Chuck Schwartz

I would also add Larry Hancock to my list of very knowledgeable people about the Big Event.

Roger, for what its worth, I agree with your posts on this thread.

I would also add Bill Kelly.

Its a tie between John Newman, Doug Horne, Peter Dale Scott, James DiEugenio, Bill Simpich, David Josephs and Leslie Sharp. Honorable mention to Robert Montenegro.

Thread is somewhat relevant now...

This is from a Doug Horne essay, " Why Do So Many in the JFK Research Community Resist the Mounting Evidence that the Zapruder Film is an Altered Film? I do not include here, in this question, those who have written books defending the Zapruder film’s authenticity; their obstinacy and closed-mindedness is related to ego, reputation, and to lifelong defense of their established turf. The old orthodoxy always resents the new paradigm that threatens established ways of thinking.[38] There is a bigger problem within the JFK research community, and it revolves around the following question commonly posed by perplexed members of the “old guard,” first-generation JFK researchers, to whom the concept of an altered Zapruder film seems dangerous heresy. They usually ask, “Why would anyone alter the film, and yet still leave evidence of conspiracy in the film?” (By this they usually mean the “timing problem” in the extant film which makes the single bullet theory impossible; and the “head snap” of JFK’s upper torso and head to the left-rear after frame 313—which they equate with a shot, or shots, from the right front, and not from the Texas School Book Depository.) The answers to this valid question are clear to me: (1) those altering the Zapruder film at “Hawkeyeworks” on Sunday, November 24, 1963 were extremely pressed for time, and could only do “so much” in the twelve-to-fourteen hour period available to them; (2) the technology available with which to alter films in 1963 (both the traveling matte, and aerial imaging) had limitations—there was no digital CGI technology at that time—and therefore, I believe the forgers were limited to basic capabilities like blacking out the exit wound in the right-rear of JFK’s head; painting a false exit wound on JFK’s head on the top and right side of his skull (both of these seem to have been accomplished through “aerial imaging”—that is, animation cells overlaid “in space” on top of the projected images of the frames being altered, using a customized optical printer with an animation stand, and a process camera to re-photograph each self-matting, altered frame); and removing exit debris frames, and even the car stop, through step-printing. In my view, the alterations that were performed were aimed at quickly removing the most egregious evidence of shots from the front (namely, the exit debris leaving the skull toward the left rear, and the gaping exit wound which the Parkland Hospital treatment staff tells us was present in the right-rear of JFK’s head). I believe that in their minds, the alterationists of 1963 were racing against the clock—they did not know what kind of investigation, either nationally or in Texas, would transpire, and they were trying to sanitize the film record as quickly as possible before some investigative body demanded to “see the film evidence.” There was not yet a Warren Commission the weekend following the assassination, and those who planned and executed the lethal crossfire in Dealey Plaza were intent upon removing as much of the evidence of it as possible, as quickly as possible. As I see it, they did not have time for perfection, or the technical ability to ensure perfection, in their “sanitization” of the Zapruder film. They did an imperfect job, the best they could in about 12-14 hours, which was all the time they had on Sunday, November 24, 1963, at “Hawkeyeworks.” Besides, there was no technology available in 1963 that could convincingly remove the “head-snap” from the Zapruder film; you could not animate JFK’s entire body without it being readily detectable as a forgery, so the “head-snap” stayed in the film. (The “head snap” may even be an inadvertent result—an artifact of apparently rapid motion—caused by the optical removal of several “exit debris” frames from the film. When projected at normal speed at playback, any scene in a motion picture will appear to speed up if frames have been removed. Those altering the film may have believed it was imperative to remove the exit debris travelling through the air to the rear of President Kennedy, even if that did induce apparent “motion” in his body which made it appear as though he might have been shot from the front. The forgers may have had no choice, in this instance, but to live with the lesser of two evils. Large amounts of exit debris traveling toward the rear would have been unmistakable proof within the film of a fatal shot from the front; whereas a “head snap” is something whose causes could be debated endlessly, without any final resolution.) Those who altered the Zapruder film knew that the wound alteration images in frames 317, 321, 323, 335, and 337, for example, were “good enough” to show investigators the film on a flimsy movie screen coated with diamond dust, but they also knew the alterations were not good enough to withstand close scrutiny. That is why I believe C.D. Jackson—the CIA’s asset at LIFE and its best friend in the national print media—instructed Richard Stolley to again approach Abraham Zapruder on Sunday night, and to offer a much higher sale price for Zapruder’s movie, in exchange for LIFE’s total ownership of the film, and all rights to the film. By Sunday night, the name of the game at LIFE was suppression, not profit-making. By Sunday night, November 24th, C. D. Jackson was wearing his CIA hat, not his Time, Inc. businessman’s hat. After striking the new deal with Time, Inc. on Monday, Zapruder received an immediate $25,000.00, and the remainder of his payments ($25,000.00 per year, each January, through January of 1968), were effectively structured as “hush money” payments. His incentive to keep his mouth shut about the film’s alteration would clearly be his desire to keep getting paid $25,000.00 each January, for the next five years. The alterationists in 1963 also had a “disposal” problem, for they had three genuine “first day copies” of the Zapruder film floating around which threatened to proliferate quickly, unless they could get them out of circulation immediately, replaced with new “first generation copies” stuck from the new “Hawkeyeworks” master delivered to NPIC on Sunday night. For them, speed was of the essence, not perfection. I believe that once the new “master” was completed at “Hawkeyeworks” early Sunday evening, three new first generation copies were struck from it, as well as at least one “dirty dupe” for the LIFE editorial crew standing by in Chicago. Only after these products were exposed at Rochester, early Sunday evening, was the “new Zapruder film” (masquerading as an unslit, 16 mm wide camera-original “double 8” film) couriered down to NPIC by “Bill Smith,” who took his cock-and-bull story along with him, to his everlasting discredit. Of course, the cock-and-bull story worked, since Homer McMahon and Ben Hunter knew nothing about the event with the true camera-original film at NPIC the previous night. McMahon and Hunter had no reason, on Sunday night, 11/24/63, to disbelieve “Bill Smith” when he told them that he had brought “the camera-original film” with him, after it had been “developed” at Rochester. After all, the product handed to them looked like a camera-original “double 8” film: it was a 16 mm wide unslit film, with sprocket holes on both sides, and exhibited opposing image strips, upside down in relation to each other, and going in reverse directions. I am quite sure that by Tuesday, November 26th, all of the original “first day copies” had been swapped out with the three replacements made at “Hawkeyeworks” Sunday night from the new “original.” NPIC finished up with the new “original” Zapruder film by some time Monday morning, November 25th, or perhaps by mid-day Monday at the latest. McMahon went home after the enlargements (the 5 x 7 prints) were run off, but the graphics people at NPIC still had to finish assembling the three sets of four panel briefing boards. And the rest is history. Now, through the magic of high resolution digital scans—technology undreamed of in 1963, in an analog world—the forgery and fraud of November, 1963 is being exposed, slowly but surely. Alterations that were “good enough” to hold up on a flimsy, portable 8 mm movie screen back in 1963, look quite bad—very crude—today, under the magnifying glass of today’s digital technology. The two back-to-back “briefing board events” the weekend of President Kennedy’s assassination at the CIA’s National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC) in Washington, D.C.—compartmentalized operations bracketing the Zapruder film’s alteration at the “Hawkeyeworks” lab in Rochester, N.Y.—are the signposts that illuminate for us, like two spotlights piercing the night sky, the hijacking of our nation’s history almost 49 years ago. The Zapruder film was altered by the U.S. government, using clandestine, state-of-the-art Kodak resources in Rochester, to remove the most egregious evidence within the film of shots that came from in front of JFK’s limousine. The true exit wound in the rear of his head was blacked out in many frames; frames showing exit debris from the fatal head shot propelled violently to the left rear were removed from the film; and a false “exit wound” was added to many of the image frames, in an attempt to support the lone assassin cover story. The altered film is one of the strongest proofs of a massive government cover-up following President Kennedy’s death, and the intelligence community’s third party surrogates are doing all they can, today, to deny that the film was ever altered, and discredit this story. I believe the facts speak for themselves. I will close now with this cautionary quote for those skeptics, unwilling to let go of a discredited paradigm, who still feel compelled to defend the Zapruder film’s authenticity: “It is misleading to claim that scientific advances and scholarly experiments can cause all photo fakes to be unmasked. Questions about authenticity remain. Many photos that once were considered genuine have recently been determined to be faked.” —Dino Brugioni, Author of – Photofakery: the History and Techniques of Photographic Deception and Manipulation, 1999 " [1] The panel voted its decision on June 16, 1999, but did not announce its decision publicly until August 3, 1999, due to its sensitivity over the death of John F. Kennedy Jr. in a plane crash. [2] Richard B. Trask, National Nightmare on Six Feet of Film (Yeoman Press, 2005); David R. Wrone, The Zapruder Film: Reframing JFK’s Assassination (University Press of Kansas, 2003); and Douglas P. Horne, Inside the Assassination Records Review Board (self published, 2009). [3] Horne, 2009, p. 1220-1226 [4] Ibid., p. 1231. [5] Roland J. Zavada, Analysis of Selected Motion Picture Photographic Evidence (September 25, 1998), Attachment A1-8 (Meeting Minutes of Discussion between Roland Zavada, Phil Chamberlain, and Dick Blair), and Attachment A1-11 (Phil Chamberlain’s original manuscript regarding events related to the handling and processing of the Zapruder film at the Kodak Plant in Dallas). [6] Zavada, 1998, Attachment A1-8. [7] Trask, 2005, p. 119-122; and Wrone, 2003, p. 22-28. [8] Zavada, 1998, Study 1, p. 27. [9] Trask, 2005, p. 127-131; and Wrone, 2003, p. 32-35. [10] Horne, 2009, p. 1200. [11] Trask, 2005, p. 131; and Wrone, 2003, p. 34-35. [12] Horne, 2009, p. 1346-1350. [13] Trask, 2005, p. 152-155; and Wrone, 2003, p. 34-35, and 52-53. [14] Wrone, 2003, p. 34-37. [15] Horne, 2009, p. 1200-1201. [16] Trask, 2005, p. 154-155. [17] Peter Janney, Mary’s Mosaic (Skyhorse Publishing, 2012), p. 293. [18] Horne, 2009, p. 1221. [19] Dino A. Brugioni, Eyes in the Sky (Naval Institute Press, 2010), p. 364. [20] ARRB interview of Homer A. McMahon conducted on July 14, 1997 by Douglas Horne. [21] Horne, 2009, p. 1326-1327. [22] Horne, 2009, p. 987-1013. [23] Trask, 2005, p. 122. [24] ARRB interview of Homer A. McMahon conducted on July 14, 1997 by Douglas Horne. [25] Trask, 2005, p. 118. [26] Trask, 2005, p. 117-119; and Horne, 2009, p. 1277-1281. [27] HD Video interview of Dino Brugioni conducted on July 9, 2011 by Douglas Horne. [28] Ibid. [29] Ibid. [30] Handwritten Memo for File written by H. Knoche on 5/14/1975. [31] Dino A. Brugioni, Eyeball to Eyeball (Random House, 1991), p. 66. [32] Horne, 2009, p. 1295-1296 [33] Ibid., p. 1296. [34] Ibid., p. 1201-1205. [35] Ibid., p. 1352-1363. [36] Ibid., 1299-1302. [37] Zavada, 1998, Attachment A1-1C, “Film Map of Original Zapruder Film” (prepared by ARRB staff member Douglas Horne following examination of the extant Zapruder film on April 4, 1997, at the National Archives) [38] Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (University of Chicago Press, 1962).

# 47. LHO would not have been murdered in the Dallas Police Station

This is from an essay by Doug Horne, " The Secret Service Customer—Bill Smith—and what he reported about the film’s provenance: Homer McMahon said he was told by Bill Smith that a patriotic citizen in Dallas had donated the camera-original film to the Secret Service out of a sense of duty, and that the individual did not want to make any money off of the film, and so had given it to the Secret Service for free. Bill Smith told McMahon he had personally couriered the undeveloped film himself to a Top Secret Kodak film lab called “Hawkeyeworks,” which McMahon knew to be in Rochester, N.Y. at Kodak Headquarters; that it had been developed there; and that the personnel at the Top Secret lab had subsequently referred Bill Smith back to his home base of Washington, D.C., to NPIC, for the making of individual frame enlargements and briefing boards, since those specific tasks could not be performed at the lab in Rochester. McMahon was extremely sensitive about the code-name “Hawkeyeworks” during the interview, and regretted mentioning it. [NOTE: In 1997, the CIA’s HRG asked the ARRB staff to expunge the use of the code-word from our written interview reports, and from the audiotape of the interview to be released to the public. Thus, in 1998, a sanitized (i.e., redacted) tape was provided by the ARRB staff for public release by the JFK Records Collection at NARA, and the Archives placed the unredacted, original tape recording under lock and key, for automatic release not later than 2017, in accordance with the JFK Records Act. The point is now moot, for the code-name “Hawkeyeworks” has since been effectively declassified, per the mention of this facility (“Eastman Kodak’s Hawkeye Film Processing Facility in Rochester, N.Y.”) in Dino Brugioni’s 2010 book, Eyes in the Sky, which was thoroughly vetted and approved for publication by the CIA.[19] Furthermore, Dino Brugioni himself repeatedly mentioned the “Hawkeye Plant,” and the capabilities of that state-of-the-art, high-tech laboratory, during his interviews with Peter Janney and me in 2009 and 2011.] McMahon explained that the government had classified contracts with Kodak in 1963, and that both the CIA and Kodak had their best people working together on classified projects. He was absolutely certain that the film had been developed at Rochester, and had come from Rochester, for Bill Smith had indicated this by using the unique code-word (“Hawkeyeworks”) that unmistakably referred to the “other Top Secret lab” in Rochester, to the exclusion of all other locations. (The “Hawkeyeworks” lab and its capabilities, as defined by Dino Brugioni, will be further discussed later in this article.)"

Here is a short biography of Dino B. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dino_Brugioni

"But, for it" should read "But, for me, it..."

Jim, I know you didn't write your essay in order to indict A. Dulles. But, for it was yet another dot to connect in the case against him.

I read the essay and the 12 comments following. It confirms my belief that A. Dulles was probably the driving force behind the murder of JFK.

Paul C., here is a relevant essay on the subject you bring up...https://archive.politicalassassinations.net/2013/04/executive-action-jfk-witness-deaths-and-the-london-times-actuary/

Paul, LBJ appointed Helms DCI in 1966. Shortly after that appointment , Helms had Des Fitzgerald fire Barnes, who had tried to get Helms kicked out of the CIA by going to Dulles. It did not work and Barnes was out as soon as LBJ appointed Helms DCI in 1966- see page 502 in "Coup in Dallas" ( it is in the essay by Alan Kent at the end of the aforementioned book).

This appears to be a relevant part of an essay on Maria Oswald Porter on SparticusL " (5) Marina Oswald Porter, letter to John Tunheim (19th April, 1996) (6) Marina Oswald Porter, statement published on 17th September, 1996. Subscribe to our Spartacus Newsletter and keep up to date with the latest articles. Popular Pages John F. Kennedy Winston Churchill Socrates × × × Spartacus eBooks Related Reading Oswald Talked Related Reading Assignment: Oswald Sections Marina Oswald : Biography Primary Sources 1 2 3 4 5 6 Interesting articles Queen Catherine Howard Why the Tories opposed the introduction of the NHS in 1948? Did Leon Trotsky betray the ideals of the revolution in 1921? Why did the parents of these five children decide that they had to die in Berlin on 1st May, 1945? Anne of Cleves American Artists and the First World War Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex Benjamin Disraeli Sylvia Pankhurst The Wild Bunch First World War Second World War The Tudors British History Vietnam War Military History Watergate Assassination of JFK Assocation Football Normans American West Famous Crimes Black People in Britain The Monarchy Blitz United States Cold War English Civil War Making of the United Kingdom Russia Germany The Medieval World Nazi Germany American Civil War Spanish Civil War Civil Rights Movement McCarthyism Slavery Child Labour Women's Suffrage Parliamentary Reform Railways Trade Unions Textile Industry Russian Revolution Travel Guide Spartacus Blog Winston Churchill John F. Kennedy Lyndon B. Johnson Robert F. Kennedy Queen Victoria J. Edgar Hoover Ku Klux Klan Martin Luther King Adolf Hitler Joseph Stalin Jim Crow Laws Benito Mussolini Franklin D. Roosevelt Abraham Lincoln Lee Harvey Oswald © 1997-2020 Spartacus Educational Publishers Ltd. Privacy Statement Advertising News Online Written by John Simkin About Blog Newsletter Web Developer: Peter McMillan Contact