The Harper Fragment proves a lot.

[David Lifton]

On 8/28/2021 at 2:46 AM, Paul Bacon said:

10-4, Chris!  The Zapruder film is a wierd thing--it shows evidence of what happened and, at the same time, it shows evidence that it has been manipulated.  Where those boundry lines are is anyone's guess...

Paul: Correct your spelling. Its "w e i r d."  DSL  And yes: the Z film has been falsified.  See my essay: "Pig on a Leash."

[Paul Bacon]

21 hours ago, David Lifton said:

Paul: Correct your spelling. Its "w e i r d."  DSL  And yes: the Z film has been falsified.  See my essay: "Pig on a Leash."

Thanks for the correction David.  So much for "i before e except after c."  And I have read "Pig on a Leash."

 

Edited August 30, 2021 by Paul Bacon
add

[Eddy Bainbridge]

Many thanks to Chris Davidson for the Hickey quote and encouragement. I am going BIG with my next conclusions. If this post sparks some interest I'll post the evidence.

 

Zapruder film sequence (note This sequence is not exactly correct, as what it doesn't incorporate is frame removal, necessary to hide the limo stop (Decelleration/Acceleration) :

 

Z309-Z311 - Limo starts to brake

Z312 - JFK's torso moves forward and down due to braking.

Z312a - JFK slumps further forward with Jackie concerned

Z312b - Shot from the rear hitting JFK in the head (as per Boswell, Hulmes, Finck, Ipsley, and Doug Horne location, and per Pat Speer discovery of large fragment from this shot in the eye socket)

Z312c - Jackie  is aware JFK has been shot again, but can't exactly see the right sided blast location. (The car is virtually stationary)

Z312c - Jackie lifts JFK to try and see what has happened to his right side

Z312d - JFK is now upright (See George Hickey quote above)

Z312e - Shot to JFK's head from the front (as per Kilduff and Xray fragment pattern and other evidence), blasting out at the rear (as per Uncle Tom Cobley and all) and ejecting the Harper Fragment. A piece of JFK's brain shoots across the back of the car.

Z313  - The Harper Fragment has shot nearly vertically into the air, and can be seen in this frame, the initial blast is diminishing in this frame.

 

The added 6 frames amount to 0.33 seconds removed. I have a feeling the missing sequence may need a few more frames.

----------

The WC Rydberg Drawing is correct!! It shows the angle and direction JFK was first hit at. (Arlen Specter spotted the problem but it has been interpreted as a fault in the drawing not the Z film)

Dan Rather was correct. JFK slumped forwards.

The Autopsy Rear Head photograph is accurate. It unfortunately fails to show the low rear entrance, due to the loose scalp (after repair) sagging slightly. It was intended to show the rear entrance, not to fool anyone. It was only in 1967 that the autopsy surgeons got to see their intention failed. If they had seen the picture on the day of the autopsy it would have been retaken. Doug Horne found the hole when viewing the original at the archives but everyone else has been looking at other features in the photo.

Life Magazine was correct!!. Their initial sequence published was based on what they saw, a forward slump. They may have used actual missing frames for their sequence, or more likely; placed extant frames in the wrong order based on their viewing of the original film. This accurate reporting may have required the death of the reporter.

The Bang.....Bang-Bang sequence accurately depicts two head shots (Bang-bang). Witnesses accurately report the sequence, but not the timing, as this varies (Jarman in the TBSD hears a shot originating close to him, and one the from the other side of the Plaza, potentially up to 0.5 seconds apart. Clint Hill hears one shot and an 'echo' as he is between the two shots)

 

This may not be perfect, but I'm looking for some rebuttals to damp down my enthusiasm for this concept.

Edited September 2, 2021 by Eddy Bainbridge
Frame misnumbering

[Paul Bacon]

I completely agree with you.  After reading Doug Horne and David Mantik's evaluations I came to the same conclusions, but you've taken the conclusions a few steps further and have provided some very interesting food for thought...

I never thought Dan Rather was lying. I believe he saw what he said he'd seen.

[Eddy Bainbridge]

2 hours ago, Paul Bacon said:

I completely agree with you.  After reading Doug Horne and David Mantik's evaluations I came to the same conclusions, but you've taken the conclusions a few steps further and have provided some very interesting food for thought...

I never thought Dan Rather was lying. I believe he saw what he said he'd seen.

Many thanks Paul. It seems impossible that Rather would lie, and I think he repeated his statement 'on air' three times. Its pretty implausible that any conspirators had time to think 'Rather needs to reverse the body movement', bearing in mind we ended up with a backward movement that suggested a shot from the front anyway!. From the edgy approach to the subject he  seems to have ever since, I think he knows what was done to the film, and falling back on 'I misremembered' was the safest option.

Edited September 2, 2021 by Eddy Bainbridge
spelling