Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Rich Pope said:

Um...this was a genuine question.  Was the Muchmore film ever handed over to law enforcement? Yes I believe it was but theres no evidence of alteration, I believe it was handed in later. I really don't think the Z film was altered that much, I've seen some very flakey conjectures. It is cretainly worth keeping in mind though. The Muchmore film in some ways is better than the Z film too, showing the slow down, almost stop and Clint Hills movement. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 166
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

This is really not on topic but, for Rich and Denis' curiousity:

The Marie Muchmore has been altered.  Whether the AP or the FBI did it is questionable.  Someone did it and if you look at the film you can see those alterations. 

 

I first wrote about Marie Muchmore in 2017 and how I thought the film was altered.  But, that topic wasn’t well composed and I did not state all that I have learned about the film.  I have revisited Marie Muchmore’s film several times and will try to point out why I say it is altered.  This is the topic on the forum. 

 

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23315-marie-muchmore-and-the-see-through-man/

 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, some basic info

 

“Muchmore was an employee of Justin McCarty Dress Manufacturer in Dallas located at 707 Young Street, four blocks south of the Texas School Book Depository. On November 22, 1963, Muchmore was in Dealey Plaza with five co-workers, including Wilma Bond, who had a still camera, to watch the presidential motorcade. Muchmore stood near the northwest corner of Main Street and Houston Street with her 8 mm Keystone movie camera and awaited the president’s arrival….

Muchmore sold the undeveloped film to the Dallas office of United Press International on November 25, 1963, for $1,000. It was processed by Kodak in Dallas, and flown to New York City. It appeared the following day on local television station WNEW-TV.[6] The film now belongs to the Associated Press Television News, which restored it in 2002.

I don’t know whether the FBI obtained a copy and altered it or, the AP altered it or some unknown entity.  I will discuss several alterations.  The first is Phil Will The Flat headed See Through Man.  This is a one of the Muchmore frames on which that claim is based.

mm2.jpg

This frame shows Willis is a cutout figure from another film and that didn’t quite do right when pasted into the Muchmore film. This generated some argument and disbelief when first shown.

Willis, in my opinion, showed up in places he didn’t have time to get to.  Such as what we see in this Muchmore frame.  Willis is in the street, the intersection of Main and Houston, as the presidential limousine passes by.  At the same time, he is on the west side of Houston by the light pole with Rosemary.  There is no way he could have gotten back to the sidewalk on west Houston from his place in the intersection when his photo was taken by Jay Skaggs.  Jay Skaggs took a picture of Willis and Rosemary on the west side of Houston.  No matter how fast you may think WWII vet and VA disabled Willis could move he couldn’t have done this.  I also have questioned how he ran down Houston to Elm to be there before the presidential limousine.

Muchmore-phil-willis-location.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, John Butler said:

This is really not on topic but, for Rich and Denis' curiousity:

The Marie Muchmore has been altered.  Whether the AP or the FBI did it is questionable.  Someone did it and if you look at the film you can see those alterations. 

 

I first wrote about Marie Muchmore in 2017 and how I thought the film was altered.  But, that topic wasn’t well composed and I did not state all that I have learned about the film.  I have revisited Marie Muchmore’s film several times and will try to point out why I say it is altered.  This is the topic on the forum. 

 

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23315-marie-muchmore-and-the-see-through-man/

 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, some basic info

 

“Muchmore was an employee of Justin McCarty Dress Manufacturer in Dallas located at 707 Young Street, four blocks south of the Texas School Book Depository. On November 22, 1963, Muchmore was in Dealey Plaza with five co-workers, including Wilma Bond, who had a still camera, to watch the presidential motorcade. Muchmore stood near the northwest corner of Main Street and Houston Street with her 8 mm Keystone movie camera and awaited the president’s arrival….

Muchmore sold the undeveloped film to the Dallas office of United Press International on November 25, 1963, for $1,000. It was processed by Kodak in Dallas, and flown to New York City. It appeared the following day on local television station WNEW-TV.[6] The film now belongs to the Associated Press Television News, which restored it in 2002.

I don’t know whether the FBI obtained a copy and altered it or, the AP altered it or some unknown entity.  I will discuss several alterations.  The first is Phil Will The Flat headed See Through Man.  This is a one of the Muchmore frames on which that claim is based.

mm2.jpg

This frame shows Willis is a cutout figure from another film and that didn’t quite do right when pasted into the Muchmore film. This generated some argument and disbelief when first shown.

Willis, in my opinion, showed up in places he didn’t have time to get to.  Such as what we see in this Muchmore frame.  Willis is in the street, the intersection of Main and Houston, as the presidential limousine passes by.  At the same time, he is on the west side of Houston by the light pole with Rosemary.  There is no way he could have gotten back to the sidewalk on west Houston from his place in the intersection when his photo was taken by Jay Skaggs.  Jay Skaggs took a picture of Willis and Rosemary on the west side of Houston.  No matter how fast you may think WWII vet and VA disabled Willis could move he couldn’t have done this.  I also have questioned how he ran down Houston to Elm to be there before the presidential limousine.

Muchmore-phil-willis-location.jpg

 

John, any explanation as to why they would cut and paste a random man in , who appears to be wearing different clothes also, overnight ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was slightly off with my Muchmore explanation but got the general idea right. The film was shown the next morning and so any teleportation into the future and use of CGI must have been done very quickly. It is of course possible that there were bits cut out but beyond that it is hard to believe that much was done. 

Edited by Jake Hammond
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, John Butler said:

 

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23315-marie-muchmore-and-the-see-through-man/

 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, some basic info

 

“Muchmore was an employee of Justin McCarty Dress Manufacturer in Dallas located at 707 Young Street, four blocks south of the Texas School Book Depository. On November 22, 1963, Muchmore was in Dealey Plaza with five co-workers, including Wilma Bond, who had a still camera, to watch the presidential motorcade. Muchmore stood near the northwest corner of Main Street and Houston Street with her 8 mm Keystone movie camera and awaited the president’s arrival….

Muchmore sold the undeveloped film to the Dallas office of United Press International on November 25, 1963, for $1,000. It was processed by Kodak in Dallas, and flown to New York City. It appeared the following day on local television station WNEW-TV.[6] The film now belongs to the Associated Press Television News, which restored it in 2002.

I don’t know whether the FBI obtained a copy and altered it or, the AP altered it or some unknown entity.  I will discuss several alterations.  The first is Phil Will The Flat headed See Through Man.  This is a one of the Muchmore frames on which that claim is based.

mm2.jpg

This frame shows Willis is a cutout figure from another film and that didn’t quite do right when pasted into the Muchmore film. This generated some argument and disbelief when first shown.

Willis, in my opinion, showed up in places he didn’t have time to get to.  Such as what we see in this Muchmore frame.  Willis is in the street, the intersection of Main and Houston, as the presidential limousine passes by.  At the same time, he is on the west side of Houston by the light pole with Rosemary.  There is no way he could have gotten back to the sidewalk on west Houston from his place in the intersection when his photo was taken by Jay Skaggs.  Jay Skaggs took a picture of Willis and Rosemary on the west side of Houston.  No matter how fast you may think WWII vet and VA disabled Willis could move he couldn’t have done this.  I also have questioned how he ran down Houston to Elm to be there before the presidential limousine.

Muchmore-phil-willis-location.jpg

 

John Butler,

The frame above from the Marie Muchmore film is manna from heaven to me.  I've seen it before but couldn't isolate it like this.  That is most definitely NOT Phil Willis.  Quick trivia question: Who was the first American soldier to capture an enemy combatant in WW2?  Time's up, it was Phil Willis at Pearl Harbor, later MAJOR PW.

That blurry head in the top and bottom left photos is our old friend JACK RUBY, Jacob Leon Rubenstein.  Quick trivia: Why did JR legally take Leon for a middle name?  A: He admired a labor leader named Leon Cooke whom he helped to murder in December 1939, and he felt bad about it later.  Just like he later felt bad about helping murder JFK.

That image is blurry because Jack be nimble, Jack be motoring, probably hopped up on his Preludin.  Diet pills, wink, wink.  Jack was about to be late, be late for a very important date.  Behind the stockade fence atop The Grassy Knoll.  He had to get there to help with interference.  Jean Hill saw him batting *ss from behind the pergola to the NE end of the fence, while everyone else was frozen in shock or hitting the dirt.  I figure the limo didn't pass Ruby until they were halfway down Houston to Elm.  That was one slow limo.

Phil Willis's head wasn't that fat and he was dressed very differently.  And PW didn't have that bun of hair on the back of his head below the bald spot.  JR had missed a couple haircuts at that time.  Too busy "working" on The Big Event in order to pay the Mob the ~40K he owed them and the ~40K he owed IRS, ~a half million in today's money.

JR's time at Dallas Morning News, two blocks from Dealey, is very hazy.  He was flitting hither and yon, using the bathroom, gone for stretches.  It's quite a coincidence you see PW in that motion blur because it was Phil Willis who, a few minutes later, took a photo of the crowd around the SE corner of TSBD, which included, you guessed it, Jack Ruby.  Of course, the WARren COmmisioN cropped that photo, so it was hard to see ol' Jack.  But Major Willis did some detective work of his own and PROVED it was that old Chicago hood.

I figure JR was gone from DMN for about 15 minutes around 12:30.  With all the hubbub, his absence would not be missed.  He had been hanging out there, for the flimsiest of reasons!, for much of the morning.  Gone a lot of that time.  Julia Ann Mercer saw him dropping off a guy with a gun case on the Grassy Knoll, about halfway from the stairs to the RR bridge.  About 10:30 to 11:00.  Jack was one busy boy that weekend until they locked him up before high noon on the 24th.

Again, JB, thanks for that frame.

Edited by Roy Wieselquist
Link to post
Share on other sites

The following could be the Rosetta Stone evidence that finally convinces L Payette there truly was a conspiracy.

Listen carefully starting at the 6 minute and 40 second mark.

Lance, enjoy:

hqdefault.jpg?sqp=-oaymwEZCPYBEIoBSFXyq4

 
 
Remote viewer Daz Smith sets out on an incredible journey as he works a blind remote viewing target for the Farsight Institute.
Edited by Joe Bauer
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

The following could be the Rosetta Stone evidence that finally convinces L Payette there truly was a conspiracy.

Listen carefully starting at the 6 minute and 40 second mark.

Lance, enjoy:

hqdefault.jpg?sqp=-oaymwEZCPYBEIoBSFXyq4

 

You're too late, Joe.  Flat-Headed See-Through Man had already shaken my core beliefs and caused a 179-degree (at least) revision in my thinking.  Flat-Headed See-Through People point in pretty much only one direction:  That's right, I'm talking about ALIENS.  I don't need any stinking Rosetta Stone after Flat-Headed See-Through Man has clinched the deal.  The Alien Presence, baby - take it to the bank.  JFK was killed after Greer overheard him nudge Jackie and say, "Am I just being paranoid or do there seem to be a lot of Flat-Headed See-Through People in the crowd today?"

However, your remote viewing video from the Farsight Institute (known in the skeptical community as the Farwrong Institute) does afford me one more opportunity to repeat Lance's Axiom, which can never be repeated too often:  Although someone may seem to be highly intelligent and reasonably sane and may have excellent academic and professional credentials and hold a responsible position, do not assume that he is not COMPLETELY INSANE in some dark corner of his life.  Lance's Axiom may be employed with great profitability on this very forum and throughout the assassination research community.

https://www.csicop.org/si/show/art_bell_heavenrsquos_gate_and_journalistic_integrity 

Theories about a strange object near Hale-Bopp were first made public in November of last year when Chuck Shramek, an amateur astronomer from Houston, called Art Bell’s program to report that a photograph of his appeared to show a large object behind the comet, an object he speculated to be up to four times the size of Earth. The following night, Courtney Brown, a tenured professor of political science at Emory University and director of the Farsight Institute in Atlanta, was a guest on Bell’s show and claimed that three “remote viewers” associated with his institute had confirmed Shramek’s findings and, incredibly, had determined it to be a metallic object full of aliens. As further proof, Brown sent Bell a photograph of the Hale-Bopp “companion” (allegedly taken by someone Brown identified only as a “top-ten university astronomer”) on the condition that Bell hold off displaying the image on his Web page until the astronomer in question held a news conference. (Meanwhile, astronomers analyzing Shramek’s mystery object concluded it was a misidentified star, though Shramek continues to dispute this.) After two months of waiting for the secret astronomer to come forward (time also spent feeding the Hale-Bopp UFO hype), Bell decided to post the secret photograph. One day later Bell was contacted by Oliver Hainut and David Tholen, both professors from the University of Hawaii, who said that Brown’s image was merely a doctored copy of one of their recent comet photos, and they provided a comparison to prove it. The image was a fake.

Link to post
Share on other sites

New member here.   For the past few weeks I've been reading through a lot of threads on this site, and am amazed to see DVP here, and still at it.   I used to debate him 15 years ago on the Lancer site.  Of course nothing has sunk in, and he's no different than he was 15 years ago.   Actually, there is a difference, I notice that this new breed of DVP is much more polite than he was back then.

My question is, why do you CTer's waste your time with these people?  They refuse to make a connection to anything.   Fifteen years later, and the same thing is going on.   There's a Ruth Paine thread here where the CTer frustratingly presents all kinds of valid points that go unanswered by the LNer's.

The motive of McAdams is obvious, the professor from the Jesuit Marquette Univ.  The rest, I guess i don't know them well enough.

I notice both sides here comment on the FBI, and there investigative job in this matter, and use what they say for evidence.   I live here in Colombia, South America, and I can tell you that the FBI/DEA/CIA are some of the biggest crime organizations I can think of.

There's another assassination.alt site with a guy named Ben Holmes, and I really feel sorry for the guy.  They sit there day after day, calling each other liars.  I'm a lurker there, and his opponents seem to be some kind of shills.  Why go through all of that?  They're just wasting your time.

I admit though, it's fun studying the JFK assassination, and I'm still learning something new all the time.  With the death of H Bush recently, I learned for the first time that Bush called the FBI 90 minutes after the assassination with some phony info.  I guess he was panicking.  This from the guy that said he didn't know where he was on that day for decades.   To add one more, he told Kitty Kelley the author that he didn't recall where he was.

I think you're enjoying yourselves, so carry on, but understand that nothing is going to sink in.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Robert Card
Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert,

The reason DVP is not as bad here as he was at Lancer is this: he was actually thrown out of that forum and this one many years ago.

When I decided to join up here, he and Reitzes decided to join.  Not a coincidence, as one member told me. At that time, DVP had to make a pledge to Simkin that he would not start insulting people as he had before on both sites e.g. recommending books on curing paranoria etc.

The odd thing is that Lancie Boy is actually the one who does that now, and rather frequently. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually remember that far back, and I left before DVP was removed.  He was really bad with the ad hom, so I left.  He had a partner there too.  Actually, I think that's all they have is ad hom.  I notice he thinks that everything a CTer says is 'funny'.   How funny was it when the HSCA did a limited hangout, and said it was 'probably a conspiracy'.

I should say that I wrote on the Lancer site, and private mail to DVP, and he was always cordial with me under the circumstances, and he never made a personal attack against me.  I remember we discussed many subjects, and the Jesuit educated Vincent Bugliosi, book.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

At that time, DVP had to make a pledge to Simkin that he would not start insulting people as he had before on both sites e.g. recommending books on curing paranoria etc.

This is nothing but a falsehood. I never made any kind of "pledge" to John Simkin or anyone else connected with this forum at that time (2010). DiEugenio, as usual, doesn't know what he's talking about.

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to post
Share on other sites

I love it.  DVP is such a denial artist in every single way imaginable.

I even have this from a guy who knew him and his partners and was infiltrating their conversations. (I used to have  all kinds of spies out for DVP back then.)

He said in one conversation that he had to tone it down to get back on and he only blew up once and got a warning from a mod when he and I went through a back and forth about Jean Davison and her POS book.

But just use logic, if he got thrown out for his usual invective and then later got back in, then obviously he would have had to amend his ways.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Robert,

The reason DVP is not as bad here as he was at Lancer is this: he was actually thrown out of that forum and this one many years ago.

When I decided to join up here, he and Reitzes decided to join.  Not a coincidence, as one member told me. At that time, DVP had to make a pledge to Simkin that he would not start insulting people as he had before on both sites e.g. recommending books on curing paranoria etc.

The odd thing is that Lancie Boy is actually the one who does that now, and rather frequently.  

Lancie Boy seldom if ever personally insults individuals unless he believes he can do so in a manner wittier than some insult or inanity that has been lobbed his way, to wit:  "Mr. Banana Suit" (Mr. DiEugenio's witless characterization of my former profile photo) vs. "Mr. Scowly Face" (my witty return volley).  See the difference?  Well, I don't either, actually, but he called me Mr. Banana Suit first - so neener-neener to you, sir.

What is actually troubling Mr. DiEugenio is that here, in this veritable conspiracy kindergarten, I have introduced peer-reviewed literature to the effect that persons who are prone to see conspiracies all around them tend to have a certain psychological profile.  I have also emphasized Lance's Axiom that academic and professional credentials are no guarantee that you are not dealing with a complete loon.  No big deal - except, perhaps, to someone for whom this all hits a little too close to home:  "Hey, that's me, and my acolytes are going to think he's talking about me!"

Draw your own conclusions.

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

I even have this from a guy who knew him and his partners and was infiltrating their conversations.

What do you mean by "infiltrating"? Anybody can read any thread at a public forum (like Lancer and EF).

And Jimmy tells another falsehood by implying I have "partners". Why, Jim, do you use that word---"partners"? Some fellow "LNers" posted on the same forums I have posted on, naturally (and they still do here at this forum), but the word "partners" implies something else----doesn't it Jim? Why are you using that word? I'd really like to know.

 

Quote

(I used to have all kinds of spies out for DVP back then.)

LOL.gif Oh, brother. As if anyone would need any "spies" to see all of my online posts. Just go to the forums and look for yourself. Everything is out in the open and public. Why were any "spies" required?

 

Quote

But just use logic, if he got thrown out for his usual invective and then later got back in, then obviously he would have had to amend his ways.

But you, Jim, were in the very same boat as me (with respect to getting reinstated after getting booted from this forum).....because you too were kicked off this forum by Mr. Simkin a few years ago (approx. 2013 or 2014 as I recall). The new owners let you back in.

So I wouldn't throw too many stones if I were you on the subject of getting "thrown out".

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...