Babuska Lady

[John Dolva]

I think the fact that we don't have the B film today is a good reason to say that the Z film was not comprehensively altered, because if it was so undetectably altered as some suggest, then why haven't they released the supporting B version. They've had the B film for 43 years, time enough to produce a version to show anything they wish, surely?

So, they haven't, because it cannot be done. The B film is not here today because from where it was taken it showed something that proves particular Z film interpretations and disproves others. It shows something so convincingly that it would clearly point in the right direction.

John...a few comments on your interesting posting:

...we do not know that the Z film was COMPREHENSIVELY altered. Perhaps only

small portions were altered so it would fit the official story. Evidence seems clear

that the LIMO STOP was removed, as an example.

....the Zfilm was not UNDETECTABLY altered. I refer you to the studies of Dr.

Costella at:

http://www.assassinationscience.com/johnco...ntro/index.html

Costella points out numerous anomalies he DETECTED showing alteration.

Jack

Jack, I agree with you that the film we have today is not fully as original, largely as you suggest re 'portions'. And I also agree that the changes made are detectable, though perhaps not as Costella suggests. I have my own ideas on that and continue to read in order to try to understand it better. Thank's for your comments.

[Jack White]

I think the fact that we don't have the B film today is a good reason to say that the Z film was not comprehensively altered, because if it was so undetectably altered as some suggest, then why haven't they released the supporting B version. They've had the B film for 43 years, time enough to produce a version to show anything they wish, surely?

So, they haven't, because it cannot be done. The B film is not here today because from where it was taken it showed something that proves particular Z film interpretations and disproves others. It shows something so convincingly that it would clearly point in the right direction.

John...a few comments on your interesting posting:

...we do not know that the Z film was COMPREHENSIVELY altered. Perhaps only

small portions were altered so it would fit the official story. Evidence seems clear

that the LIMO STOP was removed, as an example.

....the Zfilm was not UNDETECTABLY altered. I refer you to the studies of Dr.

Costella at:

http://www.assassinationscience.com/johnco...ntro/index.html

Costella points out numerous anomalies he DETECTED showing alteration.

Jack

Jack, I agree with you that the film we have today is not fully as original, largely as you suggest re 'portions'. And I also agree that the changes made are detectable, though perhaps not as Costella suggests. I have my own ideas on that and continue to read in order to try to understand it better. Thank's for your comments.

Thanks, John...I would be interested in any things you perceive

that indicate alterations to the Zfilm. Maybe you have spotted

things that others of us have not.

Jack

[John Dolva]

I'll do that Jack, but not in detail just now. I don't know if it's anything new. I'll just mention some of it in order to see if it corresponds with what others have found . One thing I could say is that in looking at the frames in pairs there's a strangeness about 314 that I can't explain. There seems to be blur lacking where I would expect them. It's almost as if some light solvent was appilied and the film smudged. This is a suggestion I haven't come across before. Also I think there is a frame mssing from the torn bit around 206, and I don't know what Gordon says about that set. IOW 313 is actually 314 etc.

Edited September 15, 2006 by John Dolva

[Jack White]

I'll do that Jack, but not in detail just now. I don't know if it's anything new. I'll just mention some of it in order to see if it corresponds with what others have found . One thing I could say is that in looking at the frames in pairs there's a strangeness about 314 that I can't explain. There seems to be blur lacking where I would expect them. It's almost as if some light solvent was appilied and the film smudged. This is a suggestion I haven't come across before. Also I think there is a frame mssing from the torn bit around 206, and I don't know what Gordon says about that set. IOW 313 is actually 314 etc.

I look forward to anything you find out. Two questions:

...what is the "torn bit" you mention?

...who is "Gordon"?

Thanks.

Jack

[Jack White]

Beverly Oliver has been sending me some of her interesting

old photos. Here a very young Bev singing with a western band.

As a lifelong "leg man", I must say, nice legs Bev!

Jack

[Jack White]

Here, researcher Dick Sprague embraces Bev at a symposium.

Jack

[Jack White]

Beverly Oliver has been sending me some of her interesting

old photos. Here a very young Bev singing with a western band.

As a lifelong "leg man", I must say, nice legs Bev!

Jack

Beverly has emailed me that the old photo of her singing with the

"Dewey Groom western band" was early in 1963, because of the

long hair. When she went to work at Six Flags that summer, she

cut her hair short, and it was short when she went to work at Abe

Weinstein's club.

Jack

[Guest Mark Valenti]

Appendage Analysis