JFK RFK MLK Assasination Forum - Archive

On the film Maarten Coumans posted which shows a re-enactment is strange. They are using the Secret Service backup cars. (completly different cars) the film quality is horrible (if they were going to try a Zapruder Renactment they would want to use the same type of camera) and they don't even show the car slowing down when greer slowed for Hill to get on the car. ( well we know it was to slow for the headshot)

Thanks
Ricky Clow

Also if you look at JFK carefully I don't think it looks like him (yes I know it's an old type camera) but I've been into the assassination for over 2 years now and have seen many pictures of him and just watching it , it doesn't seem to look like him.

http://citmedia.org/blog/wp-content/upl ... er-246.jpg
doesn't Jackie look a little fat in this picture? and how come in almost all of the Zapruder film you never get to see JFK's face clearly? you can see almost everyone elses?

I have just noticed a possible reason for altering the Z film. But it is not as you think. Doctoring a film in those days wouldd hyave left some evidence. But if you get rid of what you don't want people to see then no prob. I have noticed for the first time the mirror like reflection on the back hood and side of the limo. Except when it gets near reflecting the grassy knoll. then it goes high and also seems unussually black when it comes back into frame. No reflection at all as it re-emerges passing the knoll.
Just an observation.
Peace

Could be possible but I think that the shooting would make the most sence.

If you are interested in alterations:
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zf ... rame.html

In this site you can find the missing frames from roadsign, as well as 3 frames that were "lost". These frames do show up in the Groden DVD.

I wonder if those splices are on the "original film"....

Maarten.

Harrison E Livingston has pointed out numerous reasons why the Zapruder film appears to have been manipulated and 'faked' in his various books, especially his 1995 tome, Killing Kennedy and the hoax of the century. The hoax referred to is the Zapruder film.

The key question for me is "Why was the Zapruder film allowed to surface when other films have been stolen, suppressed and in some cases destroyed?" For example, Beverly Oliver has been trying for years to get her camera and film returned; she was filming the head shot. There has to be a reason why the US government (a) allowed the Zapruder film to exist and gradually emerge from the murky depths of its secret vaults and (b) Why the US government paid $16million to the Zapruder family and then handed the film back into their custody for them to exploit commercially as they please.

The DVD now available, Image of an Assassination, MPI Teleproductions ISBN 0-7886-0024-9 available from Amazon.co.uk is a very high quality version of the film. If you study it you will see many puzzling things. Have fun!

I think the most basic reason is to cover up the crime... and get away with it.

"Many puzzling things"... do not get me started.....

But a lot of analysis on Z-film, are highly suseptable to interpretation. And the US gouvermant is well trying to keep it hat way.

A I try to get attention for: Apart from the missing/glued frames at roadsign and 155, there are 3 more missing. If the "original" does not have splices, and glue, it cannot be the original. Easily established and can be proven.

$16 million buys a lot of silence.....

Not sure on the reason they held on to it (altered or not). Maybe they are scared themselves. "No honesty among thieves", and the film could then serve as a "get out of jail free card", in othe words.... blackmail.

Maarten

good point, makes sence to me and I like 16$ million buys alot of silence thats makes sence. I'd say Zapruder was also payed to there at the right time at the right place, every one else pretty much stopped filming, doesn't it seem kinda suspicous that in the Nix film you can't see the giant blood spray that's in the Zapruder Film. Also doesn't anyone else think that Beverly Olover looks awful young to have been there, from what age she says she was, to me she looks maybe 45?

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid= ... +film+hoax

yet again some more proof to a fakery