Jump to content

Zapruder Film


Recommended Posts

>>...So we have a film that could not have been altered that shows exactly the same thing the Zapruder film does during a critical part of the assassination...

Now there's an assignment for students. Come up with ONE photo taken that day that refutes what is shown on the authenticated Zapruder film.

None of the "alterationists" have been able to do so. And do they squirm when asked to! Here's a list of over 500 exposures from which to choose...

http://www.jfk-info.com/photos1.htm

>>...Noel Twyman...

What Twyman wrote is now moot. Twyman has dropped out of the JFK research community, and has admitted that his book contained many incorrect conclusions.

Clint Bradford

http://www.jfk-info.com

Edited by clintbradford
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

A major problem with self-professed "JFK assassination researchers" is their lack of proper citations and methodology. For example, Jack White has recently again cited a 9-year-old paper by a "school principal" that backs ups Jack's claim of Zapruder film "alteration."

What Jack doesn't do for us is to properly cite just exactly what the school principal was studying. I mean, nine years ago there were several copies of the Zapruder floating around - from the worthless-for-research contrasty, grainy copies bootlegged from the Clay Shaw-trial-era copy, to those with amateurish edits (like the Medio / MacMillan CD-ROM rendition). Heck, I have a copy of the Zapruder film that I can convince a crowd that shows Secret Service Agent Greer pointing a nickel-plated revolver at the President! (One of Jack White's friends, Roy Schaeffer, firmly believes that Greer shot at the President from the limo driver's position.)

A responsible researcher would take this nine-year-old study and return to the author - with the best available copy of the Zapruder film available. And ask the researcher if all these "anomalies" appear in a piece of evidence whose heritage CAN be defined.

But we will not see Jack White taking this responsible step. He wants us to believe that there are scores of ("30 seconds are missing!") "excised frames," "motionless people," "super-human movements," "stick people," "disappearing loads in the backs of pickups," "false shadows," "enlargement of only the background of the film by 130 percent," et al ad nauseum.

Jack has used this "motionless people" claim several times over the years. But when confronted with evidence of very obvious motions (13 distinct motions) by another researcher five years ago, he backed down and admitted that they weren't really motionless. "Almost motionless," was the phrase Jack started to use. Then Jack started to tell people that MOTION WAS ADDED BACK IN to the Zapruder film in Frames 133 to about 196. Now he appears in this forum to start the silliness all over again.

One would think that these "master alterationists" would have the President's head movement at the time of the final head shot(s) to move violently towards the front to bolster the single assassin theory. I mean, if they can re-position spectators...enter false shadows...repeat a line of spectators frame after frame without altering the background...alter the foreground only for several frames...(ALL things Jack White belies was done to the film) - then certainly they could have performed more editing to actually indicate bullet trajectory.

Another item of note: None of those who claim that the Zapruder film was masterfully altered give any reasonable amount of time for the task to be accomplished...The chain of possession of the original and copies made in Dallas has been responsibly established. But don't ask those who have staked their reputations and made money off their "alterationist" nonsense to actually cite the time it would have taken to so masterfully have altered this footage and WHEN in the chain of possession it occurred.

Clint Bradford

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One would think that these "master alterationists" would have the President's head movement at the time of the final head shot(s) to move violently towards the front to bolster the single assassin theory. I mean, if they can re-position spectators...enter false shadows...repeat a line of spectators frame after frame without altering the background...alter the foreground only for several frames...(ALL things Jack White belies was done to the film) - then certainly they could have performed more editing to actually indicate bullet trajectory.

Clint Bradford

First of all, I don't think that the alterationists were at all satisifed with their finished product. They probably had to leave the head snap in there because of time constraints. They first had to take out images that were even more unacceptable. This is probably why the Zapruder film was suppressed for so many years.

Edited by maynardsthirdeye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

>>...time constraints...

There was absolutely no time in the chain of possession for this incredible amount of sinsister alterations to occur.

And none of the proponents of alteration have ever been able to come up with WHERE and with what type of equipment this magical feat was performed.

"I'm exhausted envisioning the logistics of this purported set of 'miracles'" - so says the gentleman who literally invented the emulsion type that Zapruder used that day, as he authenticated the Zapruder film footage.

Clint Bradford

http://www.jfk-info.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be extremely cautious when using the words "expert" and "Jack White" in the same sentence. I would even be hesitant to use them in the same book. Jack White is one of the great con men of Kennedy assassination research. White has absolutely NO recognized training in photographic analysis or film analysis at all. Has everyone but me forgotten his public humiliation before the HSCA when he admitted that he did not even know what he was talking about. He came into the HSCA hearings confident that he could fool REAL scientists. He attempted to explain his bizarre triangulation method to prove the backyard photographs were forged and exposed himself as a fool. He is of the same ilk as Robert Groden--another "god" of the conspiracy community who has been similarly destroyed under competitant cross examination during the O.J. Simpson civil trial, in which Groden was forced to admit that he was not a college graduate and not even a high school graduate. When asked which recognized photographic analysis organizations he was a member of, he sadly answered, "None." He even confessed he did not even know the names of any such organizations. White and Groden have had a lot of people fooled for a lot of years, but REAL science and REAL experts are not fooled by these carnival hucksters and conmen. They have nothing of evidentiary value to contribute to the study of the Kennedy assassination at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maynardsthirdeye: Two different photographic experts have watched some of Jack White's videos and they said that while some of his arguments are invalid or doubtful, the majority are valid.

Folsom: What are their names and what are their credentials? Then we will discuss their agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are their names and what are their credentials? Then we will discuss their agreement.

So far you have refused to disclose your full identity. Is it possible you are Burton W. Folsom. See biography below:

Dr. Burton W. Folsom, Jr., formerly a Senior Fellow in Economic Education with the Mackinac Center for Public Policy in Midland, Michigan, has taken a new position at the Center for the American Idea in Houston, Texas. He is also adjunct full professor at Northwood University. He received his Ph.D. in American history from the University of Pittsburgh, where he also taught before becoming a full professor at Murray State University.

His books include The Myth of the Robber Barons, (Young America's Foundation), which is in its third edition. He has also written Urban Capitalists: Entrepreneurs and City Growth in Pennsylvania's Lackawanna and Lehigh Regions, 1800-1920 (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1981); and edited two books, The Spirit of Freedom: Essays in American History (Foundation for Economic Education, 1994), and The Industrial Revolution and Free Trade, (Foundation for Economic Education, 1996).

His most recent book is Empire Builders: How Michigan Entrepreneurs Helped Make America Great, (Rhodes and Easton, 1997). His articles have appeared in the Journal of Southern History, Pacific Historical Review, Journal of American Studies, Great Plains Quarterly, The American Spectator, and the Wall Street Journal. He has also served as editor-in-chief of Continuity: A Journal of History.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>>What are their names and what are their credentials?

> So far you have refused to disclose your full identity.

Instead of answering the inquiry, you attack the message.

I have completely disclosed my identity. Can -I- ask for the names of these alleged photographic experts without being personally attacked?

Clint Bradford

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I stated in an earlier post...my private life is...well...my private life. I have never met such a paranoid group of individuals. What difference could my first name make to this forum? I will continue to go by my first initial and my last name(T. Folsom) until the same individuals behind the assassination of Kennedy also shoot me with invisible bullets, alter my x-rays, change by autopsy photographs, digitally enhance my family photographs, and surgically alter my mortal remains. Until then, everyone please relax, uncircle the wagons, climb out from under the bed, and let's move onward. T. Folsom is me and I am T. Folsom. Geeeez. Now, as I said, who are these "experts" that have agreed with that nut Jack White? THAT is the issue at hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was absolutely no time in the chain of possession for this incredible amount of sinsister alterations to occur.

And none of the proponents of alteration have ever been able to come up with WHERE and with what type of equipment this magical feat was performed.

ahh, ONE that pinned ALL his JFK Assassination theories on the validity of the Z-film --

"There was absolutely no time in the chain of possession for this incredible amount of sinsister alterations to occur. "

dgh: NONSENSE btw, incredible amount? Based on the statement you must have an idea of what might of been done to the film, yes?

"And none of the proponents of alteration have ever been able to come up with WHERE and with what type of equipment this magical feat was performed."

dgh: NONSENSE [again] do your self a favor [educate yourself before you really embarass yourself] read Jim Fetzer's Great Zapruder Film HOAX.

Maybe Bradford can show us some of his optical film printing expertise and explain who Lynwood Dunne is and what he (Dunne) means to the "type" of equipment he's (Bradford) seeking that can perform what HE (Bradford) thinks is *magical*... rofl

David Healy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maynardsthirdeye: Two different photographic experts have watched some of Jack White's videos and they said that while some of his arguments are invalid or doubtful, the majority are valid.

Folsom: What are their names and what are their credentials? Then we will discuss their agreement.

I don't know the second one's name but the first one is Mr. Brian Mee.

Mr. Mee is a professional photographer and photo lab technician. He has worked in photography for 18 years. He has worked as photographer and photo lab technician for the U.S. Government for the last ten years. Among other things, Mr. Mee has studied and had on-the-job training in negative retouching, print development, shadows, and negative analysis.

In addition, he has had technical courses in color print development and color negative development at the Winona School of Photography, which is affiliated with the Professional Photographers of America School. He has also had courses in automatic printing and in using computer video analyzers at the KODAK School of Photography in Rochester, New York.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can find virtually nothing about Mee except the same source you found your information from. However it strikes me as odd that of all the people that have studied the Zapruder film only ONE guy with photographic esperience comes to White's defense. I would like to know what recognized organizations Mee is a member of. I noticed he does not have a PhD. Not that means he is right or wrong, but it does mean his training is recognized by others. Working for Kodak doesn't exactly make someone an expert in photographic analysis. And, by the way, the interview I read with Mee only talked about the backyard photographs, they didn't mention the Zapruder film alteration issue at all. So I concede that point, I guess here is some guy somewhere named Brian Mee who agrees with Jack White. I will expect to see the evening news covering this breakthrough any day now and the case will soon be solved.

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...