Zapruder Film Discussion

[ThomZajac]

During recent discussions with Wim it became more evident to me that one central piece of evidence critical to understanding the nature to the events at Dealey Plaza is the Zapruder film. The central question is obvious; Is the Zapruder film completely authentic, or has it been altered?Wim and I have reached different conclusions on this key issue. Wim believes it to be authentic, and I believe it to be altered.I am a bit righteous about my conclusion; I am confident I could prove in a court of law that it has been altered. I believe the evidence to be not merely suggestive, but rather overwhelming and conclusive.In future posts I will prove both of the following;1) That subjects in the Zapruder film at times make movements that are significantly faster than is humanly posssibleand2) That some events (and non-events) depicted in the Zapruder film do not match the eyewitness testimony and physical evidence that has been established to be true beyond a reasonable doubt.I will try to make my first post on this in the next few days, but if anyone would like to chime in now, please do not hesitate.Adjourned for now-Thom

[Bob]

I can't wait to see your analysis your honor. Put me on the side of the film having been altered somewhat, although not totally. I also think Zapruder took the film as a trophy for the conspirators to watch later, as he was in the same circles of many of the conspirators. But if one is going to REALLY alter the film, the two areas that needs real alteration are the sequence when the magic bullet theory "supposedly" took place and the final head shot or shots. To me, whoever "altered" the film didn't do a very good job of convincing me that there was only one shooter and at least one of the head shots came from the right front. However, many witnesses have said that Bill Greer stopped the limo for a moment, or at the very least slowed down to a crawl. That is why I think he is complicit in the assassination, plus you have the actions of Emory Roberts at Love Field, when he waved off the two SS agents that would have stood on the back of the limo, negating a shot from behind. At the first sound of gunfire, Greer should have been out of Dealey Plaza like a bat out of hell, but he and Kellerman froze in their seats and actually waited and looked for the fatal shot to occur before they sped from the scene.

[kenmurray]

Robert Groden believes the Zapruder film was not altered. Key frames have been missing, damage or had a printing error (lol) when it was sold to Life magazine. Those critical frames were 207-210 which shows JFK in some distress before the Limo disappeared behind the Stemmons sign. That distress would blow the lid off the SBT. Groden said on Black Op Radio last week that those missing frames are NOT missing and he will have them in his new book. Groden talks about the Zapruder film in some detail. If you haven't heard it yet here is the archive show:http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2009.html

[Bob]

kenmurray wrote:Robert Groden believes the Zapruder film was not altered. Key frames have been missing, damage or had a printing error (lol) when it was sold to Life magazine. Those critical frames were 207-210 which shows JFK in some distress before the Limo disappeared behind the Stemmons sign. That distress would blow the lid off the SBT. Groden said on Black Op Radio last week that those missing frames are NOT missing and he will have them in his new book. Groden talks about the Zapruder film in some detail. If you haven't heard it yet here is the archive show:http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2009.htmlI heard that from Robert as well, Ken. And I respect Groden a lot. But Tom Rossley was on just before Groden on BOR, and he definitely thinks the film was altered. So do many others like Jack White. It is an excellent debate, and I'm still on the fence for the most part.

[kenmurray]

Bob wrote:kenmurray wrote:Robert Groden believes the Zapruder film was not altered. Key frames have been missing, damage or had a printing error (lol) when it was sold to Life magazine. Those critical frames were 207-210 which shows JFK in some distress before the Limo disappeared behind the Stemmons sign. That distress would blow the lid off the SBT. Groden said on Black Op Radio last week that those missing frames are NOT missing and he will have them in his new book. Groden talks about the Zapruder film in some detail. If you haven't heard it yet here is the archive show:http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2009.htmlI heard that from Robert as well, Ken. And I respect Groden a lot. But Tom Rossely was on just before Groden on BOR, and he definitely thinks the film was altered. So do many others like Jack White. It is an excellent debate, and I'm still on the fence for the most part.Bob, I'm on the fence with you as well. Both sides have some valid arguments.

[tom jeffers]

bob and those of you that have been around awhile know my position. i too think that zapruder was there for the purpose of taking this film. i think it is possible that someone else behind him shot sequences in 16 mm to use in masking the film. i think the limo stopped while the final shots were taken. i think the nix film was also altered. he even said that wasn't what he shot. moorman and hill were in the street but the film doesn't show that. you got people looking at different directions than at the president. it doesn't make any sence that you would show up that day and not follow the president. i think they put this red painted flap on the front temple of jfk in order to show an exit wound in the front. the blood splatter looks fake. i respect both wim and groden however nobody has all the right answers, least of all me but i do not buy the zapruder fake. i pretty well know all the main points but i look forward to your presentation thom. Namaste'

[ThomZajac]

Me too!(Current Tally: Authentic- Wim On the Fence- Bob & Ken Altered- Tom & Thom)

[ThomZajac]

Ladies and gentlemen of the forum jury, the Zapruder film that was denied to the public for well over decade is not an authentic film, but rather one that has been altered, and I will prove that to you beyond any reasonable doubt. My initial purpose is not to explain how or why the film was altered- that will come later- but to simply demonstrate that it was indeed altered.Let's get right to it.Exhibit A is a stabilized version of the Zapruder film. I'd like for you to focus on the people on the far side of Elm Street (beyond the presidential limousine, on the grass) and make note of their size; does everything look to be as it should, or do those people appear to be significantly smaller or larger?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9w6zveedj0oSome of them look too large, don't they? That is because they are too large. Provably so. Beyond reasonable doubt. Again, why this was done is not important at the moment, only that it was done. The next link is from a video made by Jack White. Please start it at the 18:24 mark and then stop it at 22:30 (we'll get to other parts of that video in due time- thank you). What Mr. White has done is this; he has made a blowup (composite) of Dealey Plaza and placed (superimposed) a frame from the Zapruder film over it, in an unquestionably precise manner. Here is Exhibit B-video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6264396057713515921#Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. White has proven that the grassy area above the curb on the far side of Elm Street, and the people on it, have been enlarged (altered). Again, it is not important at this point to know why this was done, or how, but only that it was done. Personally, I think the evidence you have viewed is conclusive proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the Zapruder film has been altered, but this is only the beginning. There is much more. But that is all for this post.(Your comments are most welcome).

[Bob]

ThomZajac wrote:Ladies and gentlemen of the forum jury, the Zapruder film that was denied to the public for well over decade is not an authentic film, but rather one that has been altered, and I will prove that to you beyond any reasonable doubt. My initial purpose is not to explain how or why the film was altered- that will come later- but to simply demonstrate that it was indeed altered.Let's get right to it.Exhibit A is a stabilized version of the Zapruder film. I'd like for you to focus on the people on the far side of Elm Street (beyond the presidential limousine, on the grass) and make note of their size; does everything look to be as it should, or do those people appear to be significantly smaller or larger?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9w6zveedj0oSome of them look too large, don't they? That is because they are too large. Provably so. Beyond reasonable doubt. Again, why this was done is not important at the moment, only that it was done. The next link is from a video made by Jack White. Please start it at the 18:24 mark and then stop it at 22:30 (we'll get to other parts of that video in due time- thank you). What Mr. White has done is this; he has made a blowup (composite) of Dealey Plaza and placed (superimposed) a frame from the Zapruder film over it, in an unquestionably precise manner. Here is Exhibit B-video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6264396057713515921#Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. White has proven that the grassy area above the curb on the far side of Elm Street, and the people on it, have been enlarged (altered). Again, it is not important at this point to know why this was done, or how, but only that it was done. Personally, I think the evidence you have viewed is conclusive proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the Zapruder film has been altered, but this is only the beginning. There is much more. But that is all for this post.(Your comments are most welcome).I usually hope to be excused from jury duty, but this is one jury that I wouldn't mind being on. Nice start Thom!

[kenmurray]

I present to the jury forum the Zapruder film frame by frame:http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/