Will Emaus
-
Posts
100 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Will Emaus
-
-
Interesting point, Will. It makes me ponder on what free will is and whether anyone then could have been acing on free will from Pilate to Peter everyone seemed to in a way have avoided a free will because of their natures so I suppose that may be something to do with what the crucifixion was about, setting people free?
That's true John, I think it speaks quite a bit towards what is perceived as the power of temptation. Jesus' prediction of Peter's denial was essentially an order to put Peter in the position of denying three times; obviously He was pretty confident as to what the outcome of that would be.
Temptation to sin is met with the resistance of free will, temptation to create is embraced...
Will, I'm not clear about what you mean with the last sentence. Could you elaborate please?
''Jesus' prediction of Peter's denial was essentially an* order to put Peter in the position of denying three times; obviously He was pretty confident as to what the outcome of that would be.''
*Do you mean : in
On an other matter, derived from discussions elsewhere, Do you see an incompatibility with stating one is a Christian and a rejection of even part of the New Testament?
John,
When one is confronted with the urge to steal a piece of candy, they filter that urge through their own sense of right and wrong. When confronted with an urge to respond to a statement with a funny one-liner or to create a work of art or music or a particular lyric, the same person is simply grateful for the inspiration or possibly refers to it as a muse.
The problem is, it's possibly the same internal agent at work as the one telling you to steal the piece of candy. This is how I believe you achieve certain synchronicities in music in which the artist has no awareness of how they are contributing to a spiritual objective. Embracing "random", which Dylan and the Beatles were doing (derived in part from the Beats and Joyce), is intentionally opening the door for this. I question just how the Beatles could have achieved the complexity of the Sgt. Pepper cover while seemingly having lacked the capacity to make a deeper movie than Magical Mystery Tour only 6 months later...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfKr1fhvr7Q&feature=player_embedded
This particular clue illustrates, the 2007 Paul McCartney song Gratitude states in reverse I was Willie Campbell and Who is this now? The problem is that the name William Campbell was invented on the campus of the University of Michigan by Fred LaBour in October of 1969 for his article in the Michigan Daily. He has stated repeatedly that he didn't derive the name from any Beatles related information, he simply made the name up.
So, to insert a name into a song as if it's a Paul is dead clue using a name that was absolutely fictional and had nothing to do with the Beatles isn't particularly clever or smart; it basically suggests that a number of the Paul clues were being placed intentionally. However there are also a myriad of clues like the mirrored drum in Sgt. Pepper that states IOneI X He Die, that are taken to be Paul clues but almost certainly could not have been intended by the band.
As far as Peter, I meant an. The interplay between angels and demons suggests that if Jesus were simply peering into a crystal ball by stating that Peter would deny Jesus three times, that demons would then assert their will to prevent Peter from being given the opportunity to deny in order to discredit Christ. The fact that they didn't suggests to me that in fact Jesus proclamation wasn't a matter of seeing into the future but rather His ability to see the condition of Peter's heart that he would deny given the opportunity, and then an order to place Peter in the position to deny three times.
In other words, either angels or demons (or both) had to manipulate those around Peter to make it happen and were in fact being told by Jesus to do so.
The third one is tough, I hate to come off like I have all of the answers because I'm really just trying to define what I believe is a system at work and I've been working on a book on all of this for awhile now; I personally think that Scripture is a work of faith and maybe it would be different if God and Jesus dictated everything in the Bible Themselves; but no I don't think if you reject some of the words and interpretations of men that you can't call yourself a Christian.
Men also dictated which books went in and which ones didn't, and given that their interpretations of scripture allowed for atrocities to occur during their watch I can't see how their choices could be regarded as infallible.
What do you think?
-
Interesting point, Will. It makes me ponder on what free will is and whether anyone then could have been acing on free will from Pilate to Peter everyone seemed to in a way have avoided a free will because of their natures so I suppose that may be something to do with what the crucifixion was about, setting people free?
That's true John, I think it speaks quite a bit towards what is perceived as the power of temptation. Jesus' prediction of Peter's denial was essentially an order to put Peter in the position of denying three times; obviously He was pretty confident as to what the outcome of that would be.
Temptation to sin is met with the resistance of free will, temptation to create is embraced...
-
Former Weezer bassist Mikey Welsh's tweet from September 26th. http://twitter.com/#!/MikeyWelsh71/statuses/118305899923259392
He died over the weekend in Chicago.
-
Hmmm...
I don't get this bit : "Free will is the most significant barrier to that, as it was to Judas and the betrayal.".
I don't know who visited S.O. Does it matter what timezone any event occurs? Does it matter if names are misspelled or changed through the various ways that names can change?
edit typo
Based on this, you could wonder if an assassin of JFK would be encoded backwards into a Bob Dylan song for instance, but its free will to resist temptation that gets in the way of anyone "chosen" to do something. Judas could have said no to betraying Jesus, then what? Prophecy still is what it is, the crucifixion still needed to happen.
Some would argue John Lennon to be December 9th. Norma Jean Baker or Marilyn Monroe could be significant, I think it's what is commonly accepted, although it's also possible that some piece of information has been deliberately hidden for a certain amount of time via a name change or such. 666 or 616 is a pretty substantial difference...
-
Ok, I might have an opportunity to dig out my interlinear and king james and get back to that later.
I'd be interested in what you make of K and O (JFK and LHO)
Sounds good John. K and O don't mean anything to me except the time of your post (11 and 15), maybe someone else would see a significance to a Bible verse somewhere perhaps, I suppose Oswald could maybe relate to Shakespeare in this sort of supernatural sense but its all a guess and I try to stay with the strongest links, although I'll speculate about pretty much anything.
I do believe that some people sort of got "picked" simply because something about them or their name or whatever makes their inclusion a method of communicating. I guess I'm saying if you have 7 billion people to choose from in order to carry something out, you would most likely tend to pick out people who have some characteristic that sends a message in some way. Free will is the most significant barrier to that, as it was to Judas and the betrayal.
I don't know that Bob Woodward's name or initials mean anything for instance, but the fact that he was living in apartment #617 when Watergate happened is significant to me.
I think it's strange that Sylvia Odio is visited by three people in September of '63, two of them are LH (Loran Hall and Lawrence Howard) and one is LHO(Oswald). Why? Not sure.
-
John,
I use King James, I tend to like to use a NIV plain english in communicating though as I'm not really convinced that any version has the whole thing right...
As far as who is communicating the message, this is the supernatural piece to this. People in my view are being tempted and manipulated to do certain things on certain dates in which the act or the date has meaning to an entity, God or Satan, Angels or Demons in any combination not prohibited elsewhere in scripture
(God doesn't lie for example, so Paul is Dead didn't come from God).
This isn't to take a moralist stance about Rock or anything else, but you have to use scripture to identify and define the system that is at work.
I'm pretty sure you know what I'm saying, but in case someone else reads this and doesn't, the reason why CS Lewis and Aldous Huxley would die on 11/22/63 along with JFK is to spotlight the letters L and H (sorry to go Sesame Street) because the letters L and H are the 12th and 8th letters of the alphabet.
So hypothetically (because I haven't sat down for coffee with God or Satan lately), you have two very famous people dying simply to communicate a "signature", saying something to the effect that "I caused this". Whether it was actually caused by Lee Harvey Oswald, or a conspiracy or both, something is behind them making sure it is understood that there is a supernatural component to these events that relates to a much larger agenda.
This isn't to imply God caused it, God allowed it would probably be more accurate.
We tend to see military intelligence as having all of this complexity, that MKUltra would have this sort of sophistication, but don't really seem to realize who in fact probably taught them and how much more complex the actual spiritual realm is capable of functioning.
If you consider Revolution Number 9 as a work of temptation, it is staggering...
-
Will, I wonder, does Numerology have a place in your scheme of things?
Hi John,
I think certain things have a pattern by design, but here I think it was purely a matter of temptation
to communicate rather than something that is based on a structure,so to speak. It seems very dynamic, as if there is a genuine will involved, meaning the number has no power in this; whoever wants a number highlighted is doing so to communicate a message.
I think the principle of how you get this sort of precognition is the coupling of Romans 9:22 which talks about God creating Objects of Wrath and Destruction; and James 1:13 which states that it is impossible for God to have anything to do with sin, including tempting it. Meaning that demonic spirit activity is required to carry out this task, and the foreknowledge comes as a result.
John and Yoko lived off of numerology, and yet clearly got entrapped if you watch the Attica State clip. Its almost inexplicable to me that she wanted to live in the Dakota after the Manson -> Polanski coincidences, like a lot of these artists believed they had a certain control and then found out differently...
-
Yoko's Kiss Kiss Kiss, stating I shot John Lennon in reverse, released weeks before his death.
-
...and more.
Revolution Number 9 ended with the chant "Hold that line, block that kick". 39 years to the day after the United States entered WWII after Pearl Harbor, Hawaii resident Mark David Chapman shot John Lennon.
An ABC news correspondent happened to be at Roosevelt Hospital when John Lennon was brought in, allowing for ABC to jump everyone else on the story of Lennon's death which was fed to Howard Cosell just in time for him to announce it live on the Monday Night Football broadcast of December 8th 1980 with 0:03 seconds remaining in a game tied 13-13 as John Smith was lining up to kick a field goal.
-
Why would John Lennon foreshadow his own death?
Much like Dark Side of the Moon and the Wizard of Oz, Revolution Number 9 syncs up perfectly
with the third verse of Hotel California. Listen to the placement of the "shhhs" with HC.
"Stab it with their steely knives but they just can't kill the beast" turned backwards is "John Lennon
by himself".
Hotel California was released on December 8th 1976, 9 years to the day after Magical Mystery Tour
and it's poster proclaiming "The Best Way to Go is by MDC".
Hotel California came 4 years to the day before John Lennon's death. How could they have intended this?
...and at 5:55 in the Attica State clip where Yoko declares that prisoners need freedom as an audience member objects and asks what she would say if an Attica prisoner killed one of her family members while a guy who looks quite similar to how Mark David Chapman will look 9 years in the future listens on next to her.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvjqC2oFLcQ&feature=player_embedded
The Attica riot happened on September 9th 1971, the same date that John Lennon released Imagine.
What conspiracy could get someone to foreshadow their own death?
-
I'm probably talking to myself at this point, but that's OK.
Look at the conspiracies, take a step back and look objectively.
Chappaquiddick kept a 3rd Kennedy from the White House, but who caused it?
A human group? Honestly? Every component of a conspiracy is there, except another human
being to cause it.
Solve that riddle...
A human conspiracy can be a component of a supernatural one; BMI vs. Ascap/Payola was a component of the "day the music died". But Little Richard? Elvis? Jerry Lee Lewis? All "naturally" occurring...
This isn't to go David Icke (unless you want to talk about theosophy and the Isle of Wight)
or little green men, 43% of the United States goes to Church every Sunday and puts their faith in something
much less plausible.
"There's something happening here, and you don't know what it is..."
CS Lewis, Aldous Huxley on 11/22/63. L and H. Ordinal position, 12th and 8th letters of the alphabet. The US entry into WWII (12/8). Jim Morrison, Admiral George Morrison's son (born on 12/8). Magical Mystery Tour and "The best way to go is by MDC (12/8). Dorothy Hunt plane crash (12/8). John Lennon (12/8) etc...
Someone is trying to tell you something...
-
For the past year-and-a-half, I've been working on an idea that there could be a supernatural component to conspiracy theory and pop culture, primarily through the work of the Beatles.
I came to the conclusion while starting to look at the assassination of JFK for myself; an independent tip that I should take a look at the early deaths in rock started me on a path of positing that the possible supernatural component in rock and the corresponding synchronicity between pop culture and political conspiracy may be in fact related to each other.
This is what I've come up with. (See page 7)
I don't necessarily expect everyone to take my premise seriously, although I believe its what is happening. My reason for posting is that the "coincidences" relating to December 8th are strong enough I think to look at not only for the possibility of a supernatural component to conspiracy, but an occult/secret society involvement also.
To quote Bob Dylan in late '63, there's no black and white, left and right to me anymore. There's only up and down.
Take a look, let me know what you think... -
Gary Mack notes to Chris:
I saw your Zapruder camera reply on the Ed Forum and noticed a problem. The 16fps speed was factory set when that model camera was first introduced but, as Rollie Zavada explained in his report to the ARRB, the camera industry switched to 18fps in the early 60s. Zapruder’s camera, based on all the test results, was obviously built after the change over and was machined for the faster speed; as such, it operated normally at the time of the assassination. Marcel’s manual must be from an early camera manufacturing period: http://www.copweb.be/UsersManual/b&h-17.jpg As far as LIFE having access to Zapruder’s camera, I don’t of any evidence for that.
Gary Mack
I understand the point in general but I don't think it addresses Life getting fps information before November 28th.
"...and from the movie camera's known speed of 18 frames a second -- two frames a second faster than it should have run"
It's pretty clear from that quote in Mandel's article that Life believed the camera should have run at 16fps also; so it stands to reason that they did in fact either test Zapruder's camera themselves (just reload it and film a clock to get "18") or talked to someone else who had, by November 28th.
The above quote would make absolutely no sense if Life thought the camera should have run at 18fps.
Also note that whoever did the NPIC notes also were positing a possible 16fps scenario in their timing analysis
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=8
That doesn't make much sense either if these notes were created after the FBI published 18.3fps on December 20th.
Will
-
Will:
The dates on which the various camera speeds and individual frame numbers were known is as follows, to the best of my knowledge:
Zapruder told FBI Agent R.M. Barrett on December 4, 1963 that the Secret Service had access to his camera on the previous day for some unspecified “checking”, and Zapruder handed the camera over to Barrett on December 4. The camera had three standard speeds – animation (single frame), run (16 frames per second), and slow motion (48 frames per second).
We know that after Barrett got the camera on December 4, it went to the FBI lab for testing. On December 20, the lab reported that the “normal run speed” of the camera was actually 18.3 fps. The Warren Commission subsequently requested a more detailed study of the camera speed, which the FBI provided on February 3, 1964. That study showed that the fully wound camera (Zapruder said his camera was fully wound) ran at an average of 18.0 to 18.1 fps for the first 10 seconds, it gradually increased to 18.3 to 18.5 fps for the next 20 seconds, then gradually decreased to 18.1 fps for 10 seconds before the final 20 seconds, which ran at an average speed of 17.6 to 17.9 fps.
On January 27, the FBI began their examination of the film itself, using a second-generation copy. By January 30, FBI agent Lyndal Shaneyfelt had assigned frame numbers to the individual frames of the film.
In summary, then, the camera speed was naturally assumed to be the factory setting of 16 fps until December 20, 1963 when the FBI reported it to be 18.3 fps. More detailed/precise speeds were known by February 3, 1964, and the individual frame numbers were assigned January 27-30, 1964.
I cannot find any reference whatsoever to the camera being in the possession of Life at any point, so I don’t know where they could have heard the 18 fps speed before mid-December, at the earliest (remember, the standard camera setting was 16 fps).
Interesting.....
Chris.
Thanks Chris, I thought maybe it was just something I hadn't read about but it's pretty definite in my mind that Mandel's article had to be done by the 28th; and that's only because the Life production cycle was delayed by a day due to the late breaking information...it normally would probably be due a full 9 days before the date on the issue (November 27th).
Someone from Life could verify that but I'm sure they would use the 9th day for proofing before it hit the press on the evening of the 28th.
What I was wondering by asking was whether Life could have gotten the information over the weekend and in time for the Sunday night session with Homer...they certainly had the opportunity as early as the 23rd.
Will
-
So now, the consensus is that there were three Z film events at the NPIC, two during the weekend of the assassination and one after the publication of the Life Mag?
Also, does anyone have the reports on Horne's second interview with Hunter and McMahon?
Thanks,
BK
Bill, I was looking through the timelines and see a reference to when the FBI determined 18.3fps using Zapruder's camera (December 4th) but I don't see anything relating to when Life had Zapruder's camera.
http://books.google.com/books?id=T1IEAAAAM...;q=&f=false
The Life production cycle starts roughly a week before the date on the issue, so Paul Mandel's article in the December 6th issue of Life had to be completed by November 28th, and yet they already have 18fps in this article...so when did they have Zapruder's camera to determine 18fps?
Knowing when would help narrow down when the first opportunity was for the NPIC folks to have used Life's information...
it doesn't have to be when the magazine hits the streets, they could have gotten it directly from Life's staff.
-
Addendum to comment on Zapruder film
This is my retyping of a document that apparently accompanied the release of the yellow legal pads and remaining NPIC briefing boards to the Church Committee and/or ARRB.
What does anybody make of it?
Are they talking about either of the two Z-film jobs done at NPIC on the weekend of the assassination? Sounds like the first one - with Brugioni to me.
And if this is page 14 - what is a part of where's the rest of it?
Thanks to Chris Scally for this one.
BK
P. 14
Addendum to comment on Zapruder film:
In late 1963, the Secret Service brought a copy of the Zapruder film to Director McCone and asked to have the film analyzed technically, particularly with regard to anything
That could be learned from the film concerning elapsed time between rifle shots.
A laboratory at the National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC) was made available for the analysis late that same night. The film was analyzed in individual stop frames, and two sets of four briefing boards each were prepared by NPIC. Because the film had been taken in a spring-powered movie camera, it was not possible to determine precise time between shots without access to the camera to time the rate of spring run-down. We assume the Secret Service informed the Warren Commission about anything of value resulting from our technical analysis of the film, but we have no direct knowledge that they did so.
Secret Service representatives were present during the process of analysis and took the film and one set of briefing boards away with them that night. Mr. McCone retained one set of boards. The set was controlled carefully; very few people saw it. It was retired to a CIA records storage facility subsequently. This set has been recalled from storage and can be made available if required.
Blacked out square at the bottom middle of the page.
Bill, this seems pretty similar to Brugioni's account...
DB-He also said that the Secret Service was vitally interested in timing how many seconds occurred between various frames, and that Ralph Pearse informed them, to their surprise and dismay, that this would be a useless procedure because the Bell and Howell movie camera (that they told him had taken the movie) was a spring-wound camera, with a constantly varying operating speed, and that while he could certainly time the number of seconds between various frames if they so desired, that in his view it was an unscientific and useless procedure which would provide bad data, and lead to false conclusions, or words to that effect. Nevertheless, at the request of the two Secret Service agents, Ralph Pearse dutifully used a stopwatch to time the number of seconds between various frames of interest to their Secret Service customers.
I agree Will,
But why do they say "late 1963"? and "late that same night"?
Brugioni's event took place on the weekend of the assassination, probably on Saturday, as Zapruder delievered the SS copy to a jet at the Grand Prarie Naval Air Station at 10 PM Friday night, so it was in DC by midnight.
Lundahl briefed McCone on their analysis of the Z-film with the briefing boards early the next day. But when McCone went to brief LBJ, who was with McGeorge Bundy in the Situation Room, LBJ didn't want to be briefed and waved him off. There was nothing McCone could tell LBJ at that point that he needed to know. Especially the fact that the Zapruder film indicated there were two shooters and thus a conspiracy.
So when RFK crosses paths with McCone, after already accusing McCone's Cuban boys of being behind the murder, he looks McCone in the eye and asks for an honest report, and McCone tells him there were two shooters, based on Lundahl's analysis and briefing.
That's how and why RFK told Arthur Schlesinger that the FBI said there was no conspiracy, but the "CIA said there were two shooters."
That's what I believe was the conclusion of Lundahl's briefing - that the Z film indicates two shooters, and McCone was not given the opportunity to pass that on to LBJ, who didn't want to hear it.
BK
Bill, agreed...but then where this gets strange (to me anyways) is that Homer McMahon recognized his own handwriting on this page of the notes - http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...mp;relPageId=10
He said in the transcript that the processing information is in his handwriting, and then beneath that there are calculations on this page that correlate with the calculations made on previous pages relating to shot timing.
I thought that Brugioni said that the existing briefing boards themselves didn't match the ones he helped prepare and that in his session the boards only contained two frames per board. The earlier pages of the handwritten notes clearly describe more than two frames per board. That gives me the impression that the description in the addendum is referring to Brugioni's session but the notes themselves may be from McMahon's.
Thoughts?
Will
-
Addendum to comment on Zapruder film
This is my retyping of a document that apparently accompanied the release of the yellow legal pads and remaining NPIC briefing boards to the Church Committee and/or ARRB.
What does anybody make of it?
Are they talking about either of the two Z-film jobs done at NPIC on the weekend of the assassination? Sounds like the first one - with Brugioni to me.
And if this is page 14 - what is a part of where's the rest of it?
Thanks to Chris Scally for this one.
BK
P. 14
Addendum to comment on Zapruder film:
In late 1963, the Secret Service brought a copy of the Zapruder film to Director McCone and asked to have the film analyzed technically, particularly with regard to anything
That could be learned from the film concerning elapsed time between rifle shots.
A laboratory at the National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC) was made available for the analysis late that some night. The film was analyzed in individual stop frames, and two sets of four briefing boards each were prepared by NPIC. Because the film had been taken in a spring-powered movie camera, it was not possible to determine precise time between shots without access to the camera to time the rate of spring run-down. We assume the Secret Service informed the Warren Commission about anything of value resulting from our technical analysis of the film, but we have no direct knowledge that they did so.
Secret Service representatives were present during the process of analysis and took the film and one set of briefing boards away with them that night. Mr. McCone retained one set of boards. The set was controlled carefully; very few people saw it. It was retired to a CIA records storage facility subsequently. This set has been recalled from storage and can be made available if required.
Blacked out square at the bottom middle of the page.
Bill, this seems pretty similar to Brugioni's account...
DB-He also said that the Secret Service was vitally interested in timing how many seconds occurred between various frames, and that Ralph Pearse informed them, to their surprise and dismay, that this would be a useless procedure because the Bell and Howell movie camera (that they told him had taken the movie) was a spring-wound camera, with a constantly varying operating speed, and that while he could certainly time the number of seconds between various frames if they so desired, that in his view it was an unscientific and useless procedure which would provide bad data, and lead to false conclusions, or words to that effect. Nevertheless, at the request of the two Secret Service agents, Ralph Pearse dutifully used a stopwatch to time the number of seconds between various frames of interest to their Secret Service customers.
-
Since the NPIC yellow legal pad notes include references to Life Mag., I'd like to know why they used Life as a source when they had the original film?
BK
Well either the Life portion of the notes came after the NPIC weekend sessions or they had Life's information much earlier than when the article was submitted. Or like Paul said, someone could have fed Life the information and then it came back to the NPIC through Life afterwards.
The best reason for them to have used Life's timings would have been to save time themselves I would imagine...
-
If I remember correctly (not guaranteed) it was Shaneyfelt of the FBI who claimed
to have numbered the film with the numbers now assigned to frames.
The Hawkeye works numbers would be earlier than the FBI numbers.
Jack
Jack, did Shaneyfelt do that for the May '64 reconstruction or did he do it earlier?
EDIT-Based on this thread it looks like January of '64 - http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...mbers&st=15
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=7
http://books.google.com/books?id=T1IEAAAAM...;q=&f=false
It's apparent that whoever wrote the notes used 312 as a starting point and worked backwards based on Life's timings to get the other frame numbers...
-
Thanks Will,
I wonder how they got the references from Life Magazine if the issue wasn't on the street yet?
Were they talking to them? Did they get the original film from Life?
Has anybody bothered to figure out if these stats are correct?
BK
Bill,
The numbers refer to the Paul Mandel article in the Memorial Edition of LIFE (a week and a half after the assassination), which is one of the most curious pieces of evidence that we have.
Horne makes the argument (and this is one thing that I do agree with him on) that researchers have been mightily confused by assuming that these "as in LIFE" notes are somehow attached to the NPIC event(s) of the first weekend. In my opinion, if they represent anything genuine at all, they represent someone looking at the extant Zapruder film some time after the Memorial Edition of life, trying to figure out how the hell anyone came to those results. (Of course, they make no sense at all because they refer to a different film -- the extant film has nothing at all at those frame numbers that could possibly lead to Mandel's description.)
John
I'm definitely one of the people very confused by this...
Mandel's article would have been completed by probably November 28th, it would have been on the streets on roughly December 3rd.
The briefing boards referenced by Doug Horne in the transcript to this interview are dated November 23rd.
Do the board frames used match the frames referenced in the notes?
There's 3 interesting things about the frames referenced in the notes imho-
1. Mandel's JFK first shot "head turn" most likely was referencing frame 188 where JFK does turn to an extent. It's obvious now that his turn was nowhere near enough to justify an entry wound. Life uses 190 as the first shot. The notes have 188 listed as a frame to use in the boards.
2. The frames referenced in the notes also skip from 206 to 213, they just so happen to skip right over the second splice in the original film. Obviously that was never mentioned in Paul Mandel's article...
3. There are calculations on the same page of the notes that Homer McMahon took credit for, that correspond with the calculations that are on the other pages.
Is anyone really sure that most of the notes came after the first weekend, or is that an assumption because it matches Paul Mandel's article in the December 6th Life issue?
-
I also want to add links to the yellow legal pad notes that the CIA/NPIC turned over to the Church Committee and to photos of the surviving briefing boards, if anyone has the links. B?
BK
Bill, here are the legal pad notes...
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=1
-
• It seems apparent that Wainwright was simply incorrect—off by one day—in regard to when the activity at the Chicago printing plant took place. (If Cartha DeLoach can be off by one day in his memoirs, so can Loudon Wainwright, who after all, was writing about events [/font]
Bill, Doug Horne needs to realize that there were also 10,000 potential witnesses in the RR Donnelley complex that could attest to production having started on Saturday night, not Sunday.
http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/e/webexhibits/...ingMoments.html
In fairness though, he obviously did a lot of thinking about the likely scenarios to go along with the NPIC sessions; one possibility that doesn't rule out altered stills showing up on Sunday is the fact that the presses did shut down again Sunday afternoon after Oswald died. If new stills happened to get inserted on Sunday evening when the Ruby -> Oswald material was inserted then it could have happened as something resembling his assertion...
I was all set to write something of a refutation to the timing portion of this, but to be honest the Sunday-Oswald scenario is a legit option so I don't think the door is closed on Doug's theory and the fact that no one from Life has apparently ever bothered to explain what happened to the film beyond Saturday night keeps this possibility on the table.
Understand though that everyone being "off by a day" isn't really much of an option. There are many people from RRD that took their little piece of history seriously and kept bedsheets and/or timecards from that weekend; there stands a pretty good chance that hardcopy proof still exists today of the start to production of the November 29th Life issue vs. relying on simple recollections.
-
Thinking about it, didn't Life's original print agreement preclude any showing of the film for 7 days, starting on the 23rd?
I'm pretty sure all the various elements of the Zap/Time-Life agreements, the above included, were retrospectively "tweaked" to conform to the agreed lie we are today familiar with. Lifton's Pig on a Leash, full of prudent and productive scepticism in general, is richly suggestive on this subject.
Paul
Well hopefully what he's found is from the 25th, any possible legalities would be for CBS to worry about...
-
If true - and I stress the "if" for the very good reason I haven't yet seen the kinescope in question - then the Rather narrative contained within Four Days in November is a retrospective fiction: The film, as a film, was not yet owned by Time-Life on the evening of November 25.
Paul
Thinking about it, didn't Life's original print agreement preclude any showing of the film for 7 days, starting on the 23rd?
The Beatles, Conspiracy and the Supernatural
in Music:Resources
Posted · Edited by Will Emaus
Yeah you're right John, I think I see it as a war too.
I happened to read a bit of Janov while researching John Lennon, and I think this illustrates the issue.
So John's impression while in Janov's care is God is a concept by which we measure our pain. God was written to renounce any belief outside of himself, except when you turn the song around backwards it immediately says The devil is in me.
John Lennon and George Martin created backwards lyrics in Rock for the song Rain, but in this case either he intended to renounce God while acknowledging Satan or he missed this entirely.
There is faith-based psychotherapy as well as what Janov believes; the question is how do you reconcile the coordination of what happens on the outside with what happens on the inside? If you told Jonah that he really was making up God's pursuit of him, he would possibly agree with the assessment of his mind but then point out that what was happening on the outside was quite real and that there were witnesses as well.
I don't question Manson's psychosis, I question how his followers happened to pick out Sharon Tate and Rosemary LaBianca at random coupled with Manson's psychosis, i.e. the condition is being used to achieve a spiritual purpose.
Mark David Chapman just so happened to try and commit suicide on June 20th 1977, 9 years to the day after John Lennon laid down the tracks to Revolution Number 9. That doesn't mean that I believe that his Lila and Dobar demons were real, I would bet they were quite made up, but was he being manipulated nonetheless?
I think he was, yes...standing in front of the Dakota ruminating about The Beatles and Manson and Rosemary's Baby is one thing; Mia Farrow happening to walk past you while you are ruminating is another...