[Ben Holmes]

Henry Sienzant Wrote:Now, what's the evidence the Z-film is altered again?

We've just covered one of them - to wit, that no-one ever noted a limo stop in the film prior to Alvarez.

Henry Sienzant Wrote:What's the evidence the witnesses that saw a limo STOP were correct, especially since others only mentioned a limo slow-down, and the film shows a slow-down, not a stop?

Simple common sense... tell us Henry, what would be the characteristics of those witnesses whom you'd accept as more credible?

HONEST people would state that Police Officers are generally more credible.
HONEST people would accept that closer eyewitnesses are generally more credible.
HONEST people would accept that when a person is DIRECTLY AFFECTED by the conditions, they would be more credible.

All four of the motorcycle police who were TRACKING THE LIMO TO SET THEIR OWN SPEED stated that the limo stopped.

Henry Sienzant Wrote:Ben will argue that the limo STOP and SLOW-DOWN witnesses should be treated as a group, but there's obviously a difference between a stop and a slow-down, so Ben's argument is not persuasive.

This is not too unlike arguing that water is a deadly poison. Of course, it actually IS - but there's the slight problem, rarely do people encounter conditions where it's deadly. But it's not unknown to drink too much, and die.

It's obvious even to a moron that there's a TREMENDOUS difference between a car that parked in a parking spot all day long, and someone who pulled to the curb to pick up someone. No-one would confuse the two at all.

But a limo that came to a stop of roughly 2 seconds? And witnesses dozens or hundreds of feet away, in crowded conditions?

Henry has a huge credibility problem here.

This is actually a tactic quite favored by the WCR Supporters... The INTENTIONAL misinterpretation of witnesses. The limo didn't stop, because eyewitnesses reported that it slowed down.

Henry cannot imagine that witnesses could observe the same event, and depending on their distance or acuteness of observation, describe it differently.

Does it sound familiar? The shots came from the TSBD... because almost EVERYONE reported a single location for the shots. The ones that reported the Grassy Knoll are all wrong, because we know that the shots came from the TSBD.

A limo that stopped for 2 seconds could EASILY be described as one that slowed down dramatically. And indeed, this explanation EXPLAINS ALL THE KNOWN EYEWITNESS STATEMENTS.

If the limo merely slowed dramatically, it fails to explain the most credible witnesses of all, who state that it came to a very brief stop.

The fact that NONE of this is seen in the extant Z-film to the casual viewer is something believers still cannot explain. It took Alvarez to do a frame by frame analysis to detect a slowdown.

And nothing Henry can do will change that historical fact.

[William Charleston]

Of course the limo almost stopped, it definitely slowed down.

Bobby Hargis:

https://vimeo.com/125992798

In the NIX film at time 30 sec and 1 min, you can easily see the limo was moving very slow and then rapidly sped up.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GU4mAVCprAU[/youtube]

1. Clint Hill would NEVER have been able to catch the limo unless the limousine slowed way down.
2. Because the Zapruder film does NOT show the limo slowing down, we know it is forged because the Z film does not match what the witnesses say happened and it does not match the Nix film. This is just another example which clearly shows the Z film is forged.

[Ben Holmes]

William Charleston Wrote:In the NIX film at time 30 sec and 1 min, you can easily see the limo was moving very slow and then rapidly sped up.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GU4mAVCprAU[/youtube]

1. Clint Hill would NEVER have been able to catch the limo unless the limousine slowed way down.
2. Because the Zapruder film does NOT show the limo slowing down, we know it is forged because the Z film does not match what the witnesses say happened and it does not match the Nix film. This is just another example which clearly shows the Z film is forged.

The slowdown can be seen most easily by comparing the two motorcycle cops closest to the viewer, in comparison to the limo... The motorcycle cops are clearly overtaking the limo.

[Patrick C]

As I recall there are examples of comparisons of the Nix and Z films frame by frame and there are no discrepancies in limo speed.

I would accept totally that if for example Nix showed a slow down and Z did not then yes something is not right - aside from an error in speed of the film shown.

I also agree that the Nix film does appear to make the slow down more apparent - perhaps because he did not capture the whole lower Elm St section as did Zapruder - Nix section 2 starts in the middle of the slow down which may create the impression that the car moves more slowly than in the Z film.

It is clear to me that the limo did not stop, it simply slowed right down.

[Patrick C]

Oh yes.....the answer to the heading of this thread

Did the limo stop?

NO....!!!

[Ben Holmes]

Patrick C Wrote:Oh yes.....the answer to the heading of this thread

Did the limo stop?

NO....!!!

Amusingly and predictably, you gave zero evidence for your opinion.

An opinion that isn't very credible, judging by your previous proven lying on the topic of this case.

[Patrick C]

Neither the Nix film nor the Zapruder film show the limo stop.

The majority of witnesses who commented on this specific point said the limo slowed right down.

If it did stop, as you seem to think, we would be looking at say 2 seconds or some 36 Z frames....missing!

This would be entirely obvious and would mean other people in the film would suddenly jump positions. This is not evident.

It is categorically a ridiculous theory and in it is the even more ridiculous notion that it was deliberate because elements of the Secret Service were in on a plot. A notion that extends the degree of stupidity regarding conspiracy theories in this case to Himalayan proportions.

[Patrick C]

Patrick C Wrote:An opinion that isn't very credible, judging by your previous proven lying on the topic of this case.

Once again you call me I liar. This is getting to become a daily accusation and ill founded. It is thuggish, rather ignorant behaviour on your part Holmes. Not really my cup of tea - and that is being polite.

So I think for the time being at least, enjoy your forum and enjoy the self indulgent back patting with your fellow crackpots. I might check in once in a while for a laugh and I might make a post with the other guys.... But anyway I expect the number of posts will now deservedly drop somewhat!

[Ben Holmes]

Patrick C Wrote:

Patrick C Wrote:An opinion that isn't very credible, judging by your previous proven lying on the topic of this case.

Once again you call me I liar. This is getting to become a daily accusation and ill founded. It is thuggish, rather ignorant behaviour on your part Holmes. Not really my cup of tea - and that is being polite.

So I think for the time being at least, enjoy your forum and enjoy the self indulgent back patting with your fellow crackpots. I might check in once in a while for a laugh and I might make a post with the other guys.... But anyway I expect the number of posts will now deservedly drop somewhat!

Not unexpected...

Most WCR Supporters will never enter this forum. John McAdams, for example; learned long ago that he cannot debate me in a forum he doesn't control. David Von Pein has made it clear he'll never post here... I'm sure Henry has dropped in, but knows better than to try to debate in a forum where there's no personal attacks allowed.

This is a frequent tactic of WCR Supporters... when the going gets rough, they simply disappear.

Quite frankly, I think they're doing the only possible thing they can do... and I don't blame 'em at all...

But if the evidence were in their favor, this wouldn't be a useful tactic.

All you're doing, Patrick; is proving that there's no honest way to defend the Warren Commission's theory - using the EVIDENCE in this case...

And I'm happy with that.