We also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

[Todd W. Vaughan]

Test Films

www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE

Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

Todd you say "And let's be clear, it was only in a separate, follow-up post that you noted “I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera”.

Well there is my first post, read it again real slow and tell me what you missed

You might miss it again so I will give you a hint, it ends with a question mark

You know what im going to post my question for you tro read again so you dont miss it

are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said?

Just like I said, I was asking others if these were the films we were looking for or something else that was filmed?

I await your apology

Well then, yes, I was wrong – you apparently HAD earlier asked if these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera.

So, for the assumption on my end that you only asked this afterwards, you have my sincere apology.

But good grief Dean, that makes it even worse!

Now it’s apparent that you made your grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, made in a follow up answer to your question “Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?” when you admittedly didn’t even know if these were the films made through Zapruders camera to begin with!

To illustrate this, here are your relevant posts all in one place in chronological order:

DEAN 1 - Here we Test Films www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

DEAN 2 - Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn? Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

DEAN 3 - Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera. They look to be the ones, but im not sure. Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work

So thanks for pointing out my mistake, Dean, because now everyone can see for themselves that your ignorance as to whether or not these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera sure didn’t stop you from claiming they proved the Zapruder film was altered.

[Todd W. Vaughan]

Question...why would they only ??""and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations."" anyone any idea...??

thanks b..

any thoughts ?? I take the above to mean and i could be in error that mr.zapruder's camera was used to take photos of as it states ''and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations."" anyone any idea...??

what fixed locations ,with the car just stationary , the limo supposedly never stopped...????? thanks b

The car was not shot in motion. Surveyors established the car locations based on Zapruder photos and

Shaneyfelt photographed the stationary cars at those locations. The WC even provides the surveyor

elevation figures based on the limo position as it turned from Houston onto Elm. Shaneyfelt used

a 4x5 Speed Graphic from the pedestal. If they took any photos using the Zapruder camera, the

films are not in any record.

Jack

Nonsense, Jack.

Did you even bother to READ Shaneyfelt's testimony?

LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT -- "During the reenactment the black-and-white

photographs were made from Zapruder's position with a Speedgraphic

camera and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera

from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they

were established with the car just stationary in those locations.

After establishing all those points and making these film records of

it, we then had the car proceed along that Elm Street route at

approximately 11 miles per hour, and filmed it with Mr. Zapruder's

camera loaded with color film from Mr. Zapruder's position and

simultaneously photographed it with Mr. Nix's camera from Mr. Nix's

position, and Mrs. Muchmore's camera from Mrs. Muchmore's position,

and this was done twice."

The reconstruction film, which can be seen here...

...clearly shows that not only did they film the car stopped at fixed points as Shaeyfelt stated but that they also filmed the car in motion as Shaneyfelt stated.

Why would you claim otherwise?

where are the film slates (you know what those are? If not, tell'em Gary), Sherlock.... surely someone, ANYONE with a modicum of film knowledge KNOWS you slate: film type-speed and camera type, cameraman, date and time. How do we know these are Shaneyfelt films? Hell, he can't even tell us when he numbered the Z-frames, nor can you or the Pope of Dealey Plaza...

No cigar chum!

Ridiculous Dave, utterly ridiculous.

[Dean Hagerman]

Test Films

www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE

Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

Todd you say "And let's be clear, it was only in a separate, follow-up post that you noted “I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera”.

Well there is my first post, read it again real slow and tell me what you missed

You might miss it again so I will give you a hint, it ends with a question mark

You know what im going to post my question for you tro read again so you dont miss it

are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said?

Just like I said, I was asking others if these were the films we were looking for or something else that was filmed?

I await your apology

Well then, yes, I was wrong – you apparently HAD earlier asked if these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera.

So, for the assumption on my end that you only asked this afterwards, you have my sincere apology.

But good grief Dean, that makes it even worse!

Now it’s apparent that you made your grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, made in a follow up answer to your question “Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?” when you admittedly didn’t even know if these were the films made through Zapruders camera to begin with!

To illustrate this, here are your relevant posts all in one place in chronological order:

DEAN 1 - Here we Test Films www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

DEAN 2 - Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn? Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

DEAN 3 - Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera. They look to be the ones, but im not sure. Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work

So thanks for pointing out my mistake, Dean, because now everyone can see for themselves that your ignorance as to whether or not these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera sure didn’t stop you from claiming they proved the Zapruder film was altered.

Kind of like your ignorance of you making claims without reading posts?

I never said it proves the Z-film was altered

It has already been proven

[Todd W. Vaughan]

Test Films

www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE

Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

Todd you say "And let's be clear, it was only in a separate, follow-up post that you noted “I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera”.

Well there is my first post, read it again real slow and tell me what you missed

You might miss it again so I will give you a hint, it ends with a question mark

You know what im going to post my question for you tro read again so you dont miss it

are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said?

Just like I said, I was asking others if these were the films we were looking for or something else that was filmed?

I await your apology

Well then, yes, I was wrong – you apparently HAD earlier asked if these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera.

So, for the assumption on my end that you only asked this afterwards, you have my sincere apology.

But good grief Dean, that makes it even worse!

Now it’s apparent that you made your grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, made in a follow up answer to your question “Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?” when you admittedly didn’t even know if these were the films made through Zapruders camera to begin with!

To illustrate this, here are your relevant posts all in one place in chronological order:

DEAN 1 - Here we Test Films www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

DEAN 2 - Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn? Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

DEAN 3 - Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera. They look to be the ones, but im not sure. Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work

So thanks for pointing out my mistake, Dean, because now everyone can see for themselves that your ignorance as to whether or not these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera sure didn’t stop you from claiming they proved the Zapruder film was altered.

Kind of like your ignorance of you making claims without reading posts?

I never said it proves the Z-film was altered

It has already been proven

You "never said it proves the Z-film was altered"?

You've got to be kidding me, Dean.

Anyone can see that your statement “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, was made in direct reference to the Youtube video that you posted the link for.

And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!

Now you're trying to say that you weren’t claiming that the FBI film proves the Zapruder film was altered?

Whatever, Dean, whatever.

Edited January 4, 2010 by Todd W. Vaughan

[Gary Murr]

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

Dean,

What kind of film was the FBI using?

Todd

Todd, Dean, et al:

I first saw the Zapruder, Nix and Muchmore reenactment films, shot with each of the three individuals original camera's, in March of 1999 during a research trip to NARA II. The films are actually a part of the massive FBI Bulky file 62-109060, in this instance serial # 4199. This is a very large serial subsection of the 62-109060 file and the films in question are actually in box number 102A, Folder # 4. Also included with this material are notes made on strips of paper, approximately 9" long by 3" wide, notes written by Lyndal Shaneyfelt that are affixed to the various film boxes that contain the small 8mm plastic spools of exposed film. To answer one of your questions posed to Dean, Todd; the film used by the FBI in the May 24, 1964 Zapruder camera reenactment is Kodachrome Movie Film with a small label bearing the # 9 affixed to the back of the familiar and traditional yellow, black and red Kodak company box.

The surviving Shaneyfelt constructed notes that are a part of this folder are also interesting and do help to provide a few further details. On May 23, 1964, the day prior to the actual reconstruction event, a roll of Kodak Kodachrome 8mm film was exposed in both the Nix and Muchmore cameras "on site in Dallas 5/23/64 during preliminary tests before reenactment on 5/24/64." This film was, in turn, taken by Lyndal Shaneyfelt.(62-109060-4193, Box 102A, Folder 4; film box containing reel labeled "15") On the day of the reconstruction, May 24, 1964, the Nix camera 8mm reconstruction film was "shot on site 5/24/64 by SA R. E. Triplett" with a further Shaneyfelt notation that there was "no 2nd run." On the same date the Muchmore camera 8mm reconstruction film was "shot on site by SA C. Ray Hall 5/24/64" with the same further Shaneyfelt notation as that which accompanies the surviving Nix film reconstruction notes - "no 2nd run." These two films are labeled, in turn, "16A reenactment thru Nix" and "17A reenactment thru Muchmore". The Zapruder reenactment film, item # 9, is listed as "Exposed in Zapruder camera on site in Dallas 5/24/64 by SA L. H. Shaneyfelt, with stills and moving." And unlike the Nix and Muchmore exposures, Shaneyfelt actually did "2 runs" of the assassination reenactment through the Zapruder film, one it would appear with the "zoom" feature on the Zapruder camera activated; the other without, though I could be wrong about this. I made photocopies of all of these notes, as well as photocopies of the actual film reels and their accompanying Kodak boxes, during my 1999 visit to NARA II. I also acquired, that same year, a copy of the reenactment films and it is identical to the YouTube copy link provided by Dean. (Not being a film expert, I am at a loss to explain the "cool" blue tint that appears to be self-evident on the film when one watches it; one could assume that this jhad something to do with the original development, but that would only be an assumption on my part).

FWIW, and in closing, in actuality the WC staff controlled reconstruction was originally set to take place on the previous weekend, May 17, 1964, but was delayed one week. Part of this delay was caused by an assumption on the part of WC Chief Counsel, J. Lee Rankin, that the FBI still possessed the camera of Abraham Zapruder. This was not the case, the camera by this time (May of 1964) now in the hands of the Bell and Howell people, stored in their archives room at the head office of Bell and Howell in Chicago, Illinois. The FBI did pick the camera up on May 12, 1964, used it in Dallas over the weekend of May 23, 1964, and returned it to Bell and Howell, Chicago, via SA Dennis Shanahan, on June 23, 1964. And again, FWIW, during the week of November 28, 1966 (yes, 1966) the Bell and Howell company had the camera removed from the archives storage facility and taken to their engineering lab in Lincolnwood, Illinois, where the camera was tested by their staff at which time the average film speed - fps - was found to be 18.2 fps, or within 1/10th of a second of the FBI results of 1963-1964. Lawrence Howe, then Vice President and Secretary of Bell and Howell, did admit that this testing was conducted directly "because of many news stories published from time to time espousing various new theories concerning the Dallas tragedy..."

Gary Murr

[Dean Hagerman]

Test Films

www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE

Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

Todd you say "And let's be clear, it was only in a separate, follow-up post that you noted “I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera”.

Well there is my first post, read it again real slow and tell me what you missed

You might miss it again so I will give you a hint, it ends with a question mark

You know what im going to post my question for you tro read again so you dont miss it

are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said?

Just like I said, I was asking others if these were the films we were looking for or something else that was filmed?

I await your apology

Well then, yes, I was wrong – you apparently HAD earlier asked if these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera.

So, for the assumption on my end that you only asked this afterwards, you have my sincere apology.

But good grief Dean, that makes it even worse!

Now it’s apparent that you made your grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, made in a follow up answer to your question “Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?” when you admittedly didn’t even know if these were the films made through Zapruders camera to begin with!

To illustrate this, here are your relevant posts all in one place in chronological order:

DEAN 1 - Here we Test Films www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

DEAN 2 - Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn? Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

DEAN 3 - Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera. They look to be the ones, but im not sure. Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work

So thanks for pointing out my mistake, Dean, because now everyone can see for themselves that your ignorance as to whether or not these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera sure didn’t stop you from claiming they proved the Zapruder film was altered.

Kind of like your ignorance of you making claims without reading posts?

I never said it proves the Z-film was altered

It has already been proven

You "never said it proves the Z-film was altered"?

You've got to be kidding me, Dean.

Anyone can see that your statement “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, was made in direct reference to the Youtube video that you posted the link for.

And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!

Now you're trying to say that you weren’t claiming that the FBI film proves the Zapruder film was altered?

Whatever, Dean, whatever.

Todd, this is what you make out of my statement

"And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!"

But thats not what I said

The FBI films do not prove alteration, the fact that Zappy never stopped filming and the limo turn was taken out does prove alteration

Where did I say the FBI films prove alteration? Your making up things that you want me to have said, for some odd reason

You can post as many quotes as you want, its not going to make the words change Todd

[Craig Lamson]

Test Films

www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE

Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

Todd you say "And let's be clear, it was only in a separate, follow-up post that you noted “I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera”.

Well there is my first post, read it again real slow and tell me what you missed

You might miss it again so I will give you a hint, it ends with a question mark

You know what im going to post my question for you tro read again so you dont miss it

are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said?

Just like I said, I was asking others if these were the films we were looking for or something else that was filmed?

I await your apology

Well then, yes, I was wrong – you apparently HAD earlier asked if these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera.

So, for the assumption on my end that you only asked this afterwards, you have my sincere apology.

But good grief Dean, that makes it even worse!

Now it’s apparent that you made your grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, made in a follow up answer to your question “Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?” when you admittedly didn’t even know if these were the films made through Zapruders camera to begin with!

To illustrate this, here are your relevant posts all in one place in chronological order:

DEAN 1 - Here we Test Films www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

DEAN 2 - Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn? Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

DEAN 3 - Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera. They look to be the ones, but im not sure. Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work

So thanks for pointing out my mistake, Dean, because now everyone can see for themselves that your ignorance as to whether or not these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera sure didn’t stop you from claiming they proved the Zapruder film was altered.

Kind of like your ignorance of you making claims without reading posts?

I never said it proves the Z-film was altered

It has already been proven

You "never said it proves the Z-film was altered"?

You've got to be kidding me, Dean.

Anyone can see that your statement “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, was made in direct reference to the Youtube video that you posted the link for.

And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!

Now you're trying to say that you weren’t claiming that the FBI film proves the Zapruder film was altered?

Whatever, Dean, whatever.

Best of luck with this Todd. I've confronted Dean more than once with exact and complete quotes of his and he has yet to actually accept his own words. Simply amazing!

[Todd W. Vaughan]

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

Dean,

What kind of film was the FBI using?

Todd

Todd, Dean, et al:

I first saw the Zapruder, Nix and Muchmore reenactment films, shot with each of the three individuals original camera's, in March of 1999 during a research trip to NARA II. The films are actually a part of the massive FBI Bulky file 62-109060, in this instance serial # 4199. This is a very large serial subsection of the 62-109060 file and the films in question are actually in box number 102A, Folder # 4. Also included with this material are notes made on strips of paper, approximately 9" long by 3" wide, notes written by Lyndal Shaneyfelt that are affixed to the various film boxes that contain the small 8mm plastic spools of exposed film. To answer one of your questions posed to Dean, Todd; the film used by the FBI in the May 24, 1964 Zapruder camera reenactment is Kodachrome Movie Film with a small label bearing the # 9 affixed to the back of the familiar and traditional yellow, black and red Kodak company box.

The surviving Shaneyfelt constructed notes that are a part of this folder are also interesting and do help to provide a few further details. On May 23, 1964, the day prior to the actual reconstruction event, a roll of Kodak Kodachrome 8mm film was exposed in both the Nix and Muchmore cameras "on site in Dallas 5/23/64 during preliminary tests before reenactment on 5/24/64." This film was, in turn, taken by Lyndal Shaneyfelt.(62-109060-4193, Box 102A, Folder 4; film box containing reel labeled "15") On the day of the reconstruction, May 24, 1964, the Nix camera 8mm reconstruction film was "shot on site 5/24/64 by SA R. E. Triplett" with a further Shaneyfelt notation that there was "no 2nd run." On the same date the Muchmore camera 8mm reconstruction film was "shot on site by SA C. Ray Hall 5/24/64" with the same further Shaneyfelt notation as that which accompanies the surviving Nix film reconstruction notes - "no 2nd run." These two films are labeled, in turn, "16A reenactment thru Nix" and "17A reenactment thru Muchmore". The Zapruder reenactment film, item # 9, is listed as "Exposed in Zapruder camera on site in Dallas 5/24/64 by SA L. H. Shaneyfelt, with stills and moving." And unlike the Nix and Muchmore exposures, Shaneyfelt actually did "2 runs" of the assassination reenactment through the Zapruder film, one it would appear with the "zoom" feature on the Zapruder camera activated; the other without, though I could be wrong about this. I made photocopies of all of these notes, as well as photocopies of the actual film reels and their accompanying Kodak boxes, during my 1999 visit to NARA II. I also acquired, that same year, a copy of the reenactment films and it is identical to the YouTube copy link provided by Dean. (Not being a film expert, I am at a loss to explain the "cool" blue tint that appears to be self-evident on the film when one watches it; one could assume that this jhad something to do with the original development, but that would only be an assumption on my part).

FWIW, and in closing, in actuality the WC staff controlled reconstruction was originally set to take place on the previous weekend, May 17, 1964, but was delayed one week. Part of this delay was caused by an assumption on the part of WC Chief Counsel, J. Lee Rankin, that the FBI still possessed the camera of Abraham Zapruder. This was not the case, the camera by this time (May of 1964) now in the hands of the Bell and Howell people, stored in their archives room at the head office of Bell and Howell in Chicago, Illinois. The FBI did pick the camera up on May 12, 1964, used it in Dallas over the weekend of May 23, 1964, and returned it to Bell and Howell, Chicago, via SA Dennis Shanahan, on June 23, 1964. And again, FWIW, during the week of November 28, 1966 (yes, 1966) the Bell and Howell company had the camera removed from the archives storage facility and taken to their engineering lab in Lincolnwood, Illinois, where the camera was tested by their staff at which time the average film speed - fps - was found to be 18.2 fps, or within 1/10th of a second of the FBI results of 1963-1964. Lawrence Howe, then Vice President and Secretary of Bell and Howell, did admit that this testing was conducted directly "because of many news stories published from time to time espousing various new theories concerning the Dallas tragedy..."

Gary Murr

Thanks Gary. I noticed that you were online, and, knowing your expertise in the matter, I was hoping you would weigh in on this issue with a detailed explanation of the facts, which is exactly what you did. Thanks again.

[Todd W. Vaughan]

Test Films

www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE

Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

Todd you say "And let's be clear, it was only in a separate, follow-up post that you noted “I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera”.

Well there is my first post, read it again real slow and tell me what you missed

You might miss it again so I will give you a hint, it ends with a question mark

You know what im going to post my question for you tro read again so you dont miss it

are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said?

Just like I said, I was asking others if these were the films we were looking for or something else that was filmed?

I await your apology

Well then, yes, I was wrong – you apparently HAD earlier asked if these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera.

So, for the assumption on my end that you only asked this afterwards, you have my sincere apology.

But good grief Dean, that makes it even worse!

Now it’s apparent that you made your grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, made in a follow up answer to your question “Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?” when you admittedly didn’t even know if these were the films made through Zapruders camera to begin with!

To illustrate this, here are your relevant posts all in one place in chronological order:

DEAN 1 - Here we Test Films www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

DEAN 2 - Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn? Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

DEAN 3 - Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera. They look to be the ones, but im not sure. Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work

So thanks for pointing out my mistake, Dean, because now everyone can see for themselves that your ignorance as to whether or not these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera sure didn’t stop you from claiming they proved the Zapruder film was altered.

Kind of like your ignorance of you making claims without reading posts?

I never said it proves the Z-film was altered

It has already been proven

You "never said it proves the Z-film was altered"?

You've got to be kidding me, Dean.

Anyone can see that your statement “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, was made in direct reference to the Youtube video that you posted the link for.

And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!

Now you're trying to say that you weren’t claiming that the FBI film proves the Zapruder film was altered?

Whatever, Dean, whatever.

Todd, this is what you make out of my statement

"And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!"

But thats not what I said

The FBI films do not prove alteration, the fact that Zappy never stopped filming and the limo turn was taken out does prove alteration

Where did I say the FBI films prove alteration? Your making up things that you want me to have said, for some odd reason

You can post as many quotes as you want, its not going to make the words change Todd

Dean,

You wrote:

QUOTE ON

Todd, this is what you make out of my statement

"And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!"

But that's not what I said

QUOTE OFF

Not what you said?

Hmmm.

Well let's see what you did say:

QUOTE ON

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

QUOTE OFF

Now, that sure appears to be exactly what you said, and exactly what I said that you said.

And now you deny it.

Amazing. Simply amazing.

[Dean Hagerman]

Test Films

www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE

Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

Todd you say "And let's be clear, it was only in a separate, follow-up post that you noted “I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera”.

Well there is my first post, read it again real slow and tell me what you missed

You might miss it again so I will give you a hint, it ends with a question mark

You know what im going to post my question for you tro read again so you dont miss it

are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said?

Just like I said, I was asking others if these were the films we were looking for or something else that was filmed?

I await your apology

Well then, yes, I was wrong – you apparently HAD earlier asked if these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera.

So, for the assumption on my end that you only asked this afterwards, you have my sincere apology.

But good grief Dean, that makes it even worse!

Now it’s apparent that you made your grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, made in a follow up answer to your question “Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?” when you admittedly didn’t even know if these were the films made through Zapruders camera to begin with!

To illustrate this, here are your relevant posts all in one place in chronological order:

DEAN 1 - Here we Test Films www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

DEAN 2 - Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn? Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

DEAN 3 - Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera. They look to be the ones, but im not sure. Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work

So thanks for pointing out my mistake, Dean, because now everyone can see for themselves that your ignorance as to whether or not these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera sure didn’t stop you from claiming they proved the Zapruder film was altered.

Kind of like your ignorance of you making claims without reading posts?

I never said it proves the Z-film was altered

It has already been proven

You "never said it proves the Z-film was altered"?

You've got to be kidding me, Dean.

Anyone can see that your statement “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, was made in direct reference to the Youtube video that you posted the link for.

And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!

Now you're trying to say that you weren’t claiming that the FBI film proves the Zapruder film was altered?

Whatever, Dean, whatever.

Todd, this is what you make out of my statement

"And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!"

But thats not what I said

The FBI films do not prove alteration, the fact that Zappy never stopped filming and the limo turn was taken out does prove alteration

Where did I say the FBI films prove alteration? Your making up things that you want me to have said, for some odd reason

You can post as many quotes as you want, its not going to make the words change Todd

Dean,

You wrote:

QUOTE ON

Todd, this is what you make out of my statement

"And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!"

But that's not what I said

QUOTE OFF

Not what you said?

Hmmm.

Well let's see what you did say:

QUOTE ON

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

QUOTE OFF

Now, that sure appears to be exactly what you said, and exactly what I said that you said.

And now you deny it.

Amazing. Simply amazing.

Todd please stop im going to break a rib from laughing so hard

[Dean Hagerman]

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

Dean,

What kind of film was the FBI using?

Todd

Todd, Dean, et al:

I first saw the Zapruder, Nix and Muchmore reenactment films, shot with each of the three individuals original camera's, in March of 1999 during a research trip to NARA II. The films are actually a part of the massive FBI Bulky file 62-109060, in this instance serial # 4199. This is a very large serial subsection of the 62-109060 file and the films in question are actually in box number 102A, Folder # 4. Also included with this material are notes made on strips of paper, approximately 9" long by 3" wide, notes written by Lyndal Shaneyfelt that are affixed to the various film boxes that contain the small 8mm plastic spools of exposed film. To answer one of your questions posed to Dean, Todd; the film used by the FBI in the May 24, 1964 Zapruder camera reenactment is Kodachrome Movie Film with a small label bearing the # 9 affixed to the back of the familiar and traditional yellow, black and red Kodak company box.

The surviving Shaneyfelt constructed notes that are a part of this folder are also interesting and do help to provide a few further details. On May 23, 1964, the day prior to the actual reconstruction event, a roll of Kodak Kodachrome 8mm film was exposed in both the Nix and Muchmore cameras "on site in Dallas 5/23/64 during preliminary tests before reenactment on 5/24/64." This film was, in turn, taken by Lyndal Shaneyfelt.(62-109060-4193, Box 102A, Folder 4; film box containing reel labeled "15") On the day of the reconstruction, May 24, 1964, the Nix camera 8mm reconstruction film was "shot on site 5/24/64 by SA R. E. Triplett" with a further Shaneyfelt notation that there was "no 2nd run." On the same date the Muchmore camera 8mm reconstruction film was "shot on site by SA C. Ray Hall 5/24/64" with the same further Shaneyfelt notation as that which accompanies the surviving Nix film reconstruction notes - "no 2nd run." These two films are labeled, in turn, "16A reenactment thru Nix" and "17A reenactment thru Muchmore". The Zapruder reenactment film, item # 9, is listed as "Exposed in Zapruder camera on site in Dallas 5/24/64 by SA L. H. Shaneyfelt, with stills and moving." And unlike the Nix and Muchmore exposures, Shaneyfelt actually did "2 runs" of the assassination reenactment through the Zapruder film, one it would appear with the "zoom" feature on the Zapruder camera activated; the other without, though I could be wrong about this. I made photocopies of all of these notes, as well as photocopies of the actual film reels and their accompanying Kodak boxes, during my 1999 visit to NARA II. I also acquired, that same year, a copy of the reenactment films and it is identical to the YouTube copy link provided by Dean. (Not being a film expert, I am at a loss to explain the "cool" blue tint that appears to be self-evident on the film when one watches it; one could assume that this jhad something to do with the original development, but that would only be an assumption on my part).

FWIW, and in closing, in actuality the WC staff controlled reconstruction was originally set to take place on the previous weekend, May 17, 1964, but was delayed one week. Part of this delay was caused by an assumption on the part of WC Chief Counsel, J. Lee Rankin, that the FBI still possessed the camera of Abraham Zapruder. This was not the case, the camera by this time (May of 1964) now in the hands of the Bell and Howell people, stored in their archives room at the head office of Bell and Howell in Chicago, Illinois. The FBI did pick the camera up on May 12, 1964, used it in Dallas over the weekend of May 23, 1964, and returned it to Bell and Howell, Chicago, via SA Dennis Shanahan, on June 23, 1964. And again, FWIW, during the week of November 28, 1966 (yes, 1966) the Bell and Howell company had the camera removed from the archives storage facility and taken to their engineering lab in Lincolnwood, Illinois, where the camera was tested by their staff at which time the average film speed - fps - was found to be 18.2 fps, or within 1/10th of a second of the FBI results of 1963-1964. Lawrence Howe, then Vice President and Secretary of Bell and Howell, did admit that this testing was conducted directly "because of many news stories published from time to time espousing various new theories concerning the Dallas tragedy..."

Gary Murr

Gary

Amazing reply!

Thank you so much for all the info!

Would you be abel to scan and post Shaneyfelt's notes?

I would love to see those

Now we know the clip from Youtube are the films we are looking for, if we could get them and make a transfer with the sprocket area it would be a HUGE step in research of Full Flush Left and other items

Dean

[David G. Healy]

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

Dean,

What kind of film was the FBI using?

Todd

Todd, Dean, et al:

I first saw the Zapruder, Nix and Muchmore reenactment films, shot with each of the three individuals original camera's, in March of 1999 during a research trip to NARA II. The films are actually a part of the massive FBI Bulky file 62-109060, in this instance serial # 4199. This is a very large serial subsection of the 62-109060 file and the films in question are actually in box number 102A, Folder # 4. Also included with this material are notes made on strips of paper, approximately 9" long by 3" wide, notes written by Lyndal Shaneyfelt that are affixed to the various film boxes that contain the small 8mm plastic spools of exposed film. To answer one of your questions posed to Dean, Todd; the film used by the FBI in the May 24, 1964 Zapruder camera reenactment is Kodachrome Movie Film with a small label bearing the # 9 affixed to the back of the familiar and traditional yellow, black and red Kodak company box.

The surviving Shaneyfelt constructed notes that are a part of this folder are also interesting and do help to provide a few further details. On May 23, 1964, the day prior to the actual reconstruction event, a roll of Kodak Kodachrome 8mm film was exposed in both the Nix and Muchmore cameras "on site in Dallas 5/23/64 during preliminary tests before reenactment on 5/24/64." This film was, in turn, taken by Lyndal Shaneyfelt.(62-109060-4193, Box 102A, Folder 4; film box containing reel labeled "15") On the day of the reconstruction, May 24, 1964, the Nix camera 8mm reconstruction film was "shot on site 5/24/64 by SA R. E. Triplett" with a further Shaneyfelt notation that there was "no 2nd run." On the same date the Muchmore camera 8mm reconstruction film was "shot on site by SA C. Ray Hall 5/24/64" with the same further Shaneyfelt notation as that which accompanies the surviving Nix film reconstruction notes - "no 2nd run." These two films are labeled, in turn, "16A reenactment thru Nix" and "17A reenactment thru Muchmore". The Zapruder reenactment film, item # 9, is listed as "Exposed in Zapruder camera on site in Dallas 5/24/64 by SA L. H. Shaneyfelt, with stills and moving." And unlike the Nix and Muchmore exposures, Shaneyfelt actually did "2 runs" of the assassination reenactment through the Zapruder film, one it would appear with the "zoom" feature on the Zapruder camera activated; the other without, though I could be wrong about this. I made photocopies of all of these notes, as well as photocopies of the actual film reels and their accompanying Kodak boxes, during my 1999 visit to NARA II. I also acquired, that same year, a copy of the reenactment films and it is identical to the YouTube copy link provided by Dean. (Not being a film expert, I am at a loss to explain the "cool" blue tint that appears to be self-evident on the film when one watches it; one could assume that this jhad something to do with the original development, but that would only be an assumption on my part).

FWIW, and in closing, in actuality the WC staff controlled reconstruction was originally set to take place on the previous weekend, May 17, 1964, but was delayed one week. Part of this delay was caused by an assumption on the part of WC Chief Counsel, J. Lee Rankin, that the FBI still possessed the camera of Abraham Zapruder. This was not the case, the camera by this time (May of 1964) now in the hands of the Bell and Howell people, stored in their archives room at the head office of Bell and Howell in Chicago, Illinois. The FBI did pick the camera up on May 12, 1964, used it in Dallas over the weekend of May 23, 1964, and returned it to Bell and Howell, Chicago, via SA Dennis Shanahan, on June 23, 1964. And again, FWIW, during the week of November 28, 1966 (yes, 1966) the Bell and Howell company had the camera removed from the archives storage facility and taken to their engineering lab in Lincolnwood, Illinois, where the camera was tested by their staff at which time the average film speed - fps - was found to be 18.2 fps, or within 1/10th of a second of the FBI results of 1963-1964. Lawrence Howe, then Vice President and Secretary of Bell and Howell, did admit that this testing was conducted directly "because of many news stories published from time to time espousing various new theories concerning the Dallas tragedy..."

Gary Murr

Gary

Amazing reply!

Thank you so much for all the info!

Would you be abel to scan and post Shaneyfelt's notes?

I would love to see those

Now we know the clip from Youtube are the films we are looking for, if we could get them and make a transfer with the sprocket area it would be a HUGE step in research of Full Flush Left and other items

Dean

no, it's not amazing Gary Murr is on his game...

so, let's see here:

11/22/63 in-camera DP-Zapruder film shot;

02/64 (late) WCR en-group viewed the Z-film;

05/64 Shaneyfelt and tribe shot re-enactment films..

when were the Z-frames numbered by Shaneyfelt again?

[Gary Murr]

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

Dean,

What kind of film was the FBI using?

Todd

Todd, Dean, et al:

I first saw the Zapruder, Nix and Muchmore reenactment films, shot with each of the three individuals original camera's, in March of 1999 during a research trip to NARA II. The films are actually a part of the massive FBI Bulky file 62-109060, in this instance serial # 4199. This is a very large serial subsection of the 62-109060 file and the films in question are actually in box number 102A, Folder # 4. Also included with this material are notes made on strips of paper, approximately 9" long by 3" wide, notes written by Lyndal Shaneyfelt that are affixed to the various film boxes that contain the small 8mm plastic spools of exposed film. To answer one of your questions posed to Dean, Todd; the film used by the FBI in the May 24, 1964 Zapruder camera reenactment is Kodachrome Movie Film with a small label bearing the # 9 affixed to the back of the familiar and traditional yellow, black and red Kodak company box.

The surviving Shaneyfelt constructed notes that are a part of this folder are also interesting and do help to provide a few further details. On May 23, 1964, the day prior to the actual reconstruction event, a roll of Kodak Kodachrome 8mm film was exposed in both the Nix and Muchmore cameras "on site in Dallas 5/23/64 during preliminary tests before reenactment on 5/24/64." This film was, in turn, taken by Lyndal Shaneyfelt.(62-109060-4193, Box 102A, Folder 4; film box containing reel labeled "15") On the day of the reconstruction, May 24, 1964, the Nix camera 8mm reconstruction film was "shot on site 5/24/64 by SA R. E. Triplett" with a further Shaneyfelt notation that there was "no 2nd run." On the same date the Muchmore camera 8mm reconstruction film was "shot on site by SA C. Ray Hall 5/24/64" with the same further Shaneyfelt notation as that which accompanies the surviving Nix film reconstruction notes - "no 2nd run." These two films are labeled, in turn, "16A reenactment thru Nix" and "17A reenactment thru Muchmore". The Zapruder reenactment film, item # 9, is listed as "Exposed in Zapruder camera on site in Dallas 5/24/64 by SA L. H. Shaneyfelt, with stills and moving." And unlike the Nix and Muchmore exposures, Shaneyfelt actually did "2 runs" of the assassination reenactment through the Zapruder film, one it would appear with the "zoom" feature on the Zapruder camera activated; the other without, though I could be wrong about this. I made photocopies of all of these notes, as well as photocopies of the actual film reels and their accompanying Kodak boxes, during my 1999 visit to NARA II. I also acquired, that same year, a copy of the reenactment films and it is identical to the YouTube copy link provided by Dean. (Not being a film expert, I am at a loss to explain the "cool" blue tint that appears to be self-evident on the film when one watches it; one could assume that this jhad something to do with the original development, but that would only be an assumption on my part).

FWIW, and in closing, in actuality the WC staff controlled reconstruction was originally set to take place on the previous weekend, May 17, 1964, but was delayed one week. Part of this delay was caused by an assumption on the part of WC Chief Counsel, J. Lee Rankin, that the FBI still possessed the camera of Abraham Zapruder. This was not the case, the camera by this time (May of 1964) now in the hands of the Bell and Howell people, stored in their archives room at the head office of Bell and Howell in Chicago, Illinois. The FBI did pick the camera up on May 12, 1964, used it in Dallas over the weekend of May 23, 1964, and returned it to Bell and Howell, Chicago, via SA Dennis Shanahan, on June 23, 1964. And again, FWIW, during the week of November 28, 1966 (yes, 1966) the Bell and Howell company had the camera removed from the archives storage facility and taken to their engineering lab in Lincolnwood, Illinois, where the camera was tested by their staff at which time the average film speed - fps - was found to be 18.2 fps, or within 1/10th of a second of the FBI results of 1963-1964. Lawrence Howe, then Vice President and Secretary of Bell and Howell, did admit that this testing was conducted directly "because of many news stories published from time to time espousing various new theories concerning the Dallas tragedy..."

Gary Murr

Gary

Amazing reply!

Thank you so much for all the info!

Would you be abel to scan and post Shaneyfelt's notes?

I would love to see those

Now we know the clip from Youtube are the films we are looking for, if we could get them and make a transfer with the sprocket area it would be a HUGE step in research of Full Flush Left and other items

Dean

no, it's not amazing Gary Murr is on his game...

so, let's see here:

11/22/63 in-camera DP-Zapruder film shot;

02/64 (late) WCR en-group viewed the Z-film;

05/64 Shaneyfelt and tribe shot re-enactment films..

when were the Z-frames numbered by Shaneyfelt again?

Hello David:

As I have indicated before, the Z frame numbering system created and thereafter applied by Lyndal Shanefelt was done on January 29 - 30, 1964, as a result of a direct request from Norman Redlich of the WC staff; this occurred after the third in a series of long Z film "analysis" sessions conducted with members of the FBI (Shaneyfelt and Rose), the WC staff, including on most occasions Specter, Redlich, Eisenberg and Belin, and the SS members Thomas Kelley and J. J. Howlett.

Gary Murr

[Todd W. Vaughan]

Test Films

www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE

Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

Todd you say "And let's be clear, it was only in a separate, follow-up post that you noted “I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera”.

Well there is my first post, read it again real slow and tell me what you missed

You might miss it again so I will give you a hint, it ends with a question mark

You know what im going to post my question for you tro read again so you dont miss it

are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said?

Just like I said, I was asking others if these were the films we were looking for or something else that was filmed?

I await your apology

Well then, yes, I was wrong – you apparently HAD earlier asked if these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera.

So, for the assumption on my end that you only asked this afterwards, you have my sincere apology.

But good grief Dean, that makes it even worse!

Now it’s apparent that you made your grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, made in a follow up answer to your question “Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?” when you admittedly didn’t even know if these were the films made through Zapruders camera to begin with!

To illustrate this, here are your relevant posts all in one place in chronological order:

DEAN 1 - Here we Test Films www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

DEAN 2 - Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn? Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

DEAN 3 - Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera. They look to be the ones, but im not sure. Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work

So thanks for pointing out my mistake, Dean, because now everyone can see for themselves that your ignorance as to whether or not these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera sure didn’t stop you from claiming they proved the Zapruder film was altered.

Kind of like your ignorance of you making claims without reading posts?

I never said it proves the Z-film was altered

It has already been proven

You "never said it proves the Z-film was altered"?

You've got to be kidding me, Dean.

Anyone can see that your statement “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, was made in direct reference to the Youtube video that you posted the link for.

And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!

Now you're trying to say that you weren’t claiming that the FBI film proves the Zapruder film was altered?

Whatever, Dean, whatever.

Todd, this is what you make out of my statement

"And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!"

But thats not what I said

The FBI films do not prove alteration, the fact that Zappy never stopped filming and the limo turn was taken out does prove alteration

Where did I say the FBI films prove alteration? Your making up things that you want me to have said, for some odd reason

You can post as many quotes as you want, its not going to make the words change Todd

Dean,

You wrote:

QUOTE ON

Todd, this is what you make out of my statement

"And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!"

But that's not what I said

QUOTE OFF

Not what you said?

Hmmm.

Well let's see what you did say:

QUOTE ON

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

QUOTE OFF

Now, that sure appears to be exactly what you said, and exactly what I said that you said.

And now you deny it.

Amazing. Simply amazing.

Todd please stop im going to break a rib from laughing so hard

Dean,

One more try.

Again, referencing your YouTube video link of the FBI reconstruction film, here is what you wrote:

QUOTE ON:

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

QUOTE OFF:

You referred to the FBI film with …

“…look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white…”

and then asked…

“… how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

…and then answered…

“Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”

And to this you now claim “I never said it (the FBI film) proves the Z-film was altered”

Do you really expect me (or anyone else for that matter) to believe for one minute that you were not trying to use the FBI film to prove that the Zapruder film was altered based on your stated observation that when the camera stops in the FBI film the picture fades into white but when the camera stops in the Zapruder film the picture does not?

Todd

[Dean Hagerman]

Test Films

www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE

Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

Todd you say "And let's be clear, it was only in a separate, follow-up post that you noted “I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera”.

Well there is my first post, read it again real slow and tell me what you missed

You might miss it again so I will give you a hint, it ends with a question mark

You know what im going to post my question for you tro read again so you dont miss it

are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said?

Just like I said, I was asking others if these were the films we were looking for or something else that was filmed?

I await your apology

Well then, yes, I was wrong – you apparently HAD earlier asked if these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera.

So, for the assumption on my end that you only asked this afterwards, you have my sincere apology.

But good grief Dean, that makes it even worse!

Now it’s apparent that you made your grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, made in a follow up answer to your question “Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?” when you admittedly didn’t even know if these were the films made through Zapruders camera to begin with!

To illustrate this, here are your relevant posts all in one place in chronological order:

DEAN 1 - Here we Test Films www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions

DEAN 2 - Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn? Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

DEAN 3 - Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera. They look to be the ones, but im not sure. Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work

So thanks for pointing out my mistake, Dean, because now everyone can see for themselves that your ignorance as to whether or not these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera sure didn’t stop you from claiming they proved the Zapruder film was altered.

Kind of like your ignorance of you making claims without reading posts?

I never said it proves the Z-film was altered

It has already been proven

You "never said it proves the Z-film was altered"?

You've got to be kidding me, Dean.

Anyone can see that your statement “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, was made in direct reference to the Youtube video that you posted the link for.

And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!

Now you're trying to say that you weren’t claiming that the FBI film proves the Zapruder film was altered?

Whatever, Dean, whatever.

Todd, this is what you make out of my statement

"And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!"

But thats not what I said

The FBI films do not prove alteration, the fact that Zappy never stopped filming and the limo turn was taken out does prove alteration

Where did I say the FBI films prove alteration? Your making up things that you want me to have said, for some odd reason

You can post as many quotes as you want, its not going to make the words change Todd

Dean,

You wrote:

QUOTE ON

Todd, this is what you make out of my statement

"And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered!"

But that's not what I said

QUOTE OFF

Not what you said?

Hmmm.

Well let's see what you did say:

QUOTE ON

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

QUOTE OFF

Now, that sure appears to be exactly what you said, and exactly what I said that you said.

And now you deny it.

Amazing. Simply amazing.

Todd please stop im going to break a rib from laughing so hard

Dean,

One more try.

Again, referencing your YouTube video link of the FBI reconstruction film, here is what you wrote:

QUOTE ON:

Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming

QUOTE OFF:

You referred to the FBI film with …

“…look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white…”

and then asked…

“… how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?

…and then answered…

“Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”

And to this you now claim “I never said it (the FBI film) proves the Z-film was altered”

Do you really expect me (or anyone else for that matter) to believe for one minute that you were not trying to use the FBI film to prove that the Zapruder film was altered based on your stated observation that when the camera stops in the FBI film the picture fades into white but when the camera stops in the Zapruder film the picture does not?

Todd

Like I said no matter how many times you quote me or try to put my words together you cant change them

What are you trying to do anyways Todd? Discredit me?

Why would you want to do that when we have so much fun debating Z-film issues?

If it wasnt for me you would have nobody to debate with

So whats up

Do you think im a sloppy researcher?

Do you think im dishonest?

Do you think im trying to fool everybody?

Do you think im stupid?

Why dont you answer all of those questions so I can see what you are trying to prove?