Shanet Clark Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 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 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 <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Forman Posted February 26, 2005 Author Share Posted February 26, 2005 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanet Clark Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 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... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Forman Posted February 26, 2005 Author Share Posted February 26, 2005 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Forman Posted February 26, 2005 Author Share Posted February 26, 2005 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Forman Posted February 26, 2005 Author Share Posted February 26, 2005 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanet Clark Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 NIX versus Moorman: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Forman Posted February 28, 2005 Author Share Posted February 28, 2005 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Forman Posted February 28, 2005 Author Share Posted February 28, 2005 NIX versus Moorman: <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Forman Posted March 1, 2005 Author Share Posted March 1, 2005 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Forman Posted March 3, 2005 Author Share Posted March 3, 2005 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Forman Posted March 4, 2005 Author Share Posted March 4, 2005 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Bollschweiler Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 (edited) 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 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 Edited March 31, 2005 by George Bollschweiler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John Gillespie Posted July 5, 2005 Share Posted July 5, 2005 "...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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now