Dean Hagerman
-
Posts
1,402 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Dean Hagerman
-
-
You really think you can make out anything in that area of the image? Or are you just taking Jack's word for it? There isn’t nearly enough detail to make such a determination. The man seems to be holding up something to his face but it could Just as well could be something he is eating or drinking or him scratching his nose or it could be an artifact. In any case the perspective from his vantage point doesn’t match that of the Z-film.
What exactly would be the point of taking two films and claiming one was the other?
Why does the second cameraman (TSCM) appear in any other images?
How could the plotters count on TSCM not being noticed or clearly filmed/photographed by someone?
Len good questions
I am not taking Jacks word for it, but I give Jack credit for the find, I first saw it in TGZFH, then I got out my copy of Life (I think it was in a 1966 edition) with the Betzner photo in it, I looked very closly at TSCM and also the Tri-Pod film location inside the Pergola (I will post a blow up of that, I just need to find it on my computer)
I also talked to Jack about it on another JFK forum, and you even say it seems like a man, I would say it is because when you look at Zappy and Sitz they have the same clarity as TSCM.
You avoided my point about the degree of detail, do really think there is enough to reach the conclusion Jack did. That the blob probably was a person proves nothing.
IMO the point of two films is that it makes it easier to fake the film that Life bought, if Zappy takes a film of the background and bystanders and TSCM takes the real film of the assassination then all that has to be done is add the two together and take out whatever is needed (the wide limo turn/the car stop/the head shot/the blood spray/Cheany riding ahead/Moorman in the street/DCM walking into the street) put the two films together as one
Shall I take it your photo/video/film etc experience is very limited? Films taken from such different positions would not have lined upcorrectly. It would have been easier to alter what happened in the target car and copied it back into the same film.
"and take out whatever is needed (the wide limo turn.../the blood spray/Cheany riding ahead/Moorman in the street/DCM walking into the street"
And why would they want to remove any of this? There is a thread about the blood splatter "error" .It was yet another mistake by the TGZFH crowd.Costella couldn't figure out the splatterwould be accelerated by the bullet
Len
From what I see TSCM is just as clear as Zappy and Sitz IMO
If you think that my photo/film/video experience is limited thats fine, its not, but I will have to prove that to you over time
-
Duncan,
All that other stuff aside I have a couple questions for you
You say that you discovered the Tri-Pod in Betzner, thats fine by me I believe you.
There's no need for anyone to doubt me Dean, my name is in the book index, they just got it wrong in the article.
After pointing out the mistake, Costella later claimed on this very forum that he couldn't remember who discovered it, despite numerous back and forth correspondances between us at the time that he was doing his signal to noise ratio analysis on it based on my analysis.... huh?
Did you first spot the image in the Life Mag issue from I think 1966 (Im sorry I have that issue but its in my basement and I have not dug it out after I moved back home to California so I might be wrong on the year but I know I have the issue that the Betzner photo was first published) and if so was that image you used for your study of Betzner?
It wasn't the life magazine image that I used, it was a scan which was sent to me by a fellow researcher.
Does it seem odd to you that all later generation copies of Betzner do not have the Tri-Pod image in them?
That's not true, many later generation copies show the same anomoly.
Were you looking for a second camera man or camera location when you spotted the Tri-Pod? Or did you just come across it while looking at the picture?
I was looking for anything unusual, and discovered what are now commonly known as Tripod Man and the infamous pergola tripod.....I was wrong, but many still choose to believe in my mistaken analysis.
Do you have a real copy of the Betzner picture?
No
Sorry for all the questions but Betzner, his pictures, and his locations have been a big part of my studies for the past three years.
Thanks Duncan
No problem Dean, you are very welcome
Thanks Duncan
Thank you Duncan,
As I said I believed that you did discover the Tri-pod I had just never heard your name as the one who did
One last question, when you found these images you believed in what you discovered back then, what made you change your mind?
-
Your certainty ("I'm sure") is the result of blind reliance on authority
No it isn't. I used to believe in a consipiracy. After reading numerous books on the subject I changed my mind, and now I believe that LHO killed JFK and acted alone. I used my brain, you see. I'll change it back as soon as someone comes up with some hard evidence that proves otherwise. To date there isn't any.
What books have you read that changed your mind?
"Reclaiming History" or "Case Closed" im sure will be your reply
I have some books for you to read
Lets start off with a nice easy to read book that while small it packs a big CT punch, "Cover-Up" by Stewart Galanor
When you are done with that you need to break out the big bucks for this one, "Bloody Treason" by Noel Twyman
After you have read those two books I would love to talk to you about them
Then you can move on to the three books from Fetzer starting with TGZFH
Just wondering, if TGZFH is so good, then how did Dr. John get it soooo wrong?
www.craiglamson.com/costella.htm
www.craiglamson.com/costella2.htm
And if Jack White does such a good job at 'photo analysis' how did he miss the above error and how did he make this whopper?
Craig its nice to finaly meet you
As a part of Tink's gang all you care to do is smear Jack White's name
Thats all you care about
You dont care who killed JFK, you dont care about the case as a whole, you dont care about research, and you dont care about people who have tried for most of their lives to help solve this case
I dont care what you have to say, I do care what Tink has to say because "Six Seconds In Dallas" was one of the first books I read about the assassination and I still give Tink credit for writing a great book
However Tink and his gang (that includes you) have devoted all of your time to trying to smear the researchers who I not only agree with but looked up to as a young kid trying to get a grip on the assassination
Nothing you can say to me about jack White will ever change my mind about the man or his work
If you would like to talk to me about what you know and what you think about the photgraphic evidence I would love to chat with you about it.
Dean
-
Duncan,
All that other stuff aside I have a couple questions for you
You say that you discovered the Tri-Pod in Betzner, thats fine by me I believe you
Did you first spot the image in the Life Mag issue from I think 1966 (Im sorry I have that issue but its in my basement and I have not dug it out after I moved back home to California so I might be wrong on the year but I know I have the issue that the Betzner photo was first published) and if so was that image you used for your study of Betzner?
Does it seem odd to you that all later generation copies of Betzner do not have the Tri-Pod image in them?
Were you looking for a second camera man or camera location when you spotted the Tri-Pod? Or did you just come across it while looking at the picture?
Do you have a real copy of the Betzner picture?
Sorry for all the questions but Betzner, his pictures, and his locations have been a big part of my studies for the past three years
Thanks Duncan
-
Your certainty ("I'm sure") is the result of blind reliance on authority
No it isn't. I used to believe in a consipiracy. After reading numerous books on the subject I changed my mind, and now I believe that LHO killed JFK and acted alone. I used my brain, you see. I'll change it back as soon as someone comes up with some hard evidence that proves otherwise. To date there isn't any.
What books have you read that changed your mind?
"Reclaiming History" or "Case Closed" im sure will be your reply
I have some books for you to read
Lets start off with a nice easy to read book that while small it packs a big CT punch, "Cover-Up" by Stewart Galanor
When you are done with that you need to break out the big bucks for this one, "Bloody Treason" by Noel Twyman
After you have read those two books I would love to talk to you about them
Then you can move on to the three books from Fetzer starting with TGZFH
-
OR BETTER STILL STUDY THEM FOR 46 ALMOST YEARS EARN JACKS CREDENTIAL'S THEN GET BACK TO ALL OF US INCLUDING JACK....THAT I SHALL AWAIT..
DEAN MCADAM'S
ISN'T THAT WHERE THE NEOCONS PLAY THEIR GAMES..I DO BELIEVE.THOUGH ON OCCASION THEY DO TAKE A STROLL.....TAKE CARE..BEST B 
Everytime I am directed to McAdams website by a Lone Nutter I just shake my head, its hard to believe how much BS McAdams crams into his website for all the LNers to drool over, I dislike his website so much, but no need to go on and on about it
And Bernice I agree with you 100% that Paul will never debunk or even come close to doing anything that would make me rethink any of Jack's work, what he does not understand is that not only do I think of Jack as one of the best researchers on the case but who has put in more time researching then Jack?
Not many
-
All of Jacks work has been debunked? By who? You?
Please show me all of Jacks work that you debunked
Dean, go off and search for any of Jack's "studies" in this forum. I haven't seen one yet that hasn't been debunked. Personally I haven't debunked any of them, why do I need to?
Paul,
Im sorry but all of Tink's gangs "debunking" of Jack's work means nothing to me, you might as well have posted a link to Mcadams website because its seems to me you have been taken in by these guys and believe if they say "Oh we owned Jack and Jim and David today! We debunked everything! The score is now Tink's gang-1 and Fetzer's gang-0"
If you want to believe researchers who think its a game then go right ahead, but if you want me to believe that Jacks work has been debunked (It has not) then do some work on his studies yourself and get back to me.
-
Tri-pod camera inside of the pergola
-
You really think you can make out anything in that area of the image? Or are you just taking Jack's word for it? There isn’t nearly enough detail to make such a determination. The man seems to be holding up something to his face but it could Just as well could be something he is eating or drinking or him scratching his nose or it could be an artifact. In any case the perspective from his vantage point doesn’t match that of the Z-film.
What exactly would be the point of taking two films and claiming one was the other?
Why does the second cameraman (TSCM) appear in any other images?
How could the plotters count on TSCM not being noticed or clearly filmed/photographed by someone?
Len good questions
I am not taking Jacks word for it, but I give Jack credit for the find, I first saw it in TGZFH, then I got out my copy of Life (I think it was in a 1966 edition) with the Betzner photo in it, I looked very closly at TSCM and also the Tri-Pod film location inside the Pergola (I will post a blow up of that, I just need to find it on my computer)
I also talked to Jack about it on another JFK forum, and you even say it seems like a man, I would say it is because when you look at Zappy and Sitz they have the same clarity as TSCM.
IMO the point of two films is that it makes it easier to fake the film that Life bought, if Zappy takes a film of the background and bystanders and TSCM takes the real film of the assassination then all that has to be done is add the two together and take out whatever is needed (the wide limo turn/the car stop/the head shot/the blood spray/Cheany riding ahead/Moorman in the street/DCM walking into the street) put the two films together as one
I know the "other" film has been viewed by someone who I trust and know would not make up a story about viewing it, this is where I think that "Other" film came from, TSCM's complete film showing all the things that were taken away from the Z-film we all know about and have seen millions of times.
I think Betzner is genuine and that is the reason we see TSCM in his picture, the picture taken by Phil Willis very close to the spot that Betzner was standing was altered to take out TSCM IMO
-
From Jack White's study
-
Is it a coincidence that Zapruder filmed the events in Dealey Plaza? Is it possible that De Mohrenschildt suggested to Zapruder that he filmed the events that day? De Mohrenschildt was a shrewd businessman and maybe he had agreed with Zapruder to split the profits of the deal.
Good call John
I also think that De Morenschildt told Zappy where to stand in Dealey Plaza, by standing on the pedastool almost everyone in the plaza would see him, that way another film taken close to Zappy's position would not questioned by anybody.
In other words Zappy was a distraction to the person taking the real film (as seen in Betzner)
-
I worked for a company that had around 180 employees in the same building and I knew every single person by first and last name.
For Gary to say they probably didnt know each other after 7 years of working for the same company is crazy
-
Darkening the back of JFK's head to mask the rear exit wound blowout. Sanitizing the view by reducing number of frames in which blood spray appears, making temporal wound seem an exit wound. Painting in an overlarge temporal wound skull flap to disguise frontal entrance. Making the timing of the shots harder to establish. Masking wounding of JFK with overlarge Stemmons Freeway sign, now undamaged by rifle fire miss.
Two important questions to consider:
1. Why did 'they' leave the apparent rearward headsnap in, which gave fuel to the conspiracy fire when the film was first shown on American TV in 1975?
2. How did 'they' ensure that the altered Zapruder film was consistent with the entire photographic record of events in Dealey Plaza on that fateful day? (Please spare us any reference to any of Jack White's 'studies', all of which have been debunked).
I'd be interested to read sensible answers.
Paul.
All of Jacks work has been debunked? By who? You?
Please show me all of Jacks work that you debunked
-
Two HUGE facts to remember:
NO witness can say with 100% certainty that Oswald carried THAT rifle into the TSBD on Friday, November 22, 1963, or on any other day.
NO witness can place Oswald in ANY 6th floor window with ANY rifle at the time the fatal shots were fired.
I don't think you can distill all the evidence that points firmly at LHO into these two "huge" facts. If this was all that was presented to a jury, they may well have found him not guilty. As it is, there are numerous other pieces of evidence which prove that LHO killed JFK, and did so on his own.
my goodness, a young lone nutter - how quaint.... So, one and ALL, hear this now: the SBT/WCR/LHO did it all by his lonesome nuttter-xxxxx legacy will live for another 90 days. Cheers.... LMFAO!I wonder how consipracy theorists feel about having a moron like Healy in their camp. He seems to spend all of his time LMFAO-ing, like some drug-crazed monkey.
I feel great having David Healy in my "camp" his research is outstanding, have you read TGZFH Paul?
If not then read it ASAP
-
And why Dealey Plaza? Of all the places an assassin could get to JFK, Dealey Plaza hardly seems like a assassin friendly shooting range.....
Why Dealey Plaza? Simple. The opportunistic assassin just happened to work there. If the motorcade hadn't passed the TSBD on 22 November 1963, JFK might still be alive today.
It must have been real hard to get off three shots from the 2nd floor lunchroom
-
I have just finished reading this amazing book
Anyone who has wanted to know about Tom Wilson's work needs to get this book ASAP
Like Jack said it has tons of pictures and most of Tom's work is explained in detail with pictures
I myself have been waiting for 10+ years to see Tom's work published, and all I can say is that this book has made it worth the wait
This is a must have for any serious JFK researchers library
-
No problem Bernice
Nice to hear from you
-
The head-on shot on Houston would have prevented the limo from entering the true kill zone, where David Ferrie's vaunted "triangulation of fire" would be in effect, and the combination of multiple silenced and unsilenced weapons would insure confusion over shot direction, down to conflicting witness testimony.
Maybe a useful question is, why would triangulation and multiple shooters be necessary, if it was all to be pinned on one man with a matchable "pristine bullet?" To provide options for explanation? To guarantee total confusion? If the latter, it surely succeeded.
What David just said was real close to what I was going to post, that is the way I see it
-
I see some of Tinks friends post here so I thought I would post a plat Cutler did for "Six Seconds In Dallas" as an example
-
I own two of Robert Cutlers amazing books about TUM and DCM/TA
His book "The Umbrella Man" is one of my favorites, and the other one I own is "Seventy Six Seconds in Dealey Plaza"
Both books have tons of research on both The Umbrella Man and The Dark Complected Man
I have scanned most of Cutlers plats from both books, im sure most of you guys know about Cutlers plats and have used them as I have for you own research.
I have posted a number of scans and parts of both books on JFKresearch.com for members who can not find or not afford (all of Cutlers books are rare and OOP and if you can find them you will have to pay and arm and a leg) any of Cutlers work
I am willing to do that here as well, if anyone has anything they want to see or need as far as plats go please let me know and I will post them up
Dean
-
Thanks for listing those books
Of the books you listed I have read/own
The Last Investigation (Fonzi)
The Hidden History (Talbot)
JFK and the Unspeakable Douglas)
JFK Assassination Debates (Kurtz)
A Farewell to Justice (Joan Mellen)
I really want to read/buy Larry Hancock's book as well as Dick Russell's
I am always adding to my library and am willing to read any book on the JFK case, right now I am reading (for the second time, only very slowly this time) "A Deeper, Darker Truth" by Don Philips
I like this book, I have been waiting to see Tom Wilson's work be published for the last 15 years
If anyone was at all interested in Wilson's work pick this book up
-
I bought RH the day it came out and read it in record time
I think Bugliosi has a way with words, that is because he has been a lawyer for so long and has spent all that time trying to convince people of things
I must admit I was under his spell until I hit the section about David Lifton (and right before that when he talks about other conspiracy authors) and it pissed me off
Here he was talking about a researcher that I hold in the highest regard like he should be in the mental ward
I didn't even feel like finishing the book after that, but I did and when I was done it cemented my beliefs in a conspiracy ten fold
I'm glad I read RH, all Bugliosi could really do was call the real researchers names and make fun of every theory that was not Oswald acting alone
I have read your online book Vince and I was stumped just like everyone else when I heard you jumped over to the other side
I hope you have fun with the likes of David Von Pain (in the XXX) and other LNers.
-
Thank you John for allowing me to join
Alot of guys already know me and I know most of you
Just to start out here is a top 10 list of my favorite books so you guys who dont know me can get an idea of where I stand (I am an alterationist)
1. Bloody Treason (Twyman)
2. Best Evidence (Lifton)
3. Crossfire (Marrs)
4. High Treason (Groden)
5. Conspiracy (Summers)
6. The Umbrella Man (Cutler)
7. Post Mortem (Weisberg)
8. The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (Fetzer)
9. Six Seconds In Dallas (Thompson)
10. JFK: The Case For Conspiracy (Groden)
I own over 200 books on the assassination (most passed on from my grandpa) all of Penn Jones and Harold Weisbergs books (originals)
I feel very lucky to part of this forum that is full of great researchers
I cant wait to get involved
Thanks again John
-
I began researching the JFK assassination at the very young age of 9 back in 1988. My grandfather was a researcher from the day JFK was assassinated, he bought every book that came out on the case as well as mags/newspaper and other JFK related things.
He passed all of his JFK stuff down to me. The first book I read was JFK: The Case For Conspiracy by Robert Groden followed by Best Evidence by David Lifton. When I started to get into the assassination back in the late 80s three books were released that got me involved 100% they were High Treason, Crossfire and On The Trail of the Assassins. Ever since reading those books I have read just about every book written on JFK.
I am an Alterationist
ISN'T THAT WHERE THE NEOCONS PLAY THEIR GAMES..I DO BELIEVE.THOUGH ON OCCASION THEY DO TAKE A STROLL.....TAKE CARE..BEST B 
Has anyone attempted to explain....
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
Well thanks for spelling out my post for me
You seem to think im some new fool who just started following Jack White, well I followed Gary Mack back in the late 80s as well as Jack White
I have nothing bad to say about about Gary Mack, and most of his views are way different then Jack's
I have nothing bad to say about Robert Groden either, I like Groden's work and his views are different then Jack's
And like I said I like Tinks work as well, as a matter of fact the theory I have about the number of shots and the position of the shooters matches his theory in SSID almost perfectly
Yet you seem to think I only follow Jack and JFKresearch.com guys and gals
That is true that JFKresearch.com is where I belong in terms of what I believe and posting among researcher who believe in the same things that I do.
But I have my own theory and follow the work of many researchers who dont agree with Jack White
I do agree with Jack White and the TGZFH guys, but thats not my only basis for research as you clearly pointed that is what you thought of me out in your last post
So let me ask you a question, you think Jack's work on the backyard photos is wrong? Do you think the pictures are genuine?