Denis Pointing
-
Posts
370 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Denis Pointing
-
-
Time to bring together, on a single thread, the full, sorry tale.
Part 1: The Muchmore film
Thompson claims:
JFK Lancer: 2064, Why all the assassination films are authentic!Posted by Josiah Thompson, Wed Dec-31-69 06:00 PM
Wed Apr-30-03 08:37 AM
Richard Trask wrote about this in both his book, “Pictures of the Pain,” drawing on an earlier article by UPI’s Maurice Schonfeld in the “Columbia Journalism Review.” According to Trask, Marie Muchmore walked into the Dallas office of United Press International (UPI) and sold her film to them UNDEVELOPED for $1000 on Monday, November 25th. UPI immediately took it to Kodak for processing. UPI then shipped either the original 8mm film or a 16mm print to UPI's home office in New York City. Further research by Gary Mack, has shown that Muchmore's film first was shown in New York around midday Tuesday, November 26th on WNEW-TV.
The Truth:
Of course, further research has revealed nothing of the sort: Mack can’t substantiate his claim; and has singularly failed, after a mere two years-worth of opportunity, to find the newspaper report that is the alleged source for his certainty. For more on this topic, see the thread on this forum: Was Muchmore’s film shown on WNEW-TV, New York, on November 26, 1963? A cinematic shell game sketched
As for the timing of the film’s showing, here is the earliest newspaper clipping yet located on the subject:
Richard K. Doan, “Now the Task of Righting Upset Schedules,” New York Herald Tribune, 27 November 1963, section 1, p.21:“WNEW-TV (Channel 5) claimed it was the first TV station in the country to televise an amateur photographer’s film footage of President Kennedy’s assassination. The film was distributed by United Press International and aired by Channel 5 at 12:46 a.m. yesterday.”
Thompson claims:
Josiah Thompson, “Proof that the Zapruder Film is Authentic:“The FBI first learned of the Muchmore film, for example, when it was shown on the New York City station WNEW-TV just after midday on Tuesday, November 26th.”
http://home.earthlink.net/~joejd/jfk/zapho...pson-proof.html
The Truth:
5WCH140
Mr. Specter:How did you obtain a copy of that film?
Mr. Shaneyfelt:
Our first knowledge of this came as a result of a review of the book "Four Days" which covers the assassination period, in which representatives of the FBI noted a colored picture taken from a motion picture film that did not match either the Nix film or the Zapruder film.
Once we established that, then we investigated and learned that it was made by Mrs. Mary Muchmore, and was at that time in the possession of United Press International in New York, and made arrangements for them to furnish us with a copy of the Muchmore film. That is the copy that I used for examination.
In part 2 of this thrilling series, I examine the mislocation of witnesses in Thompson’s 1967 Six Seconds in Dallas.
Paul
Paul with respect, are you sure your not letting your animosity with Josiah Thompson and Gary Mack cloud your better judgement here? There are literally hundreds of references and citations for the Muchmore film first being shown on WNEW TV on 26/Nov/63. To any reasonably minded person that amount of reference would stand as proof. If there are hundreds of ref/citations for the Muchmore film, there are literally THOUSANDS for the Zapruder film first being shown on TV March 1975. Your suggestion that ALL these references are wrong and that it was the Zapruder film shown on WNEW is totally unreasonably. As is your demand that Gary Mack drop everything and search for a 45 year old newspaper clipping. This is starting to resemble a debate with a member of the Flat Earth Society! Your better than that Paul, give it up. Denis.
-
Mr Thompson,
In your opening post you used the phrase:
"...bootstrap a piece of incomplete and somewhat shoddy work into “a major breakthrough” in Kennedy assassination research..."
This perilously close to accusing Prof Fetzer of poor research, which is prophibited by our rules:
(iv) Members should not make personal attacks on other members. Nor should references be made to their abilities as researchers. Most importantly, the motivations of the poster should not be questioned. At all times members should concentrate on what is being said, rather than who is saying it. It is up to the reader to look at the biography submitted by the poster, to judge whether they are telling the truth or not. The word “xxxx” is banned from use on the forum.http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=13297
Please phrase your comments so as to not imply that. Thank you.
Your right Evan, of course. But the problem here is, there is no real middle ground between Josiah Thompson and James Fetzer. Their views are so polarised that any meaningful discussion could hardly fail to produce a certain amount of criticism of each others work. Many of us have been waiting some time now for a "head to head" between the two. So perhaps, for the sake of an interesting debate, somewhat more latitude than usual could be allowed. Denis.
-
Does anybody know if there is a website where I can search a 1963 phone directory for New Orleans??
I'm looking for certain address locations, such as the Secret Service Field Office location.
Thanks -Bill
Is this any help William? It's the phone number of the present day Secret Service Office location. NEW ORLEANS 504-841-3260. Denis.
-
I have serious problems with some of this.
I snipped the parts I agreed with, which is most of the article.
Yes Cliff, I must agree there are certain aspects that I dont 100% agree with as well. I didn't really feel it was appropriate to cut 'n' mix someone else's work to conform to my opinion. I think , generally speaking, the part concerning the film alteration to be reasonably sound. Denis.
-
old news Pointing, real OLD news .... you have the credentials to challenge anything Fetzer or those that contributed to his books have to say? If so speak up.... or asre you just another Josiah Thompson place mat?
Are you suggesting that only someone with certain credentials is allowed to post an opinion on this forum Healy? Ill take a look thru the forum rules, see if I can find that one. Meanwhile, the credentials I possess are lateral thinking, strong logic, common sense and street savvy, Don't think your too strong on those one's, are you Healy? Josiah Thompson place mat?....No, not really, but I would imagine that's a far more comfortable position than being one of Dr Jims bitches. LOL
-
Written by Jossiah Thompson. AKA Good old fashion common sense. By Denis Pointing
Friday morning in Dallas dawned overcast and showery.
Although "Abe" Zapruder knew the president would be passing close to his office, he chose to leave his year-old movie camera at home. Later that morning, his longtime secretary, Lilian Rodgers, persuaded him to go home and get it. The camera was a top-of-the-line Bell & Howell, Model 414 PD 8 mm camera. He purchased it a year earlier to take movies of his grandchildren. In a family scene on the same spool of film that later would contain John Kennedy’s death, Abe’s grandson can be seen digging beside a tree in a backyard patio.
Shortly after noon, Zapruder wandered over to Dealey Plaza from the Jennifer Juniors offices on the fourth floor of the Dal-Tex Building. He was called "Mr. Z." by his staff and that’s what his receptionist, Marilyn Sitzman, called him as they made their way across the sun-splashed intersection of Elm and Houston Streets. Zapruder and Sitzman moved through the gathering crowd at the intersection and made their way to the concrete pergola and grassy slope of Dealey Plaza beyond. Once there, Zapruder ran his camera to test its windup spring.
"Well before the presidential motorcade came down the street," Marilyn told me in an interview for Life magazine back in 1966, "Mr. Zapruder ran a few frames of the film just with us standing there on the lawn." The frames show Sitzman in a tan wool dress standing by a bench where sit fellow Jennifer Juniors employee Beatrice Hester and her husband, Charles.
"Then he," said Marilyn, "I don’t know if he had decided before or had picked a spot, but he went on top of the... what do you call it?"
I answered that it was a "concrete square."
"Yes," she continued. "Well, he stood up there and he asked me to come up and stand behind him ‘cause when he takes pictures looking through the telescopic lens he might get dizzy and he wanted me to stand behind him so in case he got dizzy I could hold onto him."
Marilyn described what she saw standing there on that concrete pedestal with her boss.
"We saw the motorcade turn the corner at Main onto Houston. He hadn’t started taking pictures there then and we watched them as they came down Houston; and just as the motorcycles that were leading the parade came... started... came around the corner and started down the hill, he started taking pictures then. And there’s nothing unusual about it... there was nothing unusual until the first sound, which I thought was a firecracker, mainly because of the reaction of President Kennedy. He put his hands up to guard his face and leaned to the left, and the motorcade, you know, proceeded down the hill. And the next thing that I remembered correctly... clearly was the shot that hit him directly in front of us, that hit him on the side of his face."
Marilyn said this shot hit Kennedy "between the eye and the ear" and "we could see his brains come out, you know, his head opening. It must have been a terrible shot because it exploded his head, more or less."
Marilyn then described how she and Abe got down off the pedestal, ran down the hill in front of the pedestal and then made their way back into the pergola structure. They were photographed there first by AP photographer James Altgens and then by Art Rickerby of Life magazine.
As the confusion in the Plaza settled down, it was obvious that Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal were in a position to have seen everything. Dallas Morning News reporter Harry McCormick got to the Plaza about ten minutes after the shooting and tried to talk to Zapruder. "Abe" said he would only talk to federal investigators. McCormick went off to find a federal investigator.
Dallas Times-Herald reporter Darwin Payne heard about Zapruder probably from Marilyn Sitzman and Beatrice Hester who were standing across from the Depository in front of the Dal-Tex Building. Payne went to Jennifer Juniors and briefly interviewed Zapruder and tried to get publication rights to Zapruder’s film. Rather quickly, McCormick showed up at Jennifer Juniors with Secret Service Agent Forrest Sorrels in tow. Sorrels later said Zapruder was quite emotional. Zapruder said he would give a copy of the film to Sorrels but it could only be used officially by the Secret Service and not given to any newspapers or magazines. Zapruder told Sorrels he expected to sell the film for a high price. McCormick offered Zapruder several hundred dollars for the film right there but Zapruder turned it down.
McCormick, Sorrels, Zapruder, plus Zapruder’s business partner Erwin Schwartz, then went to WFAA-TV to get the film developed. WFAA-TV could not develop the film but put Zapruder on the air with program director Jay Watson. A still photo shows Schwartz sitting in the studio holding the Zapruder’s camera while Zapruder described over TV what he had seen. Bert Schipp, chief photographer at WFAA-TV, called the Kodak lab and made sure they could process Zapruder’s film.
A Dallas police car took Zapruder, Schwartz and Sorrels to the Kodak lab near Love Field. It was now getting close to 3:00 PM.. Phil Chamberlain met them upon their arrival at the lab. Dick Blair ran off the remaining film onto the camera take-up spool. The film was taken out of the camera and given to Kathryn Kirby. She perforated it with the number 0183 and passed it on to J. Kenny Anderson for processing. Zapruder remained in the lab with his film while all this was being done.
During processing of the film, SS Agent Forrest Sorrels left after receiving word that Lee Harvey Oswald had been arrested. Another Dealey Plaza witness, Phil Willis, and his family arrived with his 35 mm slide film for processing.
Zapruder, Phil Chamberlain and other employees saw the unslit 16 mm film run on a projector at twice normal speed to check for processing errors. Zapruder wanted to run it again. Chamberlain, however, afraid of damaging the film on the projector, told Zapruder there would be no charge for the processing and gave him the processed film.
Zapruder said he wanted to make copies of the 8 mm film for Forrest Sorrels. Kodak could not do this but suggested Zapruder take the film to Jamieson Films in central Dallas. Duplicating film would be the first choice for copying but neither Kodak nor Jamieson had any in 8 mm format. Instead, Chamberlain gave Zapruder the last three rolls he had of Kodachrome IIa (tungsten balanced). They each were 25-feet-long and would have to suffice for copying by Jamieson.
At Jamieson company, the film was copied on a Bell & Howell 5205 Model J continuous contact printer, which had been customized by Jamieson’s staff. As a result, the three copies were marked outside the frame with a "septum line" unique to this particular printer. The same filter pack was used to make all three copies with the exposures bracketed one-half stop apart.
Zapruder returned to the Kodak lab with his camera-original and three unprocessed copies. The copies were given lab ID numbers 0185, 0186 and 0187 and were processed immediately. Following processing, the camera-original was split to 8 mm and viewed at least once by Chamberlain, Zapruder and twelve to fourteen lab personnel. The film was watched in stunned silence except for an audible gasp when Kennedy’s head exploded.
While Zapruder was having his film copied, Life magazine was moving resources to Dallas. In New York, Life managing editor George Hunt cancelled the print run on next week’s issue and sent editorial and photo lab staff to Chicago where a major portion of next week’s issue would be printed. Life editors Dick Stolley and Tommy Thompson flew into Dallas from Life’s Pacific Bureau in Los Angeles and set up offices in the Adolphus Hotel. Meanwhile, Life stringer Patsy Swank had heard of Abraham Zapruder and his film and told Stolley. During the evening hours, Stolley started calling Zapruder’s home at fifteen-minute intervals.
Meanwhile, Zapruder had tracked down Forrest Sorrels, head of the Dallas Secret Service office. He and Erwin Schwartz gave Sorrels two copies of the film while retaining the camera-original and the best of the three copies. At 9:55 PM that night, Secret Service Agent Max Phillips sent off one of these two copies to Chief Rowley in Washington. Very likely, it was that copy which National Photo Interpretation Center (NPIC) technicians studied later that weekend.
Somewhat dazed by the events of the day, Zapruder drove around aimlessly for one-half or three-quarters of an hour before arriving home at 11:00 PM. Stolley reached him at that hour and wanted to see the film that night. Zapruder put him off until the next morning. They would meet at 9:00 AM at Jennifer Juniors.
Stolley showed up at Jennifer Juniors an hour early at 8:00 AM. He persuaded Zapruder to show him the film and bought initial rights from Zapruder for $50,000. Stolley walked out of Zapruder’s office with the camera-original and Zapruder’s remaining copy. Stolley sent both to Chicago where editorial and photolab people were assembling.
The camera-original was worked on in Chicago over Saturday and Sunday. During this preparation work, it was accidentally broken in two spots (Z frames 156-157 and 207-212). Frames 208 through 211 may have been "cooked" or "burned" in a too-hot enlarger as the issue was being prepared. Since these frames survived on both the Life and the two Secret Service copies, it was of no great consequence. Thirty-one (31) frames were selected for black and white reproduction in the Life issue which would hit news-stands the following Tuesday. Millions of copies of Life started to roll off the printing presses in several cities Sunday night and Monday.
Meanwhile, back in New York, Life’s publisher viewed the copy obtained by Stolley and instructed Stolley to buy worldwide exclusive rights from Zapruder. On Monday morning, Stolley met with Zapruder and his lawyer and negotiated the sale to Life of worldwide rights for $150,000. As early as Tuesday or Wednesday, copies were ordered from the Life photolab by editors and began to circulate. In Chicago, a private lab made a 16 mm black and white copy for Life. In Washington, D.C., another private lab made a 16 mm black and white copy for the Secret Service. The Secret Service made additional copies of their copies and these were circulated to other law enforcement agencies. That Monday, Dallas secret service agents asked if they could use the 16 mm projector owned by the local CBS affiliate (KRLD) to view the film. They brought over the film in 16 mm format and Bob Huffaker projected it for them. Huffaker remembered that Dan Rather of CBS News was there to watch it with the agents.
Over the next few weeks, the Zapruder film was at the evidentiary center of various law enforcement investigations. On November 29, 1963, SS Agent J.J. Howlett reported that using the Zapruder film he had been "unable to ascertain the exact location where Governor John B. Connally was struck." However, Howlett stated that "it had been ascertained from the movies that President Kennedy was struck with the first and third shots fired by the assassin, while Governor Connally was truck with the second." Both the initial Secret Service and FBI reports on the shooting reported it the same way, their analyses of the Zapruder film contradicting the later Warren Commission’s single-bullet theory.
The combination of what is seen on the Zapruder film and the minimum mechanical firing time of the rifle caused the Warren Commission extreme difficulties through the winter and spring of 1964. The camera-original of the film was brought to Washington on one occasion and screened by Herb Orth for various members of the Commission staff. In addition, slides of the film were provided by Life. However, nowhere in the voluminous Warren Report or its 26 volumes of testimony and exhibits will one find a single mention of the most obvious feature of the film — the left, backward snap of Kennedy’s head and body following the impact of a bullet to his head.
This one feature of the film was probably responsible for bringing about a reopening of the case in the 1970s. When Bob Groden showed a bootlegged version of the film on Geraldo Rivera’s program, Goodnight America, the American public saw for the first time what had shocked Marilyn Sitzman. Sitzman had been transfixed by the gruesome explosion before her eyes and had not paid much attention to the movement of the President’s body under the impact of the fatal bullet. But the American public saw all this and it registered. A tidal wave of public outcry reached Congress. I was on Rivera’s program with Groden that night (March 6, 1975) and worked that summer with him lobbying senators and representatives. The one part of our presentation that always evoked an audible intake of breath was the showing of the Zapruder film with its gruesome climax. Within a matter of months, the showing of this film and the revelations of the Church Committee prompted Congress to order a reinvestigation of the assassination.
The camera-original of the film now rests in the National Archives as well as the two first-generation copies provided by Zapruder to the Secret Service. The third and best copy of the film, which Zapruder retained and then gave to Dick Stolley on the morning of November 23rd, resides with other Zapruder material in the Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza. Zapruder died on August 30, 1970. Marilyn Sitzman died on August 11, 1993. Dick Stolley is alive and well in New York City where he worked for many years as editor of People magazine.
****************************
If altered, the Zapruder film would be an example of a more general phenomenon: the alteration of physical evidence by the authorities in a criminal case. Yes, it does happen. Not often. In fact, it's almost unique. For the last twenty-four years, I've made my living as a defense investigator in criminal cases. Some of these cases were quite celebrated and had quite large stakes on the table for the authorities. In these twenty-some years of experience, I've seen it happen only once or twice. But it does happen.
So let’s ask ourselves: What conditions would have to be satisfied in order for it to make any sense for someone to alter or fabricate physical evidence?
Let’s try a hypothetical case.
Let’s suppose that a particular letter is found at a crime scene. Let's say that that letter was the output of a computer at a remote location. Let's also say that the investigating officer for the authorities had some incentive to change the wording in the letter. If you were that investigating officer, what questions would you ask yourself? Wouldn't you first ask whether there were other copies of the letter? Had the writer kept a copy in a safe place or given it to someone else? Was the text of the letter kept on the computer? Even if it had been deleted from the hard drive of the computer was there a backup somewhere? The alteration of evidence in a criminal case is a desperate act. Would you take that chance if you knew that irrefutable evidence of the alteration might turn up somewhere else? And how could you ever be sure?
Now let’s take for an example a photograph of a crime.
First, you'd have to know exactly how you wanted to alter it. Secondly, you'd have to be sure no other copies — no negative hidden away, no second copy residing in someone else's possession — existed. Thirdly, you'd have to be sure that no other photographs taken by anyone else would later surface to expose the alteration.
First, the problem of copies.
As shown above, the original of the film was processed and copies made under Zapruder’s control on the afternoon of November 22nd. Within hours, two of these copies were given to the Secret Service who immediately began the copying process. One copy was sent to Washington that night with additional copies being made by a private lab in Washington for other law enforcement agencies. The next morning, Zapruder turned over the original and a first copy to Dick Stolley of Life magazine. These were flown to Chicago and immediately turned into enlargements for the Life issue then in preparation. By early Sunday, printing plants in various cities were printing millions of copies of Life containing 31 Zapruder frames. During the next week, the proliferation of copies of the film continued as both the Life photolab turned out copies for editors and a private lab in Chicago produced one or more 16 mm black and white copies. There was no way for anyone to control the ever-growing number of copies, any one of which could expose a potential forgery.
Next, the problem of other photographers.
At the same time that copies of the Zapruder film were being made in Washington, New York and Chicago, other photographers were having their film developed. Fetzer has claimed that the government laid a security net over photo development in the Dallas area, posting individual FBI agents to photo developing locations. This, of course, is nonsense. All the FBI did was ask photo developers to include a note in packets of developed film asking customers to contact the FBI if their photos showed anything relevant to the assassination. Many of the most important films of the assassination were still in their owners’ cameras when the proliferation of Zarpruder copies started. The FBI first learned of the Muchmore film, for example, when it was shown on the New York City station WNEW-TV just after midday on Tuesday, November 26th. Orville Nix's film remained in his camera until the weekend of November 30th/31st.
This is important because of an obvious fact which cannot be underestimated.
When a single event is photographed from different viewpoints, the various photos form a self-authenticating fabric. If any single photo is altered, it will no longer fit with the others. This self-authenticating fabric is precisely what we have with respect to the photographic record of Dealey Plaza on November 22nd. Several dozen photographers were taking still and movie film in and around the Plaza on November 22nd. Where correlations can be made, all of the other photographs and frames of film taken during the assassination correlate with each other and with the Zapruder film.
For example, the famous Altgens photo taken from the front of the president’s limousine as it proceeds down Elm Street has been shown to be coincident with Zapruder frame 255. This means that the position of the limousine with respect to background objects, the position and demeanor of the occupants of the limousine, the position and demeanor of spectators... all these small details have to mesh if both are to be considered authentic. If there is any discrepancy between the two, then some degree of forgery may be suspected. Likewise, (1) with respect to the equally famous Moorman photo showing the limousine in the foreground with the grassy knoll behind and Zapruder and Sitzman on their pedestal, (2) with respect to the Muchmore and Nix movie films which show the assassination itself and the killing impact on Kennedy’s head, (3) with respect to the Willis, Betzner and Towner photos. All these photos and movie film form a single, seamless tapestry. From different angles they present a single picture of what happened in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963. Since many of these films were still in their owners’ cameras at the time the Zapruder film genie escaped from the bottle, the fact that they match the Zapruder film establishes the authenticity of both.
With the sequential, detailed exposure of the fallacious arguments presented in The Great Zapruder Film Hoax, it becomes ever more clear that Fetzer’s latest book is not just about the Kennedy assassination. Rather, it is about THE BIG CONSPIRACY of which the Kennedy assassination is only a part. The United States failed to go to the moon and constructed the moon photos on a sound stage. It was not an airliner but a DOD missile that crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11. Senator Wellstone’s plane was brought down by an electro-magnetic pulse weapon and even the space shuttle may have been downed by a similar weapon. These are views which Fetzer and some of his contributors have either proclaimed or backed. Fetzer’s book not only exemplifies bogus science put to work in the service of a cult belief, it also offers a whole reservoir of urban myths surrounding the Kennedy assassination.
For true believers, it is not just the Zapruder film whose authenticity is a "hoax": (1) Other films and photos of the events in Dealey Plaza have been fabricated in whole or in part. (2) Physical evidence has been planted. (3) Bullets and cartridge cases have been changed while in government possession. (4) X-rays and photos of the President’s body have been altered and a fake brain has been substituted for the real brain. (5) The President’s body itself has been radically altered before being subjected to autopsy. (6) Two — not three — cartridge cases were found on the Sixth Floor of the Depository with a third added later. (7) A bullet made a through-and-through hole in the windshield and this hole was covered up by the Secret Service. And only for the truly paranoid.... (8) Dealey Plaza has been sprinkled with "listening devices" called "rain sensors" to spy upon the conversations of people like Jack White and John Costella.
There are solid, scientifically grounded reasons for believing that all the shots fired that day in Dealey Plaza did not come from the Texas School Book Depository. In the last few years, the work of Dr. Donald Thomas on the acoustics evidence has rocked earlier skepticism of this evidence back on its heels. It now appears that the chance of the sound impulse of the so-called "grassy knoll" shot being caused by random noise is not 1 in 20 but rather 1 in 200,000. Even more to the point, by applying the work of Dr. Michael Stroscio on the Zapruder film to the acoustics evidence, Thomas has been able to show a correlation between the sound and timing of five shots on Dallas Police Channel #1 and the timing of apparent shots in the Zapruder film. New analyses by Drs. Art Snyder and Erik Randich concerning neutron activation tests done on various bullet fragments show great promise. None of this meticulous, hard work would find a place in Fetzer’s work. Rather, it appears in obscure peer-reviewed journals.
What is particularly odious to me is that Fetzer’s work attempts to mimic the hard work of an earlier generation of private citizens who carried out a meticulous and rigorous investigation of the Kennedy case. It was nearly forty years ago, long before Professor Fetzer and his cohorts came on the scene. Calvin Trillin wrote about it in an article in The New Yorker entitled "The Buffs"(6/10/67; pp. 41-71).
There was Mary Ferrell in Dallas, Penn Jones just outside Dallas, Sylvia Meagher in New York City, Paul Hoch in Berkeley, Cyril Wecht in Pittsburgh, Vince Salandria and myself in Philadelphia, Harold Weisberg in Maryland and Ray Marcus in Los Angeles... and many, many more. A housewife, a lawyer for the school board, the editor of a small paper, a graduate student, a young professor, a WHO official. We were little people. People who had only a few things in common — inquiring minds, an unwillingness to be intimidated by public attitudes, more than a little tenacity, a bit of modesty and a willingness to laugh at oneself. None of us had any money or hoped to make any money out of this. We believed that the government had cheated in their investigation but we weren’t going to cheat in ours. We were going to follow the strict canons of historical research and believed that precisely that rigor would lead us to the truth. We didn’t cite hearsay when we could go to the original source. We didn’t publish muddy photos and then tell people what they should see in them. We didn’t substitute our own speculations for actual evidence. Most importantly, we weren’t looking for any dramatic sensations. We were doing it for its own sake. We formed a community... the closest thing to a true community of inquiry that I've ever known.
Nothing could be farther from that community than the twisted logic and assassinated science of Fetzer's work.
Looking at the present book against the example of that community, one has to be reminded of Marx's prediction that somehow or other historical events get repeated first as tragedy and then as farce. If the HSCA investigation of the 1970s is seen as repeating the work of the buffs as "tragedy," Fetzer's latest compilation must be seen as repeating the whole thing as "farce!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Prof McAdams recently posted a link to this article on alt.assassination.jfk
http://www.midtod.com/new/articles/7_14_07_Dorothy.html
He wrote:
I'm not endorsing this, which seems to have the normal quote of
misinformation, but it's mildly interesting.
So is the good professor beginning to wonder if the death of Dorothy Kilgallen was "mysterious"? If so he may need to rethink his views on the death of JFK!
Tim, Great to see you back, place hasen't been the same without yer buddy. Denis. P.S. Still dont agree with most of your post's. LOL.
-
*****************
Denis:
I know you will not be, but some may, expect the full tape or all tapes, to have been....or allowed to have been copied.....Not...
...it is a clip that is heard...as I have stated.....in my previous post.......of that tape.......it is also heard again louder and clearer at the end of the DVD.....
...of course it is ,as LHO is speaking of
killing.....but they leave out the chuckling I shall call it, that you can hear from Eric and LHO.....in the first playing.....of the clip, on the
DVD......part way through......
........Eric as he calls himself...has a very valuable collection
of these LHO tapes.......they used the facitiies, as I understand the day or full afternoon at the Univ..He is not ready to sell or
release then, he knows of their monetary value it appears....
It took them months ,to get close enough to him to be able to converse and then the video interview.....
LHO apparently read such as Shakespeare, and from books etc that day, for hours.....and Eric has them all....
The setting, is Minsk, all filmed within Russia, it is the story of LHO while he lived there........all interviews are with people who
knew or were in contact with him...There is also information about how the KGB kept track of him...it is also mentioned that
the Russians also have their set of tapes, from the bugging of his apt.........
Eric states LHO did speak Russian, but poorly, he wanting to learn proper English, became his friend and one helped the other....it relates
quite the story.........imo....
But the ending as with so many, is that LHO in the end assassinated JFK and alone....
FWIW...........B
Yes Bernice I did realise the DVD wouldn't carry the compleate Minsk tape, I belive I read that the tape is over 2hrs long. But I was hoping the extract would be something not released previously, sounds like its the same stuff I heard before, never mind, I'll still enjoy the DVD I've always been interested in Oswald's time in Russia. Cant belive Titovetz is still holding out for more money, if he waits much longer he will be too old to spend it. Thanks again Bernice, always nice to "talk" to you. Denis.
-
******************
Denis, can I ask you a favor? When you get the DVD, could you tell us if that tape is included and how long it goes on? I'm waiting for a credit approval.
Sure thing Kathy, no probs. Denis.
-
What tape is this? Is there a transcript available? This is fascinating.
I don't know which tape specifically is being referred to, but you can bet your bootie much of Oswald's and Marina's converstations and actions were taped and still held in Russia. I have a contact I'm trying to obtain files/transcripts from. Aside from the things they actually talked about, what languages they spoke would be most enlightening!...I think Russia is withholding them to not anger the USA on something they don't have a big stake in...IMO. [i.e. the tapes would blow the whole official version out of the water]
The link below will take you to a small extract of the tape Kathy is referring to. Denis. http://www.russianbooks.org/oswald/tapes.htm
******************
Hi Denis:
The DVD is called, "American Assassin" out last year...2007......
It is very one sided, you get my meaning, but there is much information within ...
It is available at Amazon but the best price is at
http://www.cduniverse.com/productinfo.asp?...rm=frooglemovie
People will just have to break open that piggy bank and order it...
Ernst Titovetz , his closest friend while there, also states what you have, in the past, they were young
men and fooling around one day with a tape machine, and LHO was trying to put on an accent....there
was much kabitzing going on....
B.....
Thanks Bernice, I didn't even realise the DVD existed, It's a definite buy for me. Thanks again, you little font of knowledge you. Denis.
-
What tape is this? Is there a transcript available? This is fascinating.
I don't know which tape specifically is being referred to, but you can bet your bootie much of Oswald's and Marina's converstations and actions were taped and still held in Russia. I have a contact I'm trying to obtain files/transcripts from. Aside from the things they actually talked about, what languages they spoke would be most enlightening!...I think Russia is withholding them to not anger the USA on something they don't have a big stake in...IMO. [i.e. the tapes would blow the whole official version out of the water]
The link below will take you to a small extract of the tape Kathy is refering to. Denis. http://www.russianbooks.org/oswald/tapes.htm
-
Was the man ( Norton) John Judge etc met deluded? Possible, IMO he was definitely trying to appear dark and mysterious and give the impression he was Oswald, but I dont belive he ever made that particular claim. There certainly seems to have been an attempt to "sheep dip" Oswald by having someone impersonate him, but I personally dont belive in the extreme nonsense that Armstrong put's forward in his book. You, of course, will have to make up your own mind. Personally, I dont belive there ever was a "Harvey and Lee", just a Lee, who was slain by Ruby. Going back to Oswald's accent, dont forget that he suffered badly from bullies at school in New York, making fun of his southern speech, he also seems to have been embarrassed by his accent which he deliberately tried to hide. I belive that accounts for his rather "unnatural" sounding voice. Kathy, with respect, you seem totally obsessed with Norton and Harvey and Lee, maybe its time to forget that nonsense and move on. Believe me every thing becomes a lot clearer without that disinformation. Up to you honey, good luck. Denis.
Denis, recently I posted a theory about the death of actress Karyn Kupcinet. I'd like your opinion:
Next, was Karyn Kupcinet. I believe there was a contract out on her. Mafia bigwig, Paul Dorfman, realized that some kind of major happenstance in Chicago was needed to take the pressure off the Mob and Jack Ruby. He spent the weekend of Kennedy's death in Palm Springs, CA. Karyn Kupcinet was also in Palm Springs for the weekend. Did Dorfman see her? Somehow, her father, Irv Kupcinet, got in touch with Dorfman in Palm Springs, and asked about Ruby. I think Dorfman had a brainstorm: kill Karyn Kupcinet, who was Irv Kupcinet's daughter, so well-known in Chicago. That headline would overpower anything about Jack Ruby and the Mob. A distraction, needed to get the heat off the Chicago Mob. I think the killer cut off her carotid artery in a headlock and placed her face down on the couch. The face down was an additional insult, especially to a woman. The blood would center in her face and leave her discolored. Then her father flew to West Hollywood and had to identify her. Only, in Kup's case, a close family friend did it for him. Irv, prominent columnist and talk show host, wouldn't have Ruby on his mind.
Kathy
Sorry Kathy, I'm afraid I know virtually nil re Karyn Kupcinet. I'm sure someone else here is more qualified to give an opinion. Denis.
-
[...]
There certainly seems to have been an attempt to "sheep dip" Oswald by having someone impersonate him, but I personally dont belive in the extreme nonsense that Armstrong put's forward in his book. You, of course, will have to make up your own mind.
[...]
"extreme nonsense" not bad for no cites, eh? Perhaps you can be the first to undertake the huge project, shooting down Armstrongs work. Show him the error of his ways, eh? Have you even READ Armstrong's book.
Thanks,
DHealy
Yes I have read Armstrong's book, in fact I'm re-reading it at the moment....to my 5 year old daughter every night at bedtime, its a far better fairy tale than Jack and the beanstalk. LOL. If you want to belive that c**p Healy that's up to you. I dont...o.k. And I certainly dont intend wasting my time debating the issue. Like it or lump it, that's my opinion. And if my opinion upsets your or anyone else's fantasy world.... tough.
-
Kathy, there's a longer version of this tape, easily found on the web, which has Oswald speaking in his normal American accent as well as his rather poor imitation of an upper class English accent. The longer version makes it more obvious, IMO, that Oswald is just fooling around. Its been suggested by some that this recording is really "Oswald" being taught how to speak English, if this was true I dont belive his KGB "teacher" would have handed the tapes over. Just my opinion. When it comes to Norton, whom I know your extremely interested in, all common sense seems to fly out the window. Had LHO survived he would have been taken back to Russia and "got rid of", at the very least he would have been hidden away somewhere very remote. The Russians would have 100% definitely NOT have allowed him to go back to the USA, let alone start talking to JFK researchers. Rethink Armstrong, his theories are so ludicous I wouldn't be surprised if the guy was pure disinformation, this is certainly the kind of wacko theory that gets researchers laughed at by the public. And no politician will ever support the research community whilst nonsense like that is being supported. Denis.
I would love to find the longer version of the Russian tape. I'll have to keep plugging along. Norman Mailer was able to learn a lot of info from the KGB when Russia split. Why not the tape?
Donald O. Norton is a puzzle to me. These yearbook photos -- why do we have them if they're not relevant? And the photos I found of Norton and Geb as adults? I guess the initial photos John Armstrong discovered. But Norton isn't mentioned in Armstrong's book, Harvey and Lee. Someone, probably a long time ago, identified these pictures as Lee Oswald, who escaped Dallas. But if Lee resembled Harvey, why does he have red hair? The origin of all this puzzles me. Maybe Jack White knows they're relevance. They are true redheads, not dyed. How could they resemble Oswald?
Basically, where did these photos come from? What happened to the real Lee Oswald? Would he be able to walk around and tell Mae Brussel he was Donald O. Norton/Lee Oswald? Supposedly John Judge and others saw this man and were struck with his resemblance to Harvey. Was this man they saw deluded, believing he was connected to the Kennedy Assassination? He supposedly was sending Mae Brussell money and recited word for word Harvey's words from his radio show appearance. I guess he would make a good mate to Judyth Baker.
I'm going to try and find the longer version of that Russian tape.
Kathy
Kathy, the full 2 hr tape has never been released, to my knowledge, there is however a 3-4 min version out there. It makes it clear that Titovetz and Oswald are just fooling around, the segment you refer to has Oswald imitating an upper class Englishman, we call it "talking with a plum in your mouth". Oswald is NOT trying to learn English. Read the following: " Titovetz recalls that it was very important for Oswald to be able to
converse with someone in his native language, for he was never very
good at learning Russian. Titovetz, too, was quite eager to speak
English to a real American, so they saw a lot of each other. In fact,
Titovetz viewed Oswald as a "talking machine" or an "English language
textbook on legs." He even recorded Oswald's voice on tape in order to
listen and analyze the American way of speaking. Incidentally,
Izvestia continues, these tape recordings and letters from Oswald in
America are still in Titovetz's possession - for some reason the KGB
never got around to them". Was the man ( Norton) John Judge etc met deluded? Possible, IMO he was definitely trying to appear dark and mysterious and give the impression he was Oswald, but I dont belive he ever made that particular claim. There certainly seems to have been an attempt to "sheep dip" Oswald by having someone impersonate him, but I personally dont belive in the extreme nonsense that Armstrong put's forward in his book. You, of course, will have to make up your own mind. Personally, I dont belive there ever was a "Harvey and Lee", just a Lee, who was slain by Ruby. Going back to Oswald's accent, dont forget that he suffered badly from bullies at school in New York, making fun of his southern speech, he also seems to have been embarrassed by his accent which he deliberately tried to hide. I belive that accounts for his rather "unnatural" sounding voice. Kathy, with respect, you seem totally obsessed with Norton and Harvey and Lee, maybe its time to forget that nonsense and move on. Believe me every thing becomes a lot clearer without that disinformation. Up to you honey, good luck. Denis.
-
Thanks Tom, certainly food for thought. Denis.
-
For those who have not become completely disoriented and/or lost in chasing mythological creatures firing rifles (or whatever) from multitudes of locations, perhaps the following may be of some assistance.
A. Happens to be the approximate entry location for the entry of the Z313 impact headshot. AKA/ the SECOND shot/aka the "Cowlick" entry.
B. Happens to be the approximate entry location for the entry of the THIRD shot/aka that shot directly in front of James Altgens position/aka the EOP entry, which bullet also passed through the coat of JFK at the juncture of where the collar turns down.
Tom, Ive been following with interest your "two hits to the head" theory for some time now. And in many ways it makes a good deal of sense. But I cant figure out WHY exactly the W.C. would lie about it and invent the more complicated SBT. I'm sure you'll enlighten me, just try an keep it simple mate, for the benefit of this "good ole thick consruction worker". Denis.
-
Can any members, Jack White maybe, post a photo of the real Lee Oswald (as opposed to Harvey) that you are sure is Lee?
As I said before there's a tape of Harvey stammering over English words with a weird British accent. It was the same voice of the man Ruby killed. But his English was now fluent. Judyth also said there was a lot of inbreeding in Cajun, LA, and a lot of men looked like Harvey. (She calls him Lee.)
Where are the Lee pictures? The one in the classroom, in which he's showing his missing tooth, I believe is Lee. But what about when he was older?
Kathy
Kathy, there's a longer version of this tape, easily found on the web, which has Oswald speaking in his normal American accent as well as his rather poor imitation of an upper class English accent. The longer version makes it more obvious, IMO, that Oswald is just fooling around. Its been suggested by some that this recording is really "Oswald" being taught how to speak English, if this was true I dont belive his KGB "teacher" would have handed the tapes over. Just my opinion. When it comes to Norton, whom I know your extremely interested in, all common sense seems to fly out the window. Had LHO survived he would have been taken back to Russia and "got rid of", at the very least he would have been hidden away somewhere very remote. The Russians would have 100% definitely NOT have allowed him to go back to the USA, let alone start talking to JFK researchers. Rethink Armstrong, his theories are so ludicous I wouldn't be surprised if the guy was pure disinformation, this is certainly the kind of wacko theory that gets researchers laughed at by the public. And no politician will ever support the research community whilst nonsense like that is being supported. Denis.
-
If someone appears out of the shadows on the 5th floor, what appears out of the shadows on the 6th floor.
http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/Window.png
chris
I thought the identity of the person on the fifth floor was established...Bonnie Ray Williams. And he may look like he's in the shadows, but I've definitely seen pics of the 5th floor window after the shots were fired, and he is basically hanging out of it looking down on the crowd.
I know this thread is related to the "pipe" in the 6th floor window, but there's something that's always bothered me about Williams and his account of the shots allegedly fired in the window above him. From pictures I've seen, the 6th floor window is what, five feet above the 5th floor window? If that? That's a pretty close "earwitness", the shots would have been fired practically right on top of him. And yet, although he testified that he heard three shots and the shells hitting the floor, did he even bother to yell down to the street and get the attention of police or anybody? Did he race upstairs?
I know this is easy to point out given hindsight and all, but it just seems kind of odd that a witness just a few feet below the "sniper's nest" didn't have more of a reaction at the time.
(by the way, if I have confused Williams with another man, my apologies. The main point still stands, even if I am mistaken about the name)
Hard to tell how anyone would react after seeing someone getting their brains blown out, was he stunned perhaps? As for rushing to the floor above to confront an armed killer....if it was me, no way. Denis.
-
Incredible site, with live radio bulletin's of both Kennedy's and Oswald's murder. Also some very interesting stuff on Ruby. http://www.klifhistory.com/pgtwo.html
-
Has anybody heard of John Templin. I would appreciate info on him in connection to Dealey Plaza 11/22/63
Wim
John Templin was a witness to the assassination. Standing on the north side of Elm Street, by the curb in front of grassy knoll a few feet from Zapruder. Always believed the 2nd shot was the head shot. Always stated shots came from TBD, believed Oswald acted alone. Denis.
-
The backyard photos of Oswald or whoever it was holding the rifle was a right-handed person... his pistol is on the right, gripping a rifle with his left hand shows a person who shoots with his right hand. If you have proof to Oswald being left-handed then you might have a case.
Don
Don, the back yard photos show Oswald holding his rifle in both hands and the second photo showing Oswald on the firing range firing right handed. Whatever Oswald's mother said I'm inclined to belive Oswald was right handed, remember in Russia he cut his LEFT wrist using his RIGHT hand. Actruly on just reading the above link from Maggie, it would seem Oswald's mother was really saying Oswald was both left and right handed.
-
There was no shooter in the easternmost-window 6th floor of the SBDB.
That not means there was nobody at all.
The Powell photo proves, there was somebody, holding something in his
hand, when Oswald, according to the WCR, was on the stairs down to the
second floor.
The man in the Powell pic couldnt be Oswald. But what is he holding?
When I read the testimony of Amos euins, it struck me: that could be a
telephoto, to document the crime.
Quote.
Dont know what it is Karl but it still seems to be there today. So I'm guessing it ain't a guy holding a telephoto. Denis.
-
Does Vladimir I. Toumanoff come up anywhere on the LHO or JFK case radar?
He's usually listed as a State Department official (and he testified before Sen. Joe McCarthy). What caught my attention is that he was one of the two US representatives at the trial of U-2 pilot Francis Gary Powers in Moscow in 1960. The other was Richard Edward Synder.
As far as I know only very slightly. That was thru Adolph W. Schmidt who along with RICHARD HELMS managed OSS ops in Germany after WW2. Later, when Schmidt was appointed ambassador to Canada, Toumanoff was his principal political advisor.....unless of course someone on the forum has more. Denis.
-
I respect your opinion Peter of course, as for my comment re getting support from politicians, I was not speaking of financial support but rather support in opening a new investigation. And I dont belive any politician would touch a researcher who backed Armstrong's theory with a barge pole. Thinking "outside the box" in one thing, but thinking too far out the box only alienates JFK researchers. I also find it incredible that not all forum members are as discriminating as your self and treat every word Armstrong utters as the JFK assassination Gospel. Denis.
Gary Mack believes in a second shooter in Dealey Plaza
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted · Edited by Denis Pointing
Yes Terry, I think many here are guilty of exactly that. Gary Mack has sent me many emails, always helpful and polite, pointing out mistakes Ive made on various postings, answering questions etc, but NEVER trying to lead me down any particular road, NEVER trying to persuade me in any particular direction and NEVER giving an unsolicited opinion. I belive Gary Mack to be not only honest and sincere, but also the best damn researcher on the planet, let alone this forum. And if anyone wants to call me "poster boy" or "fan boy" or any other nasty labels they can think up..let em! Where I'm from those insults are just polite conversation. If this case is ever reopened, it will be due to researchers like Gary Mack, not "researchers" like Fetzer an Co. And I'll add one more observation, Gary Mack has never sent emails warning me not to listen to a fellow member, because they "work for the other side" or they are "disinformation agents" which is more than can be said about one of the previous posters on this thread. Denis.