006, 08:30 =
PM =BB =20
--------------------------------------------------
Thanks Rich, I stand corrected. I should =
have checked the date a little closer before posting. =20