Andrew & John - any help in getting my inability to upload files remedied?

Operation Dallas: Construct

The construct within which I work to understand the events in Dallas can be summarized as follows: a full scale 'Black Operation' in which multiple organizations and groups were brought to Dealey Plaza, many in typical covert 'compartmentalized' fashion [e.g. ref: Larry Hancock’s ‘Someone would have talked’ – Noel Tyman/Roy Hargraves interview, pages 274 – 275]. This suggests that of the actual players in Dealey Plaza, very few had total control or comprehension of the overall plan. There is strong evidence to indicate that multiple operations may have been meshed, with conflicting results [eg: the death of Officer Tippit, the stabbing/shooting of someone in the vicinity of the retaining wall and bloody pools]. The total number of operatives present in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 IMO, is greater than 25.

The major locations used by the operation, which have been uncovered to date, include the stairs at Elm Street, the retaining wall, the pergola, behind the picket fence, both sides of Elm for signalmen, the TSBD 6th floor, the doorway at the TSBD, the DalTex building, and the North Peristyle. Understand that this list is most likely not comprehensive - it's what can readily be identified using the existing photos and films.

Functions of the Operatives:
The functions of these operatives were many, but can be boiled down to a limited number, for the basis of this argument: Coordinator, Signalman, Radio Operator, Spotter, Transporter, Security, Shooter and Recorder.

Someday I hope to be able to address the ‘Signalman,’ but of the roles detailed above, the most significant, and the one I intend to expand on, is the role of the 'Recorder.'

Recording the Assassination

As anyone who may have followed any of my pasts posts may have seen, I have found evidence of cameras in multiple locations in the various films and photos. Note: 'Cameras' plural. They are in many locations. Duncan MacRae, Ed O'Hagen and Jim Hamilton had also located cameras, lending credence to my own beliefs and analyses.

As I have indicated in the past elsewhere, the camera lens is readily visible, when turned towards the camera capturing the subject. The lens gives off a concentrated and brilliant refraction, which is in itself an interesting phenomenon, worthy of further study. I'm not sufficiently technically astute concerning this effect to be capable of explaining it any further - but it does make locating the cameras somewhat easier, with the drawback of often obscuring many of the details of the individual in possession of the camera [many times the face].

Add to this the fact that certain inviduals have seen an 'other' film of the assassination. Based upon some very limited research into this factor, it appears that there may be more than one 'other' film. However, the subject of this 'other' film, or films, appears to have been the same as with the Zapruder film - the Motorcade and Kennedy.

Here's where it begins to get interesting. In speaking with Ed O'Hagen, it appeared evident that we were in agreement on a very bizarre detail concerning the cameras in Dealey Plaza - they are not all pointing in the direction of the motorcade. This had troubled me before, but it wasn't until Ed and I began talking about it when I decided to take a closer look.

Here's an example I have posted elsewhere before. I went through a few enhancements, but this one seems the most clear. I can, of course, demonstrate this fact with other frames and other films [Muchmore, for example]. This is an enlargement taken from the area of the retaining wall in Nix.

Note: This man, as an example, is not seeking to follow the motorcade at all.

[Attachment One - From Nix419, enhanced and enlarged Cameraman pointing over retaining wall towards North Peristyle area]

In tandem with this analysis, I was also responding on this Forum concerning the 'triangulation' of fire. Based upon all of my observations, this was incorrect. The 'triangle' idea was outdated, and required revision, based upon my discovery of operatives in the North Peristyle location.

I arrived at another interesting observation: If the main signalman, the leader of the operation, was indeed 'Dark Complected Man,' a.k.a. 'The Assistant' -- then this individual would need to be visible from all locations. If this theory was implausible, then an initial signaling point would have been required, in the neighborhood of Houston and Elm. I very much am of the opinion that both electronic and manual means of signalling/communication were in use.

Without going off too far into this tangent, this concept helped me to recognize an interesting coincidence regarding the cameras and their locations. It appears, from what I can tell, their main subject was not the Kennedy or the Motorcade, instead, they appear to have been recording one another.

While I cannot support every location recorded, I can theorize at a minimum, that one individual with a camera at the North Peristyle was focused on the Knoll. Another camera at the North Peristyle appears to be panning and capturing the location of DCM. One camera behind the retaining wall appears to have been recording the North Peristyle team. Another camera on the steps appears to have been focused in the vicinity of the DalTex. What may be a cameraman at the DalTex fire escape appears to be getting a very good view of the plaza in general. I also believe it may be possible to make out a camera in the window of the TSBD [in one of Moorman's polaroids, or the Bell film, or Cancellare?], but admittedly, this needs work. If the theory holds true, then there would have been a camera present in the TSBD [aside from the one held by Elsie Dorman on the 4th floor].

I wanted to have an attachment here on the gif I created for the North Peristyle camera crew - using Zapruder - but it's almost a mb, and I can't cut it down. I tried to create a webpage to support the gif. Hope it works.

[Attachment Two - zfilm - stabilized, saturation removed, tone and contrast enhanced, enlarged and animated]

http://home.comcast.net/~lforman23/Enhancement.htm

The camera lenses are like small balls of fire - that about all I can do to describe them. You can see the man in the corner panning to his right. The light projects from the lens and actually distorts his head.

The man to his right is panning to his left.

I'm assuming that there is one camera close to the ground to the rught - this one is steady, and appears to be centered on the knoll area.

The man at far right appears to be panning.

Now this led me to theorize - the entire assassination may well have been recorded. Not simply the motorcade, but the overall operation - every location. This would imply that there were also cameras focused on the TSBD [or present on the 6th floor], and perhaps other locations for which very little data exists.

What would have been the purpose of recording the entire assassination? I have
come up with a few concepts, but it may be a combination of more than one.

Reasons for Recording the Assassination:

- Propoganda: Due to the presence of the Cuban Hats, and the use of rifles,
this may have been an effort to promote the 'Castro did it' view, towards engaging
the US in an invasion of Cuba. It's very possible that some of these films were
intended for Public viewing, and that a Civilian 'plant' may have been coordinated
in advance as the source of the film. A concept I continue to struggle with - but
no more on that now.

- Security: If every player was recorded, then it would be easy to blackmail
anyone who may want to disclose their complicity in the event of 11/22. All for one and one for all. Insurance.

- Control of Cover-up: With the subsequent seizure of the majority of the
media taken by private citizens [including the FBI's diligent follow-up with photo
processing companies in the Dallas area, eg. how they got the Nix film], it makes
more sense to have film taken for the purpose of controlling what was seen, and
making use of other input to develop the overall storyline.

- Training: This one has seen speculation before, and inmy opinion it's very
plausible. There are also accounts of certain individuals having seen footage in a
training environment. No more on that here.

- Documentation: As per a well known researcher who has found multiple
CIA links to the assassination, documentation of the event would be a normal practice.

- Private concerns: I don't want to rule out the idea that some of these films
may have been created on the basis of private funding by wealthy contributors. There may be quite a bit to support this theory, but primarily I will cite the example of HL Hunt coming into possession of a copy of the Z-film's original prints [MIDP, Fetzer, page 33]. An additional citation could be Maury Terry's 'The Ultimate Evil' in which he maintains that at least one of the 'Son of Sam' killings was recorded for a 'Snuff Film,' created for and funded by a private investor, hence the need for street lighting on the target, parked on the street.

What is the Zapruder Film?

In my opinion, the Zapruder Film is a 'mosaic.' It is a carefully crafted tapestry; a multi-layered puzzle, consisting of a large volume of data. The first layer may well be the film taken by Abraham Zapruder with a Bell & Howell camera from the vicinity of the pedestal. It has seen splicing, and a great deal of alteration.

Rosemary Willis is a prime example of the deliberate tainting of the original record, since she is seen wearing no hood at all in the Dorman film - seconds before she appears in the z-film. There are multiple other issues, including the shoe and leg seen hanging over the door when the limo arrived at Parkland [Ed O'Hagen demonstrated for me that this could not have belonged to Clint Hill], the disconnect between the witness accounts about multiple wounds to Kennedy's head, the medical evidence [which in itself is questionable], etc.

[Attachment 3 - Rosemary Willis running on sidewalk sans hood in Elsie Dorman film]

However, the purpose of this Post is not to dwell on the first layer, but instead, on the second.

Ed and I went through all of the various scenarios to how these images we had found made any sense. I was specifically focusing on the so-called 'ghost images' between the area of the sprockets, mainly in frames 195 - 207. Plainly, I saw a gunman, and a rifle. I was working to resolve the location of this individual, with anomolies in the camera held by Zapruder.

What I was attempting to reconcile, was the fact that Zapruder alleges he was standing on the pedestal, filming in a semi-crouched position, with a line of sight in the direction of Elm and Houston, in a NorthEasterly direction - this would mean that the camera in question would have been elevated to some 7 - 8 feet above the ground in that location.

Ghost Images:

QUOTE

From the Zavada study.

This fails to explain the rifleman. The rifleman is not seen in the primary image area, and neither are a multitude of other images.

The rifleman, in order to have been captured by Zapruder's camera, would then have had to have been standing very close to his position. I was originally theorizing that it was a glitch produced by the lens, which may have caught the subject, based upon the lighting in the main action area, at an agle to the lens of some 65 degrees. I no longer believe this to be the case. Nor does this in any way explain how the rifleman would be captured from one perspective, while his rifle another entirely [assuming they are connected].

Unusual Iris Shapes:


Zavada again.

This fails to satisfy the very clear images of an eye, seen in certain frames of the film, as demonstrated by myself in other posts elsewhere. I have a very nice one if anyone would like to see it.

PinHole Effect:

I then was led to consider, with Ed in lengthy phone conversations, that this may have been a 'pinhole' effect, due to a crack in the camera case, or at the lens. Improbable. If you examine the B&H Director Series 440P camera [that's the one that I own], you'll see that it is a very bulky and solid, metalcast affair. The area of the retaining wall would have been to Zapruder's right rear if he was standing on the pedestal. His hands would have been on both sides of the camera. Any crack or hole in the camera may have permitted light to enter the case [even the aperture], but how would the image have then been focused and captured by the film?

As part of our discussions, Ed began to show me some of his work on the 'Purse" building. He had found some bizarre and unexplained images in this part of the film as well. I had also found other unexplained images in other parts of the film - outside of the area of the perforations! How was this to be explained?

First Frame of the Zapruder Film

Coincidentally, I returned to the so-called 'first' frame of the Zapruder film, z1. It was then that I noted what turned out to be the answer to the entire problem. Some very careful alteration exists, in the upper right hand section of the film. It has been tinted very carefully, but is easy to penetrate. I enhanced multiple frames in this area and was stunned. I was looking at the Knoll. It appeared to me that I was viewing the knoll from the location of the North Peristyle camera. So how could Zapruder have captured that? This could not be a ghost image, a pinhole effect, claw, etc.

For the purpose of illustration, I am using z3 [Attachment 4 - Upper righthand corner of frame enhanced].



The way I processed it, was analogous to a Chinese Fortune I had once read: "Help! I'm being held captive in a Chinese Fortune Cookie Factory!"

But Ed summed it up better:



If we take this view in z3, and call it the Grassy Knoll, replete with Badgeman and at least one camera man visible, where would this view come from? How about the camera crew at the North Peristyle, as an example?

This is a view of the knoll, from a squatting position in the bushes, at the North Peristyle, with the section of the z-film [still using Frame 3] set in. Recall that the bushes were much shorter in 1963. The red arrow points to Bob Groden - Use him for scale.

[Attachment 5 - animated comparison of upper portion of z3 compared to 11/04 view of Grassy Knoll from North Peristyle bushes location]

Now, this part is speculation, but it certainly appears that frames from multiple cameras, multiple locations have been embedded as the underlayer to the Zapruder film - throughout the film. It is not always possible to see the images, as it is largely dependent upon the strength of the subject in Zapruder's main viewing area - however, in hundreds of locations throughout the film, when the main action area is dark enough, it would appear that the images can be readily accessed. z310 is a very good example of this.

The rifleman

Now, more than ever, I do believe that the man seen in the images at the sprocket area in 195 - 207 is in fact one of the men contracted to fire live rounds at Kennedy that day. I also believe, based upon exchanges with Ed O'Hagen, that research is required concerning the appearance of gunfire from a rifle. It appears much smaller than I had previously believed - a pinhole of light, and it's gone.

However, I have come to realize that these embedded images, these records of conspiracy, can't be expected to be synched chronologically with the subject of the main action area. This leads me to believe that we may not be seeing what I had believed to be the throat shot. IMO, this now may be any of the shots that may have been taken from the retaining area of knoll - including a possible shot to the side of Kennedy's head [just above and a bit behind the ear, as per Emmett Hudson], the right front temple shot, or the throat shot.

Take another look at the rifleman. These are 2 distinct and separate images. They could not have been caught by Zapruder's camera, IMO. This appears to be a combination of 2 camera's footage - one possibly from the man in Nix 419, standing behind the retaining wall, as the rifle is positioned at almost a perfect 90 degree angle to the lens. The other, I really am unsure. From inside the pergola, perhaps. It's next to impossible to know, since we can't use the background for reference.

[Attachment 6 - stabilized view of the Rifleman in the panel area, using z196 - z207?]

I genuinely like this theory, and it helps me to process a lot of data. It makes sense also that someone may not have 'gone along' with the idea of covering up the execution of the President, and wanted to create a permanent record - a trail of clues, using pieces of footage, and cleverly arranging that as a second layer throughout the film.

I think it's of special importance to pull up a few examples of some of the underlayer - certainly some of it could be deemed as artifacts and imagination - but some of it has too much of a similarity to other scenes and individuals whom I have found elsewhere in my hunting. That can't be a coincidence.

There is one more piece which I haven't finished yet - more theorizing. If I'm right, then it is a view of the North Peristyle - but it could not have been taken from the Pedestal's perspective. Unclear.

Something to ponder - if this theory bears any weight and holds any merit - did someone with a certain sense of Patriotic duty create this 'mosaic' to leave behind an indelible record of conspiracy, in the hopes that it would be one day found, at a large cost to themselves?

Who would have had access to such materials, if these are small sequences of footage from more than one of the other cameras film?

If only someone could get 'original' film stock on some of the more significant 'published' films, I believe proof of conspiracy in the assassination would be complete.

I just love quotes, don't you?

Emmett Hudson, my absolute favorite witness.



And how could any good thread be complete without a quote from Gerry Patrick Hemming?



This one thanks to Bernice Moore...



I have multiple views of the Peristyle - so I don't know what attachment to use - best to put a Dorman enhancement here for Attachment 7.

It's unfortunate that I can't do much better, because they have made some effort to conceal these men. At a minimum, you can assume that if Lee Harvey Oswald was standing in the doorway of the TSBD, he would have been captured on the record. If preparations had been made in advance for the development of these films, and the ones at the knoll - someone was very busy - but they'd have plenty of time to study the entire assassination, and know what required 'treatment.' Possibly they would have even had some material available for matting.

Here's a panoramic I tried to make while sitting in the corner. Note the view - unzoomed. Where are these films today?

[Attachment 8 - panoramic from North Peristyle corner viewing Elm]

Possible camera views within the Z-film

- From the retaining wall, looking north [z196 - z207 panel area]
- From behind the fence, looking at the corner of the retaining wall [z1 - z? panel area]
- Man [z300s]
- From the North Peristyle looking towards the grassy knoll [z1 - z100? upper right quadrant - tinted to resemble a building]
- From the TSBD, looking down towards the grassy knoll [z460s panel area]

Did these cameramen have fake Press IDs like Jack Ruby? Was Jack Ruby perhaps in the midst of one of these groups? Was Lee Oswald outside of the TSBD at the stairs on a radio [note: Wisconsin Radio purchase in 1963, and defacing of 2 individuals at 'Billy Lovelady's' left in Altgens - did they simply cut and paste Billy head on LHO?]? Where are all these films today? Why was CD Jackson entered on the 'mysterious deaths' record?

Conclusion:

Many interesting questions, but the bottomline appears to be that Operation Dallas was a carefully planned and coordinated extensive 'black operation,' in which numerous operatives played a number of different roles, including creating a 'slanted' record of the entire event. The use of rifles, and what appear to be Cuban Military Hats, Cuban military garb, etc., appears to have been part of an overall plan to squarely place the blame of the assassination on Castro, to provide the required momentum for a full scale invasion of Cuba.

If CD Jackson was given the task of 'altering' the original record, making use of the Zapruder film and other films provided for use in creating a new 'official' record, he may well have introduced sequences of these other films into the 'extant' version of the Zapruder film, for the purpose of providing insurance - which may have unfortunately ran out in September of 1964. It certainly seems logical, and using Occam's razor, it gives me personally a nice close shave.

If anyone knows how I can get my hands on some high quality Dorman frames [specifically of the area of the North Peristyle Concrete Structure], I'd greatly appreciate it.

I have to tell you that when I read over this post that I just shook my head in disbelief. There are some of the most poorly thought out claims being made that I have ever heard. Why in God's name would someone want to sit in the bushes and film the motorcade when they could stand along the street or along the wall next to the reflection pool? You mention "Occams Razor" ... do you know what it says ...

Main Entry: Oc·cam's razor
Pronunciation: 'ä-k&mz-
Function: noun
Etymology: William of Occam
Date: circa 1837
: a scientific and philosophic rule that entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily which is interpreted as requiring that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities

The link allegedly showing men with cameras in the bushes was done in B&W - why was that? The only reason I can see for this is because B&W images lose information, thus one can take the shrubs and say they are men with cameras. However, when one looks at the images in color - what was suggested to be a man with a camera is seen as a red cluster of foliage. By removing the color factor and going with a B&W image does one then provide themself with an image that can be used to mislead someone into thinking they are seeing heads and not foliage clusters. Elsie Dorman's film also looks down on the same area from above and there is no one in the bushes.

I see that Ed Ohagen was mentioned. Ed likes to enlarge an image beyond recognition and then claim he sees things in it. He once posted an enlarged cluster of light and shadows off the stockade fence and claimed that these were cops with cameras. Ed was asked to not post such enlargements, but rather the source of the enlargement so everyone could see what exact photo he was using, but he never cooperated by obliging the forum. I later recognized the shadows and found them in Moorman's photograph. Ed had taken the shade spots on the stockade fence and claimed them to be cops with cameras. Then he enlarged the shade and sun spots to offer a false image so to make people think they might be seeing hidden cops. Because of the location of these sun and shade spots and because Ed had been unwilling to share the source for his claim, his credibility was shaken and his motives for carrying out such deceit became highly suspect.

Then there is this talk about films being shot from other locations and then bled into the Zapruder film. Doing such a project is an impossible task. The ability to line up obstacles becomes nonexistant. Anyone who says that someone could film at one spot in the plaza and somehow think they get all the things in their photo to match with a film from another location have not actually tried to do it. The change in perspective between locations would be quite noticible even to the untrained eye.

Very interesting Bill, but it's not my part to determine 'why' they chose these locations.

In terms of Dorman's film I am at complete odds with you. If you can scrounge up some higher quality frames for me I will demonstrate them to you to your complete satisfaction.

I see no reason for you to begin criticizing this work until you have made an effort to see it for yourself?

BM wrote:

[...]

Then there is this talk about films being shot from other locations and then bled into the Zapruder film. Doing such a project is an impossible task. The ability to line up obstacles becomes nonexistant. Anyone who says that someone could film at one spot in the plaza and somehow think they get all the things in their photo to match with a film from another location have not actually tried to do it. The change in perspective between locations would be quite noticible even to the untrained eye.

__________________

We've waited for what 3-4 years now - for 'trained eyes' to assemble a comparison of the "SEAMLESS DP films". No sense in getting to the bottomline, right? roflmao!

By-the-way, you say above; "change in perspective". Would you care to elaborate? I don't recall serious film alteration researchers [that I've spoken with anyway] saying definitively; films shot from various locations in and around DP make up a new and improved Zapruder film.

The reality is: one would need the alledged 'camera original' Z film itself [if your in a tight spot], and maybe a few seconds of additional double 8mm film shot from the Zapruder or Zapruder like camera. Shot from the same pedestal, of course - seconds before the motrorcade wandered into the kill zone. This is NOT rocket science, not even close...

Pretty easy -- as any optical film printer could tell you, especially those in the know of film printing techniques that were avaiable, and practiced in 1963. All sorts of SMPE [Society of Motion Picure Engineers] and SMPTE [Society of Motion Picure & Television Engineers] **published** references for same, some in camera film special effects technique references dated to 1915. 1915 was SMPE's inception, their first order of business was to set 35mm film specifications...

Toil on Mr. Forman - tis what "research" is all about...

Lee - I have seen it and it is irresponsible IMO. You are the one responsible for proving such claims and obtaining clear prints to work with. You used a shaking "BLACK and WHITE" clip of the shrubs along the concrete wall to imply that we are seeing camera men swaying back and forth as if you be singing "We are the World". You didn't even consider the movement of the rest of the background in correlation to the shrubs so to understand why you though you saw movement. Here is a link to all those frames and some are clear enough to see the red foliage. Red foliage does not equate to camera men.

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z202.jpg

Only when you remove the color could you possibly make a leap from foliage to hidden camera men - shame on you!

Sure I'll explain it - try and take a photo from atop the pedestal and another photo standing next to it and attempt to create an overlay. Every photo or artist drawing works from a vanishing point. Once you choose another film location - the angles to the vanishing point changes and the things within the field of view do as well. Take Moorman's photo #5 of the knoll for instance. The crossbar of the limo - the seat tops - the hand holds all are in line with a vanishing point that keeps everything in perspective. Draw lines through each and they should all intersect at a certain point off the photo. If you took another photo at a higher elevation, then those angles across the car would change and this would be detectable if you placed a photo/film of the limo taken at one location into a film that was taken at a different location. You may recall my being critical of one of Dale Myers replica 3D images of the limo coming out from behind the road sign. Every one of those locations on the car ran parallel to one another when they should have all had a different pitch that would lead to a vanishing point. While you may understand optical printers - you do not seem to grasp the physics involving perspective.

And the reason that you don't recall what serious researchers have been saying is probably because you do not associate with any. And FWIW - there have been people on the site you call home bring up the possibly that Gordon Arnold's film was used in conjunction with the Zapruder film. The reasons why that could not ever be done goes to what I said in the above paragraph.

Bill,

Why don't you afford me the professional courtesy of waiting until I'm finished in uploading at least some of the various photos I have prepared before damming the entire case as preposterous? I am still unable to upload files.

- lee

BM penned:

Sure I'll explain it - try and take a photo from atop the pedestal and another photo standing next to it and attempt to create an overlay. Every photo or artist drawing works from a vanishing point. Once you choose another film location - the angles to the vanishing point changes and the things within the field of view do as well. Take Moorman's photo #5 of the knoll for instance. The crossbar of the limo - the seat tops - the hand holds all are in line with a vanishing point that keeps everything in perspective.

[...]
_______________

Gonna have to do better than THAT, young man -- might want to sell your revelations to film editors in a industry making a torrid living altering reality as we know it, for years and years and YEARS... and I'm not speaking of cartoon cell animators, they live in fantasyland. However, some film printing techniques even apply in their work, wayback when...

AGAIN, for those participating in this thread that CAN'T read -- film shot from the EXACT same spot on the Zapruder pedestal, with LIKE camera, by AZapruder either knowingly or unknowingly -- additional footage included in the "alledged" Zapruder film, perhaps?

VANISHING points WELL intact. Your so EASY!

How'm I doing, champ? Need a quote from; The Technique of Special Effects Cinematography -by Raymond Fielding, 1965, Lib. of Congress Catalog Card Number: 64-8116 reprinted in 1968. Re-issued and updated, late 80's, on how you merge this film sources, optically? Some have said the guy, Fielding, still teaches in Florida, give him a call... I noticed you avoided the SMPE comments like the plague? Why is that? Why would anyone fear, the FACTS, facts about film matting techniques?

As for other comments regarding where I call my "internet home" re: Zapruder film discussion[s]. Its not unknown, a few original posters on that particular board were successful exposing LN'ers that pose as CT'ers, most before my time. During my time there, I fondly refer to the current crop as the "preservers of unknown history", some paid most unpaid...

Of no real interest to me, really - just more disinformation for the uninitiated...

Lee wrote:

Why don't you afford me the professional courtesy of waiting until I'm finished in uploading at least some of the various photos I have prepared before damming the entire case as preposterous? I am still unable to upload files.

____________

Simple, he can't help himself...

David

Here is the first attachment which I had originally planned to add demonstrating the angle of the camera. This is an enlargement taken from a Nix frame - the number I have is 419, but I don't know whether this is of any consequence.

I have pasted an enlarged version of the cameraman [who has been segmented and lifted from a previous enhancement I performed] and indicated his general position in the tinted and over-exposed area of the original frame. All I would like to point out is the location of the motorcade, vs. the apparent line of sight of the cameraman.

For the record, the camera team located behind the retaining wall can be seen in a variety of the films and photos, however it is not my intent to dwell on the operatives in this location, the stairs, the fence or the North Peristyle for this purpose of this thread. Furthermore, I would like to refer anyone to the map created by RB Cutler of Dealey Plaza, in which he credits Richard Sprague with photo interpretation.

- Cutler and Sprague have 4 men located behind the retaining wall.
- Emmett Hudson said 'a bunch of people.'
- Altgens recalled people appearing in this area prior to arrival of the motorcade.

I have emailed Bill Newman and asked similar questions [retaining wall camera team and North Peristyle Camera Team], as his testimony states that he did look back at the 'garden area,' and I believe his location would be prime for noticing the NP team - looking in this general direction for the arrival of the motorcade, but the address I have for him is apparently no longer valid.

Does anyone have a better email address for Mr. Newman that they could email to my attention?

Sorry all - still can't load the photo. I cut it down from 210K to ~120K and still no go.

Nix419...

From Muchmore [frame 018]. What appears to be another cameraman, on stairs.

Note: He also does not appear to be interested in recording the events transpiring directly to his right, where the motorcade is passing, but instead appears to be focusing in the general area of Elm and Houston.

Rosemary Willis is a prime example of the deliberate tainting of the original record, since she is seen wearing no hood at all in the Dorman film - seconds before she appears in the z-film. There are multiple other issues, including the shoe and leg seen hanging over the door when the limo arrived at Parkland [Ed O'Hagen demonstrated for me that this could not have belonged to Clint Hill], the disconnect between the witness accounts about multiple wounds to Kennedy's head, the medical evidence [which in itself is questionable], etc.

[Attachment 3 - Rosemary Willis running on sidewalk sans hood in Elsie Dorman film]

Comparison of 'hidden' upper righthand section in z-film, compared with view taken from North Peristyle location 11/04.

The red arrow points to R. Groden, who can be used for scale. The bushes were much shorter in 1963 than they are today.

Take another look at the rifleman. IMO, these are 2 distinct and separate images.

They could not have been caught by Zapruder's camera, IMO. This appears to be a combination of 2 camera's footage - one possibly from the man in Nix 419, standing behind the retaining wall, as the rifle is positioned at almost a perfect 90 degree angle to the lens. The other, I really am unsure. From inside the pergola, perhaps. It's next to impossible to know, since we can't use the background for reference.

[Attachment 6 - stabilized view of the Rifleman in the panel area, using z196 - z207? The man, who closely resembles 'Badgeman' IMO, can be seen at center].

Frame One through Frame 39 does have an anomaly in the upper right quadrant.
It is persistent, it looks like a MATTE overlay and it resembles, indeed,
the retaining wall and bushes in Nix and Moorman....
It essentially airbrushes the windows of the building to the right of the three upright narro windows (county records?)

View it in its "original" form here:

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z1.jpg

Shanet

ALSO: The animation above (Lees post of the horizontal shadow man) might be best interpreted as light and shadow falling on the Screen during a cineplex transfer. If one were filming a dub or "doctored"
copy from a screen (or mirror) and someone opened a door, and light fell on the screen briefly, this is what you would see.

This to me is the "watermark" that shows film transfer and duplication in what
is supposedly an original. It didn't happen in the darkroom, because the light would be a dark spoilage, this is a light shining onto the image that is being filmed.

ALSO: what are the strange letters on the left margin in 34-38, some are letters against the tree, some are against a solid background, glimpse of margin of
composite element ...? (these #s return around 160...169 "M" in left margin... ?)

The shadow overlay looks most human and like the Badgeman or gunman in
Frame 170, against the follow up cars black hood --- check it out:

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z170.jpg


Here is another anomaly, visible to the naked eye.
Click on frame 183 -- what is the secondary source of the building?
It is shown in the lower left hand corner and isolated in the upper
bracket fragment ... this looks like the triple overpass or a brick building !

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z183.jpg

ALSO coming and going at random are letters in the left hand margin
M, I, K, D, C, R etc.

Sometimes they are there and sometimes not....
??????????????????????????????????????????????

Duncan's theory comes into play here.
If someone from a nearly identical Point of View as Zapruder were to pan
across the parade route, a few yards before the limo, but with no limo in the frame, then this stock footage could have been used to superimpose the
limo in the bottom of the released zapruder film -- and all the witnesses like
Jean Hill and Mary Moorman would still be in the movie....

That retouching of the first forty frames or so in the upper right hand that Lee Forman points out ... that is the "smoking gun" for forgery,
this is more compelling than the pincushion effect problems
or speed and braking issues.

Some one asked what was the one "flag" for fraud, and here it is,
along with the super fast blood dispersal 313-314.

Go to frame 461 and look at the ghost image - it is part of a shrub that has branches and foliage on it.

I googled ZAPRUDER FRAME (no pun intended) and got several good
discussions. The big edit, the jump from no limo to limo in the kill zone,
is supposedly Zapruder turning off the camera, then turning it back on.
However, this would have produced strong overexposure of the First frame
of the "restart" because the Bell and Howell always overexposed the first frame
after a complete stop.

So someone edited out the missing portion and made a spliceless splice,
which means a false master print --- read the various opinions, they range from
TOTAL FAKE to INNOCENT HOME MOVIE.

I am concerned about the letters on the margin, this is evidence of tampering that is not visible when the movie is screened, only when the full frames are inspected.

Shanet - I believe the letters spell 'Kodak' -- Kodakchrome or Cinechrome or something similar. I do not know whether or not they are consistent throughout the film.

There are strange items that defy explanation throughout the film, but the question I still believe worth asking is whether these images were planted for the purpose of demonstrating the existence of a vast conspiracy - involving numerous films taken from a variety of viewpoints. I am still trying to figure out the sublayer, as opposed to the obvious issues with the primary.

The images you have raised are also curious. I was unable to match that 'window' anywhere - not that I did not make the effort. That is part of a larger 'sequence.' I have seen it explained as a window in the courthouse - which IMO, doesn't work.

What appears, in my view, to be a rifle - aiming, firing and recoiling - there is nothing in the main action area to satisfy the movement of this object. I had originally believed that it was in fact the rifle used to inflict the throat wound, and that it could be correlated with Kennedy's reaction, and perhaps one of Zapruder's 'jiggles' in reaction to the report - I no longer believe this to be the case.

Using the 'primary' layer of the Zapruder film to establish much of anything, IMO, is highly suspect - as will one day be seen when one of the other films emerges - despite the predictable efforts by the disinformationists to discredit entire as a hoax.

There is another section which IMO appears to be a view from behind the picketfence, focused on the action behind the retaining wall. Inconclusive, but would a highly sophisticated computer program be able to separate the cross-talk using some serious algorithms and photogrammetery? I'll offer that one - I may animate it to gauge movement.

Also - don't know if you ever saw my piece on the Shaneyfelt exhibit? I'll post it here, as it may be connected. Edward K. Thompson had a hand in 'filling in the cracks' in the backyard photo. Thompson was C.D. Jackson's editor and apparently had some skill at creating composites. There's a basement/garage I would like to root through. Maybe he has some kin that can be contacted.

The attached from the Warren Report.

- lee

Here's the Shaneyfelt exhibit. I have enhanced several portions. Note what appears to be a stamp, text, handwriting, etc.

I overlayed this photo with the DeMohrenschildt version to identify the location of the text allegedly written by LHO - not anywhere near the locations of the areas I have highlighted in the attached.

Thompson died in 1996. Why is CD Jackson on the 'Mysterious Deaths' list?

http://www.governor.state.nd.us/awards/rr-...y/thompson.html



- lee

Sharp eye, Lee, as usual
Looks like the mattes had picked up some text along the way ...

Good stuff on Thompson, that guy was a ranking "lifer" in the agencies.
Edited the Army Intelligence Magazine and was in charge of intelligence
concerning the Luftwaffe....now that is just a good independent journalist, Lee...



This whole Zapruder / backyard / Life Magazine connection goes through
an intelligence agent, Thompson...very interesting...

Shanet wrote:

So someone edited out the missing portion and made a spliceless splice,
which means a false master print --- read the various opinions, they range from
TOTAL FAKE to INNOCENT HOME MOVIE.

I am concerned about the letters on the margin, this is evidence of tampering that is not visible when the movie is screened, only when the full frames are inspected.

[...]
___________

The discussed area is called the "sprocket hole area"...

Much work has been done is this area, if you'd like, I can supply a few websites that will define the 8mm edge markings. KODAK website has the definitions available, too.

I spoke with Roland Zavada of HSCA fame regarding film edge printing, he confirmed to me, over the phone; Kodak double 8mm unsplit may be manufactured without edge markings... take that where you'd like!

Over exposure on first frames is a "gate issue - light leakage" with the B&H camera, see the Zavada Report. I don't have a url handy, it is however, all over the internet...

David Healy

Thanks DHG#1

The edge marking letters wouldn't bother me if they were always present.
But they come and go.

Shanet

This doesn't exactly belong here, but I thought it should be documented someplace.

These are 2 of the cameramen on the stairs. I created this montage originally under the assumption that there was only one man on the stairs. My mistake.

They appear to be using handheld, portable cameras. Again, the light is refracting from their lenses in a brilliant fashion, making them visible to the naked eye in good quality [early generation] copies of the Moorman. I think it would be very interesting if these were all B&H Director Series Zoomatic 440s - however the B&H is a clunky affair, and difficult to view, grip and shoot with.

Is it out of the question that one or more of these 'cameras' is in fact a high quality spotter's scope?

It's interesting to note that the theory about these individuals being stenciled in after-the-fact [which may be true for some of the 'human shaped objects' behind the fence in Moorman], the montage included has a cut from the UPI Moorman [11/23/63]. I tried to collect as many 'first-day' Moormans as possible, as with later generations, the successive alterations do a fair job of sweeping the stairs clean. At least one of these operatives is still fairly well visible.

I also believe that there may have been an effort to camoflauge a shooter by surrounding him with cameramen [with bags, tripods, and phony press IDs perhaps] - but that's not the focus of this thread.

- lee

I never figured out why the alterationists would have added this bogus individual, but here he is - from Moorman. I nicknamed him 'The Phantom.'

If you examine Muchmore [inset at bottom right], he is a 'cut and paste.' In Nix, I followed him into the 'tint' and he vanishes. Perhaps he was created to provide cover for some of the many individuals gathered on the stairs. He certainly does not fit the description of Emmett Hudson concerning the 'young man' with whom he was speaking with before and during the assassination.

They should have spent a bit more time on his legs and finishing his left foot. In Muchmore, he is practically transparent, and the green background goes right through his body.

In Nix - he vanishes.

Last one from this location - this is an interpretive rendition of one of the guys on the stairs with his camera - from Muchmore.

- lee

The Nix cameraman fell from grace somehow, so here's a new one. Frame 419. The subject of this man's camera does not appear to be the motorcade.

Smoke on the knoll?

- lee

You wouldn't want to be openly seen if you were wearing Cuban Military garb as part of a prearranged plan to record the assassination and place the blame on Castro.

Since you seem to have a very good relationship with Gary Mack, could you find out how we might get access to the Dorman film for some 1mb+ high quality digital scans of the frames of the North Peristyle area? That would be a tremendous contribution, and would either confirm or deny my assumptions concerning the camera team in this location.

All I have to work with is a 17K frame, and a ripped down mpeg. I have written the 6th Floor Museum concerning same with no reply.

- lee

Lee
I hate these overlays.

Where did the black and white material come from?

You have placed a big block over a NIX frame. Where did it come from?
Zapruder?

To be honest with you, this stuff is very hard to visualize, let alone believe.

You are telling us that the third man in the EMMETT HUDSON position is
a "phantom" while trying to get us to "see" someone who ISN'T there
laying down behind them.

You may be on to something, but these posts are to confusing to be compelling.

Sorry but this is too much like the blinking, confusing stuff on LANCER....

Shanet

Shanet.

I think you're missing the point. We're in agreement that a large black operation was exercised in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 - correct? This would involve a significant number of operatives. So where are you thinking that they were located exactly?

The official photographic record of the brutal slaying of our democratically elected President of the United States at the hands of his own Government in 1963 has been criminally altered by same. This record has been subjected to overexposure, tinting, tampering, splicing, acid damage, seizure, loss of originals, control of source material, etc.

As someone once said, 'But if one of the photos were altered, all of the photos would have had to have been altered!' Precisely. And well put, even though I am taking this quote deliberately out of context.

The truth has been hidden, and with the use of photographic analysis, I can tell you that there were approximately 3 - 5 men on the stairs - not including Emmett Hudson and the man in the red shirt who was never identified. There were 5 - 7 or more behind the retaining wall. Let's stop there. These operatives have been concealed, erased, painted - whatever. The cover-up included removing their existence - but they persist in all the films and photos, and can be revealed by using a variety of tools.

It's true - it's hard to see - but what have we got to work with?

Can I get any original source material to create my own digital scans at 1mb+ per frame, in order to more fully bring to light these men, who have been hidden? No.

Can I get my hands on any of the original film stock, before it was subjected to alteration? No.

And in many cases, like Altgens 6, or Nix, the negative has been lost. Or in the case of the Dillard photo, destroyed through neglect. Or in the case of others - carefully being preserved [refrigerated in some cases I believe] by the National Archives or the 6th Floor museum.

So what do we have to work with? MPEGs. JPEGs. Digital files with compressions ratios that cause a loss of data and generate artifacts.

The square 'block' you see in the Nix frame is an enlargement of the area of the retaining wall from the same frame. I have removed the tint as best as I am able to reveal the operatives located there. Actually, I think it's a pretty fair job myself - each enhancement can take many hours and multiple iterations.

But you're question actually helped me figure something out for the first time - so thank you. The role of the 'Phantom' was either to confuse a trajectory for a shot from behind the fence, or to conceal the presence of a shooter behind him. That's about as far as my thinking takes me there - so more work to do.

Here's an example of how a frame looks as it goes through various stages of enhancement - this is a Muchmore frame. The area of the stairs is in shadow - there is a Texas Live Oak there. Consider that it was 12:30pm at the time. If you compare Nix, Muchmore, etc. to Towner - you'll note that the area near the top of the frame should be blue sky - I believe I have to credit Jack White with that observation. It's all been intentionally darkened. The Dorman film is an anathema. It's just not credible that so many Dealey Plaza photographers and film makers, amateur or not, would have experienced the same phenomenon that overexposed, blurred, or otherwise darkened their film.

Anyway - I have selected a piece of the area in shadow and treated it to a number of different steps using a standard photoshop tool. The coloring has been added, obviously, and I interpreted the image - so it is a bit subjective. However - this area should not be so dark. If I peel back the shadow, we should see the stairs, which are light in color. Here we see istead what appears to be an individual reclining in the steps. How come he isn't mentioned in the Warren Report? How come I am able to find him and others in Muchmore, Nix, Towner, Bond, Betzner, Moorman, Bell, etc.? How come I am able to animate these individuals and demonstrate movement if they were not there?

- lee

Lee penned

[...]

Can I get any original source material to create my own digital scans at 1mb+ per frame, in order to more fully bring to light these men, who have been hidden? No.

[...]

____________

Best I can do is direct you to Jim Fetzer's site where you can access John Costella's MPI enhanced Zapruder film frames. 1000x800 pixels each, I believe...

www.assassinationscience.com -- pretty sure thats correct

David Healy

That is the site we used for the frame 1-40 examples
of a FUZZED OUT upper right hand quadrant.

The fuzzed out area is a portico connecting County Records to the Jail...

Actually no - I am using 1.xmb z-frames - very high quality stuff - 820x820 pixels.

If I had access to the actual film I could really raise hell. We could calibrate the scanner to do a great deal of the penetration work for us.

z466 as an example.

- lee

Is this individual significant? Is he the same as the one we see in Bond during the aftermath behind the fence? Was he placed as an embedded image for a specific reason? I give you 'Rembrandt' from a z-ghost panel, with an inset taken from a Wilma Bond photo.

and for the hell of it...this is from Nix, with credit to Ed O'Hagen who provided me with the rough material. This is one of the operatives on the knoll.

NIX versus Moorman:

Click to view attachment

I am only at about 50% of completing this thread. Please bear with me, as I am up and running on a much higher quality machine, with a DVD drive.

Still to come:

- Animated sequence of man with rifle in z-film, which again, I believe to be an embedded treatment, taken from another camera's footage.
- A higher quality enhancement of the Dorman frames concerning the camera crew at the North Peristyle.
- An animated gif from the Bell film showing what I believe may be a camera in one of the windows, panning the scene in the plaza.

White House correspondent Charles Roberts account of the assassination from the Press Bus.


QUOTE
"At about that time, give or take two seconds, the motorcade, which most newsmen estimated had been moving at about 20 miles an hour, ground to an uncertain halt....

'What's going on?' screamed someone from the back of the bus. At that moment I saw a man I believed to be a photographer - but don't ask me what kind of camera he carried - struggling up a grassy embankment ahead and to the right of the President's car, ducking his head as if under fire. He was pursued - or, at any rate, followed - by a motorcyle policeman who rammed his three-wheeled machine over a curb and, as it righted itself, pulled a pistol for his holster....

Lane's best witness, Lee Bowers Jr., told the Warren commission that 'something occurred in this particular spot which was out of the ordinary, which attracted my eye for some reason, which I could not identify.' Of course! What probably attracted Bower's eyes and those of a hundred other stunned spectators to that grassy embankment at that moment was the out-of-the-ordinary sight of a motorcycle policeman, pistol in hand, pursuing a gunman who, if real, had just committed the crime of the Century. At that moment, I, too, thought that something had occurred in that area which was 'out of the ordinary.' Later, after no witness testified that he saw a gun or gunman there, and the police failed to find any trace of a gun or gunmen there, and pathologists found that the President had not been hit from the front, I was pursuaded by the physical evidence - as opposed to the testimony of excited eyewitnesses - that nothing had occurred there beyond a Policeman's eye-catching but futile reconnaissance of the embankment."

Newsweek, December 5, 1966, pgs 22 - 23.

Shanet - I have another overlay of this as well - but note from your comparison the lack of a vehicle behind the retaining wall. Also, there is a Sitzman interview [need to dig for it] where she answers a question concerning the lack of the presence of a vehicle behind the retaining wall.

I recognize that some have theorized that this vehicle was behind the fence - but given the 5' height of the fence and the lower elevation from which these shots were taken, the vehicle would have had to have been 7' high to clear the fence.

IMO, this is a bogus and introduced red herring, and the classic gunman more of the same to cover the actual activity that took place on the stairs, behind the fence and behind the retaining wall.

Give me a few days and I will show you an enhanced view of Nix, sans tint. I do not have access to my files for a few days.

- lee

This is from the images between the sprockets, using z215 - z219. I enhanced the last 2 frames and repeated them to highlight what I believe is the rifle.

In line with this thread - there is nothing to resemble this object in the main action area. Instead, I believe it is again an inserted 'embedded sequence' taken from another camera's film footage.

There isn't sufficient detail to provide us with much by way of clues as to this operatives position - however the angle of his weapon is telling.

As I speculated earlier - if these are indeed sequences which have been introduced for the purpose of providing a record of conspiracy, and clues to the action that took place 11/22/63 in Dealey Plaza, it can't be readily assumed that the sequences are in any way synchronized with the shots depicted in the primary level. We appear to see a man taking aim and firing, yet no one reacts in the motorcade for several more frames.

- lee

Consistent with my view of the locations of the operatives in Dealey Plaza, for the purpose of communication and recording, here is a photo [allegedly] taken from the 6th floor window, which clearly illustrates the location of the North Peristyle.

My theory is that from this position, at the North Peristyle, the operation would have recorded the activity taking place on the 6th floor.

- lee

This photo attached with the finger pointing is someone else's discovery, concerning one of the Knoll operators on the stairs, apparently visible to the naked eye in the Moorman polaroid. Unfortunately, I don't know who to credit on this one, as it was in my files along with a few other hundred photos that I downloaded from the internet in spurts [If it was someone that is a member of this forum, I hope you'll accept my apology in advance].

In any event, I slightly tweaked him to make him more obvious, and added the inset at bottom left. Take a close look at him.

The comparison, at bottom right, is an inset I created taking another image [visible to the naked eye] in z310, near the top right part of the frame, in the grass. I have removed the saturation and slightly adjusted the contrast and brightness.

As for me personally, I see a resemblance between these two images. IMO, this is one of the operatives located in the area of the knoll, near the top of the stairs. He does not belong as an object in the Zapruder film, unless he was intentionally introduced.

I've just gone through the frames of the zapruder film, starting at the beginnig and making 10 pictures steps. I don't know if this is known but as far as I can see there are some missing frames right at the beginning as if the camara was turned off and than on again.

Within 4 frames (Z130 to Z134) the motorcade jumps into the picture
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment

compared to the way the motorcade travels between Z140 und Z160. unfortunatly
I haven't enough space left, but I'm sure you got these frames taken from Costella.



George

"...the stabbing/shooting of someone in the vicinity of the retaining wall and bloody pools]. "

Someone, anyone, please steer me towards more on this (what a wonderful site here. I just joined).

Now, check these (this one is "List of Over 500 Photographs Taken on 11/22/63"):

http://www.jfk-info.com/photos1.htm


Finally, here is an analysis of the so-called patsy Paschall film, which so few reportedly have seen:

http://www.jfk-info.com/paschall.htm

Hope these last two sites are relevant to the discussion, though I'm admittedly late to the dance. Also, sincerely hope others benefit.

Yours Truly, JohnG

I posted this on another thread but I will post it here as well.



Hi all

Time to revive this thread.

Having also read the Hoax site but not, I admit, having read Fetzer's Film Hoax book, I don't find the arguments on the website too convincing.

Jack White seems to imply that the whole Zapruder film is a hoax but I would say to that there is simply far too much to fake: all the people standing on the grass, the car, the secret service and police as well as the principles in the car. The idea of propaganda films or Mary Poppins being "proof" that the Zapruder film was faked in its entirety will not wash.

I agree that there are oddities about the film which might point to manipulation of the images in certain frames, similar to the probable doctoring of the JFK autopsy photos and the photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald with the rifle, and possibly frames missing, but again there is too much in the Zapruder film to fake to claim that the entire film is a hoax to the extent that it could take in my myself and other reasonably minded observers such as Congressional committees or other investigators.

Best regards

Chris George

Christopher T. George wrote:

I posted this on another thread but I will post it here as well.

___________

I won't be responding in this thread -- responded to the other thread...

DHealy

praytell what's this about?


correct me if I'm wrong, the last post to this thread was nearly 2.5 years ago (mine).... Jim Fetzer posts to this thread yesterday and you edit his post for WHAT reason again? What are you doing, Evan? This your own personal playland? Jim Fetzer have an editor assigned to him on this forum?

How dense are you David? Sheesh!