David Von Pein Posted June 4 Share Posted June 4 (edited) ........ Edited June 5 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keven Hofeling Posted June 4 Author Share Posted June 4 (edited) 14 hours ago, Denny Zartman said: It is very strange, I agree. I wish I knew why this is. The conspirators knew that pictures would say a thousand words for a thousand years, and they were right in that the pictures seemingly have the power to convince even some of those who otherwise believe there was a conspiracy. Jenkins and O'Connor's discussion of the pictures was revealing, and I know that the inconsistencies they highlighted are but a small fraction of the many suspicious details that surround the record. I spent a lot of time over the weekend re-reading the Warren Commission testimony of the medical personnel at Parkland. I also hunted down as many of the earliest statements from the Parkland doctors and nurses as I could find. Reading them and relying only on them - I can't understand how anyone can doubt that the large head wound was observed as being either in the back of the head, or being along the right temple and extending into the back. It just seems abundantly clear, from what I've read and heard. It's a genuine puzzle to me why anyone - especially a conspiracy theorist - would go out of their way to belittle and/or deny what the doctors and nurses at Parkland reportedly observed. Just in case you were unaware, with regard to the earliest reports of the Parkland trauma team and support personnel (which constitute the testimony with the greatest probative value and evidentiary weight), something that is not very well known is that very meticulously detailed and comprehensive first and second day medical reports were made by the Parkland Hospital medical personnel who were involved in the resuscitation attempts on President Kennedy, and were initially classified "top secret," and then were published in Volume 20 of the Warren Commission's 26 volumes as "the Price Exhibits," which you can access via the following link: https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0087b.htm -- along with their TOP SECRET stamps. These reports prove to a scientific certainty both that the Parkland physicians made no surgical incisons anywhere on JFK's head whatsoever, and that NONE of the Parkland medical personnel observed the damage we see on the top of JFK's head in the autopsy photographs, nor the huge, cavernous forehead wound that is depicted by the extant Zapruder film. The obvious implication of these reports, of course, is that the huge, cavernous wound in JFK's forehead that we see in the following stills of the extant "original" Zapruder film -- which looks to me like it was calculated to appear to be about the size of a cantaloupe -- is entirely the product of what Dino Brugioni called "photographic fakery": And I'm sure you are aware of the first day Admission Notes -- which have the greatest probative value and evidentiary weight out of all of the medical evidence -- that were filed by Drs. Kemp Clark, Charles Carrico, Malcolm Perry, Charles Baxter, Robert McClelland and Marion Jenkins immediately after their efforts to resuscitate President Kennedy on November 22, 1963. None of these reports support the existence of the frontal head wound depicted by the fraudulent Zapruder film imagery either: COMMISSION EXHIBIT NO. 392: APPENDIX VIII - MEDICAL REPORTS FROM DOCTORS AT PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, DALLAS, TEXAS: https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/jfkinfo/app8.htm Summary (By Dr. Kemp Clark) The President arrived at the Emergency Room at 12:43 P. M., the 22nd of November, 1963. He was in the back seat of his limousine. Governor Connally of Texas was also in this car. The first physician to see the President was Dr. James Carrico, a Resident in General Surgery. Dr. Carrico noted the President to have slow, agenal respiratory efforts. He could hear a heartbeat but found no pulse or blood pressure to be present. Two external wounds, one in the lower third of the anterior neck, the other in the occipital region of the skull, were noted. Through the head wound, blood and brain were extruding. Dr. Carrico inserted a cuffed endotracheal tube. While doing so, he noted a ragged wound of the trachea immediately below the larynx. At this time, Dr. Malcolm Perry, Attending Surgeon, Dr. Charles Baxter, Attending Surgeon, and Dr. Ronald Jones, another Resident in General Surgery, arrived. Immediately thereafter, Dr. M. T. Jenkins, Director of the Department of Anesthesia, and Doctors Giesecke and Hunt, two other Staff Anesthesiologists, arrived. The endotracheal tube had been connected to a Bennett respirator to assist the President's breathing. An Anesthesia machine was substituted for this by Dr. Jenkins. Only 100% oxygen was administered. A cutdown was performed in the right ankle, and a polyethylene catheter inserted in the vein. An infusion of lactated Ringer's solution was begun. Blood was drawn for type and crossmatch, but unmatched type "O" RH negative blood was immediately obtained and begun. Hydrocortisone 300 mgms was added to the intravenous fluids. Dr. Robert McClelland, Attending Surgeon, arrived to help in the President's care. Doctors Perry, Baxter, and McClelland began a tracheostomy, as considerable quantities of blood were present from the President's oral pharynx. At this time, Dr. Paul Peters, Attending Urological Surgeon, and Dr. Kemp Clark, Director of Neurological Surgery arrived. Because of the lacerated trachea, anterior chest tubes were place in both pleural spaces. These were connected to sealed underwater drainage. Neurological examination revealed the President's pupils to be widely dialted and fixed to light. His eyes were divergent, being deviated outward; a skew deviation from the horizontal was present. Not deep tendon reflexes or spontaneous movements were found. There was a large wound in the right occipito-parietal region, from which profuse bleeding was occurring. 1500 cc. of blood were estimated on the drapes and floor of the Emergency Operating Room. There was considerable loss of scalp and bone tissue. Both cerebral and cerebellar tissue were extruding from the wound. Further examination was not possible as cardiac arrest occurred at this point. Closed chest cardiac massage was begun by Dr. Clark. A pulse palpable in both the carotid and femoral arteries was obtained. Dr. Perry relieved on the cardiac massage while a cardiotachioscope was connected. Dr. Fouad Bashour, Attending Physician, arrived as this was being connected. There was electrical silence of the President's heart. President Kennedy was pronounced dead at 1300 hours by Dr. Clark Kemp Clark, M. D. Director Service of Neurological Surgery KC:aa cc to Dean's Office, Southwestern Medical School cc to Medical Records, Parkland Memorial Hospital ______________________________________________________________________________________ PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ADMISSION NOTE J. F. KENNEDY DATE AND HOUR 11/22/63 1620 DOCTOR: Carrico When patient entered Emergency room on ambulance carriage had slow agonal respiratory efforts and scant cardiac beats by auscultation. Two external wounds were noted. One small penetrating wound of ant. neck in lower 1/3. The other wound had avulsed the calvarium and shredded brain tissue present with profuse oozing. No pulse or blood pressure were present. Pupils were dilated and fixed. A cuffed endotracheal tube was inserted and through the laryngoscope a ragged wound of the trachea was seen immediately below the larynx. The tube was passed past the laceration and the cuff inflated. Respiration using the resp assistor on auto-matic were instituted. Concurrently an IV infusion of lactated Ringer solution was begun via catheter placed in right leg and blood was drawn for type and crossmatch. Type O Rh negative blood was obtained as well as hydrocortisone. In view of tracheal injury and decreased BS an tracheostomy was performed by Dr. Perry and Bilat. chest tubes inserted. A 2nd bld infusion was begun in left arm. In addition Dr. Jenkins began resp with anethesia machine, cardiac monitor, and stimulator attached. Solu cortef IV given (300mg), attempt to control slow oozing from cerebral and cerebellar tissue via packs instituted. Despite these measures as well as external cardiac massage, BP never returned and EKG evidence of cardiac activity was never obtained. Charles J. Carrico M.D. PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ADMISSION NOTE J. F. KENNEDY DATE AND HOUR 22 Nov 1963 DOCTOR: PERRY Staff Note At the time of initial examination, the pt. was noted as non-responsive. The eyes were deviated and the pupils were dilated. A considerable quantity of blood was noted on the patient, the carriage and the floor. A small wound was noted in the midline of the neck, in the lower third anteriorly. It was exuding blood slowly. A large wound of the right posterior cranium was noted, exposing severely lacerated brain. Brain tissue was noted in the blood at the head of the carriage. Pulse or heartbeat were not detectable but slow spasmodic respiration was noted. An endotracheal tube was in place and respiration was being assisted. An intravenous infusion was being placed in the leg. At this point I noted that respiration was ineffective and while additional venisections were done to administer fluids and blood, a tracheostomy was effected. A right lateral injury to the trachea was noted. The tracheostomy tube was put in place and the cuff inflated and respiration assisted. Closed chest cardiac massage was instituted after placement of sealed drainage chest tubes, but without benefit. Electrocardiographic evaluation revealed that no detectable electrical activity existed in the heart. Resuscitation attempts were abandoned after the team of physicians determined that the patient had expired. Malcolm O. Perry, M.D. 1630 hr 22 Nov 1963 PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ADMISSION NOTE DATE AND HOUR NOV 22, 1963 DOCTOR: BAXTER Note of Attendance to President Kennedy. I was contacted at approx 12:40 that the President was on the way to the emergency room having been shot. On arrival there, I found an endotracheal tube in place with assisted respirations, a left chest tube being inserted and cut downs going in one leg and in the left arm. The President had a wound in the mid-line of the neck. On first observation of the remaining wounds the rt temporal and occipital bones were missing and the brain was lying on the table, with .extensive lacerations and contusions. The pupils were fixed and deviated lateral and dilated. No pulse was detectable and respirations were (as noted) being supplied. A tracheotomy was performed by Dr. Perry and I and a chest tube inserted into the right chest (2nd intercostal space anteriorally). Meanwhile, 2 pts of O neg blood were administered by pump without response. When all of these measures were complete, no heart beat could be detected. Close chest message was performed until a cardioscope could be attached which revealed no cardiac activity was obtained. Due to the excessive and irreparable brain damage which was lethal, no further attempt to resuscitate the heart was made. Charles R. Baxter M.D. Associate Prof of Surgery Southwestern Medical School PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ADMISSION NOTE JOHN F. KENNEDY DATE AND HOUR 22 Nov 1963 DOCTOR: [KEMP CLARK] 12:20pm to 13:00 hrs Called by EOR while standing in (illegible) Laboratory at SWMS. Told that the President had been shot. I arrived at the EOR at 1220 - 1225 and .The President was bleeding profusely from the back of the head. There was a large (3 x 3cm) amount of cerebral tissue present on the cart. There was a smaller amount of cerebellar tissue present also. A tracheostomy was being performed by Drs. Perry, Baxter and McClelland. Exam of the President showed that an endotracheal tube was in place and respiratory assistance was being given by Dr. Akins and Jenkins. The pupils were dilated, fixed to light and his eyes were deviated outward and the right one downward as as well . The trach was completed and I adjusted the endotracheal tube a little bit. Blood was present in the oral pharynx. Suction was used to remove this. Levine Catheter was passed into the stomach at this time. He was (illegible) that I (illegible) no carotid pulse. I immediately began closed chest massage. A pulse was obtained at the carotid and femoral pulse levels. Dr. Perry then took over the cardiac massage so I could evaluate the head wound. There was a large wound beginning in the right occiput extending into the parietal region. Much of the skull appeared gone at brief examination . The previously described lacerated brain was present. By this time an EKG was hooked up. There was no electrical activity of the heart and no respiratory effort - He was pronounced dead at 1300 hrs by me. W. Kemp Clark 22 Nov 1963 1615 hrs - PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ADMISSION NOTE DATE AND HOUR Nov. 22, 1963 4:45 P.M. DOCTOR: Robert N. McClelland Statement Regarding Assassination of President Kennedy At approximately 12:45 PM on the above date I was called from the second floor of Parkland Hospital and went immediately to the Emergency Operating Room. When I arrived President Kennedy was being attended by Drs Malcolm Perry, Charles Baxter, James Carrico, and Ronald Jones. The President was at the time comatose from a massive gunshot wound of the head with a fragment wound of the trachea. An endotracheal tube and assisted respiration was started immediately by Dr. Carrico on Duty in the EOR when the President arrived. Drs. Perry, Baxter, and I then performed a tracheotomy for respiratory distress and tracheal injury and Dr. Jones and Paul Peters inserted bilateral anterior chest tubes for pneumothoracis secondary to the tracheomediastinal injury. Simultaneously Dr. Jones had started 3 cut-downs giving blood and fluids immediately, In spite of this, at 12:55 he was pronounced dead by Dr. Kemp Clark the neurosurgeon and professor of neurosurgery who arrived immediately after I did. The cause of death was due to massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the left temple. He was pronounced dead after external cardiac message failed and ECG activity was gone. Robert N. McClelland M.D. Asst. Prof. of Surgery Southwestern Med. School of Univ of Tex. Dallas, Texas PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ADMISSION NOTE DATE AND HOUR Nov. 22, 1963 4:45 P.M. DOCTOR: BASHOUR Statement Regarding Assassination of the President of the U.S.A., President Kennedy. At 12:50 PM, we were called from the 1st floor of Parkland Hospital and told that President Kennedy was shot. Dr. D ?? and myself went to the emergency room of Parkland. Upon examination, the President had no pulsation, no heartbeat, no blood pressure. The oscilloscope showed a complete standstill. The president was declared dead at 12:55 P.M. F. Bashour M.D. Associate Professor of Cardiology Southwestern Medical School Dallas, Texas. THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL SCHOOL DALLAS November 22, 1963 1630 To: Mr. C.J. Price, Administrator Parkland Memorial Hospital From: M.T. Jenkins, M.D., Professor and Chairman Department of Anesthesiology Subject: Statement concerning resusciative efforts for President John F. Kennedy Upon receiving a stat alarm that this distinguished patient was being brought to the emergency room at Parkland Memorial Hospital, I dispatched Doctors A . H. Giesecke and Jackie H. Hunt with an anesthesia machine and resuscitative equipment to the major surgical emergency room area, and I ran down the stairs . On my arrival in the emergency operating room at approximately 1230 I found that Doctors Carrico and/or Delaney had begun resuscitative efforts by introducing an orotracheal tube, connecting it for controlled ventilation to a Bennett intermittent positive pressure breathing apparatus . Doctors Charles Baxter, Malcolm Perry, and Robert McClelland arrived at the same time and began a tracheostomy and started the insertion of a right chest tube, since there was also obvious tracheal and chest damage . Doctors Paul Peters and Kemp Clark arrived simultaneously and immediately thereafter assisted respectively with the insertion of the right chest tube and with manual closed chest cardiac compression to assure circulation. For better control of artificial ventilation, I exchanged the intermittent positive pressure breathing apparatus for an anesthesia machine and continued artificial ventilation . Doctors Gene Akin and A . H. Giesecke assisted with the respiratory problems incident to changing from the orotracheal tube to a tracheostomy tube, and Doctors Hunt and Giesecke connected a cardioscope to determine cardiac activity. During the progress of these activities, the emergency room cart was elevated at the feet in order to provide a Trendelenburg position, a venous cutdown was performed on the right saphenous vein, and additional fluids were begun in a vein in the left forearm while blood was ordered from the blood bank . All of these activities were completed by approximately 1245, at which time external cardiac massage was still being carried out effectively by Doctor Clark as judged by a palpable peripheral pulse. Despite these measures there was no electrocardiographic evidence of cardiac activity . These described resuscitative activities were indicated as of first importance, and after they were carried out attention was turned to all other evidences of injury . There was a great laceration on the right side of the head (temporal and occipital), causing a great defect in the skull plate so that there was herniation and laceration of great areas of the brain, even to the extent that the cerebellum had protruded from the wound. There were also fragmented sections of brain on the drapes of the emergency room cart . With the institution of adequate cardiac compression, there was a great flow of blood from the cranial cavity, indicating that there was much vascular damage as well as brain tissue damage . It is my personal feeling that all methods of resuscitation were instituted expeditiously and efficiently . However, this cranial and intracranial damage was of such magnitude as to cause the irreversible damage . President Kennedy was pronounced dead at 1300 . Sincerely, /s/ M. T. Jenkins M. T. Jenkins, M.D . And @Denny Zartman, I sure would be interested in seeing that footage of O'Connor and Jenkins commenting about the autopsy photographs that you have described. Do you know if it is posted anywhere online? Edited June 4 by Keven Hofeling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denny Zartman Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 (edited) 11 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said: Just in case you were unaware... Thanks for that tip! I didn't know about the Price Exhibits. The letter from Dr. Clark to Dr. Burkley is just the type of information I was looking for. I agree that the earliest statements are the ones most likely to be the most accurate So far I'm referencing: WC H Vol 6 - Testimony WC H Vol 17 CE 392 (Initial written statements from 11/22/63 Drs. Carrico, Perry, Clark, and Jenkins) Press conference from 11/22/63 with Drs. Perry and Clark ARRB Medical exhibits MD 97 and MD 98 (Initial written statements from 11/22 & 11/23/63 by Drs. Baxter and Jones) WC H Vol 21, Price Exhibit #2 (Letter from Dr. Clark to Dr. Burkley, dated 11/23/63) ARRB Medical exhibit MD 99 / WC H vol 21, Price Exhibit #24, Pg 222 (Initial written statement from 11/22/63 by RN Patricia Hutton And this video: Dr. Perry from 1963 (video is labeled as November 27, but according to another source it's from November 22) where he says “Large wound to the head in the right posterior area” - YouTube Real Time 1960’s 11 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said: I sure would be interested in seeing that footage of O'Connor and Jenkins commenting about the autopsy photographs that you have described. Do you know if it is posted anywhere online? I don't think it is online, unfortunately. It didn't come up for me in a YouTube search. It was a DVD that came along with the book "In The Eye Of History" by William Law. I'll have to check to see if it's still available or if there is some other way to get the video to you. I'll see what I can do. Edited June 5 by Denny Zartman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 On 6/3/2024 at 9:32 PM, Sandy Larsen said: Jean Ceulemans had his posting rights suspended for four days. In his case it was being disrespectful toward a forum administrator (me). Correction: TWO days, not four. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ege Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 On 6/3/2024 at 11:04 PM, Sandy Larsen said: Ron, It's good of you to show compassion for a fellow human being. I hope he deserves it. As for my handling of this and other Pat Speer threads, It is my job to decide how best to handle it for the sake of other researchers. And that's what I intend to do. BTW, I don't know how you can tell which of Pat's works are "good" as you put it, and which aren't. Any work can look good if the evidence is controlled as necessary. Which is what Pat sometimes does. For all I know, he might have don't it for every single thing he worked on. Or maybe not. We just don't know at this point. Sandy, Thank you. To be perfectly clear, I fully support your actions as moderator and am very appreciative of the all the hard work that it takes! Of course, without delving into particulars, it just MO that Pat has done some decent work, re the JFKA. If memory serves, there has been some consensus here and there? You are absolutely correct - we can never be 100 percent certain. I'd imagine that's one of the reasons we're all here - to reach some sort of unimpeachable certainly - about any facet of the JFKA. Thanks again for all your "labors"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denny Zartman Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 My thanks as well to @Sandy Larsen for his fairness and hard work keeping this forum accurate and equitable under what I know are incredibly difficult conditions. He is to be commended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keven Hofeling Posted June 5 Author Share Posted June 5 (edited) I agree that Sandy Larsen should be commended for his performance as an Administrator for this forum, both with regard to some recent challenging situations and with regard to his overall contributions to the smooth functioning of the forum in general. But much more importantly, and with regard to some insinuations that have been made that Sandy has demonstrated favoritism toward me, and in the same context bias toward others (and even worse has been the implied allegation that Sandy has been specifically colluding with me in metering out sanctions against others for rule violations), I want to make it perfectly clear that there was no communication whatsoever between Sandy and I concerning his administrative duties -- or anything else -- throughout the recent events, much less anything that could be characterized as "collusion," and he also in the same context took administrative action adverse to me by advising me that it is a rule violation to accuse others of being "a liar." The difference in outcomes came down to the fact that I immediately revised my posts to remedy the violations, and others did not. Additionally, I get the impression that some other members of the forum (and perhaps some Administrators as well) are under the impression that Sandy and I adhere to identical positions on the issues debated on these threads, and that Sandy uses his position as an Administrator in support of our shared views, as well as to throttle the opposing views of others. But I am here to tell you that Sandy and I do not see eye to eye on every issue, and that in fact there have been issues on which Sandy and I have fiercely disagreed. Sandy is nobody's dupe as far as I have seen, and he has afforded me no special treatment, nor have I requested any special treatment from him. What Sandy and I do evidently agree about is that forum members should not be free to make blatant factual misrepresentations of the historical record without being able to provide evidentiary support for their positions -- particularly not misrepresentations that are inherently defamatory to witnesses and researchers -- and that in the event such positions are taken it should be made clear by the forum member that the position is an opinion rather than a fact. Had those who were suspended conducted themselves in such a manner, all of the recent conflict and associated suspensions would have been avoided, and in my humble opinion, making such distinctions is simply the hallmark of responsible advocacy and research. Nobody should be entitled to their own facts, and extraordinary claims should be supported by verifiable evidence. Edited June 5 by Keven Hofeling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 Thank you everybody for your support. I am truly appreciative. And thank you Keven for straightening out what Mark Knight implied about me. And you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Lowe Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 (edited) The alteration theory to me is like McBride's theory that Mary Ferrell revealed the acoustic evidence in order to destroy the conspiracy community; if I had the Zapruder film and was worried about it I would have damaged it by "accident," like other documents and evidence has been destroyed. Release it with cloddish alterations, and in the process convince most of the world that there was a shot from the front? Great job on that one, just as the acoustic evidence completely altered the conclusion of the one government panel that ever investigated the assassination, and remains the one thing that is cited as irrefutable evidence of conspiracy. With enemies like this, who needs researchers? Edited June 6 by Allen Lowe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Odisio Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 42 minutes ago, Allen Lowe said: The alteration theory to me is like McBride's theory that Mary Ferrell revealed the acoustic evidence in order to destroy the conspiracy community; if I had the Zapruder film and was worried about it I would have damaged it by "accident," like other documents and evidence has been destroyed. Release it with cloddish alterations, and in the process convince most of the world that there was a shot from the front? Great job on that one, just as the acoustic evidence completely altered the conclusion of the one government panel that ever investigated the assassination, and remains the one thing that is cited as irrefutable evidence of conspiracy. With enemies like this, who needs researchers? No, Allen, if you had the Z film you would have done exactly what the CIA did with it. You wouldn't have destroyed it and be left to answer questions about what happened to it. The existence of the film that weekend was already well known and a bidding war had emerged over limited rights to it by major media. Nor would you have "accidentally damaged" it and be left explain what happened. You would have altered it at your secret facility to try to replace the incriminating evidence. Then you would have the altered film to present in public as the original that you hoped would substantiate your Oswald story. But the alterations they could do were not enough. The plan didn't work. So the CIA went back to Zapruder, gave him more money for the full rights (they had originally only bought the right to publish some stills for a limited time), and had Life bury the film for 12years until their Oswald story took hold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Lowe Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 10 minutes ago, Roger Odisio said: No, Allen, if you had the Z film you would have done exactly what the CIA did with it. You wouldn't have destroyed it and be left to answer questions about what happened to it. The existence of the film that weekend was already well known and a bidding war had emerged over limited rights to it by major media. Nor would you have "accidentally damaged" it and be left explain what happened. You would have altered it at your secret facility to try to replace the incriminating evidence. Then you would have the altered film to present in public as the original that you hoped would substantiate your Oswald story. But the alterations they could do were not enough. The plan didn't work. So the CIA went back to Zapruder, gave him more money for the full rights (they had originally only bought the right to publish some stills for a limited time), and had Life bury the film for 12years until their Oswald story took hold nonsense - they have lost other films and documents - and if you answer, well, this was something that was much more graphic and valuable, well, virtually no one knew it at the time and no one could have, in the aftermath, proved it. It would have been simply forgotten. The logic of the alterationist position is beyond bizarre - given a choice between altering something that STILL convinced everyone of a conspiracy, and destroying the evidence, they would have destroyed the evidence. What a lot of alterationists don't really get is how different the world was in 1963. A lost film would simply have faded from evidence - think about something - the actual film didn't surface publicly for about 10 years, so it was essentially lost - and NO ONE complained or noticed in that time, in any way that effected public opinion. I challenge you to cite one source - ANY SOURCE - who cited the Zapruder in the period between the assassination and the reveal on Geraldo, or who said it was incriminating or urgent to release it. Really - find me one citation, one quote that really had an impact on public opinion. There is not one, because public opinion isn't effected until the film - supposedly altered - is shown on national television. Which completely proves that if the Zapruder film had disappeared no one would have made that much of its absence. It is fine if you can prove me wrong, but you have to come up with evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Cohen Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 45 minutes ago, Allen Lowe said: I challenge you to cite one source - ANY SOURCE - who cited the Zapruder in the period between the assassination and the reveal on Geraldo, or who said it was incriminating or urgent to release it. Really - find me one citation, one quote that really had an impact on public opinion. Allen, I can't go as far as to say it had an impact on public opinion, but the Zapruder film was screened in 1968 during the Clay Shaw trial at the behest of Jim Garrison, who naturally believed it proved a conspiracy. Unfortunately, the copy sent from Washington for the trial was heavily bootlegged (and, in fact, I believe it was sold to other researchers via mail by David Lifton), resulting in poorly degraded copies circulating for many years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 1 hour ago, Allen Lowe said: I challenge you to cite one source - ANY SOURCE - who cited the Zapruder in the period between the assassination and the reveal on Geraldo, or who said it was incriminating or urgent to release it. John Connally's analysis of the Zapruder film in the November 25, 1966 edition of LIFE Magazine -- "A Matter of Reasonable Doubt." Reasonable doubt? That was another Big Lie, of course. Gaeton Fonzi pushed Arlen Specter into a nervous breakdown confronting him with the clothing evidence late June of that year. After that there was no reasonable doubt as to the fact of conspiracy, but the forces of cover-up cleverly responded. That LIFE Magazine edition became the template for the JFKA Critical Community which persists to this day: micro-analyse the hell out of ancillary evidence and ignore the primary evidence of conspiracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keven Hofeling Posted June 6 Author Share Posted June 6 (edited) 1 hour ago, Allen Lowe said: nonsense - they have lost other films and documents - and if you answer, well, this was something that was much more graphic and valuable, well, virtually no one knew it at the time and no one could have, in the aftermath, proved it. It would have been simply forgotten. The logic of the alterationist position is beyond bizarre - given a choice between altering something that STILL convinced everyone of a conspiracy, and destroying the evidence, they would have destroyed the evidence. What a lot of alterationists don't really get is how different the world was in 1963. A lost film would simply have faded from evidence - think about something - the actual film didn't surface publicly for about 10 years, so it was essentially lost - and NO ONE complained or noticed in that time, in any way that effected public opinion. I challenge you to cite one source - ANY SOURCE - who cited the Zapruder in the period between the assassination and the reveal on Geraldo, or who said it was incriminating or urgent to release it. Really - find me one citation, one quote that really had an impact on public opinion. There is not one, because public opinion isn't effected until the film - supposedly altered - is shown on national television. Which completely proves that if the Zapruder film had disappeared no one would have made that much of its absence. It is fine if you can prove me wrong, but you have to come up with evidence. Your challenge that Roger "cite one source - ANY SOURCE - who cited the Zapruder in the period between the assassination and the reveal on Geraldo, or who said it was incriminating or urgent to release it" is easily satisfied. There were many books and articles prior to the 1975 showing of the Zapruder film on Geraldo Rivera's Good Night America show which were critical of the lack of public availability of the film and called for a change in that status quo, but the one example I am going to provide you was likely the most well publicized of all of them: "Six Seconds in Dallas" by Josiah Thompson, published in 1967, was a best seller not just in the United States but also internationally. The book gained widespread acclaim for its thorough investigation of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, particularly focusing on the events that took place in Dealey Plaza in Dallas on November 22, 1963. Thompson's meticulous research and attention to detail, as well as his background as a former professor of philosophy and investigator for the House Select Committee on Assassinations, added credibility to his work. The book presented a critical analysis of the Warren Commission's report on the assassination and raised questions about the official narrative of the events surrounding Kennedy's death. "Six Seconds in Dallas" was well-received by both critics and readers for its compelling narrative, insightful commentary, and groundbreaking investigative work. It shed new light on the assassination and sparked further interest in the case, contributing to the ongoing debate and conspiracy theories surrounding Kennedy's death. Overall, the book's commercial success and critical acclaim solidified its status as a best seller and established Josiah Thompson as a prominent figure in the JFK assassination research community. The exact total number of copies of "Six Seconds in Dallas" by Josiah Thompson that have been sold is not publicly available. However, the book was an immediate best seller, has been in print for over five decades, and has maintained a steady readership, making it one of the enduring classics in the field of Kennedy assassination research. It has been through multiple editions and reprints, both in the United States and internationally, indicating a significant level of popularity and ongoing interest in the subject matter. While the specific sales figures may not be available, the book's status as a best seller and its longevity in the marketplace suggest that it has sold a substantial number of copies over the years. The book commenced with "A Note From The Publisher," Bernard Geis, which highlighted and underscored the problems Josiah Thompson encountered due to the tight controls exercised over the Zapruder film by Life, and his problems were just beginning at that point because Time, Inc. sued Thompson and his publisher for infringement of copyright because of Zapruder frames sketched in the book. A federal court gave summary judgment to Thompson and his publisher ten months later in a landmark decision stressing fair use rights. "Time Inc. v. Bernard Geis Assoc., 293 F. Supp. 130 (S.D.N.Y. 1968)" https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/293/130/1982339/ Clearly, the CIA Operation Mockingbird captured Time/Life publication attempted to suppress the Zapruder film and everything about it, just as the CIA front, The Sixth Floor Museum, continues to do today by threatening litigation against all who attempt to use the film in virtually every context. Edited June 6 by Keven Hofeling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Lowe Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said: John Connally's analysis of the Zapruder film in the November 25, 1966 edition of LIFE Magazine -- "A Matter of Reasonable Doubt." Reasonable doubt? That was another Big Lie, of course. Gaeton Fonzi pushed Arlen Specter into a nervous breakdown confronting him with the clothing evidence late June of that year. After that there was no reasonable doubt as to the fact of conspiracy, but the forces of cover-up cleverly responded. That LIFE Magazine edition became the template for the JFKA Critical Community which persists to this day: micro-analyse the hell out of ancillary evidence and ignore the primary evidence of conspiracy. I have to say respectfully that you are just proving my case - as I say below - if it had been initially destroyed Garrison wouldn't have gotten it, no one would have seen it. So by preserving it in any form, the supposed perpetrators of the alteration kept it alive as smoking-gun evidence. Edited June 6 by Allen Lowe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now