Nick Bartetzko

If you ran into a foul-mouthed, belligerent, ignorant drunk at your local bar or pub and after a few minutes it became clear that any efforts on your part to reason with him or debate with him were fruitless and would only serve to induce him to become nastier and nastier.....and it was also apparent that the drunk actually enjoyed seeing you get irritated at his behavior....... at what point would you dispense with the conversation, walk away, and let him puke all over himself?

Just a rhetorical, metaphorical question.

Thanks for the great post. I was thinking similar rhetorical, metaphorical thoughts.

Regards, Nick

Bill I've read your posts and your explanation of the technical aspects of the Z film and the difficulty of attempting alteration. Forgetting the technical aspects of the Z film for the sake of this question, are there any concerns you would have as to blurring, occupant movement or any other anomolies that would cause you to suspect a problem? Also, have you seen any evidence of alteration of any kind in any of the other photos or movies? Thanks Nick

I have nothing to add but just wanted to thank Dixie Dea for listing the Roffman book. Does anyone have the book? I was wondering if there were two editions. It was either David R. Wrone or Harold Weisberg who mentioned that Roffman had the Black Star photograph of the woman putting up curtain rods in Oswald's apartment because...he didn't have any! Defenders of the official fiction have always been critical of the Oswald curtain story, asking why he would have them if he had already them up in his apartment. In fact, David Wrone, I believe has pointed out that this photograph is supports the contention that LHO actually didn't have any curtain rods up. In the copy of the edition I have, this photograpy is nowhere to be found.

I have the Roffman book and neither photo that James posted is in the book.

Bill...Believe me, I normally would say the same given the research, emails and phone calls I've wasted on the topic. This is a dog that needs to be put to sleep however.

It's my belief that he's conspicuously absent..and I want to know why. I think there's a reason behind it that may impact the veracity of the entire Files scenario.

Jason Vermeer

Vernon still owes me a few bucks on that subscription fee I paid for Real Player........

I need a wee tad of help.

But if it's good science, I wonder why the FBI doesn't wish to confirm it, by documenting that it's not a match.

Ron, there is no "if" about it. It's a match. What the FBI, and most researchers, do not yet know is that other Mac Wallace fingerprints were matched to other unidentified latent carton prints. Wallace handled those boxes. Judge the FBI based on that truth.

Richard

Can you elaborate on your statement (and your source)? I thought it was just one print on one box. Thanks Nick

Thanks. I have bookmarked those sites.

My concern with the Z film is that some of the movements depicted don't seem possible and eyewitness testimony/comments contradict what is shown. Thanks for your work and comments in this area.

Can you be more specific about any one thing that you would like to see addressed?

Bill

I don't have a copy of the film to review. Many of my books are still in storage after my move, so all my comments are from memory. I also want to be clear that I'm not experienced at all in video, having seen maybe 30-40 8mm home videos over the years. The discepancies that come to mind right now are: 1) The blob...the head wound that does not appear to be real. Appears to be painted on. 2) The movement of Jackie's arm after the fatal shot. Seems too quick for the frames involved. 3) The description by Rather and Hill as to some forward head movement, yet it is barely seen on film. Add that to the evidence of a shot to the rear of the head, but Vince Palamera's reference to Sam Kinney saying that there was tissue and bone in the followup secret service car. I don't see how that is physically possible. 4) There was a study years ago regarding the car's front blinker lights and the sequencing of same versus the number of fps of the Z film. 5) the actual movement of JFK after the head shot. Seems very unusual and unlikely to me in that brief time frame. If there was any alteration, then removal of frames would seem most likely. Is it possible? Apparently not based on what many experts have said. Those are some of my thoughts on the subject. You needn't address them as these have all been covered over the years, but those are my thoughts. My thanks to you for your work and posts.

David coerced them into this discussion because I quoted them as saying that the alterations alleged in Hoax were impossible in 1963

Coercion or not, it's a great idea and I'm looking forward to their comments. I've always had mixed feelings about alleged alteration and alleged pseudo Z films that others claim to have seen, but can never get their hands on a copy. My concern with the Z film is that some of the movements depicted don't seem possible and eyewitness testimony/comments contradict what is shown. Thanks for your work and comments in this area.

Having these gentlemen contribute their time and insight is quite an accomplishment. They owe us nothing and are quite gracious if it, in fact, happens. Thanks, David, for working on this.

Duncan I do see a figure. The head, eyes, chest and arms (not hands) are visible. The shirt appears to be buttoned to the top and the shirt pattern is very similar to what Lovelady said he wore. The strange thing is the nearly square black color that is on the chest area. Maybe it's just an illsusion, but I do see what I describe very clearly. Nick

Duncan Just curious if you've ever used that great software to zero in on the TSBD doorway crowd...aka Lovelady etc. Nick

Ron, that's an interesting name you've come up with. Is there any information about this fellow from the early 60's or is that only available via FOIA? Would certainly be interesting who the associates and subordinates were. Claude Capehart's name comes to mind for some reason.

Nothing, Lynne. Sometimes it's easy to get sidetracked. Mea culpa.....

Watch that BP, Ron! Just think...Hilary is a real possibility for 2008 IMO. I shudder at the possibility.

I think the FBI in the 1990s may very well have been different than Hoover's FBI. Moreover, in the 1990s Clinton was president and controlled the DOJ so he could have gone to AG Reno.

You've got to be kidding. The FBI of Waco, Ruby Ridge, Filegate, Oklahoma City, and the Foster corpse with its magic car keys?

Clinton and Reno "controlled" the DOJ all right. They were two of the biggest crooks in the history of crooked government, and can take credit for bringing the corruption and politicization of the DOJ/FBI to full fruition.

Ron I have to agree with you on those two. I think you forgot Ron Brown and TWA 800. Regarding Foster, at least we had the Park Police step in and do a serious investigation while the FBI was undergoing "reorganization". I was hoping for much better from Bush, but have been deeply disappointed.

Researchers of the assassination are sometimes "wacko's". Really, what sane person would spend hundreds of hours (and dollars) to pour over documents, track down and interview witnesses and pertinent parties to this blight on American history. It is amazing how much info has come to light over the last 40+ years through the efforts of private parties. Seems the only reason some of these folks (like Sibert, O'Neill etc) talked is because they were pestered by private parties or the AARB that came into existence because Stone's movie ticked off a lot of people. Too bad the government never had the integrity to look for the truth and advise the American public. Somehow, I think we could have handled the truth. I much appreciate Messrs Hemming and Plumlee,amomg others, who contribute their time here to pass along information, whether it is openly or cryptically done. Please try not to let the "wacko's" get under your skin. BTW, I like the stuff about the "faces in Dealey Plaza". It was because of the HSCA's interest in same that Mr Capehart became quite paranoid and "fessed up" to his lady friend and then the Fresno cops looked into the matter. Too bad he had a fatal heart attack when they were about to pay him a visit in Pahrump, which is famous for other clandestine activities as well. I can understand not wanting to finger anybody in the MI briefing, but I wonder if they wouldn't want to voluntarily share their stories if approached.

I just reviewed the whole thread and Robin's enlarged color photo is probably as good as it gets.

I finally located Groden's book and there is a small color photo of Hicks on page 51. Hard to tell anything about an alleged radio and antenna, but an enlargement of that color photo would be interesting.

Hi Lee I've seen the Hicks photo with the radio/antenna allegedly in the back pocket many times. I still can't make anything out. Where is it? Can you enlarge and/or refine the image?

Thanks JRC I sent him an email

Does anyone have a current email (preferably), phone or address for Vince Palamera? Thanks

Great photo. First time I have seen it. Who took it and how was it acquired? Are you certain it is Oswald? I thought Oswald was also balding in the rear part of his head.

Lee I can't see a boy in uniform. Can you isolate and point to the individual? Nick

Like most of you, I've read many books and spent many years studying this terrible lie of American history. I'll give my general thoughts and opinions from memory and not list specific references. It would take many, many hours to do so. I have no idea who organized it, but there are many connections that point to New Orleans. Bob Tannenbaum discussed this and his lead investigator who went to NO came to the same conclusion. Professor Kurtz commented on this also and mentioned the Bannister, LHO, Ferrie connection. Then we have Shaw as well. David Phillips was involved. The Veciana info on Bishop/Phillips is interesting as was his comment of seeing Bishop/Phillips with LHO in Dallas (I believe it was Dallas). There was some SS complicity. Control of the security, control of the vehicle afterwards, control of the evidence and copies of the autopsy photos as Fox had. Vince Palamera did great work on this. He got many to talk, but some refused. Dallas was a great venue for all this. A hotbed of anti-Kennedy sentiment. I heard the Milteer tape. How interesting regarding the claims of foreknowledge of the assassination by Milteer, Rose Cheramie, Eugene Dinkin. There is a definite Cuban connection and possibly the murder of JFK could be used as an excuse to invade Cuba. Whoever set it up picked a good patsy in Oswald and used his involvement with the FBI,CIA and his phony anti-Castro leanings to elicit the right kind of pressure on various agencies. I've been to the plaza a few times. In some ways so open a venue and in others full of prime locations for the deed. Did LHO know about the attempt and did he shoot? He may well have known, but undoubtedly did not shoot. The 6th floor window with crammed boxes and vertical pipe closeby seems hardly a good location other than to attract attention. It seems ridiculous that all those wounds (or any wounds) were caused by any shots from there. Looking at the film, it seems obvious that JFK is first hit in the throat before frame 200, then is pushed forward after being hit in the back at about Z225. Connally is pushed downward by the shot to his back. Sure seems that those different body motions speak for shots from different locations and angles. Connally's wrist may well have been injured around Z 290 and that again suggests a shot from high up due to the position of the wrist. My guess is a Daltex shooter on the lower floor and a Connally shooter from a much higher location. There is pursuasive evidence that the windshield had a hole in it based on Doug's good work, a few eyewitnesses and the interviews with the Ford employee. That suggests a missed shot as does eyewitness testimony regarding the early shot that hit the street behind the car. As for furrows in the grass, a shot striking the manhole cover etc...who knows. Probably the greatest mystery in my mind is the throat shot. It was small and Weisberg's interview of Dr Perry in 1966 +/- clearly establishes a wound of entry. Perry spoke of wiping blood from the trachea and mentioned the ring of bruising. Can't blame Perry too much for denying that years later. These guys have been contacted much over the years and are probably sick of being contacted. It would be interesting if someone, someday showed Perry the quotes to refresh his memory. His denial in his AARB testimony was so firm and absolute against that. There appears to have been a shooter behind the fence. Lots of magic bullets in Dealey that day. One surfaced, some disappeared. Some were hard jacketed and others appeared to be frangible. Then we have Files, Plumlee, Holt, Hemming. They have chosen to speak. Some of these gentlemen appear to be credible. Thanks for taking the time to talk. To me, the Files story isn't believable. If some of the other folks are lying, why would they do it now and why lie to the public and their families? Doesn't make sense to me. I am amazed at all the information that has come to light so many years later. Thanks to Oliver Stone for creating the controversy that allowed for the creation of the AARB and thanks to folks like you, amateurs and professionals alike, who have spent your time trying to gather information and shed more light on this. Too bad the government only cared enough to lie and obfuscate the truth for so many years.