Martin Shackelford

Yes David, from the Weigman camera position, Zapruder was backlit. ________ What? If he turned with his back towards Elm Street and faced Sitzman, perhaps. Zapruder has NO backlight in that photo, the Zapruder camera position has more than adequate KEY-SIDE light from Weigman's camera position. What you need there Craig, is a few 5K HMI's and a 2K (all 5600) rim light "behind" Zapruder and Sizman now THAT's outdoor backlight (or the sun), then we could see whose actually ON the pedestal, (despite the piss poor quality of ALL photos/film taken that day which I do find interesting in and of itself, that we mere mortals have been allowed to view) -- nobody can positively ID him, Zapruder (based on on-the-record DP photos), not that I doubt it's probably him. Nope, you are wrong David, the sun was a good 120 degrees around from the Weigman camera position, which makes it backlight. There are ample examples of this in the Weigman frames. Craig, any chance of posting the examples in the Weigman frames so that those of us not skilled in photo analysis can get a look, or suggest a link where they can be viewed..Thanks, Steve. Steve...I think you will find this illustration of interest. It shows the Weigman clear frame lightened and colorized. THERE IS NOTHING ON THE PEDESTAL. It also shows Sitzman in the very light colored dress she was wearing. Such a light dress would have photographed in sharp contrast to the dark background, regardless of the direction of lighting. Mr. Light lies when he says the pedestal was BACKLIGHTED. The sun was in the south, not the west, as any fool can plainly see. Mr. Light surely knows the difference between SIDE-lighting and BACK-lighting. Jack Here is another Wiegman which seems to show a large black box atop the pedestal. Jack Marilyn Sitzman might object to her back being described as "a big black box." I erred in saying they were off the pedestal--I was looking at the wrong figures. Craig got it right. You were nowhere near. Martin Shackelford John...I know all about PIXELIZATION creating the appearance of rectangles. That may be what is happening to cause the black box. I cannot explain it. Even without pixelization there seems to be a solid black rectangle on top. How about spending some time using your powers of enhancement to study the Wiegman film itself instead of trying to debunk me? Repeat my studies yourself and tell us what you find. Lamson says he sees Zapruder and Sitzman SITTING on the pedestal. Tell us if that is what you find. Thanks. Jack Try using a less muddy copy of the Wiegman film, Jack. Martin Shackelford Once again a "cute" headline is used to obscure the faulty nature of the "evidence" presented. Martin Shackelford

Zapruder wore a white shirt. Sitzman wore a light beige dress. Jack A white shirt UNDER a dark coat, Jack. Martin Shackelford

Jack, You got any evidence to back this assertion? What about the Muchmore film was that altered too? Unfortunately, in the White/Fetzer universe, everything that contradicts their claims is altered evidence. Martin Shackelford Steve...COMPLETE CONTROL WAS EXERCISED by the govt. All KNOWN films and photos WERE in their hands for extended periods. They had plenty of time to attempt making all of them show what was wanted. If you know of ANY evidence film not in the govt's hands, please let us know. Jack Jack, my point exactly, all KNOWN films and photo's, but how could the authorities be absolutely certain, as they had to be, that ALL Film/ photos were in their hands to ensure that they agreed with the faked Z film, the short answer? they couldn't, not without a veritable army of men to confiscate ALL camera's, if just one slips through, and shows scenes different to zapruder then the games up. At the very least they are taking a huge risk. Jack I know of no evidence of film not seen by the Gov, but that does not invalidate my point. BTW, what part do you believe Zapruder played in this if he didn't take the film, EG willing accomplice. In fact, photos published the same day were not first in the hands of the government. Also, the Muchmore film was included in a UPI newsreel before the government received a copy of the film. UPI also used the Nix film in a newsreel. Jack has to ignore many things to support his claims. Martin Shackelford Point well taken, and understood, Stephen. However, prior the Geraldo show screening -- who cared about the contents of the Z-film? Nobody but the Warren Commssion saw the extant camera original Zapruder film run after Feb '64, if that late and IF what THEY saw was the alledged camera original in the first place! Prints of prints of prints, ad nauseum are what researchers viewed/saw projected when they went to the archives for a "preview" of the film -- No side by side comparisons of ANYTHING (relating to OTHER DP films - not even in question at the time) All the pissing and moaning by "preservers of Dealey Plaza Photographic history", he-he, if they wanted to deliver a "knock out" punch to the pro-alteration camp, they know whats required... they won't, because they can't. Any, ANY attempt on their part to clean up alledged Z-film/eye witness testimony - discrepancy would create a torrent of questions, most notably bringing the SBT theory (which ALSO drags in the Moorman5 photo and early SS/FBI re-enactments) into question and THAT will NEVER happen -- best they can do is stay below the radar screen (which means have others do your posting for you) and send in pissants, in a attempt to discredit those that question the *DP photographic record 'status quo' along with 6th floor museum endorsements...* DH This is simple nonsense, David. You suggest that the film wasn't viewed between 1963 and 1975 except by the Warren Commission, but that is completely false. It was viewed by many at Time-LIFE and shown to friends of Time-LIFE personnel very quickly. A good print was available for viewing at the National Archives by end of 1964, and many researchers viewed it there--frames slides were also available for viewing, as was the FBI frame album. The film was shown repeatedly at the Clay Shaw Trial in 1969. After that, bootleg copies were widely circulated. Mark Lane showed the film in his lectures. Robert Groden began showing the film at conferences in 1973. Copies were cheaply available to anyone who wanted to view one. Penn Jones and others sold a great many of them. Robert Groden sold sets of frame slides from 132-486. Martin Shackelford Richard Hotelett: The car never stopped did it! Dan Rather: Thc car never stoppcd, it never paused. Those who argue film alteration are always very selective in their citation of Rather. They insist that his account is precisely the content of the "real" Zapruder film--and at the same time they argue that the film is altered because it doesn't show the limousine stopping--ignoring this quote from the same description. Martin Shackelford In the Wiegman frame below which shows NOBODY ON THE PEDESTAL, I have moved the man in the hardhat from the curb to the pedestal to show what a person in FULL SUNLIGHT would look like. Jack "A few seconds" is all it took, Jack, for Zapruder to step down off the pedestal. Is it your claim that Zapruder wasn't up there filming? Martin Shackelford In the Wiegman frame below which shows NOBODY ON THE PEDESTAL, I have moved the man in the hardhat from the curb to the pedestal to show what a person in FULL SUNLIGHT would look like. Jack ------------------------------------ Jack: As I remember the Pergola area, the Zapruder "pedestal" is farther to the right, and just out of that photo. _____________________ Jack has the pedestal located correctly--he is just playing games with the time factor. Martin Shackelford I am definitely in the midst of a subject I have somewhat intentionally stayed away from (Zapruder Film controversy) but didn't the History Channel show a 'unedited' version of the Zapruder film a couple of years ago? Was it the MPI Video 'Image of an Assassination?' FWIW - I think there is an incredible lack of awareness regarding CIA technology circa 1963. And it is ironic how the 'temperature goes up', when 'certain aspects of the assassination' get brought up. I still havent quite figured that out, except it appears to be related to 'rejection of very cherished perceptions.' A complete copy (no missing frames) of the Z film can be found in Robert Groden's DVD "The Assassination Films." Martin Shackelford Tink Thompson just wiped the floor with Jim Fetzer when Fetzer supported this claim on another forum. All of the photographic evidence shows Mary Moorman was standing in the grass, not the street. Martin Shackelford In Wiegman, Zapruder is just off the pedestal, a short distance to the right of it. Martin Shackelford Jack, It was always my impression that Zapruder climbed off the pedestal nearly immediately after completing his film. Wiegman, I thought, caught the pedestal later -- after A.Z. had climbed off. I also reviewed the Nix film -- seems to show A.Z. filming exactly as expected. Is your contention that Abraham Zapruder was *not* the one who shot the film? Also -- I was under the impression that the Badgeman image was the byproduct of some *extensive* photographic enhancement. Have these techniques ever been applied to the Zapruder pedestal area? Frank...your "impression" is wrong. During his very short run, Wiegman captured both the empty pedestal and the limo not yet to the underpass (see attachment). The empty pedestal frame and the underpass frame are a split second apart. Zapruder filmed the limo entering the underpass, so MUST be on the pedestal when Wiegman films while running. On Badgeman...he can be seen on the ORIGINAL, which I have copied. There was NO EXTENSIVE PHOTO ENHANCEMENT. All I did was copy the image making an OPTIMUM EXPOSURE (bracketing). The Nix film has been altered. Nobody knows who shot the Z film...but it likely was NOT Abe. Jack As must be clear to anyone, the three frames were taken at slightly different times. Add to that the fact that Wiegman shows the limo beyond the point where it passed out of Zapruder's line of sight--Jack doesn't take into account the substantially different angle from which the film was taken. By the time Wiegman panned to the pedestal, Zapruder had just stepped down from it. Martin Shackelford

Kennedy did comment that it would be easy for someone with a rifle in a building--but he also said that anyone willing to give his life to kill the President could do it. Martin Shackelford

Hard to determine the motive without knowing who the conspirators were, as the motives could vary widely. One person who seemed to have no motive, having spoken only favorably of JFK, was Lee Oswald. Martin Shackelford

It is interesting that whenever a forum provides an opportunity to discuss Judyth's account in an open manner, it is suddenly inundated with attacks posts from three sources: 1) Team McAdams, including Dave Reitzes. 2) The Della Rosa group, including Dixie and Bernice. 3) The Lancer group, including Dave Weaver. Apparently the idea that Judyth might be taken seriously far too threatening to any of them to be permitted. But I'm sure Dixie and the other "sensitive" attack artists will find my post offensive. Martin Shackelford

Judyth's book is not yet out. Also, she currently has no Internet server, so has difficulty responding in any of the forums. Martin Shackelford Anybody can you tell me how to order Judyth's book? I do'nt see any listing at Amazon.com Bill <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Question: How do people in America today view JFK? Is he seen as a hero? Is his reputation growing/declining? Why? There's no unified view, though he's generally well-regarded, I think. The conservatives appear to be very upset by that, in fact, and delight in bashing the Kennedys. This could become awkward, as California's Republican actor-governor is married to one. Fox New Network has done a lot of Kennedy-bashing. The affairs, of course, have gotten a lot of attention, and conservatives would, it seems, die before admitting that he might have been planning a withdrawal from Viet Nam. I think, however, that after a period of flux, his reputation is again growing. Martin Shackelford

Did the activities of the peace movement help the NLF (Vietcong) gain control of South Vietnam? Not really. Fighting an insurgency from within a country, when it is supported by the majority of the population, is next to impossible. The U.S. admitted in the 1950s that the majority of the Vietnamese supported Ho Chi Minh and the NLF, but used that as an argument to support the minority government, though Ho had been a U.S. ally during World War Two. It was clear to Lyndon Johnson by early 1964 that the war was unwinnable, but he lacked the imagination or the political courage to just get out. As a result, 50,000 Americans and countless Vietnamese died as the war went on for another bloody eleven years. Withouit the peace movement, the slaughter might have continued even longer. The Vietnamese won, the dominoes didn't fall, and the waste of it all became even more starkly apparent. Martin Shackelford

Question: Could JFK have done anything to stop the Bay of Pigs invasion? Yes. He could have said no. It couldn't have happened without his approval. Unfortunately, he was newly elected, and the plan had been authorized (in a better form) by President Eisenhower, an experienced military man. JFK wasn't clearly told that the plan presented to him was modified from the one approved by Eisenhower, and went ahead with it, to his later regret. He accepted full responsibility, however, and moved on from there. Martin Shackelford

Question: Was JFK aware of the plots to kill Castro? If so, did he do anything to try and stop them? John and Robert Kennedy seem to have been aware of the anti-Castro plots, and to have supported them--upset only upon learning that the CIA had become enmeshed with the Mafia in the process. They ordered this aspect stopped, but with mixed success. Martin Shackelford

Question: What were JFK’s plans for the CIA, had he been re-elected? There are many theories and claims on this. The New York quoted JFK as talking about splintering the CIA into a thousand pieces. The most likely change, however, would have been removing the CIA's paramilitary function, and transferring that to the Department of Defense, as the CIA was never very good at it. Martin Shackelford

Question: Is there any link between the assassinations of JFK, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy? This has long been a question, but no definite link has ever been established, despite being frequently theorized. An individual being in both Dallas (JFK) and Los Angeles (RFK), theories about CIA involvement in the assassinations of JFK, RFK and Malcolm X, talk about Army intelligence involvement in the JFK and King assassinations, etc. So far, however, no real evidence linking them. One of the things I always thought more than a bit of a coincidence was that King and RFK weren't killed when they came out against the Viet Nam War, but they were killed after both had come out in support of a campaign of economic justice, the Poor People's Campaign. And Malcolm X wasn't killed when he was spouting anti-white rhetoric, but when he began talking about inter-racial coalition-building. In each case, organizing the powerless against the powerful. So there are, at least, thematic links in those cases. Martin Shackelford

Question: Is there clear evidence that the CIA and the mafia worked together? If so, where, how and why? Yes, the CIA use of the Mafia in assassination plots was exposed during Congressional investigations by the Church Committee of the Senate during the mid-1970s. The Mob was first enlisted under the Eisenhower administration in 1959, involving Jimmy Hoffa as a go-between. Richard Nixon was the White House Action Officer on the project, which was a prelude to the planned invasion of Cuba. When John Kennedy inherited the project, the Castro assassination plots were a part of it. Robert Kennedy became upset when he learned the CIA was using the Mafia, and told them to stop. Mafia figures involved in the second stage included Santos Trafficante of Florida, Johnny Rosselli of Chicago and Los Angeles, and Sam Giancana of Chicago. An Internet search should produce considerable detail on this whole disturbing history. Martin Shackelford

Were the autopsy photos actually published? And if yes, were they analysed by any other organisations except the Warren Commission? Officially, the autopsy photographs and X-rays remain classified, and are only available for examination by researchers who have Kennedy family permission to examine them. This has been only a trickle over the years. Unofficially, some autopsy photos have leaked out, and have been published. Robert Groden published five color autopsy photos. Mark Crouch obtained ten black and white copies of autopsy photos from retired Secret Service agent James Fox in 1982. Some of these were first published by David Lifton in an edition of his book Best Evidence in 1988, and have since been published in other books. The set is also available from the research journal JFK/Deep Poliltics Quarterly, as photos or on a CD-ROM. Officially, the Warren Commission never saw the autopsy photos, though reportedly Earl Warren looked at them and decided not to make them a part of the record. The photos were examined by the Clark Panel in 1968, a Justice Department-appointed panel, and later by the House Select Committee on Assassinations, which published portions of some of the photos, and drawings based on some of the photos. Martin Shackelford

The House Select Committee of Assassinations) was highly critical of the Secret Service: "The Secret Service was deficient in the performance of its duties. The Secret Service possessed information that was not properly analyzed, investigated or used by the Secret Service in connection with the President's trip to Dallas; in addition, Secret Service agents in the motorcade were inadequately prepared to protect the President from a sniper." So, my question is, was it obligatory at that time for the SS to check all the buildings that the President's car was going to pass? If yes, is there any evidence whether it was done or not? Reply: Not really. The Secret Service didn't have the manpower to check every building along a lengthy motorcade route. They relied to some degree on other federal agencies as well as local police, but even this additional assistance would not have been sufficient to check every building. Martin Shackelford