New Proof of JFK Film Fakery: "Conclusive Evidence", Experts Claim

[Thomas Graves]

Thank you, Anthony. I think it's a safe bet that Robin Unger and the other shills will no longer

be taken seriously after this exchange. Here is a copy of The News-Palladium in which the

date, "November 22, 1963", can easily be seen. Benton Harbor is a small town of 10,000 or

less, which makes the idea it would publish TWO EXTRAS about the assassination absurd.

To me, it is embarrassing when so many attempt so hard to refute clear and convincing proof

that the CIA has been manipulating evidence, even to the point of creating fake newspapers.

The Altgens6, by the way, does not even appear in The New York Times, November 23, 1963!

That Robin Unger has so many at his fingertips is fascinating to me--and worth contemplation.

Unger, Lamson, Colby, Graves--and now Dolva!--appear impervious to logic and evidence in

another stunning display of reckless disregard for reason, which requires some explanation.

How much more proof would we need to know that the Zapruder film has been fabricated and

that Altgens7 is a fake? No wonder the JFK research community becomes bogged down when

this degree of irrationality of belief is displayed by so many members. There has to be a reason. (emphasis added by T. Graves)

Dear Dr. Fetzer,

In case you haven't noticed in our posts over the years, Dolva and I (and I think Unger, too) believe that JFK's assassination was the result of a conspiracy. Yes! A conspiracy! (Not sure about Lamson and Colby. LOL)

And just because I don't think that all of the non-Zapruder films (and photos!) taken in Dealey Plaza during the assassination were altered to conform with a (possibly somewhat) altered Z-film does not obviate the fact that I believe that the CIA (or FBI, etc) was/were involved in the assassination and/or its coverup.

For your edification, Dr. Fetzer, I personally think that the Z-frames most likely to have been altered are the frames that show JFK's head wounds. But you know something? After doing a personal cost-benefit analysis regarding the feasibility or non feasibility of my doing my own (paranoic?) hyper-analysis of every frame of the Zapruder film, etc, I came to the conclusion that it doesn't really matter to me. Why? Because I already believe that there was an intelligence agency-based conspiracy and now I'm just trying to find out who, exactly, was involved.

Sincerely,

--Tommy

Edited February 27, 2013 by Thomas Graves

[Robin Unger]

quote:

That Robin Unger has so many at his fingertips is fascinating to me--and worth contemplation.

Unger, Lamson, Colby, Graves--and now Dolva!--appear impervious to logic and evidence

Your name should go to the top of that impervious to logic and evidence list.

Edited February 27, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Thomas Graves]

Thank you, Anthony. I think it's a safe bet that Robin Unger and the other shills will no longer

be taken seriously after this exchange. Here is a copy of The News-Palladium in which the

date, "November 22, 1963", can easily be seen. Benton Harbor is a small town of 10,000 or

less, which makes the idea it would publish TWO EXTRAS about the assassination absurd.

To me, it is embarrassing when so many attempt so hard to refute clear and convincing proof

that the CIA has been manipulating evidence, even to the point of creating fake newspapers.

The Altgens6, by the way, does not even appear in The New York Times, November 23, 1963!

That Robin Unger has so many at his fingertips is fascinating to me--and worth contemplation.

Unger, Lamson, Colby, Graves--and now Dolva!--appear impervious to logic and evidence in

another stunning display of reckless disregard for reason, which requires some explanation.

How much more proof would we need to know that the Zapruder film has been fabricated and

that Altgens7 is a fake? No wonder the JFK research community becomes bogged down when

this degree of irrationality of belief is displayed by so many members. There has to be a reason.

Dear Dr. Fetzer,

In case you haven't noticed in our posts over the years, Dolva and I (and I think Unger, too) believe that JFK's assassination was the result of a conspiracy. Yes! A conspiracy! (Not sure about Lamson and Colby. LOL)

And just because I don't think that all of the non-Zapruder films (and photos!) taken in Dealey Plaza during the assassination were altered to conform with a (possibly somewhat) altered Z-film does not obviate the fact that I believe that the CIA (or FBI, etc) was/were involved in the assassination and/or its coverup.

For your edification, Dr. Fetzer, I personally think that the Z-frames most likely to have been altered are the frames that show JFK's head wounds. But you know something? After doing a personal cost-benefit analysis regarding the feasibility or non feasibility of my doing my own (paranoic?) micro analysis of every frame of the Zapruder film, I came to the conclusion that it doesn't really matter. Why? Because I already believe that there was an intelligence agency-based conspiracy and now I'm just trying to find out who, exactly, was involved.

Sincerely,

--Tommy

edited and bumped

Edited February 27, 2013 by Thomas Graves

[Robin Unger]

(3) - 16mm Unslit “double 8” B&W Dupes

Quote:

Three such “dirty dupes” – all unslit, 16 mm wide, “double 8” versions of the Zapruder film – surfaced in January of 2000 when the LMH Co. materials were physically transferred to the Sixth Floor Museum, in Dallas. They are all black and white products (as are the 31 poor quality blowup prints of the Zapruder film published in the November 29th issue of LIFE). As noted by author Richard Trask, one of them, a “reversal black-and-white positive,” does contain markings that “…appear to be markings used to determine selected images for inclusion in LIFE magazine.” [25]

Unfortunately, both Roland Zavada and Richard Trask (who has endorsed Zavada’s view) have gotten carried away by the discovery of these three black-and-white “dirty dupes,” and have drawn entirely the wrong conclusion from these materials discovered about twelve-and-one-half years ago.

zavada's open letter response to Doug Horne 2010

Edited February 27, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

Standard “double 8” filming procedure.

Continuation of zavada's open letter response to Doug Horne 2010

Complete Viewable PDF Online here:

http://www.jfk-info....Z-DH-032010.pdf

Edited February 27, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

Clint Hill said he pushed jackie back into her seat.

Is that what we start to see in Nix as the film ends. ?

Click on image to view FULL SIZE:

Edited February 27, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

Life Magazine Scan LARGE

Is Clint Hill touching Jackie ?

Is the back of the head wound visible ?

Click on image to view FULL SIZE:

Altgen's 7 Crop Colorized LARGE

Edited February 27, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

Zoomed headshot

Does the back of the head look normal, or has it been re-touched (painted over)

Click on image to view FULL SIZE:

Edited February 27, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

Altgen's 6 Crop Colorized

Click on image to view FULL SIZE:

Edited February 27, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

Autopsy photo's

How much is genuine, and how much is Re-Touched or completely Bogus

Colorized autopsy photo's

Click on image to view FULL SIZE:

Edited February 27, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

Colorized autopsy image LARGE

Click on image to view FULL SIZE

Edited February 27, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

Colorized F8

Shown in BOTH orientations

Click on image to view FULL SIZE

Edited February 27, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

Serpia Colorized skull X-Rays

Click on image to view FULL SIZE

Edited February 27, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

[Len Colby]

zavada's open letter response to Doug Horne 2010

Thanks for posting that Robin, it pretty clearly demonstrates Horne's agenda took precedence over his credibility.