Zapruder

[kenmurray]

Bob wrote:ThomZajac wrote:You know, this forum has always been good, but it is now incredibly good. I'm writing less because I am reading more, and some of the links you guys have posted (along with your own insights) have been mind-blowingly good. Many thanks!I second that motion. If Alex Trebek ever had a JFK assassination game of Jeopardy, this forum would win hands down with ANY other JFK assassination forum. Plus, we would clean the clock of any lone nut club forum as well. The expertise, knowledge, persistance, research connections and differing opinions is what makes this forum great. We debate, learn and educate. Everyday seems to get better! Indeed Bob!!!

[kenmurray]

In case you didn't hear Doug Horne on BOR last night the archived show is up:http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2009.htmlDoug makes a compelling case that he had experts from hollywood look at the original of the Z film copy and looked at it frame by frame. And from frames 313-337 where the head shot occurred, the experts in high definition concluded that there was an exit wound at the back of JFK'S head and it was BLACKED out and that the head wound shown in the Z- film was nothing more than artwork.

[Dealey Joe]

I have always been a little concerned about what seems to happen in the frames of the head shot.It has always had the appearance of the brain exploding out the right front.I think that is possible but just seems a bit confusing.What does Jimmy Files say about what the film shows. Is it the way he saw it?I can understand frames being destroyed because it was very common for projectors to burn holes in the film back in the 60's.I have the DVD on the Zapruder film "Image of an Assassination" that is very well done showing all the different possibilitiesenlargements and slow motion digitalized ect.Robet Groden has pretty much built his research around the Zapruder Film and maintains its authenticity with 5 frames dammaged.His "The Case For Conspiacy" features the films and he says he has recovered the missing frames.When you compare the Zapruder, Nix and Muchmore films they pretty much show the same thing?Why do these people think the Zapruder is a hoax? To what purpose. Is it the whole thing or just certain frames?

[ThomZajac]

Hi Joe,A lot has been written on this forum regarding this subject, but I will try to give you a brief overview here-There is one camp (Robert Groden, Wim,and many others) who believe the Zapruder film to be essentially genuine, and that any 'problems' with it are very limited and generally minor.There is another camp (Horne, Lifton, Fetzer and and many others) who believe the film has been significantly altered with two purposes in mind 1) to eliminate as much evidence as possible which would have indicated that shots were fired from in front of the president, and 2) to eliminate the presidential limousine stop made by Greer. This camp maintains that the film was altered- rather than created from scratch- and so some evidence of a frontal shot remains (the president being thrown to the rear).Personally, I think Horne does a great job of explaining why he is certain the film has been altered.Hope that helps.Thom

[Dealey Joe]

Thom do you know of any video the shows the limo stopping?I can find where it seams to slow some.

[ThomZajac]

Well, we conspiracy types believe that essentially ALL videos were altered- certainly they all were confiscated and many were not ever returned.That said, I do think the Muchmore film indicates dramatic breaking if not a complete stop.Thom

[Dealey Joe]

I just watched Doug Horne on BOR about his take on the Zapruder film.I can fully agree with him as he has been able to consult with professional hollywood editors.He does not call the Z film a fake he says at high resolution they were easily ableto detect that the frames at the back of the head shot were very poorly altered to cover up the dammage to the back of the head. After Time Life got hold of it.Zapruder had nothing to do with it.Horne says that Life payed 150K for it and never showed it once. Evidentally the reason they purchased it was for the alterations to be doneSounds good to me.Groden, you, nor I would be able to examine it and detect any alteration.It is only due to the latest 1080p tecknology that has made it possible.Actuall they were able to look at it in 6K resolution.Be nice to know you (Gary Mack) at the 6th floor museum have something that if original would singlehandedly prove a conspiracy shot from the front no wonder they want to set on it.. A big plus for us..

[ThomZajac]

Joe wrote-"Groden, you, nor I would be able to examine it and detect any alteration.It is only due to the latest 1080p tecknology that has made it possible."Well, Joe, that is a matter of debate. Certainly Jack White would say he could prove alteration prior to the high resolution breakthrough, and I, and many others, would agree.But now with Horne, there can really be no doubt, though I'm sure there is. I suspect Groden still holds onto his original conclusion. Curious as to what some of the others think. Wim is/was in the unaltered camp, I wonder what his view on this is now.Personally, I think the true key to understanding the nature of the conspiracy is understanding that JFK's body was altered before autopsy, and that the Zapruder film was altered before the public was allowed to view it or frames from it. Add to that the understanding that the conspirators had complete control of the 'investigation,' and it becomes inescapable that the United States inexperienced a coup d' etat on November 22, 1963, and perhaps more importantly, that the powers responsible for it have only grown stronger since then.

[Dealey Joe]

I don't look at Groden as being "WRONG"He used the best methods at his disposal to show that in fact there was a shot from the front.what the Z film was trying to show was the shot fromt the rear but Robert, Penn and others knew better.Alll this does is to varify that we were all correct. Wim included.I don't know how Jack could tell for sure? Did he ever say?The fact that it was altered does not change anything for our side but it sure can for the LNT'ers.I was begining to hear what I thought was talk that Zapruder had faked the film or was part of it.I just could not believe that. He may have been put there to take the video?Every little advancement helps, The facts about JFK's body might not be so easy to solveIt is one area I let you all work out. I am not researcher enough to figure it out.LHO is keeping me busy.were you and I discusing the mastoid scar?

[ThomZajac]

Joe wrote-"were you and I discusing the mastoid scar?"Nope, not me.As for Jack White, his presentations shouldn't be to hard to find if you do a google or ken search for them. On his site there are a series of videos, and it will take some time, but it will be time well spent.