Lee Harvey Oswald was trained by the CIA, declassified memo reveals

[Jazzz]

You're either lying or a fucking idiot. The central core of the documentary was Zapruder's film. It showed frame by frame footage of the film.

If you'd bothered to watch the documentary , you would have seen that it kept switching back between Zapruder's footage and the computer simulation.

But I don't believe you actually saw the documentary at all because Zapruder's footage was used throughout.

No it bloody well was not, because I did watch it (although I missed the beginning), and I was sitting there going - why aren't showing the actual film?

You are mistaken here.

And why are you cutting and pasting something which says nothing, except perhaps implying that this simulation might do away with the need to show the Zapruder film itself?

 

[Jazzz]

Err, what's this got to do with your woefully ill-informed claims about the BBC2 docu?

Well, I suggest you ask pk whose point I was responding to. But unsurprisingly, you pull me up for the thread diversion.

 

[editor]

Whatever pk, the CH4 documentary didn't show the footage of the South Tower impact from the classic angle, behind the plane as it goes in (CNN is one of them, there are others).

They just showed it from the other side, way back, so you couldn't see the plane. You will have to ask them why they didn't. I don't think you will see the classic footage appearing again on national television.

Have you bothered looking? Have you written to Ch4 to ask why this 'daming' footage wasb't shown?

Of course not. As you've proved, time after time, you always prefer to dream up bonkers conspiracy 'conclusions' rather than get off your arse and actually research your wild assertions.

Much like this thread, then.

 

[editor]

No it bloody well was not, because I did watch it (although I missed the beginning), and I was sitting there going - why aren't showing the actual film?

You are mistaken here.

OK. Listen carefully. This is coming from someone who actually watched the entire documentary,
THEY SHOWED THE ZAPRUDER FOOTAGE.

You have fucked up again. You are swallowing yet more bullshit off dodgy conspiracy websites once again. You're making an arse of yourself.

Retire gracefully and remember those 'missing flights' and the 'Huntley is innocent' threads you started.

 

[Jazzz]

Have you bothered looking? Have you written to Ch4 to ask why this 'daming' footage wasb't shown?

Of course not. As you've proved, time after time, you always prefer to dream up bonkers conspiracy 'conclusions' rather than get off your arse and actually research your wild assertions.

Much like this thread, then.

Oh, so you're doing the thread diversion now. No, I haven't fucking written to CH4. I don't consider that I must jump through endless hoops of your production to have opinions and state them on Urban75. My comment that they didn't show the classic South Tower impact was a true - they didn't. Let alone, my prediction that they didn't show it slowed down (because of the missile flashes). They wouldn't even show it full speed!

 

[Jazzz]

OK. Listen carefully. This is coming from someone who actually watched the entire documentary,
THEY SHOWED THE ZAPRUDER FOOTAGE.

You have fucked up again. You are swallowing yet more bullshit off dodgy conspiracy websites once again. You're making an arse of yourself.

Retire gracefully and remember those 'missing flights' and the 'Huntley is innocent' threads you started.

I didn't see it, I distinctly remember watching it. I missed a small section of the beginning, yet you claim that they showed it throughout. Yet, I didn't see it once, and I was looking for it. I actually knew what it was too.

 

[editor]

Oh, so you're doing the thread diversion now. No, I haven't fucking written to CH4. I don't consider that I must jump through endless hoops of your production to have opinions and state them on Urban75. My comment that they didn't show the classic South Tower impact was a true - they didn't. Let alone, my prediction that they didn't show it slowed down (because of the missile flashes). They wouldn't even show it full speed!

How come all of Manhattan missed these 'missile flashes' when it happened in front of their eyes?

How come all the people working in media all across the world - who must have seen all the footage hundreds of times and have it stored int heir archives - missed these 'missile flashes'?

How come everyone who saw the footage al around the world missed these 'missile flashes'?

How come you always buy into the feeble bullshit posted by moronic book peddling charlatans?

And if the planes were in fact remote control missile blasting pretend planes, how did they fake the phone calls?

And how come you're too lazy to actually do any grown up research on your own before naking your idiotic claims?

No wonder you think Vialls is a credible source - he's as clueless, gullible, unscientific and as lazy as you!

 

[Jazzz]

Oh for Christs's sake. I'm going to bed now.

 

[editor]

Oh for Christs's sake. I'm going to bed now.

Next time, try actually watching the program before posting up your ill-informed, conspiracy-tastic 'conclusions' about the content. But if you've got any qualified, intelligent criticism about the conclusions of the decade-long research of Dale Myers, the Emmy-winning 28-year veteran of radio and television whose animation was the focus of the docu - let's hear it.

Oh, and any thread regurgitating the 9/11 'missile firing' fantasies all over again will go straight into the bin.

Come to think of it, this thread seems destined for the same fate too - after all, it's just another of your woefully ill-informed claims that you haven't bothered to research before proclaiming your 'conclusion'.

 

[Jazzz]

You mean it's another thread that you have jumped into. Until you did, it was really pretty tame.

It's the same thing with 9-11 thread. Basically they're fine, no worse than other threads on these boards. Until you plonk your size twenty doc martens over them, and fire an endless supply of questions.

And you are mistaken about the documentary. Shouting louder and louder about it isn't going to make it true.

 

[fela fan]

An entertaining read this thread. One particular post had me laughing loudly, and shaking my head in total disbelief at what was being said!

 

[editor]

You mean it's another thread that you have jumped into.

Yes. I 'jumped into' the thread to correct your clueless, ill informed claims. If someone posts up bullshit, I'll be around to point it out.

Of course, if you bothered to research your laughably inaccurate nonsense before starting threads making definitive proclamations of 'fact', I wouldn't have any need to correct your endless blunders.

But DrJ and research go together like chalk and cheese.

 

[goldenecitrone]

When I see documents like these I always do the Jazz-test. If he believes it, it must be bullshit. Easy really.

 

[Jazzz]

When I see documents like these I always do the Jazz-test. If he believes it, it must be bullshit. Easy really.

That's the 'jazzz test', I'll have you know.

 

[fela fan]

That's the 'jazzz test', I'll have you know.

Mate, why not provide evidence to irrevocably refute the golden boy/girl's theory?

Tell 'em something you believe in that you feel certain golden will accept. Then the test gets blown to fuck, to use rather non-academic language.

 

[editor]

Mate, why not provide evidence to irrevocably refute the golden boy/girl's theory?

Mate, why doesn't the 'golden boy' bother to undertake the most basic of research before making yet another evidence-frere proclamation of 'fact' from a position of woeful ignorance?

 

[fela fan]

Mate, why doesn't the 'golden boy' bother to undertake the most basic of research before making yet another evidence-frere proclamation of 'fact' from a position of woeful ignorance?

Dunno ed, you'll have to ask the good doctor, he's a mate, surely you two can get this difference sorted out between you?! Maybe he's an non-academic and eschews research? Maybe he does do research, but not up to the standard you'd like?

But the golden boy i was referring to was goldenecitrone.

 

[gosub]

I saw that computer simulation which "proved" LHO acting alone fired all the shots. Didn't dwell on the fact that he therefore waited for minute were he had a clear front on shot as the motorcade drove towards him and then, past him and then decided that the right time to fire his first shot was when he had to fire through the foliage of a tree to hit him.
Would go for two triangulated firing solutions with the book depository in on both of them and the first triangle not kicking off leaving LHO the instigator and patsy.

 

[Yossarian]

Mate, why not provide evidence to irrevocably refute the golden boy/girl's theory?

Tell 'em something you believe in that you feel certain golden will accept. Then the test gets blown to fuck, to use rather non-academic language.

Do you remember that journalist who made a big song and dance about Lord Lucan having been discovered living in Goa, only to be completely discredited when the man in question turned out to be an old flute-playing hippie from Liverpool?

How would you treat news from the same journalist that Richie Edwards was pulling pints in his local and Osama Bin Laden was working in the kebab shop down the road?

 

[Wess]

Dr. Jazz...The Z film was used throughout out the doco. They would show 15 or so seconds of the film footage and then the narrator would go through the film footage in microscopic detail.
The doco. in it's entirety was based on that piece of film footage showing not just the footage, but minute details frame by frame. Not a copy of the footage but but looking at the original footage in great detail.
If you had seen the doco you would know this.

 

[Jazzz]

Dr. Jazz...The Z film was used throughout out the doco. They would show 15 or so seconds of the film footage and then the narrator would go through the film footage in microscopic detail.
The doco. in it's entirety was based on that piece of film footage showing not just the footage, but minute details frame by frame. Not a copy of the footage but but looking at the original footage in great detail.
If you had seen the doco you would know this.

I did watch it, as I said. I was specifically looking out for the crucial shot, where you can see Kennedy's head snap back - a huge curiosity if he was being shot solely from behind. This was never addressed. So I was going, "when are they going to show the film?" But I tell you what, I'll look at a copy again and we'll see who has been mistaken.

 

[editor]

I did watch it, as I said. I was specifically looking out for the crucial shot, where you can see Kennedy's head snap back - a huge curiosity if he was being shot solely from behind. This was never addressed. So I was going, "when are they going to show the film?" But I tell you what, I'll look at a copy again and we'll see who has been mistaken.

FFS: they discussed this in depth in the programme.

 

[tarannau]

I did watch it, as I said. I was specifically looking out for the crucial shot, where you can see Kennedy's head snap back - a huge curiosity if he was being shot solely from behind. This was never addressed. So I was going, "when are they going to show the film?" But I tell you what, I'll look at a copy again and we'll see who has been mistaken.

Give it up - you didn't watch the programme did you? Either that, or you've a remarkably convenient way of forgetting details that you don't want to hear.

The primary focus of that documentary footage was the Zapruder footage... and yes, they did discuss the 'snapback'/second shooter theory in detail.

 

[Jazzz]

Well this can all be settled. It'll take a long while to download though.