Jump to content
The Education Forum

Lifton and Morningstar, nice but no cigar.


Recommended Posts

On 11/1/2022 at 6:41 PM, David G. Healy said:

First off Sandy this will never be "settled" here's why: no one can verify the authenticity of the alleged in-camera Zapruder film (stored at either NARA of the 6th floor mausoleum). The best Roland Zavada and his quest for saving the Z-film as a piece of case evidence was, he confirmed the film was indeed Double 8mm KODAK film, that's it, PERIOD. Rollie had little or no knowledge concerning optical film effects, he told that to me during a phone call prior to a SMPTE meeting at Lake Tahoe. Altering the "content" of the Z-film in-camera original? The best I can say is: many, many alterations to specific frames (at Life Magazine occurred for publication) and, any multi frame motion segments of the film needed to accomplished by the end of February 1964 (when the WC met in full and discussed said the film and other related evidence). Thats around 90 days...  To add insult to injury, because of continued non-verification and authentication of the alleged in-camera Z-film it could and possibly has been altered multiple times since 1964 -- with the advent of computers and the demise of optical film printing the last 30 years... the art and black magic of film printing is dead.......

I discussed this subject with Gary Mack in early 2000's and his final comment to me was revealing: "Who cares? The Zapruder film will never, EVER see the inside of a courtroom anyway!" And, it hasn't since Jim Garrison/New Orleans...

To accomplish and legit study of the issue here's what you need: 1. authenticated and validated 11-22-63 copy of the in-camera original Z-film (LIFE's copy); 2. the actual Z-film the Warren Commission screened late Feb 1964 (not a copy the actual 8mm film they viewed during that meeting....

My take? If the Zapruder in-camera original film isn't sitting in the bottom of a Dallas landfill, I'd be shocked...

 

 

Thanks David.

BTW, when I said I wish there was a searchable repository for settled issues, what I meant by "settled" is that all the pertinent facts and conclusions were "settled down." Not still in great fluctuation.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 187
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

@David G. Healy said

Quote

My take? If the Zapruder in-camera original film isn't sitting in the bottom of a Dallas landfill, I'd be shocked...

I guess there are still some authentic hunting trophies out there: The original Zappi film, the Harper-fragment, Kennedy's brain ... one of the men participating in Patrice Lumumbas murder kept his dental bridge as a trophy ... 

Edited by Karl Kinaski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/8/2022 at 8:32 AM, Karl Kinaski said:

one of the men participating in Patrice Lumumbas murder kept his dental bridge as a trophy ... 

Those were returned to the Lumumba family in june this year.  The ceremony was shown on Belgian TV.  It was a little strange... they used a life size casket, while the entire world knew there was only a couple of teeth in there. 

Anyway, they took the remains to Haut-Katanga.   

All those years since the murder, the teeth were kept by the Belgian officer (working for the Congo) Gerard Soete (he was ordered to find the body a couple of days after the murder, and to burn it, he kept a couple of teeth...). It was the family of Gerard Soete that got hold of them, etc Very long story. 

PS 1 :  Maurice Mpolo (Congo Secr. Internal Affairs) and Joseph Okitoo (Chairman of the Congo Senate) were also killed with Lumumba, and buried in the same spot, Soete was ordered to dispose of 3 bodies, not just Lumumba's remains.   

PS 2 : after the killings Gerard Soete stayed in the Congo and worked some 10 years for President Mobutu...

 

 

 

Edited by Jean Paul Ceulemans
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
On 10/31/2022 at 12:40 AM, David Lifton said:

10/30/22 Postscript:  IOW: FBI Director Hoover's statement took the following position re the S& O report and the  (Bethesda) Naval autopsy report (and addressing any differences between the two): that the S & O FBI report recorded "oral statements" made by the autopsy doctor(s) at the time of the autopsy examinationwhereas. . .the Naval autopsy (dated 11/24/63) represented the "final conclusions" of the autopsy.  IMHO: that's an interesting prescription for a cover-up, but that's what Director Hoover said, as reported in his statement of 11/25/63 (and which was published in the NY Times, either that day or the next. (DSL, 10/30/22 -10:40 PM PDT)

I thought David had posted somewhat recently.  Per his profile this was his last post.  It also shows he last visited the forum on November 14th.  Does anyone know, was he ill, did he have a heart attack or something?

As an aside, just a few posts down from this one David Healy, who told us adios last Saturday made a couple of interesting posts in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2012 at 7:06 PM, David Lifton said:

This post is rather superficial and highly inaccurate.

First of all, I have nothing to do with Morningstar, or his theories about Tippit. Nada.

But, moving on from there. . .

As to wound alteration, BEST EVIDENCE lays it out quite clearly. The Dallas treating physicians –in their reports—describe wounds that are entirely different than those at Bethesda, both in the area of the neck and head. None of that has changed, and it is an immutable part of the existing record.

Focusing on the head: All one needs to do is compare, for example, the description of the head wound in the autopsy (10 x 17 cm, per the Boswell diagram, or what he drew for the ARRB, when he testified), or by Dr. Finck, in his 1965 report to Dr. Blumberg, which states the wound extended all the way to the front, and he names the frontal bone) with the relatively modest sized head wound described by McClelland, Carrico (5 by 7 cm) , or even Jenkins (cerebellum “protruded”, etc.) and the difference is obvious.

In the area of the throat wound, the same “before” vs. “after” situation exists: “2-3 cm” (per Dr. Perry) versus Humes “7-8cm” with “widely gaping irregular edges.”

It matters not what some of these people said decades later, when they tried to wriggle off the hook. The record stands.

Moreover, and as to Humes’ state of knowledge: there was nothing subtle about the messed up condition of Kennedy’s body when it arrived. Humes knew the head wound was altered. It was an atrocious sloppy job, and that’s why his immediate response—written down by the two FBI agents present (even though they apparently didn’t not realize the implications)—was that it was “apparent” that there had been “surgery of the head area, namely, in the top of the skull.” (Sibert and O’Neill FBI report).

For further data, read Sibert’s September, 1997 testimony before the ARRB, which confirms what he told me in a detailed 1990 interview: that he would “swear on a stack of bibles” that the doctor said there had been surgery. That’s where he says: “that’s haunted me for years, this surgry of the head. This part, back on the back [of the head[ there. . you could like right in there.” In notes he made at the time, he wrote: “"Brain had been removed from head cavity." (Source: ARRB document MD 216) This of course was confirmed when I first interviewed Paul O’Connor, who was present (and helped) when the shipping casket arrived at Bethesda and JFK’s body was removed from the body bag inside. (See Chapter 26 of Best Evidence, for a verbatim account of my very first interview of O’Connor, in August, 1979).

Uninformed statements talking about “plastic” surgery (“ I will quote sources if pressed,” you write knowingly, and ominously) that come out of the mouth of Posner, or Dr. Wecht are no substitute for careful analysis and proper attention to the evidence.

Furthermore, Chapter 18 of BEST EVIDENCE lays out, in detail, just how seriously and violent was the smashing and bashing that must have occurred, to remove the skull cap. Specifically, I am referring here to the stellate fracture pattern, contra-coup injury on the base of the brain (reported accurately by Humes); the “crushed vomer”, and the evidence of a severed spinal cord.

Instead of buying into oversimplified name-calling, and false association with Morningstar, perhaps you’d be better off re-reading and understanding the detailed analysis set forth in BEST EVIDENCE.

DSL

7/29/12; 5 pm

Los Angeles, California

I thought David's response to the first post in this thread was worth bumping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2012 at 7:29 PM, David G. Healy said:

'tis the best the current, whipped, lone nut faction can do... 10-to-1 no plastic surgeon will venture forth here, not even an opinion. Best Evidence is still as solid as can be!

DGH's post in response to DSL's first one is worth posting as well.  No plastic surgeons ever showed up.

As they both lived in LA at points, I believe they could relate to Bruce Springsteen's 1985 LA rendition of Born In East LA.

Since these posts, ten years down the road . . .

  

Edited by Ron Bulman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/31/2022 at 12:24 AM, David Lifton said:

Yes, I spoke with Haskell Wexler --and so did Fred Newcomb.  In fact, it was Fred who made the connection with Haskell; and Haskell  who then arranged for us to spend a day (at the Beverly Hills Office of Time-Life), looking at (i.e., examining) a beautiful 16mm copy of the Z film; plus the collection of 4 x5 frame-by-frame transparencies.  As I recall, we did not get into (or pursue) any issues of authenticity with Haskell (who, BTW, passed in 2015).  His contribution was permitting us to have access to this important film material.  As you may also be aware: I arranged to rent a full-sized 35 mm microfilm reader (from somewhere in Beverly Hills) and trundled it up the multiple stairs to the Time-Life office.  Once the Z images were viewed on a microfilm reader, it became pretty obvious that the large JFK head wound --the one located towards the front-right-hand-side of the head, and which no one saw at Parkland -- looked "painted on"; also, the back of JFK's head (from Z 221 & Z-223 [as I recall] plus  Z 335, Z337) -- whzere the Dallas doctors saw the "occipital wound" -- appeared to have been deliberately "blacked out"  (DSL)

P.S. It is very difficult today--in 2022 --to reach back into the past, and recall (or resurrect) my astonishment at some of these visual (or "optical") discoveries. To quote Josiah Thompson (author, Six Seconds in Dallas), the Zapruder film was, as he once said, "the closest thing to absolute truth."  Of course, as events evolved and various discoveries were made, it became clear to me,  nothing could be further than the truth.  The Z film --our precious "time clock" on the assassination -- was a fraud, just another item of falsified evidence.  It still contains very valuable data, of course, but in the final analysis --and if the English language is to have any meaning--it is an optical forgery; and best viewed as an artifact, not a fact.

As to its being a "time-clock," that idea can be --and should be --discarded. 

A month before he passed, Z film is an optical forgery, an artifact, not a fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...