Badgeman photos

[Dixie Dea]

QUOTE by Shanet Clark

Jack White

The use of uniforms or false uniforms would indicate a central or south american

strategic planning element...i.e. the Nelson Rockefeller influenced western hemisphere plans department of the CIA,

and the United Fruit / Guatamala veterans.

Also remember that a Dallas Police officer was slated to die long before JD Tippett was killed. Any return fire that killed a police officer, by aggressive secret service

officers or an "abort team" would have killed a, well, police officer, and could be

written off as "friendly Fire"

I don't know much about Rosco White but this whole line of inquiry points in that direction.....

UNQUOTE

____________________________________

Quote from above:

Also remember that a Dallas Police officer was slated to die long before JD Tippett was killed.

Hi Shanet,

I am most curious and wondering where you obtained the above info. It is one thing I never heard before!

Dixie

[Bill Miller]

I would post my original badgeman discovery, but I have reached

the limit of images allowed by the forum.

Jack White

Jack - go remove some of those Apollo images that you posted and it will free up some forum space for you to put the more worthwhile images on here. When I ran out of space in the past, that is what I did ... I chose images from past post and deleted them to make room for new ones.

Bill

Edited February 5, 2005 by Bill Miller

[Dawn Meredith]

I would post my original badgeman discovery, but I have reached

the limit of images allowed by the forum.

Jack White

Jack - go remove some of those Apllo images that you posted and it will free up some forum space for you to put the more worthwhile images on here. When I ran out of space in the past, that is what I did ... I chose images from past post and deleted them to make room for new ones.

Bill

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

________________________________

How does superimposing images of ANYONE's face over "badge man" advance this case in the least????

Show us the unedited photos of Badge man or show us nothing, this is just ridiculous. Someone please bring back Classic gunman photos, as I recall they were UNEDITED, with No one's face superimposed and it was very clear to both my self and my husband that this was some serious photography. And then when I read that Itek studied thiese photos and had disagreed all I could do was laugh. Itek is CIA from the beginning. (I researched them in 1975 for a paper I did critical to a CBS "docudrama" on the Kennedy assassination. At that time Itek was commissioned by CBS to study the Zapruder film).

[Shanet Clark]

QUOTE by Shanet Clark

Jack White

The use of uniforms or false uniforms would indicate a central or south american

strategic planning element...i.e. the Nelson Rockefeller influenced western hemisphere plans department of the CIA,

and the United Fruit / Guatamala veterans.

Also remember that a Dallas Police officer was slated to die long before JD Tippett was killed. Any return fire that killed a police officer, by aggressive secret service

officers or an "abort team" would have killed a, well, police officer, and could be

written off as "friendly Fire"

I don't know much about Rosco White but this whole line of inquiry points in that direction.....

UNQUOTE____________________________

Quote from above:

Also remember that a Dallas Police officer was slated to die long before JD Tippett was killed.

Hi Shanet,

I am most curious and wondering where you obtained the above info. It is one thing I never heard before!

Dixie

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The possibility of return fire and the possibility of a Dallas policemen

dying in the action was a planned part of the sequence.

I cannot point to any single document or testimony, Dixie, but I have

come to believe this is true from the general circumstances.

This is a fairly speculative, theoretical approach for me,

but I do believe it is true...and would explain quite a bit.

Basically Oswald was supposed to kill the arresting officer, one,

and two, a uniformed gunman is seen in the photo near the blood stain.

It has been suggested that a wounding by return fire, or friendly fire, occured and was covered up ....

any Dallas cop who was in danger of bolting the CAROUSEL program was

probably at risk that day, etc.

The South American Police ringer murder plan

is a fairly firm concept, historically

...sorry I cannot be of not more help. >>>>>>>

PS Eugene's post today on Tippitt on the DID THE BIG FISH KNOW

presents a theory related to my line of thought...best wishes

Edited February 4, 2005 by Shanet Clark

[Bill Miller]

How does superimposing images of ANYONE's face over "badge man" advance this case in the least????

Show us the unedited photos of Badge man or show us nothing, this is just ridiculous.  Someone please bring back Classic gunman photos, as I recall they were UNEDITED, with No one's face superimposed and it was very clear to both my self and my husband that this was some serious photography. 

Dawn - I will consider that you do not know the full extent as to what is going on around you in the JFK assassination field, so I will ignore your remarks about what is and isn't ridiculous. Just so you know - recently someone challenged Badge Man's image by saying that had he of been shooting at JFK that he would have had his head tilted differently. So I then took a known photo of someone actually aiming a rifle and placed it over the top of Badge Man to show that his posture was indeed what one would expect for a gunman aiming at the motorcade. I was careful to make sure that my purpose for doing it was known. So the exercise was not ridiculous to those who understood why it needed to be done.

What would be ridiculous is to start posting about someone who cannot be seen in Moorman's photograph as was the case with the classic gunman.

Bill

[Shanet Clark]

How can we ignore the CLASSIC GUNMAN?

KILROY stands at the wall, his arms akimbo in a sharpshooter's stance

and he TRACKS THE LIMO WITH THE BARREL OF HIS GUN.

This is shown very clearly in the NIX home movie film,

he stands to Abraham Zapruder's near left, wearing a white shirt.

He may have just been posing, but he tracks the vehicle

with the barrel in NIX.

Because NIX was standing a full EIGHT TO TEN FEET ABOVE Mary MOORMAN

on the hill, while Mary Moorman and Jean Hill were down in the "well" near the

limousine he captured things on film that MOORMAN didn't have an angle on...

and I never trust a small Polaroid whose provenance the day

of the assassination has been interrupted...and the great thimbprint on it,

phoney, the Moorman photo, I think MOORMAN may be a Polaroid of an airbushed and projected image,

where a ganzfeld covers over the CLASSIC GUNMAN seen so clearly in the

NIX film.

{{Bill Miller will repeat the HSAC 1978 findings that it is a shadow on the wall,

but that shadow looks a lot more like a markman than the RORSCHAK

phenomenon called BADGEMAN>>>>>>>>>}}

CLASSIC GUNMAN IS A SOLID FIGURE :

BADGEMAN IS A FANCIFUL FIGURE

Edited February 5, 2005 by Shanet Clark

[Shanet Clark]

This is all self evident and requires only common sense.

If you were in a jury box and these two simultaneous

images were in evidence, what conclusion would you have?

Left:

NIX film of the Classinc gunman in his marksman stance, tracking

the Limousine.

Right: Simultaneous Moorman Polaroid with whited out ganzfeld

where the Classic Gunman is seen in NIX.

[Shanet Clark]

You can read the House Committees methods of dealing with pesky images:

"THE NIX FILM

The final photographic source relating to the grassy knoll is the Nix motion picture film. Several frames coinciding with ,the fatal head shot frames of the Zapruder film were selected for scanning and input into the computer. The scanning was performed at the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory; the scanned data was then sent to the Aerospace Corp. for enhancement by computer. The, mode enhancement was an edge and detail sharpening process that has the effect of making the photograph appear more in focus. (107) Fig. IV-11 (JFK exhibit F-161) shows both original and enhanced images of the Nix film, centered around the region of the retaining wall.

The, enhanced Nix film shows an object that can be construed as having a shape similar to that of a person. It is also possible to interpret this object as being of the same general shape as the person identified at the wall in the Willis NO. 5 photograph. Nevertheless, the person in the, Willis photograph displayed distinct flesh tones in the computer display of the image. No such pattern of flesh tones is visible the enhanced (or original) Nix frames.

The Panel could not conclude that the object near the retaining wall in the Nix film was the same as the person visible in the Willis No. 5 photograph. This image was not identified by the Panel as a human being. It was more likely the result of a pattern of light and shadows cast on an object in the background behind the retaining wall by the nearby trees.

The area of the retaining wall image in the Nix frames was also examined for the presence of a flash of light or a puff of smoke from a discharging rifle, which some bystanders claimed to have seen. No evidence of either was found.

The Panel also examined another controversial aspect of the Nix film. As Nix panned his camera from right to left following the motion of the Presidential limousine, the background of the grassy knoll came into view. In it, beyond the retaining wall and running along the crest of the knoll, is a region of deep shadow that is broken by patches of light. For a number of frames there appears to be a brightly lit object whose shape some have interpreted to be that of a man sighting a rifle toward the Presidential limousine. The right "arm" of this object is rigidly extended outward from the "body," with the left "arm" tucked in more tightly, as if supporting a rifle stock. There is, between and above these arms, a shape that looks like a "head." That object has been interpreted to be a rifleman in the classic military posture for firing a rifle. (108)

Magnification of the classic gunman object showed it to be indistinct and blurry. It was decided to process these images by computer techniques that would bring the image more "into focus" by making its features sharper. Computer enhancement work was carried out at both the Aerospace Corp. and the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory. (109)

It was recognized that the limitation on improving the images would be the noise in the frames. Since several frames showed the region in question, it was decided to apply a "frame-averaging" technique. This process involves registering the frames and then adding them together to reduce noise, then enhancing the resulting product. This technique can greatly improve the quality of an enhancement. (110) Aerospace applied an enhancement process to the individual frames identical to the one applied to the Nix film for the person-at-the-retaining-wall image (see fig. IV-12, JFK exhibit F163); (111) Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory applied a more sophisticated technique known as MAP restoration. (112)

Figure IV-13 (JFK exhibit F-162) shows the original and enhanced version of one Nix frame as produced at the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory; the original is shown at the top, the enhanced version at the bottom. A total of eight frames were registered, added and enhanced to produce the lower image. Eight frames, considered to have the least, blur or noise, were selected.

FIGURE IV-13.-Classic gunman image (Nix film) Top: Unenhanced. Bottom: Enhanced.

After examining the enhanced image, the Panel concludes that the so-called classic gunman object was not a gunman. First, there is no evidence of human flesh tones in the "head" and "hands"; whereas the people in the Nix film have distinct flesh tones, the object here is almost uniformly white. Second, the white tones are identical in appearance with the white tones of the light regions of the shadow patterns cast on the wall of the structure behind the retaining wall by sunlight filtering through the nearby trees. Third, in the enhanced image, the shadow pattern above and to the right of the object is seen to be connected to the object itself.

The Panel concludes that the most probable explanation is that the image is a chance pattern of sunlight on the structure behind the retaining wall. The Panel's conclusion was strengthened by an observation at the Aerospace Corp. that in one frame the "right arm" of the object disappears, only to reappear in the next frame. Such behavior would be virtually impossible for a person, but is conceivable for tree branches casting a shadow pattern on a wall.

The Panel also examined the classic gunmman object for evidence of a flash of light or puff of smoke. To enhance any phenomena as transient as these, the frames were differenced, that is registered frames were subtracted from each other sequentially in time. This technique makes transient phenomena highly visible. (113) No evidence of any flash or smoke was found.

The Panel also reviewed a previous report by the Itek Corp. (114) Itek measured the relative displacement of the classic gunman in successive frames of the Nix film as the camera panned from right to left. The extent to which an object shifts in successive frames can be used to caculate the distance from camera to object by applying the basic principles of photogrammetry. The calculated the distance from the camera to the object in this way and found that the calculations placed the object very near shelter 3 of Pergola 2 in Dealey Plaza. (ILS) Further study by Itek of the ground elevation in relation to the retaining wall showed that a line of fire toward Dealey Plaza would require that a rifle near this structure be 9 feet above ground. Itek concluded that the classic gunman object was a pattern of light and shadow on shelter 3. The Panel agrees with these conclusions.

[Bill Miller]

I think MOORMAN may be a Polaroid of an airbushed and projected image,

where a ganzfeld covers over the CLASSIC GUNMAN seen so clearly in the

NIX film.

{{Bill Miller will repeat the HSAC 1978 findings that it is a shadow on the wall,

but that shadow looks a lot more like a markman than the RORSCHAK

phenomenon called BADGEMAN>>>>>>>>>}}

CLASSIC GUNMAN IS A SOLID FIGURE :

BADGEMAN IS A FANCIFUL FIGURE

Shanet - you appear to be really lacking in knowledge of the Kennedy assassination. Let's first address your ridiculous and unfounded airbrush claim .... The fact is that Moorman had her photograph in her possession in the first 30 minutes following the assassination. It was at that time that she was approached by the news media for a statement and they also filmed her photograph. That footage was shown on NBC by 3:25 p.m. CST. Now unless you are going to suggest that it was Mary Moorman who airbrushed her own photograph within the first 30 minutes following the assassination, then you need to put this ridiculous airbrush idea to rest.

Now having said that, if there was a classic gunman figure in the Nix film, then he also has to be between the notch in the walkway wall and the South shelter. Now knowing that the Moorman photo could not possibly have been airbrushed by Mary in the first 30 minutes of the assassination and her photo coincides with the head shot ... feel free to point out where the classic gunman is seen in this example below?

I might also tell you that Mary Moorman's photo is covered with emulsion grain and that anyone trying to airbrush such an instant photo would be brushing over the emulsion grains as well.

Edited February 14, 2005 by Bill Miller

[Dixie Dea]

Quote from above:

Also remember that a Dallas Police officer was slated to die long before JD Tippett was killed.

Hi Shanet,

I am most curious and wondering where you obtained the above info. It is one thing I never heard before!

Dixie

Dixie

The possibility of return fire and the possibility of a Dallas policemen

dying in the action was a planned part of the sequence.

I cannot point to any single document or testimony, Dixie, but I have

come to believe this is true from the general circumstances.

This is a fairly speculative,

theoretical approach for me,

but I do believe it is true...and would explain quite a bit.

Basically Oswald was supposed to kill the arresting officer, one,

and two, a uniformed gunman is seen in the photo near the blood stain.

It has been suggested that a wounding by return fire, or friendly fire, occured and was covered up ....

any Dallas cop who was in danger of bolting the CAROUSEL program was

probably at risk that day, etc.

The South American Police ringer murder plan

is a fairly firm concept, historically

...sorry I cannot be of not more help. >>>>>>>

PS Eugene's post today on Tippitt on the DID THE BIG FISH KNOW

presents a theory related to my line of thought...best wishes

T

Hi Shanet..

Thanks for your reply! I do believe that to be a speculative theory.

However, I do know a researcher, who was working on a speculative theory (his words) that Tippit was behind that fence in some capacity and was shot, accidently or otherwise. Then he was placed in his patrol car and driven to 10th & Patton.

I do know a witness came forward in recent years, just before she died....and said that she saw a cop car come through the driveway between those two houses, from the alley. She did see a person get out of the car and walk around to the front of Tippits patrol car, to check him out.

But, then he could also have been leaving the scene, from Tippit being driven there and the driveway cop car picked him up. Then the car backed up and went back through the alley.

Whether all prearranged in order to frame LHO, I don't know, But, Harry Livingston said in his latest book that he believes Jack Ruby was used to pre-gather witnesses to Tippit being shot right there. I do know that many of those witness have traced back in various ways to Jack Ruby, not to mention their conflicting testimonies.

I don't personally agree or disagree with any of the above, although I have been attempting to look for clues along these lines to see if at least possible or impossible.

Dixie

[Alan Healy]

Not the best quality but this may give students a little perspective

& help them to pinpoint his position in an uncropped copy

of Moorman5(not easy to do for beginners).

Also note the height of the fence on the far left, it suggests

BM was exposed from the waist up.

Badgeman may yet be just an illusion but from the evidence

I have seen(& mostly these are blow-ups that have already been worked on)

he looks good to me.

I question everything in this area & I am not fully convinced.

Edited February 5, 2005 by Alan Healy

[Shanet Clark]

{{{Shanet - you appear to be really lacking in knowledge of the Kennedy assassination. Let's first address your ridiculous and unfounded airbrush claim .... The fact is that Moorman had her photograph in her possession in the first 30 minutes following the assassination. It was at that time that she was approached by the news media for a statement and they also filmed her photograph. I might also tell you that Mary Moorman's photo is covered with emulsion grain and that anyone trying to airbrush such an instant photo would be brushing over the emulsion grains as well...BILL MILLER}}}

OBVIOUSLY NOT BILL

I don't take the work done previously as Gospel Scripture.

The LA FREE PRESS article on Jean Hill and Mary Moormans experience

gives us plenty of room to speculate abput that shabby, grainy, rip-top Polaroid.

Of course I know Polaroids are seeled with plastic film and can't be airbrushed directly...

I said it looked like a POLAROID of a PROJECTED IMAGE, a POLAROID of a

photo shown on a screen, a process known as multiplex conversion...

What detail does the news video taken of the MOORMAN PHOTO in Nov. 1963 show of the Badgeman or the Pergola?

These women were isolated and intimidated and the provenance was destroyed.

But I am fascinated with the thread,

how Bill super-imposed and then Eugene digitally enhanced that,

and Alan Healy's remark about beginners being unable

to see BADGEMAN....

Beginners can see NIX film's Classic Gunman clearly,

and that seems to be the big problem.

First, we need to stop explaining away evidence.

Secondly, we need to stop creating new false evidence.

Third we need to take a fresh look at all the outward (not occult) aspects of the

available film record....although I agree with Dr. Manik, it is all suspect or corrupted.

Edited February 5, 2005 by Shanet Clark

[Dawn Meredith]

To Gary Mack:

I don't give a hoot who took Badge Man to ITEK, whether it was you (as you said) or the damn Pope. When I did my paper in 1975 do you really think all the ties of ITEK-to-CIA came from just "one book"--a book that I should now just "throw away"? Really Gary. Your PM's to me border on such immaturity, and then add further insult by continually having Bill Miller come in and post for you.

When I have more time I will cite all of the sources I used in my paper, demonstrating ITEK's CIA connections, but rest assured there were several. I would never make such a statement in a college paper based on the opinions of just "one book." That was your assessment of my work and you are simplly wrong.

In fact Dan Rather mislead the public several times in this particular "docudrama." One of the lies was that this was the first time ITEK had even studied the Zapruder film, when in fact it was their third such study of this film, the first two being for UPI and Life. This is according to Dick Russell, writing then for the Village Voice in an article titled "JFK Assassination Probe: CBS leaves a Skeptic Skeptical" (New York, 12/10/75).

Dan's most outrageous claim in this particular presentation concerned the headshot and the backward head motion of JFK: Dandy Dan told his audience that "Jackie did it" (pulled her husband backwards).

I do not have the time to rewrite my 1975 paper on this forum.

Dawn Meredith

[Shanet Clark]

DAWN

Not only is ITEK not my choice for deciding what I can and cannot see...

I thought it was interesting that the HOUSE committee sent the

NIX film to LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY...

[Bill Miller]

Beginners can see NIX film's Classic Gunman clearly,

and that seems to be the big problem.

I could also see the 'classic gunman' image, so your point is well taken. The problem is that beginners do not know enough about the photographical record to understand the time lines and availability as to when images could or could not have been altered photographically, nor do they know the photographic record well enough to know how to cross reference the images so to rule in or rule out possible figures they think they see in a particular photo. This is where I stepped in and offered additional data. Unfortunetly I cannot make one experienced enough or knowledgable enough to know how to apply that data. For a select few - they can keep scratching their heads and wondering if the alleged 'classic guman' figure is real or not if it gives them some sort of pleasure in doing so.