David G. Healy

And I do not believe he [LHO] had possession of any weapons.

Even though he had a pistol in his hands when he was arrested in the Texas Theater.

...

what YOU need to understand hon is this: It appears Oswald was framed! Simple as that, all your posturing otherwise is not going to change reasonable people minds that have come to this conclusion. We've reviewed, then STUDIED what the WCR tried to sell way back in 1964. As you, your idol-worship Vin Bugliosi, and a host of other well paid lone nut xxxxx authors continue to sell -- that dog don't hunt any longer, hon.

You've got a huge problem on your hands... that being, disinfo is no longer working, up to 90% of the thinking public do not believe the WCR/SBT/LHO did it all by his lonesome theory -- welcome to the real world, toots! Perhaps its time for our composite, lone nut buddy form Indiana (sic) to reel in multiple aliases and get honest with ITself, eh?

I believe there are some descriptions of alteration to the Z-film that are misguided, but also some discrepancies, apparent edits, and other evidence that cannot be ignored, and which seriously devalue the Z-film for some scientific examinations conducted through simple viewing. If anybody demands it, I'll extend my neck and post the latter.

What I want to question here is possible use of a period film alteration technique - rotoscopy. With rotoscope technique and equipment, Alfred Hitchcock, for example, was able in "The Birds" (1963) to insert flaming buildings and gas pumps into an overhead shot of a small town, and then add a second set of mattes showing individual birds flying at foreground between the aerial camera and the composited town and fire scene below.

[...]

It would be great to have a small panel of 1960s cinematographers experienced in rotoscopy and other alteration technique examine the Z-film. Where's the guy that shot the Greeks fighting Ray Harryhausen's famous skeleton army in "Jason and the Argonauts" (also 1963) when you need him?

Hi David,

If you do a forum search you will see there are many thread about the supposed alteration of the Z-film. The question is not whether or not such alterations were technically feasible in 1963 but whether or not they could have done in a way that was not detectable even decades later.

Rolad Zavada the inventor of Kodakchrome II (the type of film Zapruder used) examined the original film and said no.

Dr. Raymond Fielding who literally "wrote the book" on 'Special Effect Cinemaphotograghy' said no.

Robert Groden who was the HSCA photo consultant examined the original and said he saw no signs of alteration

Oliver Stone says said no

The director of a movie called 'The Commision' (about the Warren Commision) said no.

The closest thing the alterationist have to an expert is Healy who is a videographer. Who refuses to produce any sample of any FILM compositing he has done. When pressed for evidence such alterations could have been made undetectably at the time he used to cite Fielding's book.

As to the blood splatter issue take a look at the forum I linked above Costella's inability to rebut Sherry or me is telling. Despite having a PhD in the subject he made blunder that anyone who remembers high schools physics should not have made.

I anyone is interested Fetzer, Tink, Craig, Costella and others go over "Moorman in the Street" for the upteenth time on the linked Yahoo group, interestingly Costella agrees that Jack and Fetzer etc are and were wrong.

Mark as per your post above

No one forced you to look at this thread. There are several threads/topics other than Z-film alteration that are primarily discussions of between 2 – 4 members. I find several of those topics and even ones that draw more participants boring but rather than berate the people who post on them I skip them.

my goodness Len you have taken a mighty big bite of the apple haven't you.... put Mr, Zavada and Ray Fielding in a room with me for 2 hours they'll become believers.... especially now that KODAK is damn near KAPUT-ski.... so how can you defend Roland Zavada so these day's, wasn't he the one who told you to get lost a few years back? You, a nobody, with no knowledge in the image-compositing field and a self admitted, I know nothing about film type, showing up here out of the blue trying to represent Roland.... lmfao... actually, I felt sorry for you and embarrassed to boot!

Sorry I missed your above post... what ever happened to Ray Fielding anyway.... he hasn't returned a call lately, however, I'm still on Rollies mailing list, you?

Carry on!

...

Interestingly, I had an email from Gary Mack offering to help CBC make the documentary. No doubt, as part of Operation Mockingbird. This is the same Gary Mack who ran an email campaign against me. ...

Old Gar never met a network he couldn't hustle...

...

It's all supposition, at this point. But, I do miss those "good old days" -- I miss fighting the "good fight" back-to-back with my Compadre, Don Riccardo.

There were a few knockdown drag-outs weren't there? I remember one interesting tidbit, from the first JFKResearch forum, just before the letter incident...I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, there were over well 700,000 total posts at that particular time to Rich DellaRosa's JFKResearch forum.

Lot of familiar names showing up in the thread.....

Oh, go back to bed, DiEugenio. It's too early for you to be haunting this place.

"Reclaiming History" is the most accurate book ever written about JFK's murder, and always will be. To believe it is not is to side with the imaginative rantings and ravings of people like Jim DiEugenio, David Lifton, and Jim Garrison.

And how likely is it that that trio's theories are correct?

Answer--Zero per cent.

Yep. David Von Pein lives in a world were political parties, governmental organisations, intelligence institutions, central banks, and the power elite actually work for, and in, the best interests of their citizens.

Only in "imaginative rantings and ravings" of weirdo and unreasonable conspiracy theorists do the structures listed above not give a flying rat's backside about anything or anyone other than themselves.

Evil conspirators don't exist in power structures do they, Dave? Individual self interests of a small minority of people don't ride rough-shod across the backs of the rest of us do they, Dave? The U.S. people will make sure they collect in every last cent of those trillions of dollars of central bank borrowed TARP fund and fiscal stimulus money won't they, Dave? The people of the United States and the rest of the world need only read the Warren Commission to find out what really happened on 11/22/63, don't they Dave? The same as if they want to find out EXACTLY what happened on 9/11 they simply go to the 9/11 Report - give or take the answers to about 200 key questions? The same as if we in this country want to know what happened on 7/7 we just wait for the outcome of the 7/7 Public Inquiry that hasn't taken place in public - give or take the answers to about 200 key questions? And if we want to find out what happened in the death of Dr. David Kelly we just wait 70 years for the records to be made public after being sealed?

Attitudes like yours, where everything you are told you believe like a nodding chimpanzee, is what makes people in power able to shaft us over and over and over again and have the likes of you thank them for it once they're done.

my old pal Davey Von Pein lives in Bugli-usion times, he actually believes when Colonel Sanders died and went to heaven he took a portable 5 gallon deep fat chicken fryer with him.... <sigh> guy will believe anything....

The fact that it doesn't is proof that payment was never made to Klein's account.

Can you show us examples of other USPS money orders processed that day to back up your statement above?

reasonable doubt written all over this one Craigster -- Can you show us examples of other USPS money orders processed that day to back up WCR exihibit-statement, your move!

It was charged from another Chicago Bank

http://i56.tinypic.com/2zxsbb9.jpg

my goodness, things aren't looking so good for our lone nut/SBT/LHO-did-it-all-by-his-lonesome crowd, is it?

My guess would be that the stuff about Bugliosi getting a "$1-million advance" (as some CTers have suggested) is blown up way out of proportion.

...

If you DON'T know what are YOU defending Bugliosi for? Just curious.

...

I suppose Rosemary Newton, Bugliosi's secretary, is a rotten xxxx and cover-up artist too, eh, when she said this in 2007?:

"In response to David Lifton's outrageous, malicious and contemptible lie regarding Vincent Bugliosi's book...where he claims ghost writers wrote this great book (which will be read by generations to come, long after Mr. Lifton and the rest of us are gone, including all the die-hard conspiracy theorists)...I say, unequivocally, that NO section of Mr. Bugliosi's book was ghostwritten." -- Rosemary Newton; July 2007

You're getting defensive David Von Pein, nice show for Rosemary, but no cigar son. I say David Lifton has thrown the proverbial wrench into Vin's Reclaiming Hstory credibility... after 20 years of research and this is the best Vin could do? Hire two writers to do a good portion of the gig? Oh, my!

And what does Dale *look at my EMMY* Myers have say about all this? Does he think his cartoons are the final word?

...

All conspiracy theorists should go to my blog below. There's more common sense on this page than you can shake a stick at

...

no xxxxx advertising, hon!

LMAO! Dude there are NO credible film post production experts on the lone nut side of the fence, that's YOUR problem....

Who are the credible film post production experts on YOUR side of the table and where is their work that proves the film is altered?

who is talking about "proving" the Z-film IS altered? It's, could be altered son, that's C-O-U-L-D be altered and if so, HOW!

If you choose staying on topic, and want to post further with this subject matter, you're going to have at least 300-500 published articles to refute, that's after your head-on-collision with the American Society of Cinematographers, Cinema Technology, Society of Motion Picture Engineers, i.e., Saving Scenes with Opticals-- American Cinematographer., February 1964, pg.92. (notice the date even). The Gang of 8 will be busy for years...

I could go on for days... but here's what I suggest, purchase (on-line) Raymond Fielding's The Technique of SpecialEffects Cinematography 1965 Library of Congress Catolog Card #64-8116, head for the bibliography page 376 -- get yourself and education in the subject matter. Then we'll talk!

The Warren Commission proved nothing.

The above quote is one of the silliest comments I've encountered in a long time. Thanks, Greg.

from the planet of KFC, we have heard the bone chilling assumption from DVP, LHO stood trial before his peers. Gotta love it, perhaps promoting and selling 4 pound books on the internet has its good points, eh son?

Perhaps Rosemary (Bugliosi's sidekick) is giving you a hand on this one too?

...

You know it really is not that hard for me to accept alteration. It only takes on thing for that to happen. An expert in the field to tell me it is so.

So far, not one credible expert has done so.

...

Mike

LMAO! Dude there are NO credible film post production experts on the lone nut side of the fence, that's YOUR problem.... hell, even Roland Zavada knows ziltch concerning film composition, and he'll admit - best he can do is tell us, "yep, its KODAK film alright". That's it my-man! Wild Bill Miller, Duncan, even you Private not to mention all the rest of the wannabe Dealey Plaza film-photo preservers of the historical record can't find a legitimate source to counter simple facts on the table.

Facts that continue to stick in their (your) craws: long held SMPE (Society of Motion Picture Engineers -created 1916- documentation of layers and matte techniques i.e., post-production film producer-directors, artists, matte craftsmen, the equipment, the technology, know-how and most important: **T-I-M-E**.... yes that too, TIME!

Face it, you need the Zapruder film, to support WCR nonsense.... I care not one wit if Oswald was involved in the assassination, I have no doggie in that fight! However, IF Oswald WAS, then Oswald got what he deserved. IF he WASN'T, and there's nothing in the evidence that I've read or heard after all these years that leads me to believe a court of law (based on what we NOW know of Oswald), would convict him. Basing Oswalds guilt on the Zapruder film as we know it today, is fools folley. The Zapruder film (as evidence in a court of law), its film authentication and legitimacy would certainly be challenged.

The 6th Floor Museum (a temple to political assassination and supporting voyers), its City Fathers arrogance aside, I doubt would see a drop in their monthly gate--whether the Z-film is altered, or not! Go figure!

When one accepts that any proclaimed alterations would have been accomplished by experts within the field, then one must thereafter assume that it will take the same quality of expertise and extreme diligence to ultimately find those minute signs of alteration that a perpretrator would have overlooked..

Kind of like searching for the "Holy Grail", except that the alteration most certainly exists.

Tom

P.S. Lyndal Shaneyfelt was most certainly an "Expert".

There can be little doubt of film alteration, just as there is little doubt that CE399 DID NOT do what Specter & Company claimed.

Finding and proving (beyond any reasonable doubt) may be capable of being achieved for a 12-man/woman jury.

Proving it to the entire world is most unlikely, and those who participated in the alteration of WC evidence were masters of their trade.

Be it alteration, or obfuscation.

Amen, brother....

Zapruder Zoomed Frames GIF Stabilized. ( 19-frames ) 2.75MB

As well as the skull flap on the side of the head, there also appears to be a large "fleshy mass" hanging down in the front of kennedy's face ?

Click on thumbnail to view full size:

As always on a blowup of this frame it appears to be a tangential shot to the head from the right/side front with an exploding bullet.

Herb,

Great to see a post of yours... Enjoyed your contributions during the early days at Rich Dellarosa's, JFKResearch. Hope all is well with you and yours....

David 'aeffects' Healy

...

You know it really is not that hard for me to accept alteration. It only takes on thing for that to happen. An expert in the field to tell me it is so.

So far, not one credible expert has done so.

...

Mike

LMAO! Dude there are NO credible film post production experts on the lone nut side of the fence, that's YOUR problem.... hell, even Roland Zavada knows ziltch concerning film composition, and he'll admit - best he can do is tell us, "yep, its KODAK film alright". That's it my-man! Wild Bill Miller, Duncan, even you Private not to mention all the rest of the wannabe Dealey Plaza film-photo preservers of the historical record can't find a legitimate source to counter simple facts on the table.

Facts that continue to stick in their (your) craws: long held SMPE (Society of Motion Picture Engineers -created 1916- documentation of layers and matte techniques i.e., post-production film producer-directors, artists, matte craftsmen, the equipment, the technology, know-how and most important: **T-I-M-E**.... yes that too, TIME!

Face it, you need the Zapruder film, to support WCR nonsense.... I care not one wit if Oswald was involved in the assassination, I have no doggie in that fight! However, IF Oswald WAS, then Oswald got what he deserved. IF he WASN'T, and there's nothing in the evidence that I've read or heard after all these years that leads me to believe a court of law (based on what we NOW know of Oswald), would convict him. Basing Oswalds guilt on the Zapruder film as we know it today, is fools folley. The Zapruder film (as evidence in a court of law), its film authentication and legitimacy would certainly be challenged.

The 6th Floor Museum (a temple to political assassination and supporting voyers), its City Fathers arrogance aside, I doubt would see a drop in their monthly gate--whether the Z-film is altered, or not! Go figure!

Zapruder Zoomed Frames GIF Stabilized. ( 19-frames ) 2.75MB

As well as the skull flap on the side of the head, there also appears to be a large "fleshy mass" hanging down in the front of kennedy's face ?

Click on thumbnail to view full size:

As always on a blowup of this frame it appears to be a tangential shot to the head from the right/side front with an exploding bullet.

Oy

Never have so many been confused by so few.....

yeah I know, it's difficult getting your hands not to mention your mind around an altered Zapruder Film isn't it? But fear not, lone nut, WCR/SBT trolls will slither to your rescue. After all, protectors of the current Dealey Plaza film-photo historical record demand obedience.... Carry on, Private!

Or go back to Duncan's xxxxx site.

You do know by stating the above, that you are accusing Mark Lane who is a member of my Forum, of being a xxxxx, don't you?

Mark Lane is a member here, too. Mikey should read Lane, perhaps you too?

Gil,

It's just that you can't abide the idea that Lee H. Oswald handled C2766 (which he so obviously did -- via CE637). Naturally, you think CE637 is a fake too. (Yawn.)

And Waldman Exhibit 3, at 21H698, proves for all time that Klein's received Rifle C2766 from Crescent Firearms (via a Crescent document--that you also think is fake, naturally).

Today's list of liars for Gilbert grows some more, with William Waldman and Louis Feldsott on the Liars List now.

perhaps anything more serious than Leave it to Beaver (of which you have hundreds of posts) and the "Beav's" non-reality television exploits are a tad much for you, young man? Hmm?

...

So, really, any way you slice it, Oswald's innocence is certainly far from proven regardless of the precise time when Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles were on those stairs.

...

I believe its Oswald's GUILT you need to prove there sonny-boy. We've seen at least 5 billion words from you (all over the internet including AMAZON book reviews) suggesting LHO is guilty, when will you PROVE same? Hang in there, ya got 2.5 years to go till HBO-daBug-Hanks puff parade!

Those who pulled the JFK murder off would be complete IDIOTS if they did NOT alter that film (being one of the BEST possible witnesses to the entire event that terrible day). There is simply NO way you would allow a film of that kind of historical worth go unmolested, I don't care who pulled it off. They murdered so many witnessed, items disappearing left and right, you name it, yet the film walks away untouched???....come on. Growing up, just off the bat, I had assumed the film received some kind of high tech alteration, it had to have. Now, things are becoming clear....I guess. Here's hoping anyway.

Hey Greg, do you think Kodak is the only source capable of processing such film? Maybe others can no? I am NOT film-intelligent lol, so forgive any apparent ignorance regarding the subject.

Hi B.A.,

Kodak retains the rights to the processing procedure of that film stock. It is not "normal" film and is not developed in any standard type of manner. There is a Kodak specific "process" that must be employed in

order to accomplish the task. The absolute very last remaining facility that was licensed by Kodak to use their system of processing was Dwayne's Photo. They processed my film at the end of December, as well.

Kodak announced in 2006 that it would completely discontinue it worldwide by the end of December in 2010 (last year). So, that's it forever. I don't believe even the "know-how" to do it is available outside of

Kodak.

Now Ektachrome is still available, but I wanted to replicate as closely as possible the same conditions and use the same materials as were originally used to prevent nay-sayers from claiming the tests were not

valid due to those differences. As it is, the actual so-called "original Zapruder Camera" housed in the National Archives would have been my first choice, but obtaining usage of it wasn't going to happen. It is

likely that any differences between Ektachrome and Kodachrome will NOT make a bit of difference anyway, but this way we don't have to deal with that argument at all.

Monk,

Any full zoom left to right *pan* footage (from the Z-pedestal)from the corner of Main and Elm down to the overpass...?

David

Robin,

I didn't get a sense that he was offended at all, only a bit mystified. In my experience with John, he's pretty straight forward about that sort of thing.

Greg.

This is one of the galleries attached to Rich's old forum.

Look at the Z-Frames

I think they appear closer to the frames i posted, than to the color shown in the newer version of the Costella frames.

What was Rich's source for these frames. ?

JFKresearch Photo Gallery 11

Zapruder film sprocket area "ghost" images

http://www.jfkresearch.com/Gallery_11/

Frankly, if we're voting... I prefer Robin's colorization of the frames, but that's me. Pleasing and easy on the eyes to say the least, considering the film topic. Professionaly we would term Robin's version as New York type color(drab, somewhat flat and muted). As opposed to Dr. John's rework of the frames: Hollywood, or LA color was the term (simply-- oversatured and in the video world over saturated-over modulated and crushed blacks) probably closer to the Kodacolor film color. You can get away with that utilizing high resolution film, but not in video or jpeg-internet imagery-- color does tend to bleed into its neighboring color, so, some blurring tends to occur throughout the entire image, thus image resolution suffers... In short, tougher to do a serious inner frame study. So, from my perspective, just another subtle form of film alteration, over saturation, I suspect, some introduced in the creation of MPI DVD Zapruder film... Image color saturation one of the areas of questions I had for the editor who put MPI piece together. Unfortunately, way back then they wouldn't take my calls...

Can anyone remind me where the reprinted edition of Harvey and Lee can be bought? Thanks.

How can a Warren Commission document, in this case CD 480; be considered a book at maryferrell.org

that cannot be "unlocked?"

See

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/lockedPage.do?docId=10881

Or simply try to access CD 480.......

OK - but I was really just tring to find the publisher that reprinted and is selling Armstrong's Harvey and Lee. I used to have a link to their site, lost it, and Google's no help. Anybody remember?

http://lasthurrahbookshop.net/

might find some info there... Andy sold the last copies that I was aware of... I doubt there has been a reprint, for that matter, a new edition... in any case, Andy is the best source (I know of) for Harvey & Lee that you seek...

...

EDIT - Formatted for clarity

clarity? ....clear as mud! Now, Redd Foxx is happy! sheeeesh Dude!

Mr. Kelly,

You've been reading, thinking and walking the Jersey Shore once again -- Great work, Bill!

David

Pat Speer: "vicious gossip" to some; the ugly truth to others. As for RFK and Ethel having kids during the RFK/Jackie affair time period- that is irrelevant. Jack Kennedy had dozens of affairs while he was impregnating Jackie, through both of her miscarriages and having John and Caroline. Lots of men have all kinds of children while they are engaging in longterm affairs with their mistress or having numerous adulterous flings.

As for Jackie and Ethel being at RFK's bedside at Cedar's. That makes sense - those were the women who RFK loved the most, except that he was more obsessed with Jackie. Also, a lot of these cheated on women live in denial or semi-denial. Except that I do not think Ethel was in denial; she was completely aware of the blatantly obvious affair, but chose not to address it because that option was too painful and traumatic.

By the way, post-JFK assassination, Jackie Kennedy chose to take as one of her staff members Pamela Turnure, who JFK had been having an affair with. Pamela Turnure had been placed as Jackie's press secretary specifically to allow JFK easy access to her for sexual services.

Cheated-on women often make all kinds of adaptions and compromises.

robert, Robert, ROBERT.... you NEED a girlfrind, hon! Q-U-I-C-K-L-Y! ! ! LMAO