NatGeo...One Day in America

[JE Corbett]

I just watched the first two installments of the three part documentary
produced by NatGeo. The third part is recording as I write this. Overall it was
very well done. It tells the story through the eyes of surviving witnesses, such
as Clint Hill, Buell Frazier, Ruth Paine, the Newmans and Johnny Brewer to4
name a few. Obviously they are all quite old now.

Most of the footage appears to have been digitally remastered and enhanced.
Some of it has even been colorized. It is a much better quality than what I have
seen in the past. I heard a few tidbits that I was not aware of before.

The one thing that pissed me off was their use of the phony radio broadcast
that begins "Something has happened in the motorcade route...". That was
created the next day by a local radio personality who was fired for the hoax.
Using phony material is a serious breech of journalistic ethics yet that has
been played so many times it has become accepted as being authentic.
There was no live radio broadcast at the time the shots were fired. Why would
there be? I'll never understand why otherwise serious documentaries continue
to use such fraudulent material.

[JE Corbett]

Post by JE Corbett
I just watched the first two installments of the three part documentary
produced by NatGeo. The third part is recording as I write this. Overall it was
very well done. It tells the story through the eyes of surviving witnesses, such
as Clint Hill, Buell Frazier, Ruth Paine, the Newmans and Johnny Brewer to4
name a few. Obviously they are all quite old now.
Most of the footage appears to have been digitally remastered and enhanced.
Some of it has even been colorized. It is a much better quality than what I have
seen in the past. I heard a few tidbits that I was not aware of before.
The one thing that pissed me off was their use of the phony radio broadcast
that begins "Something has happened in the motorcade route...". That was
created the next day by a local radio personality who was fired for the hoax.
Using phony material is a serious breech of journalistic ethics yet that has
been played so many times it has become accepted as being authentic.
There was no live radio broadcast at the time the shots were fired. Why would
there be? I'll never understand why otherwise serious documentaries continue
to use such fraudulent material.

I should have mentioned this series is going to play again later this week, maybe several times.
Tonight they played all three episodes one right after the other.

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 18 Nov 2023 21:05:43 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett

I should have mentioned....

That this demolishes your wacky idea of the non-interest of the
American people...

[JE Corbett]

Post by JE Corbett
I just watched the first two installments of the three part documentary
produced by NatGeo. The third part is recording as I write this. Overall it was
very well done. It tells the story through the eyes of surviving witnesses, such
as Clint Hill, Buell Frazier, Ruth Paine, the Newmans and Johnny Brewer to4
name a few. Obviously they are all quite old now.
Most of the footage appears to have been digitally remastered and enhanced.
Some of it has even been colorized. It is a much better quality than what I have
seen in the past. I heard a few tidbits that I was not aware of before.
The one thing that pissed me off was their use of the phony radio broadcast
that begins "Something has happened in the motorcade route...". That was
created the next day by a local radio personality who was fired for the hoax.
Using phony material is a serious breech of journalistic ethics yet that has
been played so many times it has become accepted as being authentic.
There was no live radio broadcast at the time the shots were fired. Why would
there be? I'll never understand why otherwise serious documentaries continue
to use such fraudulent material.

I just finished watching the third and final installment of this series. It skipped over the events of Saturday and went
right to Sunday. Much of it dealt with Ruby's murder of Oswald. Every time they showed footage of Oswald, whether
he was speaking or not, I thought to myself, "You're going to get yours, you little bastard.". When the footage of the
shooting was shown, I pumped my fist and cheered, just as I have done every time I see it. I took fiendish pleasure
seeing the mortally wounded Oswald being loaded into the ambulance and unloaded at Parkland. I still hope that he
was suffering greatly. I say all that with no apologies or regret. I will despise that piece of shit until the day I die.

The last part of the episode dealt with the procession and funeral. Not much new but much of it had been colorized
and enhanced. Overall, I thought it was a very good production.

[Ben Holmes]

On Sun, 19 Nov 2023 08:07:09 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett

I just finished ...

Making a fool of yourself. Yes.

[David Healy]

[...]

Post by JE Corbett
Using phony material is a serious breech of journalistic ethics yet that has
been played so many times it has become accepted as being authentic.
There was no live radio broadcast at the time the shots were fired. Why would
there be? I'll never understand why otherwise serious documentaries continue
to use such fraudulent material.

and the 1964 Warren Commission Report is NOT phony? What an iron-clad moron... carry on toots!

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 18 Nov 2023 21:02:28 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett

Post by JE Corbett
I just watched the first two installments of the three part documentary
produced by NatGeo. The third part is recording as I write this. Overall it was
very well done. It tells the story through the eyes of surviving witnesses, such
as Clint Hill, Buell Frazier, Ruth Paine, the Newmans and Johnny Brewer to4
name a few. Obviously they are all quite old now.

Demolishes your theory about the lack of interest in the topic... and
you don't even realize it!