Jump to content
The Education Forum

Biography: Tom Gabbay


Tom Gabbay
 Share

Recommended Posts

Tom Gabbay was born on April Fools Day, 1953 in Bloomington, Indiana, the son of Jacob Gabbay, a history teacher, and Susan Davis, a librarian. The second of four children, Tom misspent his youth in the small town of Liverpool, New York, playing football and avoiding truant officers. He left Central New York in 1971 to attend Colorado State University in Fort Collins. In February of his freshman year, Tom joined some friends for a weekend of Mardi Gras in New Orleans, and never returned to class.

That summer, he departed for Europe, where he attended L'Ecole des Beaux Arts in Avignon, France. Backpacking throughout Europe that year, he enrolled in the Heatherly School of Fine Art in London, where he studied painting and drawing. He spent days copying paintings in the National Gallery, nights watching Peter Cooke and Dudley Moore perform in "Beyond The Fridge" at the Cambridge Theatre, where he worked as an usher.

In 1974 Tom returned to the United States to attend the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts, where he studied classical painting and sculpture. While at the the Academy, Tom contributed weekly political cartoons to the editorial page of the Philadelphia Daily News.

Upon completing the four-year degree at the Academy, Tom spent a year studying film and animation at the Philadelphia College of Art. He earned a BFA in 1978.

Tom moved to New York City in 1979 to pursue his interest in film. From his loft on Crosby Street in Soho, he directed a series of award-winning animated shorts for the innovative children's program, "Sesame Street" and went on to direct commercials and music videos.

Married in 1981, Tom's first child, Jared, was born in 1982. His second son, Jake, arrived in 1984 and the following year Tom moved his family to Los Angeles, where he took up the position of Director of Children's Programmes for NBC television. Two years later he became Director of Comedy Programs at NBC, overseeing the production of well known sitcoms such as "Cheers" and "Family Ties".

In 1990, Tom returned to London in order to run NBC's European production division. He left NBC in 1993 to become Executive Producer of "The Wanderer", a 13-hour drama series shot in Salzburg, Munich, Madrid and London. Since 1996, Tom has written several screenplays for film and television, working with companies like Fox, Warner Brothers, BBC, Bertelsmann (UFA) and Hallmark Productions. His most recent screenplay "The Vanishing Act" will be filmed in Rome in March 2006.

His first novel, "The Berlin Conspiracy", is a cold war thriller set in 1963. It will be published by William Morrow (HarperCollins) in January 2006.

Tom is married to Julia Keighley. They live in Europe with their two children, Max and Sophie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sir, hope you realized I was being facetious looking at all of your impressive accomplishments!

Good! I think I'm too old for the classroom now...I look forward to getting involved with the discussion -- more hearing and reading than talking. Writing The Berlin Conspiracy, while a work of fiction, made me realize just how much there is to learn -- and how much is missing -- from the assassinatin record.

I can think of many questions I'd like to ask, but i will have to take my time and look around, find my way into the discussions. I lok forwrd to it.

Welcome to the forum, Tom!

It can get testy around here around here at times. Real testy when it comes to the possibility of Zapruder Film alteration...

Look forward to your participation...

David Healy

Understood...Do you get testy when its suggested that the film has been aletered, or that it has not been altered? While I've read a great many books on the assassination, I am aware of how much knowledge I'm missing. I never heard it suggested that the film had been altered. What's the story?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sir, hope you realized I was being facetious looking at all of your impressive accomplishments!

Good! I think I'm too old for the classroom now...I look forward to getting involved with the discussion -- more hearing and reading than talking. Writing The Berlin Conspiracy, while a work of fiction, made me realize just how much there is to learn -- and how much is missing -- from the assassinatin record.

I can think of many questions I'd like to ask, but i will have to take my time and look around, find my way into the discussions. I lok forwrd to it.

Welcome to the forum, Tom!

It can get testy around here around here at times. Real testy when it comes to the possibility of Zapruder Film alteration...

Look forward to your participation...

David Healy

Understood...Do you get testy when its suggested that the film has been aletered, or that it has not been altered? While I've read a great many books on the assassination, I am aware of how much knowledge I'm missing. I never heard it suggested that the film had been altered. What's the story?

Welcome to the forum Tom!

To answer your question above Dave believes the Z-film was altered and can get testy when people question his conclusions.

To find what the story is check out this thread.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=3711

and this one

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...topic=2356&st=0

the second one has a link to a site that outlines the beliefs of the "alterationist".

How much do you know about film composting? One of the key questions is, did the technology and know how to alter the film the way Healy and his collegues believe was done exist back then?

Len

PS - It was very perceptive of you to grock that when Dave said that thing get testy that he iwas talking about himself.

Edited by Len Colby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sir, hope you realized I was being facetious looking at all of your impressive accomplishments!

Good! I think I'm too old for the classroom now...I look forward to getting involved with the discussion -- more hearing and reading than talking. Writing The Berlin Conspiracy, while a work of fiction, made me realize just how much there is to learn -- and how much is missing -- from the assassinatin record.

I can think of many questions I'd like to ask, but i will have to take my time and look around, find my way into the discussions. I lok forwrd to it.

Welcome to the forum, Tom!

It can get testy around here around here at times. Real testy when it comes to the possibility of Zapruder Film alteration...

Look forward to your participation...

David Healy

Understood...Do you get testy when its suggested that the film has been aletered, or that it has not been altered? While I've read a great many books on the assassination, I am aware of how much knowledge I'm missing. I never heard it suggested that the film had been altered. What's the story?

I'll put a few sentences together later today, have to upgrade this computer operating system this morning. Been around the film/video studio-post production business (in particular compositing, last 25 years) for 40 years now.

I contributed a article for the book: The Great Zapruder Film HOAX in 2003.

The question for the book I addressed was: IF the Zapruder Film was altered; was the technology, equipment, man-power, TIME and know-how available in 1963-64 to do such alteration?

David Healy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sir, hope you realized I was being facetious looking at all of your impressive accomplishments!

Good! I think I'm too old for the classroom now...I look forward to getting involved with the discussion -- more hearing and reading than talking. Writing The Berlin Conspiracy, while a work of fiction, made me realize just how much there is to learn -- and how much is missing -- from the assassinatin record.

I can think of many questions I'd like to ask, but i will have to take my time and look around, find my way into the discussions. I lok forwrd to it.

Welcome to the forum, Tom!

It can get testy around here around here at times. Real testy when it comes to the possibility of Zapruder Film alteration...

Look forward to your participation...

David Healy

Understood...Do you get testy when its suggested that the film has been aletered, or that it has not been altered? While I've read a great many books on the assassination, I am aware of how much knowledge I'm missing. I never heard it suggested that the film had been altered. What's the story?

I'll put a few sentences together later today, have to upgrade this computer operating system this morning. Been around the film/video studio-post production business (in particular compositing, last 25 years) for 40 years now.

I contributed a article for the book: The Great Zapruder Film HOAX in 2003.

The question for the book I addressed was: IF the Zapruder Film was altered; was the technology, equipment, man-power, TIME and know-how available in 1963-64 to do such alteration?

David Healy

I'm not an expert, but in my exerience, it would have been possible with optical printing to change the original negative, but I don't know if it would have been easy to hide the changes from experts. My question is this: If someone wanted to change it, why would they make it look like JFK was being shot from the front? What was the motive of those who did the altering? I recall that the film was presented in a magazine (LIFE?) with the frames in the wrong order. Am I right about that? Does that have anything to do with the theory that the film was altered?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sir, hope you realized I was being facetious looking at all of your impressive accomplishments!

Good! I think I'm too old for the classroom now...I look forward to getting involved with the discussion -- more hearing and reading than talking. Writing The Berlin Conspiracy, while a work of fiction, made me realize just how much there is to learn -- and how much is missing -- from the assassinatin record.

I can think of many questions I'd like to ask, but i will have to take my time and look around, find my way into the discussions. I lok forwrd to it.

Welcome to the forum, Tom!

It can get testy around here around here at times. Real testy when it comes to the possibility of Zapruder Film alteration...

Look forward to your participation...

David Healy

Understood...Do you get testy when its suggested that the film has been aletered, or that it has not been altered? While I've read a great many books on the assassination, I am aware of how much knowledge I'm missing. I never heard it suggested that the film had been altered. What's the story?

I'll put a few sentences together later today, have to upgrade this computer operating system this morning. Been around the film/video studio-post production business (in particular compositing, last 25 years) for 40 years now.

I contributed a article for the book: The Great Zapruder Film HOAX in 2003.

The question for the book I addressed was: IF the Zapruder Film was altered; was the technology, equipment, man-power, TIME and know-how available in 1963-64 to do such alteration?

David Healy

I'm not an expert, but in my exerience, it would have been possible with optical printing to change the original negative, but I don't know if it would have been easy to hide the changes from experts. My question is this: If someone wanted to change it, why would they make it look like JFK was being shot from the front? What was the motive of those who did the altering? I recall that the film was presented in a magazine (LIFE?) with the frames in the wrong order. Am I right about that? Does that have anything to do with the theory that the film was altered?

Few possible answers:

A.) a shot from the front, in my estimation, is irrelevant. So why alter the film? Remove the on-site, witness supported JFK limo stop on Elm street. The SS implications would be obvious. If not a part of the plot (and I not sure they were) at the very least, malfeasence.

The extant Zapruder film, as it sits in the National Archives, supports the single bullet theory (SBT) three shots - 2 hits [Kennedy/Connally] - one miss [Tague wounding]!

B.) The original FBI/SS assassination investigation reported 3 shots-3 hits with the major hit (3rd and final headshot) coming much further down Elm Street. After the reported Tague wounding, either a errant shot (whichwould mean 4 shots in Dealey Plaza) or a richoet, the 3 shot - 3 hit theory had to be changed. 4 shots in the Plaza that day would mean CONSPIRACY [another shooter] -- Oswald could not have fired 4 shots in time alloted re the Zapruder film...

ANY alteration of the Zapruder film was performed for the sole reason of convincing the Warren Commission [as that was the one and ONLY audience for the film, which by-the-way wasn't screened by the commission till late Feb '64] there was NOT a conspiracy, they had the guy (Oswald), therefore the threat of WW3 was averted. IF that's the case, I would be the first to agree, altering the film was a good decesion - my question now is simply: the Soviet Union is history, that particular threat is over, IF the film was altered, resulting from a 'real' national secuity threat, why not set the historical record straight?

The Z-film was never intended for public consumption, lifting frames here and there for publication is a meaningless diversion when it comes to authenticity issues of the 8mm film currently sitting at NARA (National Archives)... To the best of my knowledge, the extant film has noot been threaded up on a projector since Nov 22nd [when the 3 optical prints were struck]

Any discussion regarding the authenticity of the Zapruder film sends folks [in certain quarters], those being with financial incentives and on-the-record, on-camera/ published NO alteration positions regarding the film into apoplexy.

The Z-film is the fulcrum point of most Dealey Plaza evidence regarding the case, it was studied extensivley [by slect individuals] in the early days. the film was never question in public although there were rumblings as some eye-witness testimony didn't jibe with the film -- mainly, the Elm Street limo purported stop.

There very well may have been a shooter from the front, whether he fired or not is irrelevant. My opinion is 2 shooters from the right rear and side -- IF there was a shooter from the front, it was a insurance position...

And yes, LIFE and the FBI have transposed Z-film frames. The latest MPI DVD [a few years back]] had quite a few errors, complete with excising frames.... Way to many mistakes - which leads a few to think, certain effort is being made to throw researchers off...

Edited by David G. Healy
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...