Jump to content
The Education Forum

John Costella

Members
  • Posts

    81
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About John Costella

  • Birthday 09/24/1966

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    https://johncostella.com
  • Skype
    john.costella

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Washington, DC
  • Interests
    See johncostella.com

Recent Profile Visitors

5,349 profile views

John Costella's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In

Recent Badges

  1. Sally and I will be at Lancer, in tourist mode. We'll be at the Adolphus Wednesday through Sunday, so I'm hoping to meet in the flesh as many of the people in the community that get the chance to be in Dallas as possible, regardless of whether they are going to Lancer, COPA, both, or neither. I'm especially looking forward to meet those who particularly dislike my work. There are no constraints of forum rules or etiquette at a bar or on the grass in the Plaza, so here's your chance to let rip!
  2. sigh..... http://www.assassina...arch.com/zfilm/ David, I think you missed Craig's point. His hyperlink is to my "combined edit", which is where all the colour frames you have posted come from. (snip...) John John... The only point CL was trying to make, imo, was that there are indeed 486 frames. His disdain for you comes thru most every post... I KNOW you used other film (without the Intersproket area images) to replace the damaged/missing frames. I hope you've read thru my and C.Davidson's math on the zframes and timings and know how important 156, and the 207 sequences are.... That there are also problems with frames 340 and 350 is also of no surprise as this is the key area, that is corrected for the actual placement of the 313 shot, occurs at z341/2 I happen to think your contributions have been ginormous and thank you each and every time I use the zframes.... I happen to believe that MANY FRAMES of what was the Zfilm were removed and that the "original" was then recreated.... and I think 8mm copy 0184 is key.... (snip...) David, I know exactly where Lamson sits, don't worry about that. But when he points out a factual truth (that the "splicing" evident in these frames implies nothing about the original film) -- and when I'm the "splicer" myself! -- I'm going to say so, regardless of anything else. Do the "damaged" frames in the "original" film have significance? Quite possibly (although they could also be distractions). Do frames 341, 350 and 486 "lost" by MPI have any significance? Less likely, in my opinion, but it's also possible. If you've seen my Duluth presentation, or read The Great Zapruder Film Hoax, then you'd know you that I'm the last person you'd have to convince that the film is a complete fabrication. If you'd like to email me directly the details of (or links to) your analyses of the "damaged" sequences I'll take a look. Unfortunately I don't get to follow the forum regularly. John
  3. sigh..... http://www.assassina...arch.com/zfilm/ David, I think you missed Craig's point. His hyperlink is to my "combined edit", which is where all the colour frames you have posted come from. I originally created this set in early 2003 (you can see them all over the net with the blue mask around them; there was a historical reason I did this), and then improved the processing in 2006 (without adding the blue mask this time). You're showing frames from the current (2006) set, as shown on the page linked to by Craig. There was never a splice alleged at 341 or 350 by anyone. These are two of the three frames "lost" by MPI when they created the 1998 DVD that these frames (originally) came from. (They also managed to "lose" the last frame, 486.) The frames damaged and missing around 155-156 and 207-212 are that way on the "camera original" film that MPI scanned. Before 2003 I ran some processes to try to "reconstruct" as much of the missing frames (and parts of frames) from the copies of them on Groden's videos. (I tried getting some digital originals from him back around 2001, but that went nowhere.) This includes trying to position them correctly relative to where the sprocket holes would have been, removing some distortions / damage in his copies of copies, and trying to get the colour balance to match that of the MPI scans. Some parts of the Groden frame images were so damaged or distorted that I ended up just smudging them with a paint program, to remove the impression that the damage or artefacts were part of the original. Likewise where I stitched parts of reconstructed Groden frames to the MPI versions of the "camera original". All of this "splicing" was done by yours truly, this century. I don't know why you think that they are "WCR" or "SS" splices. I've tried to make it pretty clear what I did and why. John
  4. Agreed, Monk. Others were on the (short) list and at least one recipient has responded to the entire list. However, still unconfirmed. The email (by all appearances from Jack's account, although this can be faked) was signed by two other people, names unknown to me. I assume (if it is genuine) that they had no idea whom to send the notification to. The short list of people it was sent to might have been one particular list of contacts they found on his computer. I will shortly be offsite and away from computer contact for the next three days. This is one case where I wish I am absolutely wrong.
  5. I received an email from Jack White's email account a short time ago, informing of his passing on Monday, June 18. I assume the email is genuine. A sad day. John Costella
  6. [Edit: David added a section to his post. See above for the full edited post. --JPC] Agree completely, David. Apologies if I borrowed your argument about the head snap being the result of frame deletion -- I remember you explaining it well in the past. Fascinating quote from Jack Bell. I am sure I've seen -- and glossed over -- the "rising with a telephone and waving" quote before. Is it only in this one place, and it's just been quoted many times? Or is there someone else who actually described this same event? I wonder about those sorts of things too. Without corroboration, each of them is lower on the scale of evidence. It would be nice to see a genuine film one day, to see which of these "anomalous" observations did actually occur. (I have no doubt that some will be wrong. I doubt that most will be wrong.) And I have to wonder if Chaney perhaps reacted to this "waving ahead", acting as a human messenger. Anyway, enough for wondering. A useful activity, but no substitute for the hard evidence. John IMHO: the Zapruder film was altered to create evidence that would be considered superior to the eyewitness accounts. Without a film which could function as a "gold standard" (of sorts), the eyewitnesses testimony would rule the day, and that would lead one to conclude that the car stopped--and that would immediately implicate the Secret Service. So if all those witnesses are correct, then that was certainly a primary motive for the "editing"--and I'm putting the word in quotes, because I no longer believe mere "editing" explains what we have here. In any event, once one is faced with eliminating the car stop, then simple physics--i.e., Rate x time = distance--results in a most uncomfortable fact: that the car-stop (or even a serious slow down) can not be eliminated without introducing, as an artifact, an acceleration in the backward motion of JFK's body. There is really no way around that; unless one completely redraws all the imagery. And that's why I believe today--and have for many years--that the backward "snap" is an artifact of the editing/fabrication of the film. But let's move on to another matter--and why I deliberately inserted the word "fabrication." Consider the account of a credible witness, AP Reporter Jack Bell, who was in the back seat of the press car, just behind Mayor Cabell's car (which was behind the LBJ followup car "Varsity"). Here is what Jack Bell wrote, as it appeared in the NY Times of Saturday morning, November 23, 1963: "Four cars ahead, in the President's Continental limousine, a man in the front seat rose for a moment. He seemed to have a telephone in [his] hand as he waved to a police cruiser ahead to go on." Nowhere in the existing film is any footage showing this event; i.e., showing Secret Service agent Roy Kellerman, who was the senior agent in charge, standing up, or "rising" for a moment, with a telephone in his hand, "as he waved to a police cruiser ahead to go on." Not only is there no image of Kellerman rising, there is definitely no image of him "waving" to a police cruiser "to go on." Did Jack Bell imagine this? Was he just confused? Or is this another fact that --somehow--been consigned to the dustbin of history (Trotsky's phrase), because of the "editing" of the Zapruder film. So now we come face to face with the serious nature of the problem, and why I am putting the word "editing" in quotes. I have examined this film meticulously, frame by frame. There is not the slightest hint that the image of Roy Kellerman rises, or shows him "as he waved to a police cruiser ahead." Yet we do have plenty of images of Kellerman, after JFK has been hit in the head. So. . . what's going on here? What happened to that event? How was it made into a "non-event"? If what Jack Bell saw actually happened, then the extant "Zapruder film" has to be more than merely "edited." There has to be some serious fabrication, and graphics performed, in order that (a) what was originally present to have disappeared, and then (b ) for the sequence of images we have of Kellerman to appear as they do: crouched over for some frames, perhaps on the radio, but certainly not "rising" up, or waving to the police cruiser up ahead, to move on. But back to basics: If this film had been altered (and/or fabricated) in a manner that was "satisfactory", it would not have been locked up by Life, for 12 years. Furthermore: had Robert Groden not made copies from the 35mm copies made by Moses Weitzman, and then broadcast it on national TV (on Geraldo, March, 1975), the Zapruder film might have remained under wraps many years beyond March 1975. Without that national broadcast, I wonder whether there would ever have been an HSCA investigation. DSL 1/20/12; 3:45 AM Los Angeles, CA
  7. [Edited to remove sunglasses smiley instead of ( B ). I'll learn eventually.] [second edit: Of course, you also add in an imperceptible (in real time) forward head motion of some inches from 312 to 313, which completely trumps the backwards motion after 313. Good physics party trick.] Tink, A good question that I'm often asked, by young school students and seasoned TV reporters alike. Following your "what if", let's (for the sake of argument) assume that the Z film was fabricated. LIFE published some images from "an 8mm film of the assassination" in muddy black and white within days of the assassination. This locks in (a) the fact that there was at least one muddy, possibly black and white, 8 mm film taken, and ( B ) some "key frames". Why (in this scenario) was that allowed? That's a sub-question. Let's assume that either (i) it was known that there was a film taken (be it Honest Abe or anyone else) or (ii) it was deemed desirable that a film of the assassination exist. What happens now (or without (ii)) if there is no film of the assassination (never existed, or lost, destroyed, blurry, etc.)? Then all the other evidence becomes the main focal point. If you can't see with your own eye what happened, then you actually have to listen to the eyewitnesses and build up your own mind's eye view of it. That's far more dangerous. By controlling the relatively clear, comprehensive motion picture film of the assassination, you control what people believe happened. (Even today, members of this forum state events from the assassination as if they were fact, simply because they've seen them on the film -- even when it disagrees with eyewitnesses; the film is assumed to "trump" the eyewitnesses, because it's physical, objective truth. It is -- if it can be proven to be genuine.) Why the backward head snap? Because those LIFE images contained images showing the President forward with an intact head, and then back against the seat with a shot head. You eliminate the limo slow / stop, and you have to get from A to B within half a second or so. There's no way of doing it without having either (A) the head snap or ( B ) blowing out the "six seconds" timeline and reintroducing the significant slowing / stopping of the limo. What happens next? The film is a mess. The Tague bullet necessitates the Specter fairy tale. All evidence of shots -- except the 313 paint job -- is removed from the film. All blood and gore (again, except 313) is removed. And so it's locked up for 12 years. Apart from renegade authors taking photos of copies of it at LIFE and others bootlegging 58th generation copies snaffled from the subpoenaed film, it's not until Groden is allowed to add a clear copy to his growing assassination collection that it really starts to get out. And what do we get from what is there? 45 years of debate about what the film we do have even shows. Ridiculous arguments about cheeks allegedly puffing out and lapels flapping as substitutes for actual evidence of shots. (I won't speculate about the patch on the back of the head until I see some of these materials myself.) John
  8. What's not clear to me is whether this is even possible. From your post it sounds like it's "eyes only" at the moment. J good news, Monk.... Could've just emailed me or called me John. Whatever.
  9. As I'm not sure when I'll next be near Burbank, is it at all possible for Sydney Wilkinson et al to throw a scan or three onto a DVD and mail it across the Pacific? There are other moves afoot to get the NARA scans, but I'd be interested to see what everyone's excited about in Burbank. Thanks in advance, J good news, Monk....
  10. Tink, We need to establish some agreed terminology. The Zapruder film shows the limo slowing gently -- almost imperceptibly -- but continuing to glide down Elm Street. Many people have made these measurements, and I did them myself back in 2002 or so. (Interestingly -- coincidence or not? -- the slight rate of slowing, together with the trigonometry of Dealey Plaza, leads to the very curious result that the distance from the sixth floor window increases at a constant rate in the Z film during this slowing. Remarkable coincidence -- or is this telling us something about the storyboard created by the Z film's fabricators?) The best way for anyone to determine for themselves what they think of the slowing shown in the Z film is to look at this video: In any case, let's call this "the gentle slowing shown by the Z film". (And the other films, of course -- I agree that they both agree with the Z.) In contrast to this -- not seen in any of the three films -- is a violent braking, with the occupants jostled, and the limo coming to either a complete stop, or a rolling stop, for some seconds. Let's call this "the limo stop", even if it was a rolling stop. If this limo stop actually happened, then the genuine version of that YouTube video above would be much longer, and would show the limo slow, stop / roll, and accelerate again. Don't try to confound the two. You believe in the former. I believe in the latter. I've written and said plenty about Chaney, so I'll ignore your cherry-picking with regard to him driving up to the lead car. John
  11. Tink, Nice argument, except that you have made a subconscious assumption -- which seems reasonable from your conception of the assassination, but stands out like a sore thumb against mine: you assume that the limo never slowed / stopped. My conception of the assassination discards the extant photographic evidence. In my mind's eye, the limo braked suddenly and came to either a complete stop, or a "rolling stop" (like many people do when driving through a Stop sign). In this view of the assassination, there are many seconds around the head shot(s), which might be described as "the start of pandemonium breaking loose" -- interrupted only by Greer flooring the accelerator and the limo "jumping out of the street" and off under the Triple Underpass. The motorcycle cops would have slowed, weaved, circled. Clint Hill ran forward and (unlike our current version of the Z film) did reach Jackie, put her back down in the seat and cover the two, as he has said for 48 years that he did. Who knows -- another secret service agent may have crossed between the cars and started running for the Depository (which, from where they all were on Elm, simply means running back up Elm Street -- the insertion of the detail that it was towards the Depository, specifically, and not, say, the Dal-Tex building, could have come after the event, after the Depository was identified as the source of the shots); after all, everyone agrees that some sort of noise came from behind, whether that was a distraction or a genuine shot. In this view of the assassination, there is more than enough time for Chaney to see some of these things -- that would only take a couple of seconds -- and still drive up to the lead car to tell them that all was not well. The limo may well have jumped out of the street as he was getting there -- I'm not saying there were minutes to spare here, but five or ten seconds makes a big difference. (Six seconds, maybe?) Remember that it takes time for the limo to decelerate, and then to accelerate again (even if it was a powerful engine), let alone the time taken when it was stopped or rolling. (Lifton made this point well in his Duluth presentation.) I know you reject this entire scenario, but I'm sure you will agree that you can't disprove one part of it by assuming that the whole thing is false. John
  12. Tink, Thanks. We disagree on much, but at least our interactions are consistent. I am pleased that you take no offence at my recognition of your modus operandi. Adversaries can still harbour a degree of mutual respect, in some areas at least. I have had discussions with a mutual acquaintance -- whose motives (I am sure you won't mind me saying) I trust far more than yours -- and there seems to be some scope for me to get access to some of this material. Let's see how that pans out. It almost goes without saying that (if it does pan out) I'll report whatever I find -- and that won't necessarily be restricted to the back of the head. John
  13. Hang on a minute. Jim, you believe the Secret Service agents were complicit, right? And that they knowingly drove JFK into the kill zone. But you say that it's absurd for a complicit motorcycle cop to escort the limo into the kill zone? I don't necessarily ascribe to either, but I find neither of them absurd. If one or more officers (of either type) had foreknowledge, it's impossible to know the extent or details of that knowledge. Who knows what they were told? I doubt it would have been a description of what eventually happened on Elm Street -- which itself was almost certainly a stuff-up anyway. Saying that the motorcycle cops must be innocent because their accounts undermine the official story is ridiculous -- and you don't even extend the same assumption to the Secret Service agents. Have you actually read what they told the Warren Commission? By your criterion, they'd be as sweet as roses too. I don't find Lifton's all-shots-from-the-front scenario to be absurd at all. I don't believe that he's proved it to be the case beyond reasonable doubt -- so I don't ascribe to it as the sole possible answer -- but it's an interesting scenario that has a degree of simplicity and elegance to it. I've certainly worried about the amount of three-dimensional space endangered by the bullets-from-all-directions scenario. That concern doesn't rule it out either, but it does make it a more complicated scenario to plan. Doesn't anyone else find it remarkable that there was precisely one "innocent bystander" hit -- Connally? (Or maybe two, if the reports of a shot Secret Service agent were actually true.) When you look at Elm Street in hindsight, you can convince yourself that it makes sense, because of the lack of people down there, and the angles, and the position of the limo, and so on. But that's with hindsight. Planning for that scenario when you don't know exactly where everything, and everyone, is a different story. John
  14. David, Agreed -- very interesting, particularly that Chaney was yet another limo stop witness. As to what JFK (or anyone else) was doing after the first shot, we really don't know, and won't know until (and if) we ever see genuine photographic evidence of the event. I'm wondering if the piece of skull is the same one Clint Hill said was on the back of the seat when he grabbed Jackie, pushed her down into the seat, and covered the two of them. (Missing from the Z film, but likely to have happened while the limo was stopped.) Or was it yet another piece? The way the article is written implies that Chaney saw the piece of skull before motoring forward to the lead car, which would be quite possible in real life when the limo stopped, but it's not definitive. It's quite possible that Chaney was in front of the limo, in real life. Motoring forward to the lead car would then make most sense for him, because he would have been closer to it than some (all?) of the other motorcycle cops. I'm interested by the distances. Chaney had obviously been told the party line -- shots from the 6th floor. I'm curious about the "110 feet". Not "about 100 feet". Where on earth did that quite precise number (110) come from? The "50 feet or less" distance doesn't tally with it (not having all my maps and measurements at hand, but Wikipedia tells me the 6th floor was about 60 feet in the air, which sounds about right), and 50 with 60 doesn't give you 110 -- unless you just add them together instead of using Pythagoras; is that what Chaney did?? Could he have been told that the shooter was 50 feet behind the car and 60 feet in the air? Maybe it's nothing more than Chaney pulling numbers out of his arse, but it reminds me of the Paul Mandel article in the Memorial Edition of LIFE, which had frame numbers and distances that clearly correspond to an earlier version of the faked-up Zapruder film than we have today. Of course, the Chaney account is even earlier -- he's telling us the storyboard for the assassination as it was on 23 November. John I just took a careful look at this particular interview, which I don't remember seeing before. In any event, just giving it a "close reading" (a term James Angleton might have used) makes me realize the terrible opportunity lost to history, because the WC attorneys either were told to "lay off," or simply did not realize the importance of aggressively pursuing the early accounts of the motorcycle patrolmen who flanked the car in this affair. Let me state, at the outset, my bias. Almost certainly, you cannot have a "motorcade assassination" (and that's what this was) without the motorcycle escort being complicit--at the very least, they had to be paid off, and instructed to "hang back," "do nothing," "go slow" etc. Take a close look at this particular interview, apparently conducted on 11/23, and there are many avenues which would have been ripe for further questioning. Immediately below is the interview, with my interjections. Below that, for those who are interested, is an unblemished typed version. OK. . here's the one with my interjections: FIRST SHOT WAS A MISS, OFFICER SAYS Dallas-A motorcycle policeman just six feet from President Kennedy when he was hit said the assassin’s first shot missed entirely. DSL COMMENT: How the heck does Chaney know that the "first shot missed entirely." What is the source of that idea? The second of the three shots felled Kennedy, said patrolman James M. Chaney. He was six feet to the right and front of the President’s car, moving about 15 miles an hour while rounding a curve. DSL COMMENT: Chaney was not "in front" - - - why did he say he was?? The shot, said Chaney, came from the sixth floor of a warehouse building DSL Comment: How does Chaney know that?? . . . about 50 feet or less behind the President’s car. DSL Comment: . . And how does Chaney know that, on 11/23, when this interview supposedly took place? . . . From the sixth floor to the president, the bullet traveled about 110 feet, Chaney estimated. Chaney was an infantryman in Europe in World War II with experience with sharpshooting. “When the first shot was fired, I thought it was a backfire,” Chaney said. Everyone looked around. The President was looking back over his left shoulder. DSL INTERJECTION: This is nonsense. And similar to Roy Kellerman's false statement that JFK reached behind his shoulder with his right hand--an action not shown on the Z film, and which obviously did not take place. Chaney's report about JFK "looking back over his left shoulder" raises a similar issue. These bozo's did't realize there would be enough of a filmed record to establish that JFK did no such thing. A second or two after the first shot, the second shot him. “It was like you hit someone in the face with a tomato. DSL COMMENT: Highly original. . but no one reports any such thing. Blood went all over the car. “There was screaming and yelling. A secret service man yelled, “Let’s get out of here.’” DSL Comment: As a matter of fact, that's not quite the statement reported by others. But more important, AP Reporter Jack Bell says that Kellerman actually stuood up in the car, and motioned the lead car to move ahead --again, something not visible on the Z film, and something not reported by Chaney. Chaney said the motorcade stopped momentarily after the shots rang out. DSL COMMENT: Well, this is interesting. So Chaney is, basically, a "car-stop witness." A policeman ran between two cars with his pistol drawn, heading toward the building DSL Comment: Its not clear which officer this would be. Almost certainly, not Officer Baker, who would have been well behind Chaney. So who is this "other" officer who, says Chaney, "ran between two cars with his pistol drawn, heading toward the building." Is this a made-up fiction, or exaggeration? Or are we dealing with another event that has been erased from the film? In any event, it should have been the basis for serious questioning. “I sped to the lead car carrying Chief (Jesse) Curry and Forrest Sorrels, chief of the secret service division of the Treasury Department in the Dallas area. DSL comment: Well, at least he says he did that--which (as I recall) is confirmed by Chief Curry, and Sorrels, the issue being exactly when it occurred. “I told them the President had been hit and it appeared bad,” Chaney said. “A piece of his skull bone was lying on the floor board of the car,” Chaney said. DSL Interjection: Was this at Parkland? If so, not according to Clint Hill, who said it was in the rear seat. So. . is this another Chaney exaggeration? Or false statement? Or was there in fact a piece of skull bone actually lying on the floor of the car? Unfortunately, we'll probably never know. Chaney died long ago, and , more important, the WC attorney didn't realize the importance of calling him as a witness, and questioning him closely, with a record of his prior statements (such as this one) sitting in front of them. Too bad. HERE IS THE WHOLE INTERVIEW, RETYPED, and without my interjections: FIRST SHOT WAS A MISS, OFFICER SAYS Dallas-A motorcycle policeman just six feet from President Kennedy when he was hit said the assassin’s first shot missed entirely. The second of the three shots felled Kennedy, said patrolman James M. Chaney. He was six feet to the right and front of the President’s car, moving about 15 miles an hour while rounding a curve. The shot, said Chaney, came from the sixth floor of a warehouse building about 50 feet or less behind the President’s car. From the sixth floor to the president, the bullet traveled about 110 feet, Chaney estimated. Chaney was an infantryman in Europe in World War II with experience with sharpshooting. “When the first shot was fired, I thought it was a backfire,” Chaney said. Everyone looked around. The President was looking back over his left shoulder. A second or two after the first shot, the second shot him. “It was like you hit someone in the face with a tomato. Blood went all over the car. “There was screaming and yelling. A secret service man yelled, “Let’s get out of here.’” Chaney said the motorcade stopped momentarily after the shots rang out. A policeman ran between two cars with his pistol drawn, heading toward the building “I sped to the lead car carrying Chief (Jesse) Curry and Forrest Sorrels, chief of the secret service division of the Treasury Department in the Dallas area. “I told them the President had been hit and it appeared bad,” Chaney said. “A piece of his skull bone was lying on the floor board of the car,” Chaney said. * * * http://24.152.179.96...1E14/Chaney.png
  15. It's possible that Lifton has been scamming us -- or someone scammed him -- and his scans have been altered to cover up how black they originally were. But I still don't understand: if they fabricated an entire film, why would "paintwork" even be considered? You just have to look at the "crater" to realise that the President after 313 is just a fabricated set of images. I simply don't understand this fixation on a "lower-tech" version of alteration. Perhaps it's because it's something that even those who believe the Z film to be authentic might considered possible (i.e. that someone painted over it). If that's on the table, then just examine the damn "camera original' and look for the paint! J
×
×
  • Create New...