The Z film is genuine and so are the photographs

[Jack White]

The Z film is fewer than 500 frames and 20 seconds and likely involved no

paintings...just a few matte images made from other films. A competent studio

could manipulate such a film in a few hours. The Z film is NOT GWTW. Do you

understand optical printing, matte insertion, soft edge mattes, travelling mattes

liquid gates, etc? Do you understand the Oxberry animation camera? Do you

understand the Rotoscope and Rotoscoping? You overestimate the degree of

difficulty involved.

Jack

I agree with you. The Z film could easily have been manipulated. And I do understand the film terms you offered. I'm not saying it's impossible.

But are you suggesting:

JFK is killed.

Zapruder turns his film over to be processed.

The film is processed.

The film is spirited away to an undisclosed location.

Technicians have gathered, awaiting the film.

Someone - ahead of time - has figured out that the LHO story line will be hard to believe.

The film is altered to fit the lone nut scenario.

The film is released for viewing with the altered images.

And then...at the same time:

The Willis film is altered.

The Betzner film is altered.

The Nix film is altered.

The photo of the limo speeding down the freeway is altered.

And in the same time period:

The autopsy x-rays are altered

The autopsy photos are altered

And all to prove - what? That LHO fired by himself from the TSBD.

The sheer weight of the coordination of these acts seem insurmountable. I mean, really - the CIA screwed up the Bay of Pigs and numerous other operations in this time frame. How could they pull of this clean-up operation with such precision?

And don't forget - this all presupposes that the conspirators knew where the public's suspicion would lie. "Oh, man - the public's gonna think that some shots came from that Grassy Knoll area! We'd better alter the film to make it seem like they all came from the TSBD!"

Come on, it's ridiculous on its face.

No, those are YOUR suggestions. I do not have the slightest idea

of how and when the films and photos were altered.

It is YOUR position that difficult things can't be done. Those are your

imagined timelines...none provable. The incredible resources available

to the government (read CIA, military, FBI, SS) make everything

you mention possible.

I have NO THEORIES on how or when the fakery was done. But I can

prove it was done. I will leave the theorizing to you. I deal in facts.

See Apollo photo for example of faked photo.

Jack

I RESENT THAT THE BOARD SOFTWARE LUMPS POSTINGS TOGETHER

IF SENT WITHIN FIVE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS POSTING. THIS

JUMBLES UP THE POSTINGS AND MAKES FOR CONFUSION! DON'T

BLAME ME, BLAME THE SOFTWARE!

5. That is one of the photos which Altgens SAID HE DID NOT TAKE. I see no

fakery in the image, but is it an Altgens picture?

Jack

This one:

http://www.geocities.com/quaneeri3/altgens2.jpg

I've seen it listed as Altgens #2 and Altgens #4.

The films/photos I cited show that JFK's jacket dropped an inch in Dealey Plaza;

the information contained therein stands un-disputed by questions of authenticity.

Cliff...according to Trask, that is Altgens 5. Altgens said he did not remember

taking it. He said after taking no. 4 (limo turning corner) he started his dash

to get in his later position on Elm. He also said he did not take "Altgens 8".

Negs 5 and 6 are cut apart...and DO NOT LINE UP.

Jack

Edited July 6, 2006 by Jack White

[Bill Miller]

I will admit that much of your work is enlightening and valuable, but, when you begin to demean others for giving their viewpoints....your value is lost as far as I am concerned.

Chuck, with all due respect, you and others have embraced claims in the past without so much as spending any real amount of time on them to see if the claim is accurate or not. You will question the vailidity of a photo and not bother to first learn the history of the photo. For instance, Jack is presently making a claim that the Willis photo is altered to show Sitzman and Zapruder on the pedestal as if they were never there. Jack knew Jean Hill and she has said to me that she saw Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal. Moorman still had her instant photo in her possession not 30 minutes following the assassination when her photo showing Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal at the time of the fatal shot to JFK would be displayed on NBC within the next 2.5 hours. Jack has used the Bronson slide many times to show Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal, yet if you didn't know these things you might be taken in by the latest nutty claim he's made that the Willis photo was altered by placing Mr. Z and Sitzy on the pedestal.

Here is one of Jack's keen observations below where he has said that it is JFK we see sitting up in the car as it leaves the plaza ... maybe if someone didn't know that Connally was the one with gray hair ... they may be fooled into thinking JFK was not really fatally shot.

It seems that some of you are very quick to embrace poorly thought out claims, but dead set against accepting logical explanations for what you are missing. So an opinion is only good if you first know the facts. Here is a saying that you may want to embrace in your future research practice ...

"Everyone has a right to their own opinion, but no one has a right to be wrong about the facts. Without the facts, your opinion is of no value." - Rene Dahinden, August 1999

Bill Miller

Edited July 7, 2006 by Bill Miller

[Jack White]

Miller would have you believe Zapruder was shorter than 5 feet,

when it is fact that he was 5'11"

Jack

Edited July 7, 2006 by Jack White

[Craig Lamson]

Jack White sez:

"I have NO THEORIES on how or when the fakery was done. But I can

prove it was done. I will leave the theorizing to you. I deal in facts.

See Apollo photo for example of faked photo."

And he also sez in another tread on this forum:

"But a simple technique, which could have been used with the Zfilm, because it is so short,

would have been to MAKE A COLOR PRINT OF EACH FRAME, RETOUCH EACH FRAME AS

DESIRED, AND RECOPY EACH ALTERED FRAME ONE AT A TIME WITH A B&H CAMERA,

USING KODACHROME FILM. That is animation at its simplest. All that is required is about

500 color prints (8x10s will do) and a retouch artist.

Any amateur could have done this. It is basic copystand work. Check anyone who

knows anything about movies, and they will verify the above.

Complicating it somewhat were the intrasprocket images...but Costella explains that

nicely.

Jack"

The truth is your friend Jack, you should try using it sometime.

Jack White sez:

"Cliff...I will be glad to respond to a reasonable question (a rarity here)."

Gee there are dozens upon dozens of reasonable and to the point questions addressed to Jack White in this thread that have gone unanswered.:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5911

The truth is your friend Jack, try telling it sometime.

[Jack White]

I will admit that much of your work is enlightening and valuable, but, when you begin to demean others for giving their viewpoints....your value is lost as far as I am concerned.

Chuck, with all due respect, you and others have embraced claims in the past without so much as spending any real amount of time on them to see if the claim is accurate or not. You will question the vailidity of a photo and not bother to first learn the history of the photo. For instance, Jack is presently making a claim that the Willis photo is altered to show Sitzman and Zapruder on the pedestal as if they were never there. Jack knew Jean Hill and she has said to me that she saw Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal. Moorman still had her instant photo in her possession not 30 minutes following the assassination when her photo showing Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal at the time of the fatal shot to JFK would be displayed on NBC within the next 2.5 hours. Jack has used the Bronson slide many times to show Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal, yet if you didn't know these things you might be taken in by the latest nutty claim he's made that the Willis photo was altered by placing Mr. Z and Sitzy on the pedestal.

Here is one of Jack's keen observations below where he has said that it is JFK we see sitting up in the car as it leaves the plaza ... maybe if someone didn't know that Connally was the one with gray hair ... they may be fooled into thinking JFK was not really fatally shot.

It seems that some of you are very quick to embrace poorly thought out claims, but dead set against accepting logical explanations for what you are missing. So an opinion is only good if you first know the facts. Here is a saying that you may want to embrace in your future research practice ...

"Everyone has a right to their own opinion, but no one has a right to be wrong about the facts. Without the facts, your opinion is of no value." - Rene Dahinden, August 1999

Bill Miller

Miller knows that is not one of MY images. That image is nowwhere

in my computer files. I never use that sort of arrow to point at

things. However, I do remember the discussion about this several

years ago on one of the old forums. The person who posted it

called it KENNEDY RISING, and I recall agreeing with the opinion.

If Miller has any image of this WHICH I POSTED I would appreciate

seeing it. I did not do this particular image, but may have done

others.

[Bill Miller]

Miller would have you believe Zapruder was shorter than 5 feet,

when it is fact that he was 5'11"

Jack

Jack - your work is so bad that it falls below an "F" score. Just by looking at the windows in the colonnade ... I can see that your test camera was not even in the same location or height as Moorman's. These types of mistakes will effect how tall someone looks against the background.

Bill Miller

Edited July 7, 2006 by Bill Miller

[Jack White]

Pay attention Miller! The only photo I took was of Groden, from

across Elm Street. I was interested in showing the height of

a 6'2" man on the pedestal. I was not trying to match windows

in the pergola. Show us some of YOUR ORIGINAL RESEARCH

on the height of Zapruder. Zapruder was 5'11" and should be

about the same height as Groden. I did not take any of the

other photos. Whatajerk!

Jack

[Bill Miller]

Miller knows that is not one of MY images. That image is nowwhere

in my computer files. I never use that sort of arrow to point at

things. However, I do remember the discussion about this several

years ago on one of the old forums. The person who posted it

called it KENNEDY RISING, and I recall agreeing with the opinion.

If Miller has any image of this WHICH I POSTED I would appreciate

seeing it. I did not do this particular image, but may have done

others.

Jack,

I never said it was your illustration ... the frame is too clear to be one of yours, however ... you were the individual who posted the image from the Zapruder film ... and it was you who made the stupid claim that it was JFK who was sitting up in the car. I believe Ron Hepler, James Gordon, and myself were among those who posted enlargements and pointed out that it was Connally's gray hair on the person in question.

Bill Miller

Pay attention Miller! The only photo I took was of Groden, from

across Elm Street. I was interested in showing the height of

a 6'2" man on the pedestal. I was not trying to match windows

in the pergola. Show us some of YOUR ORIGINAL RESEARCH

on the height of Zapruder. Zapruder was 5'11" and should be

about the same height as Groden. I did not take any of the

other photos. Whatajerk!

Jack

Jack - I never said that you took the other photos because they were of Zapruder and Sitzman and we all know you were not in DP on 11/22/63 ... how you could think otherwise is beyond me. But your notion that all you have to do is take a photo of the 6'1" Groden atop of the pederstal from any location, any camera height, and or any distance from the subject and somehow compare that to the assassination photos just shows how over your head you are on some of the aspects of doing an accurate study. Are you not aware that you can use the same person in two test shots and without moving the camera ... if he is even 6" closer to the camera in one photo - he will appear taller and wider against the background. Your work on this subject is flawed and Groden would be the first to tell you this.

Bill Miller