Zapruder Film

[John Simkin]

As a result of interviewing James Wagenvoord, the editorial business manager and assistant to Life Magazines Executive Editor in November 1963, I have updated my page on the Zapruder Film. Feel free to suggest other ways that the page should be corrected.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKzapruderF.htm

[Bernice Moore]

The quality of the National Archives' photographic copy of this hand written report is so poor that many of its words cannot be made out in a scanned copy. Consequently, we have provided below a typed copy ]

CD - 87 Folder 1

CO2 34030 11/22

9:55

To: Chief Rowley

From: Max D. Phillips

Subject: 8mm movie film showing President

Kennedy being shot

Enclosed is an 8mm movie film

taken by Mr. A. Zapruder, 501 Elm St., Dallas

Texas (RI8-6071)

Mr.. Zapruder was photographing

the President at the instant he was shot.

According to Mr. Zapruder, the position of

the assassin was behind Mr. Zapruder.

Note: Disregard personel scenes

shown on Mr. Zapruder’s film.. Mr. Zapruder

is in custody of the "master" film. Two prints

were given to SAIC Sorrels, this date.

The third print is forwarded.

Max D. Phillips

Special Agent - PRS

b...

[John Simkin]

Message from Gary Mack:

John,

There were no "transposed frames" in any issue of LIFE magazine. An inadvertent frame reversal occurred only in volume 18 of the Warren Commission exhibits. You might review The Sixth Floor Museum's history of the Z film:

http://jfk.org/go/collections/about/zapruder-film-chronology

Gary Mack

This information comes from James Wagenvoord, the editorial business manager and assistant to Life Magazines Executive Editor, in 1963. He realized that a mistake had been made when they were published in Life on 29th November, 1963: "I asked about it when the stills were first printed, (they didn't read right) and then duped for distribution to the European and British papers/magazines. The only response I go was an icy stare from Dick Pollard, Life's Director of Photography. So being an ambitious employee, I had them distributed."

[Len Colby]

IIRC some of the motorcycle cops said that the motorcade stopped but not specifically the limo and others said it slowed.

Also you should correct the Zapruder bio.Though you couch it with "According to Gregory Burnham...", it still contains the claim he " worked with Jeanne LeGon at the company: 'In 1953 and 1954 a woman named, Jeanne LeGon worked side by side with Abraham Zapruder at a high end clothing design firm called, Nardis of Dallas. Jeanne LeGon designed the clothing and Abraham Zapruder cut the patterns and the material for her." '

Though it's true Burnham claims this it was demonstrated on another thread here his own company was successful enough to be selling coats in stores in small towns hundreds of miles away by early 1952. And thus the 1949 dated normally cited for him starting up Jennifer Juniors is probably correct.In any case he obviously wasn't working as a cutter for a rival firm 1953-4

[William Kelly]

Volume IV of Doug Horne's five volume Inside the ARRB is now available at Amazon.com.

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/

Chapter 14 of this Volume - The Zapruder Film Mystery, is sure to be one of the most significant and controversial chapters, and there are others.

After the ARRB held one of its few, if only public hearings, on the Zapurder film, which was carried on C-Span, two former CIA officers came forward and reported how they made enlargements from the original film of the assassination, and a former head of the CIA's photo department was intensely interviewed on the record by a researcher.

Together, these interviews indicate that two different films were used when making enlargements, the second version having been developed at a top secret Kodak processing plant at the Rochester, New York HQ called Hawk Eye Works.

While even this name was classified, and Doug Horne couldn't use it or say it because of his security oath, others have published the name and he can now refer to it.

Although there isn't much on the Hawk Eye Works available yet, it's clear that it was named after Kodak's Brownie Hawkeye camera, but was actually a Top Secret lab used - in 1963 - to develop the film from the first CORONA satellite photos, and Kodak later became one of the top three defense contractors involved in the supersecret NRO, who used Collins Radio as a cover when building their new headquarters in Virginia.

While Doug's chapter (#14) on the Z-film is nearly 200 pages long, it also includes examples of alteration that haven't been seen before - as revealed in new, single frame, Z-film enlargements provided by forum member Sydney Wilkenson, who works on Hollywood movies.

She also arranged for some Hollywood special effects professionals to review the Z-film and show how and where it was tampered with, and maybe figure out why.

Although it will take some time to wade through five volumes of intense analysis of the medical evidence and the cold war setting that framed the assassination, the first volume now available Volume IV - is a good one to start with, especially for its complete rundown on the Zapruder film.

Just when you think you've heard everything, you learn something new.

We'll be able to discuss these issues in more detail once people have the book(s) in their hands and reading it.

Bill Kelly (Still reading)

[Michael Hogan]

Chapter 14 of this Volume - The Zapruder Film Mystery, is sure to be one of the most significant and controversial chapters, and there are others.....

.....Although it will take some time to wade through five volumes of intense analysis of the medical evidence and the cold war setting that framed the assassination, the first volume now available Volume IV - is a good one to start with, especially for its complete rundown on the Zapruder film.

Just when you think you've heard everything, you learn something new.

We'll be able to discuss these issues in more detail once people have the book(s) in their hands and reading it.

I have great respect for Doug Horne and his significant efforts which have spanned nearly two decades in attempting to move us closer to the truth. I look forward to reading all five volumes and learning of things I did not know.

In the inaugural issue of Jerry Rose's remarkable journal, The Third Decade (November 1984), Philip H. Melanson wrote:

"It is possible that the film of the century is more intricately related to the crime of the century than we ever knew -- not because it

recorded

the crime of the century, as we have assumed, but because it was itself an instrument of conspiracy."

In the same issue, Melanson also wrote:

"Documents obtained from the FBI, CIA and Secret Service through the Freedom of Information Act contain startling revelations about the Z film's chain of possession. The first documents surfaced in 1976; others in 1981. They provide considerable support for allegations of a CIA cover-up and for allegations regarding possible CIA manipulation of evidence. There is now good reason to question the evidentiary integrity of the Z film. Moreover, it is clear that before the FBI had obtained the film, CIA experts had already analyzed it and had found data which strongly suggested a conspiracy.....

....Setting aside the worst-case scenario (so alteration of the original film in order to hide a conspiracy), there is still the fact that NPIC generated data which would logically support a conspiracy theory, and that this data never reached the Warren Commission and appears to have been withheld from the Secret Service as well."

In 1996, David Lifton told the ARRB:

"It (the Zapruder film) is the Rosetta Stone for this case and the issue now is authenticity. If the film has not been tampered with then it is an accurate record of the wounds and it is a time clock of the assassination. However, and more importantly, if the film has been tampered with in some way, as may has (sic) alleged and I might add I believe, then that matter must be investigated in the future. In short, it represents an assassination record that has to be clarified."

And in 1998, Josiah Thompson maintained:

"What emerges from this chronology is a single important fact: At no time during this hectic weekend did the original of the film ever leave the custody and control of Abraham Zapruder and LIFE magazine."

In his blog, insidethearrb, Doug Horne writes:

"I am convinced that President Kennedy was killed by a large domestic conspiracy involving key players in the national security establishment, a conspiracy that crossed agency lines. It is clear to me that a veto was cast on JFK's life by this cabal because they despised (and feared) President Kennedy's foreign policy, and were convinced he was losing the Cold War. Unwilling to tolerate the irreversible changes that he would have instituted in World affairs in his second term, and all too aware of his near-certain reelection in 1964, the establishment decided to fire the President before he could commence a second term as President and bring the Cold War to an end. By 1963, JFK wanted to end the Cold War---not win it---and this was unacceptable to the military-intelligence complex in this country."

As Jim Douglass recently told Len Osanic:

"I believe the idea Oswald was a lone assassin has government support and instigation..., since we’ve known, in terms of available information for decades, that the United States government was involved in killing the President.....

.....I don’t think it’s about getting new information on the Kennedy assassination, it’s telling the story of what we already know. That’s the task and it’s a task that’s very urgent at this moment in history…"

Douglass is exactly right. We've known for many decades. However, I believe his call for urgency is belated, and doomed to failure. We've known of this need for urgency for more than forty years thanks to efforts of people like Lane, Weisberg, Jones, Meagher, Salandria and so many others that accompanied and followed them. Those researchers underlined the urgency that was at hand then, and although incredible strides in the face of difficult obstacles have been made, it can be argued that the opportunities to resolve this case have long passed.

Whatever one thinks of Jim Garrison and his prosecution of Claw Shaw, he came to the same conclusions as Doug Horne and James Douglass forty damn years ago.

In his impassioned and eloquent book, A Heritage of Stone (1970), Garrison wrote:

A HERITAGE OF STONE

by Jim Garrison

A MAN WHO CARES too much for the human race may find himself living in a hostile environment. His humanity may not regarded as dangerous so long as his voice cannot be heard by too many people, but if he is eloquent, or in a position to affect the affairs of the nation, then his humanity will be regarded by some men as a great threat.

AFTER THE UNITED STATES ascended to the position of the most powerful military nation in history, in the midst of its accumulation of the most effective death machinery of all time, there occurred the accident election of a President who regarded the entire human race with compassion. By the time this happened, the cold war had become our major industry, and the Central Intelligence Agency had become the clandestine arm of our military-industrial complex and, in the process, (it had become) the most effective assassination machine in the world.

JOHN KENNEDY'S EFFORTS to obtain a lasting peace represented the threat of civilian control reasserting itself over the military and industrial power structure which had developed during the years of the cold war. Shortly after twelve noon on November 22, 1963, Kennedy's hopes died by assassination.

THE COUNTERTHRUST HAD taken less than six seconds. There was no risk the federal government would expose the truth about the President's murder, because agents of the federal government had participated in it. There was no risk of exposure from the national press, because, having been tossed a lone assassin and presented with an acceptable fable, the press would not go farther and try to digest the indigestable, to think the unthinkable and to question Brutus about the removal of Caesar.

THE USE OF THE COUP D' ETAT - the murder of a leader by forces within his own government - is as old as the struggle of men for power. From modern intelligence agency techiques, however, there comes a new refinement. Through the employment of cover devices and the controlled disemination of information, the role of the government in assassinations can be effectively concealed.

COUP D' ETAT GENERALLY have been accomplished by men powerful enough to be free from any fear of retribution. If they did not possess, at the outset, some manner of achieving control over the machinery of government, they would not have initiated the murder of a national leader. The people afterward may be free to make Caesar a god, as they did in Rome, but they must not be free to disturb the men who killed him.

IN THE MEANTIME, the men who sponsored his removal can change the government's policies to suit their desires, leaving the citizens free to mourn and worship their dead leader.

NO ONE WANTS TO RECOGNIZE that somewhere along the line America has ceased to be the home of the brave and the land of the free, and that only in after-dinner speeches, it is still the sweet land of liberty. No one wants to recognize that there are assassins at work in the land, systematically eliminating men who speak out for the human race and for the future. No one wants to admit that in America peace is dangerous business. Better to have the assassination accompanied by wafer-thin deceptions, eagerly accepted one after the other, than to have to face the truth.

JUSTICE IS NOT SO blind that it pursues the most powerful forces in the country. Nor is the press so committed to truth that it wants the burden of knowledge of what is happening.

AMERICA HAS BECOME A nation controlled by men who seeks ever-increasing power. Justice is whatever they want to happen. Truth is whatever they annouce has occurred.

AS THE PRESIDENT'S limousine turned right from Main Street onto Houston, gunman waited in Dealey Plaza. In other towns and cities men glanced at their watches and waited for the news bulletin. At the corner of Elm the car made a sharp left turn past the Texas School Book Depository. President Kennedy had ten seconds to live.

"What kind of peace do we seek.... not a Pax-Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of of the grave, nor the security of the slave. Not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women, not merely peace in our time, but peace in all time.

Our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's future. And we are all mortal.

Too many of us think that this is impossible, that war is inevitable, than mankind is doomed. That we are gripped by forces we cannot control. We need not accept that view, our problems are man made, therefore they can be solved by man, man's reason and spirit has oftened solved the seemingly unsolvable, and I believe they can do it again."

SUDDENLY became mere words.

OUR INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT BEGINS and ends with deception. Perceiving this deception is the key to understanding how the assassination of President Kennedy was accomplished. Understanding the motivation for his assassination is the key to understanding what has happened to America.

Early researchers had the intelligence, integrity and guts to articulate the "unspeakable" (Garrison referred to it as the indigestable and the unthinkable) in what seems like a lifetime ago. By and large, their warnings were not heeded then. There is little reason to believe that now, after so many years, things will be different.

Although some will dispute this, the American people have never had the unity or the power necessary to demand an honest investigation from their government. They didn't then and they don't today. Proof is the fact that an honest investigation never happened despite the pressures that were extant at the time.

Time is not running out. It ran out years ago.

[William Kelly]

Chapter 14 of this Volume - The Zapruder Film Mystery, is sure to be one of the most significant and controversial chapters, and there are others.....

.....Although it will take some time to wade through five volumes of intense analysis of the medical evidence and the cold war setting that framed the assassination, the first volume now available Volume IV - is a good one to start with, especially for its complete rundown on the Zapruder film.

Just when you think you've heard everything, you learn something new.

We'll be able to discuss these issues in more detail once people have the book(s) in their hands and reading it.

I have great respect for Doug Horne and his significant efforts which have spanned nearly two decades in attempting to move us closer to the truth. I look forward to reading all five volumes and learning of things I did not know.

In the inaugural issue of Jerry Rose's remarkable journal, The Third Decade (November 1984), Philip H. Melanson wrote:

"It is possible that the film of the century is more intricately related to the crime of the century than we ever knew -- not because it

recorded

the crime of the century, as we have assumed, but because it was itself an instrument of conspiracy."

In the same issue, Melanson also wrote:

"Documents obtained from the FBI, CIA and Secret Service through the Freedom of Information Act contain startling revelations about the Z film's chain of possession. The first documents surfaced in 1976; others in 1981. They provide considerable support for allegations of a CIA cover-up and for allegations regarding possible CIA manipulation of evidence. There is now good reason to question the evidentiary integrity of the Z film. Moreover, it is clear that before the FBI had obtained the film, CIA experts had already analyzed it and had found data which strongly suggested a conspiracy.....

....Setting aside the worst-case scenario (so alteration of the original film in order to hide a conspiracy), there is still the fact that NPIC generated data which would logically support a conspiracy theory, and that this data never reached the Warren Commission and appears to have been withheld from the Secret Service as well."

In 1996, David Lifton told the ARRB:

"It (the Zapruder film) is the Rosetta Stone for this case and the issue now is authenticity. If the film has not been tampered with then it is an accurate record of the wounds and it is a time clock of the assassination. However, and more importantly, if the film has been tampered with in some way, as may has (sic) alleged and I might add I believe, then that matter must be investigated in the future. In short, it represents an assassination record that has to be clarified."

And in 1998, Josiah Thompson maintained:

"What emerges from this chronology is a single important fact: At no time during this hectic weekend did the original of the film ever leave the custody and control of Abraham Zapruder and LIFE magazine."

In his blog, insidethearrb, Doug Horne writes:

"I am convinced that President Kennedy was killed by a large domestic conspiracy involving key players in the national security establishment, a conspiracy that crossed agency lines. It is clear to me that a veto was cast on JFK's life by this cabal because they despised (and feared) President Kennedy's foreign policy, and were convinced he was losing the Cold War. Unwilling to tolerate the irreversible changes that he would have instituted in World affairs in his second term, and all too aware of his near-certain reelection in 1964, the establishment decided to fire the President before he could commence a second term as President and bring the Cold War to an end. By 1963, JFK wanted to end the Cold War---not win it---and this was unacceptable to the military-intelligence complex in this country."

As Jim Douglass recently told Len Osanic:

"I believe the idea Oswald was a lone assassin has government support and instigation..., since we've known, in terms of available information for decades, that the United States government was involved in killing the President.....

.....I don't think it's about getting new information on the Kennedy assassination, it's telling the story of what we already know. That's the task and it's a task that's very urgent at this moment in history…"

Douglass is exactly right. We've known for many decades. However, I believe his call for urgency is belated, and doomed to failure. We've known of this need for urgency for more than forty years thanks to efforts of people like Lane, Weisberg, Jones, Meagher, Salandria and so many others that accompanied and followed them. Those researchers underlined the urgency that was at hand then, and although incredible strides in the face of difficult obstacles have been made, it can be argued that the opportunities to resolve this case have long passed.

Whatever one thinks of Jim Garrison and his prosecution of Claw Shaw, he came to the same conclusions as Doug Horne and James Douglass forty damn years ago.

In his impassioned and eloquent book, A Heritage of Stone (1970), Garrison wrote:

A HERITAGE OF STONE

by Jim Garrison

A MAN WHO CARES too much for the human race may find himself living in a hostile environment. His humanity may not regarded as dangerous so long as his voice cannot be heard by too many people, but if he is eloquent, or in a position to affect the affairs of the nation, then his humanity will be regarded by some men as a great threat.

AFTER THE UNITED STATES ascended to the position of the most powerful military nation in history, in the midst of its accumulation of the most effective death machinery of all time, there occurred the accident election of a President who regarded the entire human race with compassion. By the time this happened, the cold war had become our major industry, and the Central Intelligence Agency had become the clandestine arm of our military-industrial complex and, in the process, (it had become) the most effective assassination machine in the world.

JOHN KENNEDY'S EFFORTS to obtain a lasting peace represented the threat of civilian control reasserting itself over the military and industrial power structure which had developed during the years of the cold war. Shortly after twelve noon on November 22, 1963, Kennedy's hopes died by assassination.

THE COUNTERTHRUST HAD taken less than six seconds. There was no risk the federal government would expose the truth about the President's murder, because agents of the federal government had participated in it. There was no risk of exposure from the national press, because, having been tossed a lone assassin and presented with an acceptable fable, the press would not go farther and try to digest the indigestable, to think the unthinkable and to question Brutus about the removal of Caesar.

THE USE OF THE COUP D' ETAT - the murder of a leader by forces within his own government - is as old as the struggle of men for power. From modern intelligence agency techiques, however, there comes a new refinement. Through the employment of cover devices and the controlled disemination of information, the role of the government in assassinations can be effectively concealed.

COUP D' ETAT GENERALLY have been accomplished by men powerful enough to be free from any fear of retribution. If they did not possess, at the outset, some manner of achieving control over the machinery of government, they would not have initiated the murder of a national leader. The people afterward may be free to make Caesar a god, as they did in Rome, but they must not be free to disturb the men who killed him.

IN THE MEANTIME, the men who sponsored his removal can change the government's policies to suit their desires, leaving the citizens free to mourn and worship their dead leader.

NO ONE WANTS TO RECOGNIZE that somewhere along the line America has ceased to be the home of the brave and the land of the free, and that only in after-dinner speeches, it is still the sweet land of liberty. No one wants to recognize that there are assassins at work in the land, systematically eliminating men who speak out for the human race and for the future. No one wants to admit that in America peace is dangerous business. Better to have the assassination accompanied by wafer-thin deceptions, eagerly accepted one after the other, than to have to face the truth.

JUSTICE IS NOT SO blind that it pursues the most powerful forces in the country. Nor is the press so committed to truth that it wants the burden of knowledge of what is happening.

AMERICA HAS BECOME A nation controlled by men who seeks ever-increasing power. Justice is whatever they want to happen. Truth is whatever they annouce has occurred.

AS THE PRESIDENT'S limousine turned right from Main Street onto Houston, gunman waited in Dealey Plaza. In other towns and cities men glanced at their watches and waited for the news bulletin. At the corner of Elm the car made a sharp left turn past the Texas School Book Depository. President Kennedy had ten seconds to live.

"What kind of peace do we seek.... not a Pax-Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of of the grave, nor the security of the slave. Not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women, not merely peace in our time, but peace in all time.

Our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's future. And we are all mortal.

Too many of us think that this is impossible, that war is inevitable, than mankind is doomed. That we are gripped by forces we cannot control. We need not accept that view, our problems are man made, therefore they can be solved by man, man's reason and spirit has oftened solved the seemingly unsolvable, and I believe they can do it again."

SUDDENLY became mere words.

OUR INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT BEGINS and ends with deception. Perceiving this deception is the key to understanding how the assassination of President Kennedy was accomplished. Understanding the motivation for his assassination is the key to understanding what has happened to America.

Early researchers had the intelligence, integrity and guts to articulate the "unspeakable" (Garrison referred to it as the indigestable and the unthinkable) in what seems like a lifetime ago. By and large, their warnings were not heeded then. There is little reason to believe that now, after so many years, things will be different.

Although some will dispute this, the American people have never had the unity or the power necessary to demand an honest investigation from their government. They didn't then and they don't today. Proof is the fact that an honest investigation never happened despite the pressures that were extant at the time.

Time is not running out. It ran out years ago.

MH: "....the American people have never had the unity or the power necessary to demand an honest investigation from their government. They didn't then and they don't today. Proof is the fact that an honest investigation never happened despite the pressures that were extant at the time."

While James Douglas is talking here about fullfulling JFK's vision of peace as expressed in his AU speech, it also holds true for what it will take to get to the truth about his death:

“It’s possible for Obama to do something hopefull, say like carry out JFK’s American University vision, but only if there is a movement that’s pushing very, very hard to bring about that kind of realization. And if we are aware, and I’m talking more than just we in the research community – it must go Way, Way beyond the research community, it must go into the movement that brought about Obama’s election victory. If we can understand Kennedy’s story, and raise the kind of support for bringing about Kennedy’s vision under Obama, that’s one possibility. But if we walk around with some kind of idea thinking that Barrack Obama will save the world, that’s nonsense, that’s not going to happen. An understanding of our redemption from the powers of war, from oppression, manipulation and lying - if we are going to be liberated from those forces, it’s up to us. It has to be a movement, an international movement, especially a movement of consciousness of the past, an education as to what happened to John F. Kennedy, so it won’t be repeated. And I believe it will be repeated unless we understand and educate ourselves about the past....I don’t think it’s about getting new information on the Kennedy assassination, it’s telling the story of what we already know. That’s the task, and it’s a task that’s very urgent at this moment in history.”

Jim Douglas – Black Op Radio

[William Kelly]

Some Zapruder frames, including the head shot, also show a little girl on the grass in the background. Who was this girl and was she ever questioned?

Thanks,

BK

[Jack White]

Some Zapruder frames, including the head shot, also show a little girl on the grass in the background. Who was this girl and was she ever questioned?

Thanks,

BK

Rosemary Willis.

She was questioned.

Jack

[William Kelly]

Some Zapruder frames, including the head shot, also show a little girl on the grass in the background. Who was this girl and was she ever questioned?

Thanks,

BK

Rosemary Willis.

She was questioned.

Jack

No Jack, Rosemary runs along, early on in the film, while this little girl is just standing there in all of the frames she is in - standing back behind Jean Hill and friend.

Here:

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2009/12...provenance.html

That's not Rosemary, is it?

Thanks,

BK

[Michael Hogan]

.....However, I believe his (Douglass') call for urgency is belated, and doomed to failure. We've known of this need for urgency for more than forty years

thanks to efforts of people like Lane, Weisberg, Jones, Meagher, Salandria and so many others that accompanied and followed them. Those researchers

underlined the urgency that was at hand then, and although incredible strides in the face of difficult obstacles have been made, it can be argued that the

opportunities to resolve this case have long passed.

Whatever one thinks of Jim Garrison and his prosecution of Claw Shaw, he came to the same conclusions as Doug Horne and James Douglass forty damn years ago.

Early researchers had the intelligence, integrity and guts to articulate the "unspeakable" (Garrison referred to it as the indigestable and the unthinkable) in what seems

like a lifetime ago. By and large, their warnings were not heeded then. There is little reason to believe that now, after so many years, things will be different.

Although some will dispute this, the American people have never had the unity or the power necessary to demand an honest investigation from their government.

They didn't then and they don't today. Proof is the fact that an honest investigation never happened despite the pressures that were extant at the time.

Time is not running out. It ran out years ago.

While James Douglas is talking here about fullfulling JFK's vision of peace as expressed in his AU speech, it also holds true for what it will take to get to the truth about his death:

“It’s possible for Obama to do something hopefull, say like carry out JFK’s American University vision, but only if there is a movement that’s pushing very, very hard to bring about that kind of realization. And if we are aware, and I’m talking more than just we in the research community – it must go

Way, Way

beyond the research community, it must go into the movement that brought about Obama’s election victory. If we can understand Kennedy’s story, and raise the kind of support for bringing about Kennedy’s vision under Obama, that’s one possibility. But if we walk around with some kind of idea thinking that Barrack Obama will save the world, that’s nonsense, that’s not going to happen. An understanding of our redemption from the powers of war, from oppression, manipulation and lying - if we are going to be liberated from those forces, it’s up to us.

It has to be a movement, an international movement, especially a movement of consciousness of the past, an education as to what happened to John F. Kennedy, so it won’t be repeated

. And I believe it will be repeated unless we understand and educate ourselves about the past....

I don’t think it’s about getting new information on the Kennedy assassination, it’s telling the story of what we already know. That’s the task, and it’s a task that’s very urgent at this moment in history.”

Douglass' ideas of what it will take to fulfill President Kennedy's vision of peace are noble. They are also unlikely to occur in what remains of our lifetimes.

Nor do I believe that his words "hold true for what it will take to get to the truth about his (JFK's) death."

So many of the early researchers predicted what has actually come to pass. Mark Lane was one:

"Yet the prize that eludes us all is an America quite well again, one eager to learn the terrible verities that are our present before they become our history. If they are permitted to fade into the past, without redress, our chance for redemption become more remote."

(Mark Lane, A Citizen's Dissent 1968)

Harold Weisberg wrote:

"God alone knows how many shots were fired by how many people from how many weapons and from how many directions. But one thing is now beyond question. There was not a single assassin, Oswald or any other. Thus there was at least one conspiracy -- to kill the President.

Was there a further conspiracy?

What must now be asked and thought of the investigation and reports?

Do we now know all the reasons for these strange doings, especially about the autopsy, why was it two days and so many revisions in drafting?

Why was there so much editing and of a factual rather than editorial nature?

Why these most historic and classified papers were removed from the Naval Hospital?

Why some were irretrievably destroyed by fire and there unprecedented destruction so carefully certified?

Why there were the telephone calls from the Naval Hospital to Dallas?

And above all, why the photographs and X-rays and the spectographic analysis are not only not in the twenty-six volumes appended to the Report but are not even exhibits in the Commission's records?

Are these really questions?

Is there, in fact, now any basic question other than who the assassins are?

And have we anything less than the most odious event in our national history?"

(Selections From Whitewash, Postscript)

[Dean Hagerman]

Some Zapruder frames, including the head shot, also show a little girl on the grass in the background. Who was this girl and was she ever questioned?

Thanks,

BK

Rosemary Willis.

She was questioned.

Jack

No Jack, Rosemary runs along, early on in the film, while this little girl is just standing there in all of the frames she is in - standing back behind Jean Hill and friend.

Here:

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2009/12...provenance.html

That's not Rosemary, is it?

Thanks,

BK

The only person behind Moorman in the frame that you posted is Toni Foster, who is not a little girl at all but an adult who was running in every frame in the Z-film not standing still, she has been questioned and identified

Have you ever heard of the running woman?

Have you ever heard of Toni Foster?

I hope you are talking about someone else but the frame you posted a link to shows only Toni Foster in the background, because if you are talking about Toni Foster and think she was a little girl who was just standing still I have to ask Bill have you ever studied the Z-film or the background witnesses?

Edited January 3, 2010 by Dean Hagerman

[William Kelly]

Some Zapruder frames, including the head shot, also show a little girl on the grass in the background. Who was this girl and was she ever questioned?

Thanks,

BK

Rosemary Willis.

She was questioned.

Jack

No Jack, Rosemary runs along, early on in the film, while this little girl is just standing there in all of the frames she is in - standing back behind Jean Hill and friend.

Here:

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2009/12...provenance.html

That's not Rosemary, is it?

Thanks,

BK

The only person behind Moorman in the frame that you posted is Toni Foster, who is not a little girl at all but an adult who was running in every frame in the Z-film not standing still, she has been questioned and identified

Have you ever heard of the running woman?

Have you ever heard of Toni Foster?

I hope you are talking about someone else but the frame you posted a link to shows only Toni Foster in the background, because if you are talking about Toni Foster and think she was a little girl who was just standing still I have to ask Bill have you ever studied the Z-film or the background witnesses?

No, I have not studied the people in the Z-film, but I'd like to know who this person is.

If you go to that link above and look that that picture frame there is a little girl on the grass in the background about twenty feet behind and to the right of Jean Hill. I went back every frame she is in and she is not running, but just standing there.

Who is she?

Thanks,

BK

Edited January 3, 2010 by William Kelly

[Dean Hagerman]

Some Zapruder frames, including the head shot, also show a little girl on the grass in the background. Who was this girl and was she ever questioned?

Thanks,

BK

Rosemary Willis.

She was questioned.

Jack

No Jack, Rosemary runs along, early on in the film, while this little girl is just standing there in all of the frames she is in - standing back behind Jean Hill and friend.

Here:

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2009/12...provenance.html

That's not Rosemary, is it?

Thanks,

BK

The only person behind Moorman in the frame that you posted is Toni Foster, who is not a little girl at all but an adult who was running in every frame in the Z-film not standing still, she has been questioned and identified

Have you ever heard of the running woman?

Have you ever heard of Toni Foster?

I hope you are talking about someone else but the frame you posted a link to shows only Toni Foster in the background, because if you are talking about Toni Foster and think she was a little girl who was just standing still I have to ask Bill have you ever studied the Z-film or the background witnesses?

No, I have not studied the people in the Z-film, but I'd like to know who this person is.

If you go to that link above and look that that picture frame there is a little girl on the grass in the background about twenty feet behind and to the right of Jean Hill. I went back every frame she is in and she is not running, but just standing there.

Who is she?

Thanks,

BK

Bill

First of all Jean Hill is not in the frame you gave the link to, Mary Moorman is in the frame and to the right and in the background is like I said TONI FOSTER, I hope you are not getting Jean Hill (in bright red dress) confused with Mary Moorman (black dress taking picture)

She is not a child, she is an adult

She is not standing still, she was running/jogging across the infield from Houston just like Altgens did

She has been identifed

She has told her story

It is Toni Foster

I am almost speachless as to you mixing up Hill and Moorman and never having heard of Toni Foster, go back and watch the Z-film, the Nix film, the Bronson film and picture

Check out Jack Whites study of "Toni Foster The Giant Running Woman" in TGZFH

[Bernice Moore]

Some Zapruder frames, including the head shot, also show a little girl on the grass in the background. Who was this girl and was she ever questioned?

Thanks,

BK

Rosemary Willis.

She was questioned.

Jack

No Jack, Rosemary runs along, early on in the film, while this little girl is just standing there in all of the frames she is in - standing back behind Jean Hill and friend.

Here:

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2009/12...provenance.html

That's not Rosemary, is it?

Thanks,

BK

The only person behind Moorman in the frame that you posted is Toni Foster, who is not a little girl at all but an adult who was running in every frame in the Z-film not standing still, she has been questioned and identified

Have you ever heard of the running woman?

Have you ever heard of Toni Foster?

I hope you are talking about someone else but the frame you posted a link to shows only Toni Foster in the background, because if you are talking about Toni Foster and think she was a little girl who was just standing still I have to ask Bill have you ever studied the Z-film or the background witnesses?

No, I have not studied the people in the Z-film, but I'd like to know who this person is.

If you go to that link above and look that that picture frame there is a little girl on the grass in the background about twenty feet behind and to the right of Jean Hill. I went back every frame she is in and she is not running, but just standing there.

Who is she?

Thanks,

BK

BILL This is research done by debra conway at LANCER called the RUNNING WOMAN FROM A FEW YEARS BACK IN ONE OF HER CHRONICLE MAGAZINES..TONI'S INFORMATION AS GIVEN. SOME HAVE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT within her information it refers TO MISSING ZAPRUDER FRAMES WITHIN THE FILM...B SORRY FOR SOME CAPITALS..

Edited January 3, 2010 by Bernice Moore