Dean Hagerman
-
Posts
1,402 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Dean Hagerman
-
-
Facts eh. Like that really pesky and quite large fold of fabric in Betzner....
Yes! The the fold that is left side up, right side down in Betzner 3:
Left side up, right side down: \
Here's how you describe the fold and its shadow:
Yes the bottom, left side of the shadow IS diagonal.So we have by your own analysis of Betzner a diagonal fold that is
at the bottom left of the shadow.
It is readily observed that the fold in Betzner is a left-side up, right-side down
fold like this: \
Craig, there are four (4) ways you can put a left-end up diagonal fold ( \)
in clothing fabric.
That's a fold that goes like this: \
That's the fold you noticed in Betzner.
1) Pulling/stretching the fabric UP, in which case the \ will be on the right.
2) Pulling/stretching the fabric DOWN, in which case the \ will be on the left.
3) Bunching/easing the fabric UP and to the RIGHT.
4) Bunching/easing the fabric DOWN and to the LEFT.
No one pulled on JFK's jacket. The fabric was not stretched in the limo.
Just the opposite. His jacket eased as he casually sat and waved.
So we can eliminate 1) and 2) in the case of JFK.
As photo expert extrodinaire Craig Lamson has observed in the Betzner photo,
emphasis added:
Yes the bottom, left side of the shadow IS diagonal.That diagonal was created when JFK changed his posture circa Z173, turned his
head to the right and started to wave his right hand. This posture shift pushed
the fraction-of-an-inch horizontal fold we see in Croft into the "bottom, left" diagonal
fold we see in Betzner.
Thank you for your contribution, Craig.
So Cliff, here is where you stand, which is exactly where you were months ago.
You need to provide some experimental, empirical evidence shows us all ANY other form of fold other than the one I've shown that can create the shadow pattern as seen in Betzner. That's what rational people call proof.
Simple and easy. Just show us how it can happen.
You simply can't produce that shadow pattern given the angle of incidence of the light source.
And that's the bottom line now Cliff.
Can't wait to see your experimental, empirical evidence. You can use a caaera, can't you?
Craig do you still have the drum scan on a CD?
Would you be able to email it to me or is the file to big?
I want to take a close look at the gap
Any way you could provide me the image would be very much appreciated
Thanks, Dean
-
Doug,
You need to make the arguments here and cite the interview for additional discussion. Most of the members are not going to go there without having a very good idea what hey will hear. Please elaborate your position. Your presence will make a difference, but you have to state your case.
Jim
I have not only identified the white spiral nebula but pointed out that the dark hole at the center has been painted out in the versions that you and she have posted. You don't have to look at MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2003), to view it on page 149 or THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX (2003) to view it on page 436, but you can also view in in PICTURES OF THE PAIN (1994) on page 314. I understand that more photographic evidence will be forthcoming soon. But I am very curious that you challenge it. The through-and-through hole is discussed in multiple statements and letters by Robert Livingston, M.D., and in an article published by Richard Dudman in The New Republic. They can be found between pages 161 and 175 of ASSASSINATION SCIENCE (1998), which includes Livingston's analysis of cerebellum extruding from the wound.Hi Jim,
I am very curious too. One has to wonder how ... and why ... you are still promoting Dudman, as proof of, and as has having personally seen, a through-and-through hole in the windshield when the other witness you proffer above, Dr. Robert Livingston, said quite the opposite in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE? And Livingston was relating what Dudman personally told him.
Livingston, of course, never saw the windshield at all. But, according to what he wrote in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE, he did know Dudman and spoke to him about it.
“Our families had a dinner discussion on this subject in Washington, D.C. within a week or so of the assassination,” wrote Livingston in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE. “Dick Dudman told me about the windshield then, although to the present he does not know whether the hole he saw penetrated the windshield."
This quote and more was included in the article, ETERNAL RETURN: A HOLE THROUGH THE WINDSHIELD?, posted here on the Ed Forum as well as on other forums last July.
You ignored it then. And apparently still ... and, instead, choose to continue to promote a claim that is at odds with the witness you cite from the very pages you cite from your own book!
You mention Dudman's article in the New Republic as well. In that, Dudman wrote, “A few of us noticed the hole in the windshield when the limousine was standing at the emergency entrance after the President had been carried inside. I could not approach close enough to see on which side was the cup-shaped spot that indicates a bullet has pierced the glass from the opposite side.”
What does that SAY? He certainly *thought* he saw a "hole."But Dudman himself notes that he was not close enough to tell, and was prevented from, "testing" it to see if it actually was a through-and-through hole.
You have been casting aspersion on the character of Josiah Thompson in a steady stream, saying things like, "This is not the first time I have raised questions about it, but the fact that you continue to bob and weave, duck and hide, is very telling," as recently as yesterday. Yet you have ignored these quotes for months, in many discussions, totally evading discussing the points raised ... and still promote your claim regarding Dudman.
This doesn't smack of honest brokering or the pursuit of truth to me. Many of your own words (follow in quotes) to Josiah just yesterday seem apt here. How about the chance that YOU will "mislead generations of students into the false belief that" Dudman absolutely saw a through-and-through hole in the windshield. Is this "an illusion you have sought to sustain, at all costs!"? "Today you continue with this ridiculous charade, not even confronting the reports" and documentation that your premise about such a hole in the windshield is, at best, unproven.
And, of course, NO hole through the windshield IN NO WAY equals no conspiracy. Do you cling to it so tenaciosly, regardless of any evidence to the contrary, because you are unable to see that?
It is not hard for anyone to see that casting aspersions on Josiah's character and his intent is a major focus of yours. Your posts are full of just that. Such modus operandi, all the while ignoring anything that counters anything you believe, is not a plus for those who really want the truth about the conspiracy that killed our president. It is decidedly a hindrance. The assassination research arena is no place for games of tienes mas macho. I want to thank you, though, for the way you go about your game. It's very transparent.
Barb :-)
Once again, to understand Dudman and a response to your entire article please go to
Jim:
Almost the entire interview is a rebuttal to the article "Eternal return." I will be glad to respond to the authors of the article after they have listened to it. Even here, this woman named Barb distorts the evidence. I do not know if it is done intentionally or is just sloppy. Robert Livingstone wrote to David Lifton on May 2, 1992: " Also relevant, I learned from a former classmate of mine from Stanford who was then a reporter for the St. Louis Dispatch, Richard Dudman, that he was one of the White House press group that accompnied the President to Dallas. Not getting much information from the Parkland Hospital, Dick went out to inspect the Lincoln limousine in which the President and Connolly and their wives had been riding. He thought he saw, for certain that there was a through-and-through hole in the upper left margin of the windshield. He described the spaling -splintering of glass at the margins as though the missile had entered from the front of the vehicle. When he reached over to pass his pencil or pen through the hole to test its patency, an FBI or Secret Service man roughly drew him away and shooed him off, instructing him that he wasn't allowed to come so close to the vehicle.
If there were a through-and-through windshield penetration, in that location, according to Dick, it had to come from the front."
The article by this Barb, a Jerry Logan, and Josiah Thompson, was one of the sloppiest,most irresponsible, and dishonest articles I have ever read. I spoke with Dudman. It was obvious he was pressured by the government by tactics that appear similar to what happened to Taylor.. Listen to my interview. Dudman's fear destroyed his friendship with Livingstone. Let's say I witnessed a murder. I describe it in great detail and the perpetrator confesses. Later. after much pressure, I recant my testimony and the perpetrator now says he did not commit the crime. According to the logic of the authors of the article, they would set the perpetrator free, and continue to look elsewhere for another perpetrator. The real world does not work that way and the legal system certainly does not for reasons at least one of the authors know very well. When the authors sought the expertise to verify a match to two photographs they published (with no way to authenticate the first picture) they convieniently failed to share that analysis by Martin Heinrichs with the members of this forum that the pictures DID NOT match. They omitted witnesses. They mischaracterized witnesses. They impugned the character od DOCTOR EVALEA GLANGES and suggested there was something "suspect" about her and they were going to investigate. Seven months later we do not know the results of that "investigation." They dismiss Nick Prencipe by making sloppy conclusions and having no understanding of the personalities involved or the geography of Washington D.C. In my interview I allow the deceased Nick Prencipe to respond himself to these erroneous assumptions. In fact, I am quite certain that the authors of this article never spoke to even one of the witnesses they seek to dismiss. If there is not a fact, it appears to be no problem to fabricate one. For those who claim their expertise in such, there appears to be no understanding of evidence or witnesses. In Doug Horne's book he quotes Ned Price, the Head of Restoration at a major motion picture studio, to say upon viewing frame 317 of the Zapruder Film, "Oh, that's horrible, that's just terrible. I can't believe its such a bad fake." I would have a similar reponse to the article "Eternal Return." I am going to have to take exception Jim. If anyone wants to how how bad the article is they need to START by listening to my interview a few weeks ago. This is not an exercise for me. I am willing to engage in intelligent discussion but not a he-thinks me-thinks. It is a pleasure to be on this forum.
My best,
Doug Weldon
Very nice Doug!
Welcome to the forum, I look forward to reading more of your posts and talking with you about them
I enjoyed your section in MIDP very much, good job on that
Dean
-
11/22 W.A.G. will obviously be a solo gig.
Oh man! Come on Cliff why cant I join? I wanted so bad to be a member of W.A.G.
You talk too much and say nothing. No chance.
Cliff nobody ever knows what you are talking about
I think you should go back and read my serious posts
Sure, sure. You can't fool me, Dean.
I know your game, pal. I invented it.
You're trying to become a Super Member of the Ed Forum as fast as possible.
Why?
To impress chicks.
Man up and admit it!
Dang!
Cliff has figured me out, I better slow down and post less
-
In fact, Lifton first discovered the issue about the time he noticed that the Zapruder film was not in accordance with his “body alteration theory.”
I have never thought that that David Lifton's body alteration theory depends on proving that the ZFILM is fake. It seems to me that body alteration is entirely consistent with what we see in the ZFILm.
Can anyone tell me what I am missing?
Your missing everything Ray
Just like in the post about Fetzers work not amounting to a bucket of spit
Im willing to bet you have never read any of Fetzers books, from the looks of your last post it seems you have never read Liftons book either
Have you read them?
-
11/22 W.A.G. will obviously be a solo gig.
Oh man! Come on Cliff why cant I join? I wanted so bad to be a member of W.A.G.
You talk too much and say nothing. No chance.
Cliff nobody ever knows what you are talking about
I think you should go back and read my serious posts
-
11/22 W.A.G. will obviously be a solo gig.
Oh man! Come on Cliff why cant I join? I wanted so bad to be a member of W.A.G.
-
I think the issue is quite clear – the throat wound, be it entry or exit, was below the upper edge of the collar.
So in your opinion Todd which is it, an entrance wound or exit wound?
-
From the Atlgens photo........have the people hanging out the 2nd floor window of the Dal Tex ever been identified?
It would be nice if the black man sitting on the fire escape could be identified. A white shirt and black pants means he could be a cook or kitchen worker, JAT. Is he seen in any other photos taken of Dealey Plaza after the shooting?
I can't remember which book, but somewhere I read that some inmates in the jail on Houston St. saw something as the motorcade drove by. Seems like it was something about people in the windows of the TSBD. Can someone refresh my memory?
"High Treason" Robert Groden and Harrison Livingstone page 195
John Powell and several other prisoners saw two men who were adjusting a telescopic sight on a rifle
One of the men appeared to be Latin
I did not quote the book but just posted a summary of what is on page 195
Do you have "High Treason"? If not I could scan page 195 and post it for you tonight when I get off work if you would like
Dean
-
Tink
You should not have changed your mind
Don Thomas is wrong
You were right
-
Re Pamela's assertion that the Zapruder film was projected at the Bleeker Street Cinema in the fall of 1964, and that "I've been sharing this event with the research community for a very long time."
No, I was unaware that you were doing so, but that fact does not change my opinion about this one iota. I don't know what film you saw at New York City's Bleeker Street Cinema "in the fall of 1964" (which would be just after the issuance of the Warren Report) but it couldn't possibly have been the Zapruder film.
On 11/25/63, Time-Life executed an "all rights" contract on the Zapruder film for $150,000-and took permanent legal possession of the original with the express purpose of never permitting it to be seen as a motion picture film. Using a multiplier of six (to bring us to "today's money"), Time-Life executed a contract for $900,000 (in today's money) to achieve that goal.
This is very serious money, and bespeaks a very serious intent at complete suppression--especially in the fall of 1964, with the LBJ-Goldwater election on the calendar.
As previously noted, I had these contracts--courtesy of Josiah thompson--by around 1969/70. I was in very heavy contact with the ARRB and sent them to Horne, Gunn, and Marwell on July 1, 1996--along with a detailed memorandum explaining the significance of the change in price between Saturday, 11/23, and Monday, 11/25/63. I received back direct commentary that Marwell, Gunn, and Laura Denk was delighted and fascinated by the receipt of this material.
As the contracts show, $25,000 (of $150,000, in today's money) was paid on 11/23/63; and another $25,000 (i.e., another $150,000, in today's money) was paid a few days after January 1, 1964. So by the fall of 1964, $300,000 (in today's money) had been expended.
By the fall of 1964, frames from the film had appeared in three issues of LIFE magazine: about 30 frames of the Zapruder film had been published in the 11/29/63 edition of Life; and about 9 frames in the Life Memorial Edition, the next week. In early October, 1964, in an issue about the Warren Report, 8 frames were published.
Outside of the FBI, the Secret Service and the Warren Commission, and certain staffers at Life, the only way for an ordinary civilian to see the Zapruder film was to travel to Washington, D.C. and make an appointment for a screening at the National Archives. Two such persons who did exactly that were Thomas Stamm, and Stewart Galanor. They both related vivid accounts describing what that was like--Stamm's account being circulated to a number of people in the nascent "research community."
Now back to this claim about the public projection of this film at the Bleeker Street Cinema in the fall of 1964:
I continue to maintain that the Zapruder film was not projected at the Bleeker Street Cinema in New York City--or any other New York theater, for that matter--and that Time-Life had executed a contract to the tune of $900,000 (in today's money) insure that no such thing would occur--and in fact it did not occur. I do not know what you saw screened at the Bleeker Street Cinema, but it is not just "highly unlikely" that it was the Zapruder film--that is as close to impossible as one can get.
I say this as someone who lived through the frustration of this period, someone who realized, from the poor black and white reproductions of the Z frames in Volume 18, that the film showed JFK being slammed backwards and to the left, and who, consequently, greatly admired the effort expended by a small number of first generation JFK researchers--Thomas Stamm and Stewart Galanor (and Vincent Salandria, etc.) --who traveled to the National Archives, made an appointment to screen this critical evidence, were shocked at what they saw, and then did what they could--in a world where there was no Internet--to "spread the word." I believe it demeans their effort and the historic role they played to repeatedly disseminate a story that during this period when the film was clearly quarantined from the American public, that it was screened at the Bleeker Street cinema.
In my opinion, spreading this story--whether the result of confusion or misunderstanding--is simply spreading an urban legend.
DSL
January 6, 2010; 4:40 PM PST
Los Angeles, CA
Well said David, I agree 100%
And anyone who cant see the spiral nebula in Altgens is so caught up in the LNer fantasy land that their mind refuses to see it
Just look at "Pictures Of The Pain"
-
Fascinating Jack. Could you tell us more about it? Any idea of who the "official photographer" was or what organization he worked for? Any idea what he looked like or how tall he was? Was it he and not Zapruder who took the "official film" to the Kodak lab in Dallas and got it developed?
Josiah Thompson
If a decision had been made to alter the Zapruder film, then the only effective way of doing it would be to seize it. .... Yet seizure did not occur. What does that tell us?THe dark forces behind the assassination didn't plan for everything?
In my opinion, Zapruder did not take the "Zapruder film". An "official film" of the assassination
was part of the plotters' scenario. The "official photographer" was on the pedestal. Zapruder was
just a "front man" to take credit for it. The reason for an OFFICIAL FILM is that it could
be used to counteract any testimony or photos to the contrary. There is ample evidence
that Zapruder was not on the pedestal, and that other films were confiscated and altered to
conform with the "official film."
Jack
Tink
This is my answer not Jacks (even though I use his study)
The person who took the offical film was the other camera man that we see in Betzner
He was tall enough to film over the pyracantha bush
I believe that TOCM took the offical film that Rich Dellarosa viewed and that Zappy or the camera in Zappys position took a sweeping shot right before the assassination to get the proper background and bystanders (one of the reasons some of the bystanders seem to have little movement and not be looking at JFK ) that was used together with the film taken by TOCM to create the fake Z-film that is what we watch today
The answer to this analysis, and Dean's belief in that analysis can be found here.
What stunning research Duncan, keep up the good work
-
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:08:48 -0000 [02:08:48 AM CST]
From: "John Simkin" <john.simkin@ntlworld.com>
To: jfetzer@d.umn.edu
Subject: RE: Forum access for Doug Weldon . . .
Jim,
I have been in contact with Doug. All he needs to do is to send me a
photograph and biography and I will register him.
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showforum=37
John Simkin
-----Original Message-----
From: jfetzer@d.umn.edu [mailto:jfetzer@d.umn.edu]
Sent: 06 January 2010 01:39
To: John Simkin; Doug Weldon
Cc: bmoore1242@rogers.com; jfetzer@d.umn.edu
Subject: Forum access for Doug Weldon . . .
John,
For reasons I do not profess to understand, Doug Weldon has not been allowed
to register at the forum. Could you please set this right?
Many thanks! It was visionary of you to foresee a forum's potential.
Jim
Quoting "Doug Weldon" <dougweldon@comcast.net>:
[Hide Quoted Text]
Is Doug Weldon expecting everyone else to do his homework for him?
He is unable to post for himself, and he refers us to an old interview
where we have to search to find out what he said.
Why not speak plainly and tell us today exactly what you want us to
know? With your own login, like all the other responsible researchers
here.
Jim and Bernice:
In response to Pamela's post above EVERYTHING I want people to
know TODAY is in my Black Op interview done on December 3, 2009. It
is almost two hours long. I would be grateful if one of you could
post this. Unfortunately, I can only respond to questions via one of
you. I have tried to join the forum for several months and while I
can read posts as a non-member I am unable to open attachments. I
understand it is frustrating for me and inconvenient to you.
Best,
Doug Weldon
In response to Pamela's post above EVERYTHING I want people to know TODAY is in my Black Op interview done on December 3, 2009. It is almost two hours long. I would be grateful if one of you could post this. Unfortunately, I can only respond to questions via one of you. I have tried to join the forum for several months and while I can read posts as a non-member I am unable to open attachments. I understand it is frustrating for me and inconvenient to you.Doug Weldon
.... http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2009.html
SHOW 451..........
I SINCERELY HOPE THAT SOME PEOPLE WILL READ THIS AND COMPREHEND FINALLY...IF AND WHEN HIS MEMBERSHIP IS ENABLED HE WILL MOST CERTAINLY RESPOND DIRECTLY TO YOU..AND THE WHOMEVERS ..THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND FOR NOW FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE ENOUGH ..
BGood News! Here is Doug's bio, in the meantime.... http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKweldonD.htm Now we can hear more about another bullet right through the windshield and how that piece of vital evidence was faked....what wasn't?!?! (fellow serfs in our captive Nation)
Im very happy that Doug will join the forum
I look forward to hearing more about his oustanding work on the bullet hole in the windshield in MIDP
-
Dean,
I have a question, and mind you, I am not good with film study, so bear with me.
If the gentleman you say is actually taking the film, (not sure how to word this), wouldn't the perspective be off?
Zapruder actually faces the side of the limo directly , and we can see that shortly after the sign, but his facing the side would be different that the gentleman facing the side, time wise. The gentleman couldn't face the side until later.
That would throw the orientation of the film off, wouldn't it? And we'd be able to tell that it was shot from a different place, wouldn't we?
I hope you understand what I mean. (This is not my forte.)
Kathy
Kathy Zappy and TOCM are pretty close to each other and there cameras are pointing in the same direction
I believe (again my opinion, IF its a camera and IF TOCM took the "other" film) like I said both of the films were put together to create the fake Z-film
I think they were close enough to each other that when the films were put together it would be to hard to tell
And one thing that Rich said is that the "other film" was taken from a position real close to the Z-film he could tell it was from a different position
But remember that Rich saw the uncut version of the other film not the one that I believe was made from two different films, Zappys camera position (It might not have been Zappy as Jack says) supplying the background and the other film supplying the limo and the people inside the limo
Then the people inside the limo, the head shot and wounds and all the other things were altered to fit the offical version
I hope this helps Kathy, I know you dont believe in alteration but now is the time to study it in detail with Dougs books backing up TGZFH
Dean
-
Fascinating Jack. Could you tell us more about it? Any idea of who the "official photographer" was or what organization he worked for? Any idea what he looked like or how tall he was? Was it he and not Zapruder who took the "official film" to the Kodak lab in Dallas and got it developed?
Josiah Thompson
If a decision had been made to alter the Zapruder film, then the only effective way of doing it would be to seize it. .... Yet seizure did not occur. What does that tell us?THe dark forces behind the assassination didn't plan for everything?
In my opinion, Zapruder did not take the "Zapruder film". An "official film" of the assassination
was part of the plotters' scenario. The "official photographer" was on the pedestal. Zapruder was
just a "front man" to take credit for it. The reason for an OFFICIAL FILM is that it could
be used to counteract any testimony or photos to the contrary. There is ample evidence
that Zapruder was not on the pedestal, and that other films were confiscated and altered to
conform with the "official film."
Jack
Tink
This is my answer not Jacks (even though I use his study)
The person who took the offical film was the other camera man that we see in Betzner
He was tall enough to film over the pyracantha bush
I believe that TOCM took the offical film that Rich Dellarosa viewed and that Zappy or the camera in Zappys position took a sweeping shot right before the assassination to get the proper background and bystanders (one of the reasons some of the bystanders seem to have little movement and not be looking at JFK ) that was used together with the film taken by TOCM to create the fake Z-film that is what we watch today
-
BILL''And I don't accept your conclusion that we'll never know, as we are learning more every day, and it's getting exciting, isn't it?''
BILL ANY THOUGHTS..I HAVE BEEN READING WITHIN SOME POSTS OF LATE THIS WE'LL NEVER KNOW CLAP TRAP IMO...IS THIS TO BE OR IS THIS THE NEWEST PLOY LINE...IMO THAT IS CRAP AS YOU SAY ''I think we are closer now than ever before. '' SOUNDS TO ME LIKE A NEW EXCUSE BEING FORMULATED WHICH WILL be ADDed TO AS IT CONTINUES I HAVE NO DOUBT...BY THOSE WHO BASICALLY DO NOT BELIEVE THE ZAPPY IS ALTERED...AND IN THE PAST HAVE LET THAT BE KNOWN..I ALSO SEE ONE IN PARTICULAR CLIMBING ON THE BAND WAGON SUDDENLY TRYING TO GIVE THE IMPRESSION OF EITHER BEING A CONVERT , OR SUGGESTING THEY ALWAyS PERHAPS kNEW THERE WAS SOMETHING WRONG WITHIN...WHY ??SO THAT WHICHEVER WAY THE RESULT FALLS WILL BE THEY THINK ON SAFE GROUND WITHIN THE ALTS FORUMS AND OTHERS...HMMM ONE NEVER KNOWS, IT CERTAINLY IS GETTING INTERESTING...IMO...
B, EXCUSE CAPITOLS THANKS...MUCH..I agree with Bernice
I also agree with what Bill says, I have been reading Dougs 5 volumes and reading all posts and threads about Doug and his work and I must say i am very excited and also very proud of Doug for validating not only Lifton and TGZFH gang but all of us who have believed in alteration
This is a very exciting time indeed
Dean
-
I believe that the limousine driven by native Irishman William Greer, Methodist, slowed down instead of speeding up after the shots rang out, thus enabling the shots that killed John Fitzgerald Kennedy, President of the United States on November 22, 1963.
Except that the late Mr. Greer was born in Northern Ireland, which is part of the UK, so it might be more accurate to refer to him as a native Britisher.
I always thought, Greer brought the limo to a halt to give the SS-men of the follow-up car the opportunity to get onto the Lincoln-Limo, and protect JFK with their body's...but the SS-men didn't move...following an order by Emory Roberts..."Don't move!"
To me Greer did the right thing, while Roberts order, and behavior is more than questionable...
KK
-
I believe there is sufficient evidence to speculate reasonably that
JFK was hit 3 times in the head.
Cliff the things you say keep getting more and more ludicrous each day
-
I want Fred Newcomb's book so bad, thats one gem that my grandpa did not by and pass down to me
Hi Dean:
The reason that "grandpa" did not pass a copy "Murder From Within" down to you is because it was never (legally) for sale. In truth it was a joint effort constructed by Fred Newcomb and Perry Adams, copyrighted in 1974. I was fortunate enough to be one of those who contributed, in some small way, to this venture, as were many others, some of whom contribute to this forum as of this date - including both Josiah Thompson and David Lifton. Newcomb and Adams published a very limited number of "pre-publication" drafts, in their words "expressly for the use of the United States Congress and other interested law enforcement bodies, and not for the general public." My copy is #84.
I believe Fred Newcomb is still alive, but I have not spoken to him for about 4 or 5 years. Perry Adams unfortunately passed away a number of years ago. If you like I will contact Tyler Newcomb, Fred's son, who, along with fellow researcher, Larry Haapanen, has a lot of Fred and Perry's original research materials, and ask permission to make a copy for you. Or , you can contact Tyler directly yourself. I believe he has posted on this Forum in the past, though I could be wrong about that.
Gary Murr
Gary
Thank you for that explanation, as stated before my gramps passed down around 150 or so books to me, many rare ones as well, its good to know why he never had a copy of Newcomb and Adams book
If you would be abel to copy it for me I would be forever in your debt
If you can get permission that would be great
Thanks again, and if you can do that for me send me a PM and we will talk
Dean
-
I want Fred Newcomb's book so bad, thats one gem that my grandpa did not by and pass down to me
-
Since you like to speculate so much what do you imagine they used quinine for? Gin and tonics? That is the first time Len has made me laugh
Although we now have a lead into what was in GinAndTonicMans glass
-
Inside the Target Car
Reading that you use Inside the Target Car to prove a point just threw everything else out the window
To clarify, Dean, I was probably the first person to review Inside the Target Car and rip it to shreds. This review is available, here: Inside the Target Car
One of my main complaints about the program was, and continues to be, that they missed the HSCA entrance wound location in their first simulated shot from the TSBD, and hit the skull closer to the supposed exit, and failed to show the results of this shot in the program. A review of this outtake, not coincidentally, revealed the result to be far more similar to the explosion of skull seen on the Z-film than the explosion shown in the program.
I have never read your review
I liked it, good job
If you liked that, you might also appreciate my analysis of Dale Myers' animation, here: Animania
Again great work Pat, I enjoyed reading that and also enjoyed you making Dale Myers look like an idiot
I just put your website into my favorites and will read through it soon
Dean
-
I have some questions for Doug on Vol 4
Just wanted to say great job Doug, your books are very easy to read and I am enjoying them very much
-
Why this second head shot thing? Nobody needs a second head shot to prove, that the Zappi film is a fakeAgain: who needs a second-head-shot-theorie?
Talking about such a thing is, IMO, Love's Labour's Lost.
I do
Have you read TGZFH and more to the point have you read Rich Dellarosa's description of the "other" film?
I explained this in detail in the thread I started on this very forum
Go check it out, it might not be important to you in proving a conspiracy but it is very important to me
Dean
-
Dean,
Rest assured, I don't need to try and change your words - they're recorded here for all to see. Words have meaning, and combinations of words have even fuller meaning.
And no, I'm not trying to "prove" anything.
I simply noticed a contradiction in what you wrote and tried to point it out.
The fact remains that given what you wrote, and how you wrote it, it's quite clear that you were in fact trying to use the FBI film to prove that the Zapruder film was altered based on your stated observation that when the camera stops in the FBI film the picture fades into white but when the camera stops in the Zapruder film the picture does not.
And now you deny that.
So be it.
Now, to answer your questions:
Do I think you're dishonest?
No.
Do I think you're trying to fool everybody?
No.
Do I think you're stupid?
No.
Do I think your're a sloppy researcher?
At times, yes.
Todd
Well Todd like you said its right there for everyone to read, so however you want to see them then fine
But it looks like everyone is more interested in what we need to do to get these FBI films transfered to see the sprocket areas, and also to view them in better quality
I think these FBI films are VERY important to not only alteration research but anti-alteration research as well
After that happens I would be more then happy to talk with you about my thoughts on the Z-film starting and stopping
Would you agree?
B, EXCUSE CAPITOLS THANKS...MUCH..
On Jack White's Grand Zap
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
I agree with Peter 100%
Anyone who has not read Volume 4 (or for that matter all of the volumes) or is not planning on reading it is going to be left in the dust
I can not say enough times that Volume 4 validates Lifton and TGZFH authors
Buy Dougs books NOW if you have not done so