Pamela Brown

As much as Lifton would like to think he knows it all, he is in this case mistaken. I have been sharing this event since it happened. I also included it in my essay "SS-100-X" in CAR CRASH CULTURE. In fact, I believe I may have sent Lifton a copy.

1. Wolper produced 32 episodes of the 1954 series OSS: it is inconceivable that the CIA did not take a keen interest in the shaping of the series, not least because of the presence of so many ex-OSS in its own ranks, among them, the most senior. 2. The Wolper documentary Four Days in November, released in October 1964, was made in conjunction with UPI, and debuted just as UPI completed its takeover of Wolper's production company and its (five?) subsidiaries. 3. Four Days is perhaps most remarkable for what it omits - any footage of the presidential limousine turning the corner from Houston on Elm: 4. The absence of any footage of said turn is more than a little curious because according to a UPI despatch from New York in the early hours of Tuesday, November 26, 1963, it had footage of precisely that turn: My conclusion from the above? Rather to my surprise, I find Pamela's recollection entirely credible, for this additional reason: The version of the Zapruder fake which, unannounced, followed Wolper's cynical piece of pro-WC hackwork was almost certainly the second version, the one which had removed the left turn from Houston on to Elm. What I suspect she was subjected to was a small scale experiment in perception management, as part of the preparation for introducing the new, improved version of the Zapruder fake. Paul It seemed to me at the time that the copy of the Z-film I saw was not only pretty clear (in sharp contrast to the grainy version showed years later by Geraldo) but that everything in the fatal headshot went backwards. I became convinced upon viewing it that the shot could not have come from the TSBD. As all the controversy began to swirl about the myth the WCR was trying to put forth, no matter how 'logical' anything seemed, it was in conflict with my perception.

Of course SIX SECONDS needs no defense. While I reserve the future right to point out its shortcomings, no one can deny that the act of writing and publication (it is a superbly produced book) was a courageous act, much to be admired. I would basically agree with you Raymond. My initial reaction to SSID was very positive because it alluded to conspiracy and included sketches of a number of the Z-frames, which were more clear than the photocopies in the WC H&E. However, I did find it muddled and puzzling in many respects; it was difficult to determine whether the leads being presented were opening doors to new research or merely rabbit-trails. Taking a fresh look at SSID, which I am now doing, it is occurring to me that it might be valuable to ask whether or not this book was intended as some sort of limited hang-out for the CTs, appearing to give new information but concealing more than it revealed. Anyone can tell by looking at the Z-film, for example, that it was altered. It was spliced in at least two critical places. So then the question becomes not whether it was altered but how maliciously it was altered. I had a chance to see the Z-film once in a movie theatre in NYC in December 1964. It made an indelible impression. How different would my or any other researcher's perceptions have been if they had had access to it on a daily basis back then. Why, then, are so many now recognized anomalies glossed over in SSID? By 'the poster' do you mean me? How dismissive. The Bleeker Street Cinema, and it followed the David Wolper film "1000 Days" which was in black+white. They rolled without comment into the Zapruder. At the time I did not question who was responsible for the showing. I did not realize until later how unusual that was. There was indeed a small ad in one of the NYC papers, but, there was no press hype over it. I sat in the front row and my obsession with the limo began that evening, watching the limo move into view with the flags flapping in the wind, then watching JFK move from life to death on a large screen. Pamela So you are claiming to have viewed the Z-film in 1964 before Groden had a copy from Moe Wietzman in the late 60s early 70s? What copy could you have possibly seen? Not Lifes for sure, and no way a SS copy Sorry but thats real hard to believe I did. I don't know what copy it was. It certainly wasn't the original, but it was quite good. I've been sharing this event with the research community for a very long time.

Of course SIX SECONDS needs no defense. While I reserve the future right to point out its shortcomings, no one can deny that the act of writing and publication (it is a superbly produced book) was a courageous act, much to be admired. I would basically agree with you Raymond. My initial reaction to SSID was very positive because it alluded to conspiracy and included sketches of a number of the Z-frames, which were more clear than the photocopies in the WC H&E. However, I did find it muddled and puzzling in many respects; it was difficult to determine whether the leads being presented were opening doors to new research or merely rabbit-trails. Taking a fresh look at SSID, which I am now doing, it is occurring to me that it might be valuable to ask whether or not this book was intended as some sort of limited hang-out for the CTs, appearing to give new information but concealing more than it revealed. Anyone can tell by looking at the Z-film, for example, that it was altered. It was spliced in at least two critical places. So then the question becomes not whether it was altered but how maliciously it was altered. I had a chance to see the Z-film once in a movie theatre in NYC in December 1964. It made an indelible impression. How different would my or any other researcher's perceptions have been if they had had access to it on a daily basis back then. Why, then, are so many now recognized anomalies glossed over in SSID? By 'the poster' do you mean me? How dismissive. The Bleeker Street Cinema, and it followed the David Wolper film "1000 Days" which was in black+white. They rolled without comment into the Zapruder. At the time I did not question who was responsible for the showing. I did not realize until later how unusual that was. There was indeed a small ad in one of the NYC papers, but, there was no press hype over it. I sat in the front row and my obsession with the limo began that evening, watching the limo move into view with the flags flapping in the wind, then watching JFK move from life to death on a large screen.

I am asking questions. SSID provided sketches to the Z-film at a time when most of it, in any clear version, was being suppressed. Tink was by his own admission on p.217 working with Mr. George Hunt, Managing Editor of LIFE, for example, in publishing the 'missing frames' for the first time...p. 217 he says "...before WE came into possession of the original print" (caps mine). I am asking if there was an agenda to draw CTs in by presenting sketches of some of the earlier frames while 'ignoring' blatant anomaly of the film that they were aware of because of their close association with it (when this relationship was denied to most of the rest of us). In addition, as Jim Fetzer has pointed out, whereas there is considerable focus on the earlier frames of the Z-film, there is virtually no attention paid to the critical fatal headshot sequence in the Z-film. Instead, our attention is drawn away to the Nix film. Why is that? Why are there no sketches of the fatal headshot sequence? The question I am asking is whether these issues are simply lapses, or oversights, or the result of something more deliberate -- giving researchers bits and pieces of things they had not had before while withholding the fact that they all knew the Z-film had been altered and that it was for this reason being suppressed and dribbled out in little 'safe' little bits.

Of course SIX SECONDS needs no defense. While I reserve the future right to point out its shortcomings, no one can deny that the act of writing and publication (it is a superbly produced book) was a courageous act, much to be admired. I would basically agree with you Raymond. My initial reaction to SSID was very positive because it alluded to conspiracy and included sketches of a number of the Z-frames, which were more clear than the photocopies in the WC H&E. However, I did find it muddled and puzzling in many respects; it was difficult to determine whether the leads being presented were opening doors to new research or merely rabbit-trails. Taking a fresh look at SSID, which I am now doing, it is occurring to me that it might be valuable to ask whether or not this book was intended as some sort of limited hang-out for the CTs, appearing to give new information but concealing more than it revealed. Anyone can tell by looking at the Z-film, for example, that it was altered. It was spliced in at least two critical places. So then the question becomes not whether it was altered but how maliciously it was altered. I had a chance to see the Z-film once in a movie theatre in NYC in December 1964. It made an indelible impression. How different would my or any other researcher's perceptions have been if they had had access to it on a daily basis back then. Why, then, are so many now recognized anomalies glossed over in SSID?

After forcing myself to wallow through the mire of RH, I found it necessary to take a fresh look at Tink's theories. The Bug has nothing but praise for them, which can only cause one to wonder how much of a non-threat he considers them to be....

Apparently, Vince is moved by rhetoric, not substance.

Unfortunately, if these shows follow in the footsteps of their earlier shows, including ITTC, in which I was involved, they will be little more than trolls to the CT community to then try to discredit any links to conspiracy and end up regurgitating the WCR. I hope I am mistaken.

Good question. A shooter would have had a good line of sight when the limo came down Houston. Of course, everyone would then look at the window and perhaps see the rifle. That might have made escape more difficult, but not impossible.

You can see it that way, and I am sure-as-heck too cynical to rule out the crying thing as a cover story, or - if it happened - as an LBJ-manufactured excuse for why he was distraught. However - big murder, big conspiracy, and big debts are traumatic things, maybe producing momentary regrets, once one sees the upshot and responsibility of one's own handiwork.* And Johnson expressed other conflicted behavior, in prattling on, early and late, about conspiracy and "a damned Murder Inc. in the Caribbean," to what seemed like different purposes at different times. So the man was not unflappable, not unafraid. Of something. I have no doubt the man was "in on it," but to what degree of responsibility and action? Maybe, in an instant, it seemed less than he had imagined, and being suddenly thrust into the bloody target seat, still warm from Jack, unnerved him. He did, after all, retire Kennedy's desk. (And Nixon didn't bring it back.) Gloating? Sweeping change? Fear? This is biographer's meat, and we need to cut and cure more of it, so better biographies are written, and very good ones (Robert A. Caro's) might be perfected. Wonder why LBJ wanted to "stay in the area"? Did he fear going 'wheels up' and getting shot out of the air, did he fear going back to Washington? Maybe there was still unfinished business to be completed in- "the area" -Bill +++++++++ *Sidebar: I referred above to Johnson being, "unmann'd" by his guilt, in the language of Shakespeare's Macbeth. We should recall that in 1967 "MacBird," a rather well-received satirical play on Johnson as the king-killing usurper, and Bobby as the avenger, was popular off-Broadway. So the "Johnson did it" view was contemporary. And I find from my JFK and RFK research that works - even fictional works - written soon after such events do catch much important fact and opinion that was in the minds of witnesses and the general public. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacBird This is biographer's meat, and we need to cut and cure more of it, so better biographies are written, and very good ones (Robert A. Caro's) might be perfected. Wonder why LBJ wanted to "stay in the area"? Did he fear going 'wheels up' and getting shot out of the air, did he fear going back to Washington? Maybe there was still unfinished business to be completed in- "the area" -Bill Such as waiting for the patsy to be arrested?

Well, as they say, ignorance is bliss.

Both, but clearly the motives of the source of the paranoid misinformation needs to be examined. Given it was Terry who posted it I guess it is the usual head spinningly insane conspiracy stuff from the Larouche movement, and unless all medical professionals worldwide are part of the 'British conspiracy' I guess we can dismiss it as dangerous rubbish. Governments I believe are making preparations to vaccinate their populations against swine flu http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/sep...on-programme-uk It may or may not be more difficult to reach and manage national coverage given the health system in the USA. Swine flu is very real. We have had a number of cases in our local schools and it is starting to spread again quite quickly. The illnes children have experienced in my area has amounted to a week of very heavy flu followed by a slow recovery of up to 10 days - no worse than proper seasonal flu infact. However people die of even seasonal flu every year. The danger with swine flu however is the lack of any immunity within communities (it's new). It therefore spreads alarmingly quickly putting potentially more of those with underlying health issues at risk. My advice would be if you're offered the vaccine take it. If the Duke of Edinburgh is maliciously attempting to insert tracking devices into you please accept my apologies in advance Terry's post was simply a heads-up to something that is now a factor in the swine flu situation. I am not speaking from a personal standpoint, at least at this point, as much as I am concerned as to whether these posts and videos are simply fear-mongering, something with an agenda, or something with some grains of truth in them. I don't know, and would like to find out. There are posts today that the state of NY is insisting on mandatory vaccination for all of their healthcare workers. As the vaccine becomes available, it seems likely there will be better definition as to just how much control the govt at one level or another intends to exert on this situation.

Good points. Is it your interpretation of the swine flu shot paranoia that the claims are unfounded? Or are they deliberate misinformation? It seems that the flu is spreading in the south and people are in real need of a vaccine that can help them.

With all due respect, you seem to be missing the point of my concern. The question is being raised is not only as to the negative side effects that may have proven to be fatal in at least two instances, but also as to whether the vaccine is some sort of bioweapon. Another question is being raised as to whether the needles intended to be used with the injections will have some sort of tracking chip in them that is then implanted into the recipient. Surely this pushes the idea of getting a flu shot into some sort of a new dimension? Then there is also the concern that these shots may be mandatory and that those who refuse them will have to be put into some sort of quarantine. Apparently, some law along this line has already been put into place in Oklahoma. Surely if there is any truth to this concern it opens the door to the possibility of a pandemic being used as a means to control the citizens. Or, is all of this hype some sort of propaganda scheme to cause a revolt against getting the shots, per the title of this thread?

It seems Quadafi's entire rant was a diatribe against Israel. His thinking seems to be that all the wars started since the inception of the UN, plus the assassinations, were done by or on behalf of Israel. He seems to think the rest of the UN is keeping the facts secret, so kept on asking for the files to be opened. Ironically, JFK did retain an objective position on Israel, and was concerned about the well-being of the Palestinians as well as the Israelis. He did request inspection of Dimona which we now know, through whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu, was a site for building nuclear warheads. To make matters worse, JFK's father was of course a staunch Hitler appeaser. Israel certainly perceived itself to have a motive, if they wanted one.

What is happening regarding the swine flu vaccine? Just recently there have been a spate of posts and videos with various points of emphasis, such as an rfid chip in the needle(s) to be used, bad reactions re military personnel who have been innoclated, including navy ships having to return to port, everything being hushed up, mandatory innoculations in oklahoma, police and military being poised to enforce this... http://nwoobserver.wordpress.com/2009/09/2...swine-flu-chip/ http://labvirus.wordpress.com/2009/09/25/h...-petty-officer/ http://www.wral.com/golo/blogpost/6090277/

Based on my experience with Fetzer re the limo myth of the 'spiral nebulae' that he was pushing, there seemed to be some sort of agenda in his refusal to even acknowledge the possibility of another position. If I remember correctly, the last straw prior to his worst tirade and rant on this subject was when I suggested that it was the absence of damage to the limo, not a high degree of damage, that is proof of conspiracy.

I have been lugging RH to the dog park every day for the last few weeks, to force myself to read it. It seems to be one long rant against those who dare to disagree with the WCR. The chapter on the movie JFK is quite telling -- though Stone repeatedly called the movie the countermyth to the WCR myth, the Bug insists on trying to debunk it as though it is history. He of course misses the irony that neither JFK nor the WCR are history. And, of course, neither is RH, no matter how many times he tries to shove it down our throats.

Jim DiEugenio and I will be guests of Len Osanic tonight on Black Op Radio http://www.blackopradio.com/. We will be discussing the Discovery Channel program INSIDE THE TARGET CAR, and I will also be discussing my new article "Inside INSIDE THE TARGET CAR", recently published at the CTKA site. http://www.ctka.net/2009/target_car_pmb.html

I am only referencing the Dallas footage showing the replica limo. The first time the show aired the footage from the Dallas reenactment showing JBK and JFK in what was supposed to duplicate the Z312 position, was grotesquely incorrect. Many viewers spotted that at once and went screaming to the DC, me included. Subsequent to that, they edited out that frame and replaced it with a frame that better duplicated Jackie's arm position and their alignment within the limo. However, even that was not exact. And the reenactment frame didn't even really make a difference because they had already done their tests with the head aligned in a position that was other than Z312 (though they claimed they duplicated it). Let me get this straight. When the program was re-run, they'd fixed their incorrect assertion about the limousine photos, and replaced the Dealey photo of Jackie behind JFK, but KEPT in Mack's completely BOGUS claim that the GK shot would have killed Jackie? If so, I am even more outraged!!! You are correct. They did hedge the dating of the SS photos by saying 'the next day' rather than 'over 24 hours after the assassination and after at least two informal SS searches and one formal FBI search where they removed the rear seat.'

Thank you, Peter. Hopefully I can provide some definition to what actually happened and how the effects in the show were achieved. With any luck, this might help viewers to become more observant and less interested in what a 'credible' narrator is telling them. I have little doubt that my insights have merely scratched the surface of what actually went on. It is entirely possible that the DC press release was devised well before the tests were even done, and that the GK shot that blew the dummy head off just gave them (what they considered) the go-ahead to flagrantly flaunt their WCR-redux grandiose claims. With any luck the viewing population will be educated and sophisticated in discernment by the time the HBO miniseries on RH is foisted off on the public. This will undoubtedly contain all the same strategies of subterfuge, cherrypicking and deception evident in ITTC. It may even allow the public to objectively analyze just how ludicrous the theory that LHO acted alone truly is.

I am only referencing the Dallas footage showing the replica limo. The first time the show aired the footage from the Dallas reenactment showing JBK and JFK in what was supposed to duplicate the Z312 position, was grotesquely incorrect. Many viewers spotted that at once and went screaming to the DC, me included. Subsequent to that, they edited out that frame and replaced it with a frame that better duplicated Jackie's arm position and their alignment within the limo. However, even that was not exact. And the reenactment frame didn't even really make a difference because they had already done their tests with the head aligned in a position that was other than Z312 (though they claimed they duplicated it).

Good observation. One would think this might be the perfect opportunity for him to prove his "Badgeman theory". However, it is my impression that Gary Mack 'believes' whatever he is told to. "Badgeman" must not have been popular with the DC. To their credit, though, they did ask me, and undoubtedly others, where a frontal shot would/could have come from, so it seems they were starting with a wider range of possibilities than just that of "Badgeman".

Looks like Barb and Jerry will have to explain to Tink how they managed to hijack their own thread.