Dean Hagerman

When you guys get past your simplistic speculation and bring some real, hard data that shows the Z film has been altered, then get back to me. As it stands you are batting zero.

Craig

Have you read TGZFH? Do I need to send you a copy?

If you have read it then you have seen real hard data that the Z-film has been altered beyond question

If you have not read it then you need too ASAP

Dean

Uh Dean as I told you before I read that trashy book when Tink was kind enough to send me a copy of the proof.

If you think the book conmtained hard data that is beyond question your are either silly, or ignorant..or maybe both. Take your pick.

Grape...Orange AND Cherry.

Hell the TGZFH group can't even figure out something as simple as photographic parallax...

Here Craig, read all of these, the truth will set you free

Upps, seems I forget Rasberry...

Craig

When are you going to stop making stupid comments that only you find funny and give me serious replies?

Why do you think TGZFH was wrong?

Please be specific

No, more to the question (and one we are still waiting for Dean to deal with as he said he would) when are YOU going to show us what TGZFH ( and Jack White) got right?

I tried, and it was one of Jacks studies, but it did not fit your ridiculous guidelines

When you guys get past your simplistic speculation and bring some real, hard data that shows the Z film has been altered, then get back to me. As it stands you are batting zero.

Craig

Have you read TGZFH? Do I need to send you a copy?

If you have read it then you have seen real hard data that the Z-film has been altered beyond question

If you have not read it then you need too ASAP

Dean

Uh Dean as I told you before I read that trashy book when Tink was kind enough to send me a copy of the proof.

If you think the book conmtained hard data that is beyond question your are either silly, or ignorant..or maybe both. Take your pick.

Grape...Orange AND Cherry.

Hell the TGZFH group can't even figure out something as simple as photographic parallax...

Here Craig, read all of these, the truth will set you free

Upps, seems I forget Rasberry...

Craig

When are you going to stop making stupid comments that only you find funny and give me serious replies?

Why do you think TGZFH was wrong?

Please be specific

When you guys get past your simplistic speculation and bring some real, hard data that shows the Z film has been altered, then get back to me. As it stands you are batting zero.

Craig

Have you read TGZFH? Do I need to send you a copy?

If you have read it then you have seen real hard data that the Z-film has been altered beyond question

If you have not read it then you need too ASAP

Dean

Uh Dean as I told you before I read that trashy book when Tink was kind enough to send me a copy of the proof.

If you think the book conmtained hard data that is beyond question your are either silly, or ignorant..or maybe both. Take your pick.

Grape...Orange AND Cherry.

Hell the TGZFH group can't even figure out something as simple as photographic parallax...

Here Craig, read all of these, the truth will set you free

I concede. It is Billy Lovelady in a plaid shirt. I haven't looked at him in a long time. There was a thread here some time ago that challenged the Lovelady pose and face, and that it had been the result of photo editing. And was it really Billy Lovelady in that odd pose.

My error. This whole thread has been for nought. Sorry. (But he looks like Paine, ha, ha.)

Kathy C

Glad I could help Kathy

Of course I believe Oswald was in the lunch room where he was seen cool and calm drinking a Coke by Officer Baker

I think he was in the lunch room throught the entire assassination

I still contend that someone affixed Paine's face onto that body. I welcome anyone to prove otherwise. I'm not saying Paine was there, but his face was used.

No way

Its Lovelady

When you guys get past your simplistic speculation and bring some real, hard data that shows the Z film has been altered, then get back to me. As it stands you are batting zero.

Craig

Have you read TGZFH? Do I need to send you a copy?

If you have read it then you have seen real hard data that the Z-film has been altered beyond question

If you have not read it then you need too ASAP

Dean

by an obscure author

Have you ever heard of "High Treason" ?

Have you ever heard of "High Treason 2" ?

Do the words best seller mean anything to you Len?

"High Treason" is one of the best books of all time on the assassination

I cant believe you didnt know that

Yes Dean he wrote or co-wrote 2 books that spent a total of 13 weeks on the NY Times paperback nonfiction best sellers list but that was almost 20 years ago around the time of the buzz over Stone's JFK. Now he has to self publish and the Amazon.com Sales Ranks of his books is in the #326,049 - #1,431,848 so "obscure author" was a fair characterization.

WRONG!

"High Treason" was released in 1989

How was there "Buzz" over Stones JFK that was released in 1991?

You have no idea what you are talking about do you?

A classic case of projection.The book was 1st published in 1980 then re-released in 1989. Stone began filming JFK in the summer of 1990 and the book spent a few weeks on the best sellers list starting in November of that year. Can you site any cases of books becoming best sellers years after their initial release and the spike in sales not being associated with a movie death or similar event?

CORRECTION - Filming of JFK began in April 1991, but I doubt it is a coincidence that a book released over 10 years earlier became a best seller when the author was working as a consultant for a movie on the same topic being made by one of the most popular directors of the period.

Read Jacks post, Livingstone is a control freak, thats why he wrote "High Treason 2" alone without Groden

I read his posts but rarely take them seriously because he posts nonsense like RFK was going to be the VP candidate in 1964, WTC 6 was white and evolution is a hoax. I'm sure Livingstone makes up all sorts of excuses for having to resort to self publishing.I pressume it because he make ludicrous claims (is it true he said Groden is CIA?)

Len you dissapoint me

Livingstone started writing High Treason in 1980, he then joined forces with Robert Groden and High Treason came to be published in 1989

I want you to find me a book copy of High Treason that was published in 1980, if you get me a copy of a book published in 1980 I will send you $10,000 for it

Im pretty sure you read that it was first published in 1980 on Amazon.com

That info is wrong, Livingstone had his work copywrited in 1980, but was not published in book form until 1989 with Groden

And yes Groden and Livingstone had a big falling out, I think Groden had a message on his answering machine of Livingstone threating to kill him

by an obscure author

Have you ever heard of "High Treason" ?

Have you ever heard of "High Treason 2" ?

Do the words best seller mean anything to you Len?

"High Treason" is one of the best books of all time on the assassination

I cant believe you didnt know that

Yes Dean he wrote or co-wrote 2 books that spent a total of 13 weeks on the NY Times paperback nonfiction best sellers list but that was almost 20 years ago around the time of the buzz over Stone's JFK. Now he has to self publish and the Amazon.com Sales Ranks of his books is in the #326,049 - #1,431,848 so "obscure author" was a fair characterization.

WRONG!

"High Treason" was released in 1989

How was there "Buzz" over Stones JFK that was released in 1991?

You have no idea what you are talking about do you?

Read Jacks post, Livingstone is a control freak, thats why he wrote "High Treason 2" alone without Groden

by an obscure author

Have you ever heard of "High Treason" ?

Have you ever heard of "High Treason 2" ?

Do the words best seller mean anything to you Len?

"High Treason" is one of the best books of all time on the assassination

I cant believe you didnt know that

Thanks for making Lens point. The Zap book was a vanity publication. What? No reputable publisher willing to print it?

Making his point or pointing out that Len knows nothing about Livingstone or for that matter two books that every student of the assassination sans you and Len own or at least read "High Treason" and "High Treason 2"

by an obscure author

Have you ever heard of "High Treason" ?

Have you ever heard of "High Treason 2" ?

Do the words best seller mean anything to you Len?

"High Treason" is one of the best books of all time on the assassination

I cant believe you didnt know that

This is a nice example of someone who has been out-of-touch with research on the authenticity of the Zapruder film, which has been proceeding at a rapid clip since the symposium on the film I organized and moderated at the Lancer Conference in 1996. Since the film has been used as the backbone of the cover up from its inception--including the creation of the "blob" of brains bulging forward, the missing right-front cranial mass from the x-rays, the caption for frame 313 in LIFE magazine describing how the direction of the shot was determined by the study of the film, and Abraham Zapruder's appearance on television that evening, using his had to show a blow-out to the right-front that did not occur--it would have been extremely unfortunate had Doug Horne followed the advice of J. Raymond Carroll and suppressed his research on the film. Indeed, one of the great virtues of Vol. IV is its exposure of film fakery.

Let me say that Doug Horne has been extremely generous in acknowledging the previous work by Jack White, David Mantik, David Healy, John Costella, and David Lifton, who are those who have made the most important contributions to establishing that the Z-film has been recreated. After all, anyone who takes for granted that the film is authentic--as have generations of students of the crime in generations past--will be unable to reconstruct what actually happened in Dealey Plaza during the assassination, since some events--such as William Greer bringing the limousine to a halt to make certain JFK would be killed, Motorcycle Patrolman Cheney's motoring forward to advise Chief Curry that he had been shot, and Mary Moorman and Jean Hill's stepping into the street to take Mary's famous Polariod--have been removed, while other events--such as the bulging "blob", the blood spray, and the passengers being thrown forward WHILE THE LIMO WAS ACCELERATING--have been added in. Horne's studies reinforce these discoveries.

I especially like the manner in which Doug Horne encourages other students of JFK to abandon their long-held but provably-false belief in Zapruder film authenticity:

The biggest problem we face right now in the JFK research community are the legions of "old guard" researchers who refuse to face this fact [that the Z-film has been fabricated] and who stubbornly cling to some piece of "bedrock evidence", which in their mind will lead them out of the wilderness if only they study it long enough and can divine its true meaning. For Thompson, Wrone, Weisberg, Groden, and may others, the Zapruder film has been this piece of bedrock evidence for over four decades. I say to the old guard who have continued to insist that the Zapruder film is an authentic and unaltered film in spite of the mounting evidence of its alteration, "Come on over, and see the light." You will feel better for having done so--in fact, it will liberate you. Once you accept the fact that the Zapruder film is a clever (but imperfect) forgery, you are free suddenly to believe the Dealey Plaza car stop witnesses (which include several Dallas motorcycle policemen and Bill Newman); Marily Sitzman; the Kodak laboratory personnel (who all say the original film was slit the evening of the assassination); Marilyn Willis; Erwin Schwartz; Cartha DeLoach; Dan Rather; and the Parkland doctors and nurses. For if you believe the Zapruder film is authentic, you must, of necessity, believe that all of these people are either liars, or incompetent and unreliable witnesses.

Following the lead of Noel Twyman, BLOODY TREASON (1997), who consulted Roderick Ryan, an expert on special effects from the cinema capitol of the world, who told him that the "blog" and the blood spray had been painted in, Doug Horne consulted additional experts on special effects and reported that, "When the 6K scans of frames 313 through 323 were viewed, one after the other on two high resolution video screens in the editing bay, Ned Price (who just happens to also be the Head of Restoration at a major Hollywood film studio) said: "Oh, that's horrible, that's just terrible! That's such a bad fake." His colleague, Paul Rutan, opined: "We are not looking at originals; we are looking at artwork." (By this, Rutan meant we were not looking at traveling mattes; we were looking at painted visual effects superimposed on top of the original film frames--by inference, he meant aerial imaging.) The film editor concurred with his two colleagues. To say that this was an electrifying moment would be a gross understatement.

"The considered opinions of our two film restoration professionals, who together have spent over five decades restoring and working with films of the late 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s (when visual effects were done optically--not digitally), in that one moment superseded the statements of all those in the JFK research community who have insisted for two decades now that the Zapruder film could not have been altered, because the technology did not exist to do so. Our two restoration experts know special effects in modern motion picture films far better than Josiah Thompson, or David Wrone, or Gary Mack, or Robert Groden, or me, for that matter; and their subjective opinion [better: professional judgment] trumps Rollie Zavada's as well--a man who has absolutely no experience whatsoever in the post production of visual effects in motion picture films. And while Rollie Zavada, a lifetime Kodak employee receiving retirement pay from his former employer, would certain have an apparent conflict of interest in blowing the whistle on Zapruder film forgery if his former employer was involved in its alteration, our three Hollywood film professionals had no vested interest, one way or the other, in the outcome of their examination of the 6Kscans on August 25th of 2009."

In complete opposition to J. Raymond Carroll, I assert that, if this had been the only contribution of Doug Horne's research toward a better understanding of the assassination of JFK and its cover up, it would have been worth the price of the volume by itself! I am completely and utterly in awe and admiration for his painstaking efforts and meticulous research on the most controversial aspects of the case, where I believe that it has become impossible to deny that the film is a fabrication and that the cover up cannot be understood --even remotely!--without rejecting the blindfold extended by Josiah Thompson, David Wrone, Gary Mack, Rollie Zavada and their chums and allies, who have held back major advances in research on the basis of their misconceived objections to the alteration of the film. I therefore agree with Bill Kelly in his belief that "the corner has been turned" in relation to the question of Zapruder film alteration. Jack White, David Mantik, David Healy, John Costella, David Lifton and I have known it for some time, but there is no substitute for a presentation that anyone with the capacity for objectivity can comprehend! For that--and for his diligence, his dedication, his intelligence, his self-sacrifice, and his professionalism--I congratulate him!

Perfect post Dr Fetzer

My favorite book is "Bloody Treason" by Noel Twyman

I bought it brand new back in 1997 and since the day I read Bloody Treason the whole way through I have believed 100% in alteration

I also bought "Assassination Science", "Murder In Dealey Plaza" and "The Great Zapruder Film Hoax" the day they were released or the first week they were released

Those 3 amazing books are not only all worn out from my reading them over and over and over they are still being read by me even today to check information and look up facts that are disputed by Lamson, Colby and others

I hope that Dougs 5 volumes (and the Z-film alteration in Vol4) will open the eyes of researchers who I hold in a very high regard (Groden being one of them) I know Dougs book will bring on a new wave of attacks, i just wish I didnt have to wait until X-mas to get my hands on all 5 volumes (im working on the wife as I type to let me have Volume 4 as an early present )

I wanted to use this post to thank Dr Fetzer for putting together 3 of the most important books on the assassination and 3 books that I hold in a very high regard in my own research and studies as they back up my thoughts on the assassination and photographic evidence

Thank you Dr Fetzer, I cant wait for the day that us as alterationists are proven to have been right all along

Dean

Cherry...for sure.

Your a funny guy Craig, you should go on a comedy tour around the US

But, I wouldnt quit your day job

Horne's book is based primarily on the original records, they should be sited rather than the mistake ridden Murder In Dealey Plaza, which if corrected, has the potential of reaching a much larger audience than Horne's technical analysis, and those students of the assassination, like Dean, should learn and full deal, and not just from those who make the most noise.

Bill

I am getting all 5 volumes for X-mas

I will read them all and report back with my thoughts

I am very excited to read Volume 4

Im ready to move on from talking about the errors in MIDP

Thanks Dean,

I'm anxious to hear your report.

I too am a student of the assassination with a lot of reading to do.

I'm just glad Prof. Fetzer isn't grading me.

Perhaps you can suggest to him some possible articles for his next anthology.

Bill Kelly

I dont know if your being serious, I hope you are

But either way I will post my thoughts and look forward to hearing more from you Bill and from everyone else on all 5 volumes (but mostly on chapter 14 in vol 4)

The person I really want to hear from is Tink Thompson

Horne's book is based primarily on the original records, they should be sited rather than the mistake ridden Murder In Dealey Plaza, which if corrected, has the potential of reaching a much larger audience than Horne's technical analysis, and those students of the assassination, like Dean, should learn and full deal, and not just from those who make the most noise.

Bill

I am getting all 5 volumes for X-mas

I will read them all and report back with my thoughts

I am very excited to read Volume 4

Im ready to move on from talking about the errors in MIDP

You ask "who cares if the book has errors?" The answer is readers that care about accuracy, credibility, and veracity.

What percentage of readers care only about errors? 2% including you and Bill Kelly would be my guess

And now you say "It's apparent from the above remarks that your reading comprehension skills are equivalent to that of an eighth-grader"

And then you say "Maybe you should pay attention to what's in the book, instead of making yourself look like a lightweight with your childish comments"

So telling me I read like im in 8th grade is not a childish comment?

And my favorite is this "I quickly tire of dealing with guys like you that jump to false conclusions"

Then why did you reply to me?

I know your just itchin to break down my post and point out all the errors I make, go ahead, do it.

Me and my friends need a new grammer nazi to make fun of

Michael Hogan has no clue what he is talking about

Why you ask would I say that? I guess just like him im saying it just to say it

How does that sound Michael?

Maybe you should pay attention to whats IN the book like I did instead of dwelling on spelling errors, you act like this book is an report that Fetzer turned into an 8th grade English Teacher

Who cares (besides you and English teachers) if the book has errors? You make it sound like it was so bad that it was impossible to read the book, the errors did not take away from the flow of the book that was easy to read and understand

And for your info I own the first edition

I hope you break my post apart and point out all the spelling and punctuation errors to me so I (along with all the other researchers who care about the case instead of grammer) can get a good laugh

It's apparent from the above remarks that your reading comprehension skills are equivalent to that of an eighth-grader.

I see why you had to read Murder in Dealey Plaza 50 times.

Your claim that the book is "edited just fine" is as laughable as it is absurd. And then you want to defend that claim by sniping at me.

Maybe you should pay attention to what's in the book, instead of making yourself look like a lightweight with your childish comments.

You ask "who cares if the book has errors?" The answer is readers that care about accuracy, credibility, and veracity.

You neglected to mention that my post also referred to "a considerable number of factual misstatements." Ponder these..

Page 28) And yet, thirteen railroad employees of the Union Terminal are allowed on the bridge. Police officers White and Foster are assigned places at the East and West sides of a bridge that runs North-South. Access to the overpass bridge may have been limited to those with photography equipment.

Page 47) This momentary sighting also dovetails with the observation of sheriff's deputy Roger Craig, who also sees a Nash Rambler station wagon, also driven by a dark-complected man, about fifteen minutes after the shooting, heading west on Elm.

Page 54) Near Poydrus, when the bus becomes tied up in traffic, a man gets out of the car in front of the bus, walks back to the bus and tells Whaley the President has been shot.

Page 59) Norman Similas, of Toronto, also witnesses the assassination of JFK and promptly leaves town.

(This statement is cut and pasted from this website

http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_...ue/similas.html

No mention that Similas claimed to have a taken a photo; no mention of what he saw.)

Page 79) The second police car to arrive at the scene where Tippit was murdered is driven by Officer Gerald Hill. Riding with Hill is William Alexander. (Officer Hill testifies that he is given custody of the .38 revolver supposedly found on Oswald when he is arrested a few moments later.)

Page 87) Brewer then goes back to the box office and tells Julia Postal he thinks the man is still in the theater and to call the police. Julia then calls the police.

Page 96) Clint Hill sees a photographer taking pictures. "I'll get him," he says to Jacqueline Kennedy. "No, she replies. "I want them to see what they have done."

Page 101) 11/22 2:50 pm: Dallas police take a paraffin test of Oswald's hands and right cheek. Test is positive for hands; negative for the face. His interrogation continues. (See next)

Page 110) 11/22 8:55 pm: Pete Barnes comes in and the three crime lab men make paraffin casts of Oswald's hands and right cheek. The tests come back positive for his hands and negative for his right cheek....

Page 114) The HSCA is referred to as "The Senate Committee."

I quickly tire of dealing with guys like you that jump to false conclusions, and then act affronted when it is pointed out to them. Your response didn't even try to deal with the positive things I said about Murder in Dealey Plaza.

Michael,

Thank you for starting this thread, and I had hoped that Dr. Salerian would join us in discussion, but its apparent that no one of his caliber will enlist in a forum that includes those who have preconceived notions of what happened and whose to blame.

Dean is quite apparently out of his league and Professor Fetzer, while on a high having been cited as a source in Horne's epic, should go back and correct his typos, errors and errata in his anthologies and republish them in the wake of Horne's references to them.

And when we get Tink Thompson's response to Horne's work, Fetzer should just remain silent, as he has been disqualified from engaging in any determination of what did and didn't happen to the Zapruder film, while Horne's work has the potential of convincing Thompson that the chain of custody of the Z-film original was lost if in fact it did spend time at the CIA's Hawkeye Works lab at the Kodak plant in Rochester, NY.

And someone else, other than Professor Fetzer, must follow Thompson's response to Horne's new data, and make sure it is well reasoned and in the same logical, analysis Horne applies to what has already been learned.

Fetzer should not be allowed to take over the soap box, though he should be granted equal time, and since Horne's book is based primarily on the original records, they should be sited rather than the mistake ridden Murder In Dealey Plaza, which if corrected, has the potential of reaching a much larger audience than Horne's technical analysis, and those students of the assassination, like Dean, should learn and full deal, and not just from those who make the most noise.

And many thanks again to Michael Hogan, a steady and intrepid student of the assassination.

BK

I am out of my league?

Why because I can read and understand MIDP unlike you?

When I first started posting I liked you and your style, then you take a shot at Fetzer and I call you on it, now im out of my league according to the all mighty Bill Kelly?

Its nice to see the real side of you, dont call Bill out when he talks bad about someone, or else you will be branded out of your league

What a frigging joke

I cant read MIDP! It has to many errors! I hope its corrected now that Dougs 5 volumes is released! Jim needs to keep his mouth shut!

Just listen to you

I would say that your out of your league, but I wont stoop to your level

This is a nice example of someone who has been out-of-touch with research on the authenticity of the Zapruder film, which has been proceeding at a rapid clip since the symposium on the film I organized and moderated at the Lancer Conference in 1996. Since the film has been used as the backbone of the cover up from its inception--including the creation of the "blob" of brains bulging forward, the missing right-front cranial mass from the x-rays, the caption for frame 313 in LIFE magazine describing how the direction of the shot was determined by the study of the film, and Abraham Zapruder's appearance on television that evening, using his had to show a blow-out to the right-front that did not occur--it would have been extremely unfortunate had Doug Horne followed the advice of J. Raymond Carroll and suppressed his research on the film. Indeed, one of the great virtues of Vol. IV is its exposure of film fakery.

Let me say that Doug Horne has been extremely generous in acknowledging the previous work by Jack White, David Mantik, David Healy, John Costella, and David Lifton, who are those who have made the most important contributions to establishing that the Z-film has been recreated. After all, anyone who takes for granted that the film is authentic--as have generations of students of the crime in generations past--will be unable to reconstruct what actually happened in Dealey Plaza during the assassination, since some events--such as William Greer bringing the limousine to a halt to make certain JFK would be killed, Motorcycle Patrolman Cheney's motoring forward to advise Chief Curry that he had been shot, and Mary Moorman and Jean Hill's stepping into the street to take Mary's famous Polariod--have been removed, while other events--such as the bulging "blob", the blood spray, and the passengers being thrown forward WHILE THE LIMO WAS ACCELERATING--have been added in. Horne's studies reinforce these discoveries.

I especially like the manner in which Doug Horne encourages other students of JFK to abandon their long-held but provably-false belief in Zapruder film authenticity:

The biggest problem we face right now in the JFK research community are the legions of "old guard" researchers who refuse to face this fact [that the Z-film has been fabricated] and who stubbornly cling to some piece of "bedrock evidence", which in their mind will lead them out of the wilderness if only they study it long enough and can divine its true meaning. For Thompson, Wrone, Weisberg, Groden, and may others, the Zapruder film has been this piece of bedrock evidence for over four decades. I say to the old guard who have continued to insist that the Zapruder film is an authentic and unaltered film in spite of the mounting evidence of its alteration, "Come on over, and see the light." You will feel better for having done so--in fact, it will liberate you. Once you accept the fact that the Zapruder film is a clever (but imperfect) forgery, you are free suddenly to believe the Dealey Plaza car stop witnesses (which include several Dallas motorcycle policemen and Bill Newman); Marily Sitzman; the Kodak laboratory personnel (who all say the original film was slit the evening of the assassination); Marilyn Willis; Erwin Schwartz; Cartha DeLoach; Dan Rather; and the Parkland doctors and nurses. For if you believe the Zapruder film is authentic, you must, of necessity, believe that all of these people are either liars, or incompetent and unreliable witnesses.

Following the lead of Noel Twyman, BLOODY TREASON (1997), who consulted Roderick Ryan, an expert on special effects from the cinema capitol of the world, who told him that the "blog" and the blood spray had been painted in, Doug Horne consulted additional experts on special effects and reported that, "When the 6K scans of frames 313 through 323 were viewed, one after the other on two high resolution video screens in the editing bay, Ned Price (who just happens to also be the Head of Restoration at a major Hollywood film studio) said: "Oh, that's horrible, that's just terrible! That's such a bad fake." His colleague, Paul Rutan, opined: "We are not looking at originals; we are looking at artwork." (By this, Rutan meant we were not looking at traveling mattes; we were looking at painted visual effects superimposed on top of the original film frames--by inference, he meant aerial imaging.) The film editor concurred with his two colleagues. To say that this was an electrifying moment would be a gross understatement.

"The considered opinions of our two film restoration professionals, who together have spent over five decades restoring and working with films of the late 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s (when visual effects were done optically--not digitally), in that one moment superseded the statements of all those in the JFK research community who have insisted for two decades now that the Zapruder film could not have been altered, because the technology did not exist to do so. Our two restoration experts know special effects in modern motion picture films far better than Josiah Thompson, or David Wrone, or Gary Mack, or Robert Groden, or me, for that matter; and their subjective opinion [better: professional judgment] trumps Rollie Zavada's as well--a man who has absolutely no experience whatsoever in the post production of visual effects in motion picture films. And while Rollie Zavada, a lifetime Kodak employee receiving retirement pay from his former employer, would certain have an apparent conflict of interest in blowing the whistle on Zapruder film forgery if his former employer was involved in its alteration, our three Hollywood film professionals had no vested interest, one way or the other, in the outcome of their examination of the 6Kscans on August 25th of 2009."

In complete opposition to J. Raymond Carroll, I assert that, if this had been the only contribution of Doug Horne's research toward a better understanding of the assassination of JFK and its cover up, it would have been worth the price of the volume by itself! I am completely and utterly in awe and admiration for his painstaking efforts and meticulous research on the most controversial aspects of the case, where I believe that it has become impossible to deny that the film is a fabrication and that the cover up cannot be understood --even remotely!--without rejecting the blindfold extended by Josiah Thompson, David Wrone, Gary Mack, Rollie Zavada and their chums and allies, who have held back major advances in research on the basis of their misconceived objections to the alteration of the film. I therefore agree with Bill Kelly in his belief that "the corner has been turned" in relation to the question of Zapruder film alteration. Jack White, David Mantik, David Healy, John Costella, David Lifton and I have known it for some time, but there is no substitute for a presentation that anyone with the capacity for objectivity can comprehend! For that--and for his diligence, his dedication, his intelligence, his self-sacrifice, and his professionalism--I congratulate him!

Perfect post Dr Fetzer

My favorite book is "Bloody Treason" by Noel Twyman

I bought it brand new back in 1997 and since the day I read Bloody Treason the whole way through I have believed 100% in alteration

I also bought "Assassination Science", "Murder In Dealey Plaza" and "The Great Zapruder Film Hoax" the day they were released or the first week they were released

Those 3 amazing books are not only all worn out from my reading them over and over and over they are still being read by me even today to check information and look up facts that are disputed by Lamson, Colby and others

I hope that Dougs 5 volumes (and the Z-film alteration in Vol4) will open the eyes of researchers who I hold in a very high regard (Groden being one of them) I know Dougs book will bring on a new wave of attacks, i just wish I didnt have to wait until X-mas to get my hands on all 5 volumes (im working on the wife as I type to let me have Volume 4 as an early present )

I wanted to use this post to thank Dr Fetzer for putting together 3 of the most important books on the assassination and 3 books that I hold in a very high regard in my own research and studies as they back up my thoughts on the assassination and photographic evidence

Thank you Dr Fetzer, I cant wait for the day that us as alterationists are proven to have been right all along

Dean

Todd

I got Spragues list in the mail today

Thank you!

Dean

Another way is to have Wim say it is genuine.

If the book was better edited it would have had more of an effect than it did.

Not only is that a shot aimed directly at Jim its a false statement

The book is edited just fine, I have no problems reading MIDP at all, in fact it is such a great read I have read it at least 50 times

So Fetzer whose ego is bigger than the Mall of the Americas can criticize the ever humble Bill Kelly but the latter can't say anything bad about the former? Why the double standard?

Contrary to what you seem to believe the quality of the editing of any book is a matter of opinion not fact but based on Fetzer's repetitive style I imagine Bill was right

So you have never read "Murder In Dealey Plaza" Len?

I have just recently seen this document. Any comments?

Jack

In this instance, Dean Hagerman doesn't know what he is talking about.

Michael Hogan has no clue what he is talking about

Why you ask would I say that? I guess just like him im saying it just to say it

How does that sound Michael?

Maybe you should pay attention to whats IN the book like I did instead of dwelling on spelling errors, you act like this book is an report that Fetzer turned into an 8th grade English Teacher

Who cares (besides you and English teachers) if the book has errors? You make it sound like it was so bad that it was impossible to read the book, the errors did not take away from the flow of the book that was easy to read and understand

And for your info I own the first edition

I hope you break my post apart and point out all the spelling and punctuation errors to me so I (along with all the other researchers who care about the case instead of grammer) can get a good laugh

If the book was better edited it would have had more of an effect than it did.

Not only is that a shot aimed directly at Jim its a false statement

The book is edited just fine, I have no problems reading MIDP at all, in fact it is such a great read I have read it at least 50 times

So far my theory looks good

Dean, your theory will continue to look good if you don't pay attention to what you were told. You need to take a photo of the bush looking slightly upward at it like Murray was doing and then again looking slightly downward at the bush like Zapruder was doing ... does that not make sense to recreate each cameras angle ... it should!

Taking photos on the same plane will only get what you have so far and that is a worthless test designed to fail. Duncan has a point about the branches blowing, but its not important in this instance.

Bill Miller

Bill

Did you miss my post right before the pictures?

I said I would snap a picture real quick to show how untrimmed the bushes are to give you guys an idea of what I was working with and to get the ok from you guys that the bush in my front yard will work

I will take the pictures tomorrow from the Zapruder and Murray angle

It is dark outside right now, so I will get all the pictures I need tomorrow

Dean

you can set aside the wind because IMO it makes no difference

Of course the wind makes a difference.

Try simulating the wind by taping some taller branch to pull them forward to the level of lower branches, then stand back at a good distance and take photographs from different angles and you'll the understand why the wind is an important factor.

Edited : Better still Dean

Watch this video and observe how taller branches fall below branches at a lower level, giving the false camera impression ( if you pause the video at specific points to show an individual frame ) that the tall branches are not as tall as the lower branches.

Duncan

I will try anything on my untrimmed bush (now that my wife sees me paying attention to it she wants it trimmed, I told her that I was not Emmit Hudson and laughed, she looked at me like I was crazy and walked off)

I will do anything anyone wants me to do

Any suggestions? Craig, Bill, Duncan, Todd?