Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright and film director talked with Bill Maher about the JFK assassination, including a script he wrote about doctoring of the Zapruder film
Anyone interested in alleged alteration of the Z film should read Doug Horne's recent comments on this site. There is unquestionably a crude black patch which was applied to the right lower occiput in Z-317. JFK's in-house film analyst (Bruno _____?) who studied the U-2 photos of the Cuban missile sites in 1962, saw the film within 24 hours and said the publicly distributed version is NOT what he saw.
In addition, look at the photos of JFK's shirt, preferably in color. The left side is pristine; the right side is completely smeared with blood and detritis. Listen to the DPD motorcycle outriders, one of whom was splattered with debris as he rode left outboard of the president. Finally, look at the Nix film after its frame matching Z-313. You can see debris flowing rearward on the trunk of the Lincoln.
Z313 was a shot from the rear, out the right temple. The megablaster frontal head shot was at Z342-343, details in "37 Shots in Dealey Plaza." Mostly done with silencer rifles.
The headshot was from the front, hitting Kennedy in the right temple and blowing out a huge gaping wound at the right occipital-parietal. EVERY doctor and nurse at Parkland Memorial Hospital testified to this fact.
The autopsy at Bethesda was a charade perpetrated by Kennedy's own Joint Chiefs of Staff, who orchestrated the autopsy telling Hume what to do and what not to do. This was revealed when Col. Finck testified at the Clay Shaw trial put on by Jim Garrison.
Z342-Z343 are ;ong after the head shot at 313. I have the Costello single frame sequence, And I just looked at those frames. they show JFK leaning on Jackie just before she climbes onto the trunk of the limousine.
There were four headshots. The Z342/343 shot was in at the right temple, ahead of the Z313 exit, and out the rear as you describe. As it exited and blew out the large hole, it also destroyed the entry hole from Z313. Details on the others in "37 Shots in Dealey Plaza." Yes, the Bethesda autopsy was faked in many ways. If you look carefully at the Costella Combined Edit, you will notice that at Z342 there is no gouge in the rear of his head, but at Z343 there is suddenly a gouge out the back of his head as highlighted by Jackie's white glove. Only then does she start screaming because only then does she start to see large quantities of blood. At this time Z342/343 a huge jet of blood and brains and skull came out the back of his head, all over the motorcycle cops and chase car and Clint Hill. Do you see this on Zapruder? Of course not, because it proves a shot from the front and so was airbrushed out of Zapruder, see Douglas Horne in "Altered History" for the details. Clint Hill said he was doused with blood and gore when he was just a few feet in back of the limo. This is where he was at Z342/343, and the Secret Service refused to compensate him for his ruined clothing.
If you look at the Bobby Hargis plexiglass windscreen in Mary Moorman and Zapruder Z316, you will see Moorman snapped her photo at Z316. This is easy to tell because Hargis was gaining on the limo as Greer was working the brakes. Do you see the back of JFK's head blasted out, or jagged flaps of skin wagging in the breeze, in Mary Moorman? No, because that shot hadn't happened yet. It didn't happen until Z342/343 and the Z313 shot was from the rear and out the right temple. Which is why around Z317 you see brain remnant chunks flopping and slopping down the flap wound slide, which hinged at the bottom like a small breadbox door. See Robert Schorlemer in the video made by Vince Palamara to see what it all looked like after the initial flap was further loosened by the final Z342/343 shot.
If you find a quality copy of the Mary Moorman photo, you can see a two inch exit hole in JFK's cowlick area, at the top of the occipital bone area. This is the exit from the Z286 shot, which entered above his right eye at the hairline. The bottom of the wound shows a curved white line, which is the thickness of his skull bone material as just blasted open at Z286. If you look at Z286 you see Babushka Lady's shadow. From the midpoint of her shadow, flying up and to the left, is the two inch chunk of bone and hair just blasted out the back of JFK's head.
In both Z342 & 343 nothing is shown as Kennedy's head is in deep shadow. You can't even see Jackies face clearly it is in such deep shadow!
You are reaching for straws and hallucinating, seeing what you want to see.
I enlarged the frames to about 8x10 and it is nothing but deep shadow.
The head shot came at Z-313 hitting Kennedy in the right temple and exiting at the right occipital-parietal..the wound seen by all the doctors and nurses at Parkland Memorial Hospital.
The Zapruder film was not altered.
The Zapruder film, which captured the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, was processed at Eastman Kodak's Dallas film processing facility on November 22, 1963, later that evening. Jamieson Film Company later made three copies of the processed film:
In the immediate aftermath of the JFK assassination on November 22, 1963, Abraham Zapruder worked with Jamieson Film Company to produce copies of the Kodachrome film on which he recorded the shooting. Jamieson Film Company, based in Dallas, Texas, processed the film and created three additional copies, which were then sent to Washington. The Zapruder film became a key piece of evidence in the investigation and remains a significant historical document.
The FBI copy of the film was sent to the Rochester 'Hawkeyeworks' for one singular purpose; to make 8x 10 still photographs of the sequence from the throat shot to the headshot for analysis. There was no alteration of the film there as Douglas Horne claims.
The JFK head gouge new at Z343 is in front of Jackie's glove. You are looking in the wrong place so of course you don't see the gouge. Jackie is clearly screaming at Z343 but not Z342. As explained in "37 Shots in Dealey Plaza" there were four head shots and the one at Z313 wasn't from the front, as proved by the lack of a big rear hole at Z316 with the Mary Moorman photo. The Zapruder film was massively altered as proven by John Costella in his nine-part youtube series and by Douglas Horne in "Altered History." Even a child can look at the front tire on the yellow car in Z155 and see how it was suddenly faked and enlarged. Or the upper right corner of the sign in Z220 which is flattened near Jackie's hat instead of rounded as in before and after frames. Due to hurried cutting and pasting to further fake Zapruder. These are only two instances of faking, and there are many others.
For instance you can see in Willis Photo #5 how small the Stemmons sign was, but in Zapruder it is faked to be four times the size, to cover up JFK as he was shot in the shoulder and the throat 0.77 seconds apart, which proves a second sniper. In reality, as Willis shows, Umbrella Man was 10 feet downhill from the sign and standing in back of it. Zapruder fakes the story to put Umbrella Man in front of the sign and standing next to it, pretending he didn't wave the umbrella to signal for more shots. But two dozen witnesses saw him waving the sign.
I have watched John Costella in his nine-part youtube series. The guy is a crank and a charlatan who knows NOTHING of film, but quite a bit about digital CGI. There is absolutely nothing in Costella's presentations that hold water.
In the Zapruder film JFK passes by Stemmons sign with it in front of him. So when the limo emerges from behind the sign Kennedy had already been hit in the throat, The sign is large because it is in the foreground.
Z-155 is a double exposure of the yellow car in the sprocket hole area of the film and the film itself to the right of the sprocket hole image. Look at the size of the yellow car on the left compared to the same car on the right.
There is nothing about the Zapruder film that is fake, but the narrative of the alterationists. It is all bullshit blabaloni.
The umbrella man was forward of the sign. WTF?!?!?
Willis Photo #5 is from the other side, showing the Simmons FWY sign in the distance. This is a still photo with a totally different lens setting than the Zapruder film camera. You cannot successfully compare distances by such diverse lenses and settings,
JFK was shot in the back at the level of the third thoracic vertebrae, after the throat shot from the front. He was hit in the head at the right temple and perhaps in the hairline just above his right eyebrow...almost simultaneous shots like from a firing squad. There was no shot to Kennedy's shoulder.
Why you are making all of this crap up is beyond comprehension.
Again, Douglas Horne does not know shit about movie film or film making equipment, cameras. projection systems, travelling mattes or emulsion chemistry. He is as clueless as you are.
I was a special effects artist in Hollywood for some 20 years. I know everything there is to know about film effects. I have read Raymond Fieldings book on cinamatic special effects. and worked on such effects myself on many sci-fi movies.
The ignorance of the 'alterationist cult' is pathetic. The so-called "Hollywood experts" that Horne refers to work with 35mm film stock or larger. They have no experience with 8mm film. There are no special effects systems like travelling matte composite machines in 8mm.
There are no 8mm processes as in larger formats like 35mm to 70mm.
In film and visual effects, travelling matte composite machines refer to the techniques and equipment used to create composite images by combining separately filmed elements, where the mask or "matte" defining the foreground element's shape changes over time.
How it works (traditionally):
Filming: An actor or subject is filmed against a contrasting background, typically a blue or green screen.
Mattes creation: The footage is then processed to create a black and white silhouette (the "matte") of the subject. This matte changes frame by frame as the subject moves.
Compositing: The matte is used as a mask during the optical printing process (where separate film strips are combined) to block out the unwanted background and allow the foreground subject to be seamlessly integrated with a separately filmed background.
Key Aspects and Technologies:
Chroma Keying: A well-known method for creating traveling mattes by removing specific background colors (blue or green).
Williams Process: An early black matte process using high-contrast film to create silhouettes against a black background.
Optical Printer: A crucial piece of equipment in the film era for combining multiple film strips to create composite images using traveling mattes.
You should view my responses as educational rather than being insulted.
:ook up this information for yourself on the internet. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain.
Dino Brugioni was the Chief Information Officer (the briefing board czar) at the CIA's NPIC (National Photographic Interpretation Center) prior to, and after, 1963. When he retired circa the early 1980s, he was the world's foremost photo-analyst. He told me in 2011 in a recorded video interview that the head explosion in the film he saw (the unaltered Zapruder film, the true out-of-camera original) was much higher in the air than the so-called "head explosion" (i.e., artwork) in frame 313 of today's Z film, and that it was a different color: white, not red or pink. He also said that some frames were missing from the film in the head-shot sequence, and that something had been "cut out of the killing." The Zapruder film in the Archives today, and the one you see in documentaries, is not the true out-of-camera original: it is the altered---sanitized---film created on November 24, 1963, at the "Hawkeyeworks Lab" at Kodak Headquarters in Rochester, N.Y.
This is utter bullshit Horne, Dino Brugioni was a CIA asset who duped you into believing the Zapruder film was altered to bring suspicion on the film as it proves shots from the front, the headshot hitting JFK in the temple and blowing out the rear of his head at the occiplital-parietal. The scenes of Jackie climbing on the trunk of the limo to pick up pieces of skull and brain material proves the headshot came from the front.
Frame 313 plainly shows the blood spray fountain from the top of JFK's head going up and to the rear.
The question becomes Mr. Horne why you would want to throw doubt on the most important visual evidence proving shots from the front, thus a conspiracy.
If Dino Brugioni were a faker, he wouldn't be blowing the whistle on the CIA faking the Zapruder film. Your feeble lack of logic makes no sense whatsoever. There is no such thing as "the" headshot, since JFK experienced four headshots as outlined in "37 Shots in Dealey Plaza." The spray from Z313 and Z314 is up and forward, due to the bullet coming from the rear and the sum of vector forces. It actually inherently tilted further forward, except the wind was blowing 10mph into the faces of the limousine occupants. I've been following the JFK assassination since the first news bulletins said "stay tuned for a new bulletin" and Douglas Horne has done the best job of anyone in unmasking the fakery behind Zapruder. What is your motive in helping the CIA peddle the obvious thinly-veiled trash that makes up the Zapruder fakery? I also passed two medical pathology classes from Earl Rose, so I know things about anatomy, autopsy, ballistics, and wound analysis that are obviously beyond your comprehension.
Dino Brugioni wasn't "blowing the whistle on the CIA, he was fabricating a false narrative to sew suspicion as to the validity of the Zapruter film.
It is YOUR feeble lack of logic makes no sense whatsoever.
I have no motive beyond explaining the truth about the Zapruder film from the perspective of a special effects expert.
I don't believe you you passed any pathology classes of Earl Rose, he died May 1, 2012. Are you now claiming you live in Dallas, Texas?
Having studied the JFK assassination for the past forty plus years I learned about ballisitics as an autodidactic on my own. As an artist I have always known anatomy of mammals, especially human anatomy. There is nothing one cannot learn on the Internet.
Within an hour after the assassination, Johnsen was given the bullet by Parkland hospital security director O.P. Wright, after orderly Darrell Tomlinson found it by a stretcher. Like Johnsen and Rowley, neither Wright nor Tomlinson could identify the bullet.
The first 4 links in the chain of custody of the bullet found a Parkland are unable to identify it as CE399.
They are:
1. Orderly Darrell Tomlinson >>
2. Parkland hospital security director O.P. Wright >>
3. SS Agent Richard Johnsen >>
4. Agent Rowley (Secret Service Chief).
A break in the chain of custody at this proximate point proves that the bullet of record, CE399 is NOT the bullet found at parkland, and therefor CE399 is a planted bullet by the highest authorities themselves.
Let me remind you once again: A memorandum from the FBI office in Dallas on June 20th to J. Edgar Hoover contains the statement, “neither DARRELL C. TOMLINSON [sic], who found bullet at Parkland Hospital, Dallas, nor O. P. WRIGHT, Personnel Officer, Parkland Hospital, who obtained bullet from TOMLINSON and gave to Special Service, at Dallas 11/22/63, can identify bullet”
You didn't see what Dino Brugioni saw in Nov. 1963 so you are in no position to pretend to know better. You claim to know special effects, but you can't name the production company you allegedly worked for. Nor can you name any movies for which you did the special effects. So you have zero credibility. The pathology classes were obviously before 2012, so your inability to figure out the before and after is another proof you don't have a clue how to think or do any kind of logical reasoning. If you haven't worked with cadavers in three dimensions, your autodidact methods help explain your pathetic lack of knowledge. The bullet was placed on the stretcher by Secret Service Agent Sam Kinney. You obviously know very little about the bullet. It had a copper jacket and the tip was lead, but soon enough it was stolen and replaced by a fake second CE399 which was all copper and rounded tip. The original fake CE399 had six sets of grooves when a Carcano bullet actually has four, so the second and fake CE399 was replaced by a third fake CE399 with four sets of grooves, by people getting into police evidence lockers and faking the evidence. You can list a chain of custody on a fake bullet, but it is still a fake bullet. You again don't have a clue what you are talking about, nor do you have a clue about Sam Kinney originating the bullet, or when or where or why. And since you have no production history as to movie special effects, nor film credits you can provide, your entire story line has zero credibility and you meander from one irrelevance to another spouting non sequiturs as you go. Your lack of focus indicates you need to see a neurologist about potential Alzheimer's problems.
You must be very upset because I just testified before Congress and talked about the altered Zapruder film. Is this the official "blowback" from the Deep State? Your angry, mean-spirited pushback? Go attack someone else.
Why don't you address the facts provided by Roland Zavada about the edge code markings on the Zapruder film? This is firm undeniable proof that the Z-film is authentic. These edge codes on the film show where and when the film was manufactured as well as where and when the film was processed.
The Zapruder film, which captured the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, was processed at Eastman Kodak's Dallas film processing facility on November 22, 1963, later that evening. Jamieson Film Company later made three copies of the processed film.
The film ended up at Hawkeyeworks Lab" at Kodak Headquarters in Rochester, N.Y. for one purpose; to make 8x10 enlargements for analysis by the FBI. The film was NOT altered ad Rochester. Buglioni was lying to you! He was an effing CIA asset for crying out loud.
If you knew anything about film you would know that copies can be counterfeited to cover the criticisms you pretend to make. Various copies were made including fake copies you clearly have no awareness of. Simply because you can't see the far side of the moon doesn't mean it isn't there.
No Mr. Horne, I have no connection to Kodak but Rolland Zavada does, and I have read his report on the Zapruder film and Rolex 8mm movie film camera.
Why do you think I am angry Mr. Horne? Simply because I disagree with you?
Zavada explains in his report on the Zapruder film that there are edge marking codes on the film that indicate where and when the film was produced as well as codes where the film was processed.
The Zapruder film, which captured the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, was processed at Eastman Kodak's Dallas film processing facility on November 22, 1963, later that evening. Jamieson Film Company later made three copies of the processed film.
Both of these processing facilities were in Dallas, Texas. The only time the FBI copy was in Rochester Hawkeye facility was when the FBI copy was used to make 8 by ten still photos to study of the pertinent frames of the assassination. There was no film alteration there just splicing out the relevant frames to enlarge them.
I am a retired special effects expert working in Hollywood in the 1980s.
Aslo as a teen I used a Bell and Howell 8mm movie camera to do in-camera effects. So my experience is two fold as an amateur when I was young and as a professional as an adult.
So yes I am quite qualified to speak to the validity of the Zapruter film.
What is YOUR expertise in film Mr. Horne?
I find it very profitable to engage with ignorant 'Z-film alterationists', who have no experience with film making or film making equipment.
All you can do now is try to ignore me. But you should answer my observations if you have the nerve.
What are you going to do? Call Roland Zavada a liar? His information blows your theory of alteration out of the water.
Your tone is pejorative and angry, not collegial. You seem intent on confrontation and combat! This kind of anger is unhealthy for you. You should take a pill, and chill out.
"Your tone is pejorative and angry, not collegial. You seem intent on confrontation and combat!"~Douglas Horne
That is a baldfaced lie. I simply laid out the facts that you have never successfully rebutted.
You claim Zavada knows nothing of film special effects. Well, Raymond Fielding disagrees.
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 19:42:19 -0800 (PST)
From: "len colby" <lenbrasil@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Zavada
To: RAYRfielding@xxxxxxxx
Mr. Fielding, (Can I call you Raymond or Ray? )
Thank you for getting back to me. Do you have any interest in getting involved in this lunatic debate? You can ask Rollie for his estimation of David Healy but in my opinion he is an obnoxious.... (I won't finish that sentence because I don't know you sensibilities). he now wants to debate Zavada and you. I kid you not.
See below text of a message he left on a forum which is also indicative of his winning personality. As you can see wants me to forward your e-mail message to him. Is that OK with you? This would mean he would have your e-mail address.
Len
All
I've got some free time after this weekend ... Its been brought to my attention -- Mr. Colby has received a message from Raymond Fielding, author of 'The Technique Special Effects Cinematography.'
[…] (see David's message above for full text Len)
Might John Simkin grant this debate bandwidth?
David Healy
Quote
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 09:59:21 -0500
From: rayrfielding@xxxxx x
Subject: Re: Zavada
To: lenbrasil@xxxxxxxx
Mr. Colby:
No, my e-mail message and its address is only for you. I have no
further interest in this debate. What a waste of time.
I apologize for my delay in responding to your e-nail. I have been out of the city for the last couple weeks and am only now catching up with my correspondence.
I agree with Rollie Zavada that the Zapruder film could not have been successfully manipulated in 1963 with the technology then available, and had it been attempted, could not possibly have survived scrutiny. You may quote me.
You don't seem to realize that all the "evidence" you invoke can be easily faked. You can furnish no production company name you allegedly worked for, nor can you identify any movies you allegedly worked on. Thus, you have zero credibility.
"What I am going to do," Mr. Whitten, is dismantle your claims that the Zapruder film is not an altered film. Tom Whitehead, a Hollywood post-production editor, says the Zapruder film is altered. Seventy-two (72) out of seventy-five (75) post production experts he showed his digital scans to (his 6k and 4k and 2k scans of individual Z frames) say the film has been altered. (They were directors, colorists, and film restoration experts.) In 2013 Whitehead interviewed two Hollywood film experts "on camera" (Paul Rutan, an independent restoration expert, and Garrett Smith, a man with over 25 years with Paramount), and they both invoked their professional expertise and said that in their opinion, the Z film we know today is definitely an altered film. I have this interview on video. Mr. Ned Price, the former Head of Restoration at Warner Brothers, has indicated that he believes the film is altered, for a number of reasons. I was present in the editing bay at Deluxe Labs in 2009 when he first stated this. In his seminal textbook "The Special Effects Techniques of Cinematography," professor Raymond Fielding has explained the commonly used visual effects technique that I am convinced was used to alter the film at HAWKEYEWORKS---namely, "aerial imaging," using an aerial optical printer with an animation stand. Mr. Paul Rutan explained in his 2013 interview that he was confident that an aerial optical printer was used to alter the Zapruder film, and said it could have been done "overnight." Mr. Zavada of KODAK only analyzed the edge print on the Z film; we (at the ARRB) specifically did not want him to analyze image content because he was not qualified to do so. He was a film chemist, not a visual effects expert. All he ever concluded was that the edge print was "consistent with" his finding that the film was authentic. His finding was not conclusive proof, by any means. He exhibited a bias in favor of his former employer, Kodak. The three "first generation copies" that exist today exhibit definite bracketing---in exposure---that proves they are not the 3 first day copies developed in Dallas on 11/22/63. Why? Because the three first day copies exposed in a contact printer at the Jamieson lab in Dallas were NOT BRACKETED. This was stated to Zavada by Jamieson and his lead lab technician. The same light and filter pack was used, in the Jamieson lab contact printer, for all three first day copies exposed for Mr. Zapruder. Today's three bracketed first generation copies are proof that they are the "swaps" made at HAWKEYEWORKS on 11/24/63 from the altered film after it was sanitized. Just another indication of fraud in this case. The forgers screwed up and "bracketed" the swap out copies when they shouldn't have! The alteration activity at HAWKEYEWORKS on 11/24/63 was with the camera original film that Dino Brugioni of NPIC had examined Saturday night in Washington D.C. I could go on and on...but what would be the point? A person who does not want to be persuaded and does not have an open mind...cannot be persuaded. The developing edge print on the Zapruder film "first generation copies" proves nothing, since the edge print could be altered or changed in an optical printer, according to David Healey. This about all the time I have for you. Have a nice day.
I have professor Raymond Fielding's book "The Special Effects Techniques of Cinematography" and every one of those techniques are/were used with professional grade movie film of 35mm to 70mm film stock which can be used in professional film processors. like travelling matte projectors and optical printers. None of these systems were ever made for 8mm film.
So which technique from Fieldings book do you think was used to alter the Zapruder 8mm movie film?
Zavada had a "bias for his former employer"? What sort of bias? Like the emulsion chemistry for Kodachrome II Daylight film that he was involved in inventing?
You say "The developing edge print on the Zapruder film "first generation copies" proves nothing, since the edge print could be altered or changed in an optical printer" But again Mr. Horne there were never any optical printers manufactured for 8mm home movies.
Dino Brugioni was a CIA asset who duped Doug Horne into believing the Zapruder film was altered to make it seem like the evidence of shots from numerous directions evident in the film would be questionable.
Douglas Horne doesn't know diddly squat about film or movie making equipment.
I am a 20 year veteran of doing special effects in Hollywood in the 1980s. I know every technique that would have been used to alter the Zapruder film. NONE of them are possible in 8mm film format. There are no process printers for travealling mattes available in 8mm.
The Hawkeye Lab in Rochester NY had equipment you obviously didn't have. No wonder your knowledge of it is less than zero. Where did you do your 20 years of special effects for Hollywood? The 1980's is ten years, so how do you have 20 years of veteran experience in a ten-year period? Do you even know how to count to ten?
The last film I worked on was 'Dreamcatcher' in 2003. That is 22 years.
I met Morgan Freeman on 'Dreamcatcher'.
Now, I have posted the information for Roland Zavada that gives a detailed explanation of why the Zapruder Film cannot possibly be a fake, altered version of the original film from November 22, 1963.
Until you or anyone else on this thread can address these critiques of your loony theories, you should keep your pie holes shut.
I challenge Douglas Horne to rebut Zavada's critique of the alteration cult.
JFK was hit three times from the front and three times from the rear, from at least five different sniper positions. Most of the shots were from silencer rifles. Details in "37 Shots in Dealey Plaza." The assassination was originated by the CIA and Joint Chiefs. Cubans and mafiosi were added later to be standby patsies in case the Oswald gambit fell through.
Oswald thought it would be a sham assassination like practiced with Gen. Walker, it would scare JFK into invading Cuba, and Oswald would be left as the resuscitated hero spiffy spy boy of the CIA once rescued from the Texas Theater.
Mamet is correct. The Parallax View is the best movie about the string of assassinations in the 1960s. Mae Brussell is also a must read. Watergate could be the Rosetta Stone for Dallas. Loose threads were cleaned up in the 1970s. Watergate, the killings of Momo Salvatore Giancana and John "Handsome Johnny" Roselli just before they were scheduled to testify at the Church Hearings.
It’s quite clear that Lee Harvey Oswald, & Lee Harvey Oswald alone, assassinated JFK.
There was no CIA/Mafia/Communist conspiracy (take your pick) behind the assassination.
What there likely WAS however was a conspiracy to cover up the fact that Oswald was an informant (& probably a low level one at that).
The CIA/FBI panicked when they realised their own informant had murdered the president, & covered it up in a desperate attempt to avoid the blame.
The irony is that the cover up did far more damage to their reputations, and the public’s trust in them, than if they’d just been honest and admitted their mistakes.
You obviously are utterly ignorant that the ballistics and forensic medical evidence proves conclusively that Lee Oswald could not have fired a rifle in Dealey Plaza that day.
Oswald was not a CIA informant, he was an agent of ONI, the Office of Naval Intelligence who had worked at Atsugi Naval Base in Japan during the Cold War. He was sent on the mission to the Soviet Union to assess their technological capacities. Which he did and brought back to the United States when he returned with his Russian wife Marina.
You 'Lone Nut' theorists are generally utterly ignorant of the actual facts of the JFK case.
😂 Abuse (“you are obviously utterly ignorant”) speaks for itself.
The reality is no document has come out of the declassification process that points to a conspiracy behind the assassination, because there was none.
Yes, I’m aware there remains documentation still to be declassified, but I confidently predict none of it will prove the smoking gun you’re hoping for.
Which will leave you with one recourse: to claim the relevant documents were destroyed. This is possible, of course, but so is anything and won’t be provable either way.
I choose the simpler explanation, but you are free to believe what you want.
P.S. note I choose to respond politely and feel no need to insult you, but you do you
I need no documents to prove JFK was shot from numerous directions. The ballistic and forensic medical evidence proves shots from the front, from the rear..level with the limousine, and shots from the side hitting Gov. Connally.
Saying you are ignorant is not an insult Mr. Gee. It is merely the preamble to my further remarks. Your "confidence" is misplaced. The official narrative posited by the Warren Report has been disproven for decades by independent researchers. Even the HSCA reported that the assassination was likely the result of a conspiracy:
The HSCA (House Select Committee on Assassinations) concluded that President Kennedy's assassination was "probably a result of a conspiracy". While they found a high probability of multiple gunmen, they were unable to definitively identify other perpetrators or fully outline the extent of the conspiracy. The HSCA did conclude that the Warren Commission had failed to adequately investigate the possibility of a conspiracy.
You are way behind the curve on the facts of the JFK assassination. That is not an 'insult' that is a fact.
Sorry, but I’m going to just have to disagree with you.
You discount the Warren Commission because you don’t like it, but have faith in the HASC, because it suits your view of what happened.
None of what you say has been proven with regard to the number or angles of shots fired.
So called 9/11 truthers do this with 9/11 - claim things have been proven, which haven’t been.
Just as the official narrative is right about 9/11, it’s right about JFK, and the fact you’re already preparing an answer for what happens when no smoking gun emerges from the declassification process, speaks volumes.
In case you assume I always believe the official narrative on things, I don’t. But evidence is needed. A great example is WMD and Iraq, or the link between al Qaeda and Saddam. Both were pushed by the US government prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq and both were comprehensively debunked by reputable journalists who unearthed indisputable evidence.
But no such evidence has ever, or will ever, emerge to debunk the official narrative of either 9/11 or the Kennedy assassination, because in both those cases the official narrative is true.
“In this article I address the chain of custody for the so-called “magic bullet,” otherwise known as Commission Exhibit 399 (or CE399). According to the Warren Commission, this bullet wounded both President Kennedy and Governor John Connally.
In fact, the chain of custody for this central piece of evidence is non-existent. The true and amazing story about the near-pristine “magic bullet” found at Parkland Hospital shortly after JFK’s assassination has been carefully pieced together by analysts such as Sylvia Meagher in the ’60s and John Hunt in the past few years.
Although Secret Service agent Richard Johnsen received the bullet in Parkland Hospital by about 1:30 p.m., an hour after the assassination, Johnsen’s initials are nowhere on the magic bullet, despite regulations mandating Secret Service agents to initial forensic evidence.
Johnsen handed the bullet to the Secret Service Chief James Rowley at Andrews Air Force Base at about 7:30 p.m., who didn’t initial it either. Neither Johnsen nor Rowley could identify the bullet when shown it later.
___________________________________________
The chief of the Dallas police crime lab, Carl Day, said he initialed all three hulls found on the sixth floor at about 1 pm on the afternoon of November 22.
When Day testified on 4/22/64 to the Warren Commission, he had to admit that he did not initial any of them during the time that they were found at the 6th floor of the book depository.
As the hulls are nondescript, initialing them is essential if anyone hopes to recognize such an item again. Detective Richard Sims wrote that after Day took pictures of the hulls, he picked up the “empty hulls”, Day held open an envelope, Sims dropped them in. Sims held onto an unsealed envelope with three hulls in it at 2 pm; at some point, homicide chief Will Fritz was given the envelope by Sims. Fritz later gave the envelope to a sergeant, who eventually brought one hull back to Fritz and the other two hulls back to Day.
Day admitted during his Warren Commission testimony that he only initialed the two hulls in the unsealed envelope when he got it back at 10 that night. Day passed the shells on to FBI agent Vince Drain in the early morning, and I am similarly unaware of any record of Drain initialing any of these materials before he passed them on to firearms expert Robert Frazier at the FBI lab. Frazier’s testimony doesn’t mention anything about these shells being initialed by either of these men.
These hulls should have been excluded based on the failure to have a reliable chain of custody.”
Darrel Tomlinsen told Josiah Thompson in an interview that this is what the bullet looked like that he had found on the stretcher at Parkland. It looks like a 30-30, and is certainly not CE399.
The Parkland Bullet & Broken Chain of Custody to CE399
Within an hour after the assassination, Johnsen was given the bullet by Parkland hospital security director O.P. Wright, after orderly Darrell Tomlinson found it by a stretcher. Like Johnsen and Rowley, neither Wright nor Tomlinson could identify the bullet.
The first 4 links in the chain of custody of the bullet found a Parkland are unable to identify it as CE399.
They are:
1. Orderly Darrell Tomlinson >>
2. Parkland hospital security director O.P. Wright >>
3. SS Agent Richard Johnsen >>
4. Agent Rowley (Secret Service Chief).
A break in the chain of custody at this proximate point proves that the bullet of record, CE399 is NOT the bullet found at parkland, and therefor CE399 is a planted bullet by the highest authorities themselves.
Let me remind you once again: A memorandum from the FBI office in Dallas on June 20th to J. Edgar Hoover contains the statement, “neither DARRELL C. TOMLINSON [sic], who found bullet at Parkland Hospital, Dallas, nor O. P. WRIGHT, Personnel Officer, Parkland Hospital, who obtained bullet from TOMLINSON and gave to Special Service, at Dallas 11/22/63, can identify bullet”
The testimony of Darrell C. Tomlinson was taken on March 20, 1964, at Parkland Memorial Hospital, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Arlen Specter, assistant counsel of the President’s Commission
However, at the time Tomlinson was questioned by Specter, he had not seen CE399. When Tomlinson finally did see CE399, he said that it was not the bullet he found at Parkland.
The Parkland Bullet is a distinct and different bullet from CE399.
Read the entire illustrated article at the following URL:
My analysis of the Zapruder film, in "Why Jackie Scowled", indicates that the film is unaltered and consistent with Oswald shooting from the TSBD. The key is to separate horizontal panning from vertical startles, as shone by Zapruder's aim points. There are exactly three sudden vertical accelerations of Zapruder's aim points.
Exactly. Conspiracy theorists take every slight inconsistency and instead of analysing it logically, they spin it to suit their narrative.
To be clear, sometimes the official narrative is wrong or a lie (e.g. WMD in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion) but when it is, it’s usually proven to be so by credible people.
I’m sure there are such cases which are yet to be exposed, and maybe the JFK assassination will one day be exposed as such. But I doubt it, so far the evidence points to the official narrative being true, and many of the people who believe otherwise are the same conspiracy theorists who believe in other unproven theories.
The glaringly unsophisticated appreciations by Mamet and Maher of the JFK assassination conspiracy are simply unworthy of serious consideration.
And Mamet's choice to confer with mile wide-inch deep Jim DiEugenio, a shameless regurgitator and marketer of long-established facts who has yet to offer a single meaningful insight into the origin and deep purposes of the assassination, speaks to the playwright's intellectual laziness and impenetrable naivete.
Has Mamet even heard the names Peter Dale Scott and James W. Douglass?
With few but important exceptions, the "stars" of JFK research are in retrograde motion. The illumination cast by the late Vincent Salandria, George Michael Evica, Sylvia Meagher, and other first and second generation researchers is in a spectrum beyond the perception of today's Elm Street Irregulars.
David Mamet made an important statement in his discussion with Bill Maher: namely, that the Zapruder film is an altered film, and that the "head explosion" in frame 313 is fake, i.e., painted on in that frame (and that other frames associated with the "headshot" are missing from the film). Unfortunately, Mamet made three mistakes about the Z film when talking about his unproduced screenplay about the Z film's alteration: mistake #1 was when he said the original film was not developed in Dallas; actually, it was, and the ARRB commissioned a report that proved this as an undeniable fact; mistake #2 was when he said that the film was altered in Los Angeles. The film was actually altered at Kodak's R&D laboratory called "Hawkeyeworks" in Rochester, N.Y. at Kodak Headquarters, on November 24, 1963. You can read all about this in chapter 14 of my book, "Inside the ARRB." Mistake #3 was when Mamet claimed that the Zapruder film was shot at a speed of 24 frames per second; in actuality, Zapruder's Bell and Howell camera was designed to operate at 16 fps, and ran a bit fast, according to the FBI, at an average of 18.3 fps. [The 24 fps cited by Mamet is the operating speed for commercial motion pictures, not home movie cameras like Zapruder's.] I would love to see Mamet make such a film, but the actual tale of the film's interrupted chain-of-custody and alteration the weekend of the assassination is already dramatic enough; it doesn't need to be fictionalized in a way that introduces errors into the story. The real story is dramatic enough. Viewers should watch two YouTube programs to learn about this: "L'image 313," and "The Zapruder Film Mystery." They both recount what happened to the film the weekend of the assassination, based on my 2011 video interview of the CIA's Dino Brugioni, and interviews of other CIA personnel by the ARRB staff. Mamet should become more familiar with the FACTS surrounding the film's alteration---I don't think he is familiar with the actual facts, as revealed by his misstatements. David Mamet should rewrite his screenplay based on the factual account of what happened to the Zapruder film the weekend of the assassination, instead of creating a completely fictional story centered on Hollywood. I believe it was hubris on Mamet's part to make Hollywood the center of the alteration story; he should become acquainted with the true facts of the alteration, and make a film about those dramatic events. END
You're Welcome. Hollywood "bullshit" needs to be countered whenever it appears. We don't need the true story of the film's alteration diluted by a fictional account full of errors.
You don't know diddly squat about movie making equipment, nor film and film emulsions. You were duped by Dino Buglioni, a CIA asset who wanted to put the most important visual evidence in the JFK in question. You fell for his bullshit because you yourself are utterly ignorant of film processing.
Roland Zavada who examined the film and camera for the ARRB, found that the in-camera-original had all of the proper edge code markings of where and when the film was manufactured and also the edge codes and leader codes show where and when it was processed.
The Zapruder film, which captured the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, was shot at an average of 18.3 frames per second (fps). The camera used, a Bell & Howell Zoomatic Director Series Camera, had a standard frame rate of 16 fps, but the FBI later tested Zapruder's camera and found that it filmed at an average of 18.3 frames/second.
I was a special effects artist in Hollywood in the 1980s, I know special effects in and out. There is no possible way to make a fake Z-film using Kodacrome II Daylight film as a copy film. The emulsion on Kodachrome II is made specifically for daylight, using artificial light, the artificial light of any projection system alters the color, hue and contrast. The artificial light would cause the blue sky to turn out green and the green grass would appear orangish brown like dead grass.
But more importantly Roland Zavada who examined the film and camera for the ARRB, found that the in-camera-original had all of the proper edge code markings of where and when the film was manufactured and also the edge codes and leader codes show where and when it was processed.
The extant Zapruder film is in fact the very film that Zapruder shot on November 22 in Dealey Plaza. There is no doubt about that fact.
Wow both of these guys, Mamet and Maher are total crackpots!
What a howler! David Mamet claims that Zapruder was in the OSS!!!
There is no evidence to support the claim that Abraham Zapruder was in the OSS (Office of Strategic Services), the U.S. intelligence agency during World War II.
Abraham Zapruder was a clothing manufacturer who happened to be filming President John F. Kennedy's motorcade in Dallas on November 22, 1963, when the assassination occurred. His amateur film captured the tragic event and became crucial evidence in the investigation and a famous historical artifact.
The Zapruder film, which captured the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, was shot at an average of 18.3 frames per second (fps). The camera used, a Bell & Howell Zoomatic Director Series Camera, had a standard frame rate of 16 fps, but the FBI later tested Zapruder's camera and found that it filmed at an average of 18.3 frames/second.
I was a special effects artist in Hollywood in the 1980s, I know special effects in and out. There is no possible way to make a fake Z-film using Kodacrome II Daylight film as a copy film. The emulsion on Kodachrome II is made specifically for daylight, using artificial light, the artificial light of any projection system alters the color, hue and contrast. The artificial light would cause the blue sky to turn out green and the green grass would appear orangish brown like dead grass.
But more importantly Roland Zavada who examined the film and camera for the ARRB, found that the in-camera-original had all of the proper edge code markings of where and when the film was manufactured and also the edge codes and leader codes show where and when it was processed.
The extant Zapruder film is in fact the very film that Zapruder shot on November 22 in Dealey Plaza. There is no doubt abouty that fact.
I wish I knew more about photography or digital manipulation, but I don't. My background is as a psychologist. It is from that standpoint that I have something to say about David Mamet's assertion that Lee Oswald was a "CIA throwaway," or a patsy (just like Oswald said he was).
My most recent article here at Substack both confirms my previous research and extends it, showing that the Warren Commission panel organized to help construct a psychological profile of Oswald, and make a case for his motivations as a purported assassin, was itself two-thirds staffed by CIA-linked psychiatrists. One of them, Dr. Howard P. Rome, of the Mayo Clinic, was a CIA contractor and/or consultant for the Agency's Artichoke and MKULTRA programs. The other CIA-linked psychiatrist was the Superintendent of St. Elizabeth's Hospital in Washington, D.C., Dale C. Cameron, who had an agreement with the CIA for the Agency's use of hospital facilities.
Initially, the Warren Commission first contracted with Dr. Winfred Overholser, Cameron's predecessor at St. Elizabeths. Overholser himself also had intelligence links, and led the OSS's WW2-era "truth serum" experiments, some of which occurred at St. Elizabeth's itself. It was under Overholser that the first of the agreements with CIA re placement of CIA "patients" at the hospital were first made. Overholser had to bow out of helping the Commission when he developed heart issues. He died in later 1964.
There is much in my new article to show that this psychiatry panel was key in helping provide a pseudo-scientific basis for some of the WC's claims, such as that Lee H. Oswald wanted to kill Kennedy as part of a desire to become a "great man" of history. The CIA links to the psychiatrists working with the Warren Commission were hidden for decades, really until my investigations revealed them.
I believe my research to be highly pertinent, and I would hope that it could factor in to ongoing investigations and commentaries about the intelligence links to Oswald and to the assassination in general.
Zapruder was a member of the group that invited JFK to Dallas and demanded he take that route. And then he just happened to be filming right where the shooting occurred. So lucky!
Jefferson, might you do a technical summary post(s) on what the claims are about the authenticity of the Zapruder film? Seems like there’s some controversy there that could be illuminating to clarify.
I watched "Parallax View" and the theme seems to be that the corporate assassins have various targets though the overall objective of the assassinations is unclear.
The Zapruder film was processed at the Eastman Kodak Dallas processing plant on November 22, 1963, shortly after it was filmed in Dealey Plaza, Dallas. Following the assassination of President Kennedy, Abraham Zapruder, who filmed the event, initially sought to have the film developed at WFAA television station, but their equipment was incompatible. He then took the film to Kodak's Dallas facility where it was processed and three copies were made.
The original Zapruder film never went to Hawkeyeworks in Roschester, the FBI copy was taken there for enlargement stills to be made for presentation purposes.
Original film location: Abraham Zapruder kept the original film. It was later purchased by Life magazine. The original film and a first-generation copy are now held by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
FBI copy: The FBI had a copy of the Zapruder film. It's plausible that this copy was sent to Hawkeyeworks for the creation of enlarged stills used for various purposes, potentially including the investigation and presentations.
Anyone interested in alleged alteration of the Z film should read Doug Horne's recent comments on this site. There is unquestionably a crude black patch which was applied to the right lower occiput in Z-317. JFK's in-house film analyst (Bruno _____?) who studied the U-2 photos of the Cuban missile sites in 1962, saw the film within 24 hours and said the publicly distributed version is NOT what he saw.
In addition, look at the photos of JFK's shirt, preferably in color. The left side is pristine; the right side is completely smeared with blood and detritis. Listen to the DPD motorcycle outriders, one of whom was splattered with debris as he rode left outboard of the president. Finally, look at the Nix film after its frame matching Z-313. You can see debris flowing rearward on the trunk of the Lincoln.
Z313 was a shot from the rear, out the right temple. The megablaster frontal head shot was at Z342-343, details in "37 Shots in Dealey Plaza." Mostly done with silencer rifles.
Bullshit Jakie Ow,
The headshot was from the front, hitting Kennedy in the right temple and blowing out a huge gaping wound at the right occipital-parietal. EVERY doctor and nurse at Parkland Memorial Hospital testified to this fact.
The autopsy at Bethesda was a charade perpetrated by Kennedy's own Joint Chiefs of Staff, who orchestrated the autopsy telling Hume what to do and what not to do. This was revealed when Col. Finck testified at the Clay Shaw trial put on by Jim Garrison.
Z342-Z343 are ;ong after the head shot at 313. I have the Costello single frame sequence, And I just looked at those frames. they show JFK leaning on Jackie just before she climbes onto the trunk of the limousine.
There were four headshots. The Z342/343 shot was in at the right temple, ahead of the Z313 exit, and out the rear as you describe. As it exited and blew out the large hole, it also destroyed the entry hole from Z313. Details on the others in "37 Shots in Dealey Plaza." Yes, the Bethesda autopsy was faked in many ways. If you look carefully at the Costella Combined Edit, you will notice that at Z342 there is no gouge in the rear of his head, but at Z343 there is suddenly a gouge out the back of his head as highlighted by Jackie's white glove. Only then does she start screaming because only then does she start to see large quantities of blood. At this time Z342/343 a huge jet of blood and brains and skull came out the back of his head, all over the motorcycle cops and chase car and Clint Hill. Do you see this on Zapruder? Of course not, because it proves a shot from the front and so was airbrushed out of Zapruder, see Douglas Horne in "Altered History" for the details. Clint Hill said he was doused with blood and gore when he was just a few feet in back of the limo. This is where he was at Z342/343, and the Secret Service refused to compensate him for his ruined clothing.
If you look at the Bobby Hargis plexiglass windscreen in Mary Moorman and Zapruder Z316, you will see Moorman snapped her photo at Z316. This is easy to tell because Hargis was gaining on the limo as Greer was working the brakes. Do you see the back of JFK's head blasted out, or jagged flaps of skin wagging in the breeze, in Mary Moorman? No, because that shot hadn't happened yet. It didn't happen until Z342/343 and the Z313 shot was from the rear and out the right temple. Which is why around Z317 you see brain remnant chunks flopping and slopping down the flap wound slide, which hinged at the bottom like a small breadbox door. See Robert Schorlemer in the video made by Vince Palamara to see what it all looked like after the initial flap was further loosened by the final Z342/343 shot.
If you find a quality copy of the Mary Moorman photo, you can see a two inch exit hole in JFK's cowlick area, at the top of the occipital bone area. This is the exit from the Z286 shot, which entered above his right eye at the hairline. The bottom of the wound shows a curved white line, which is the thickness of his skull bone material as just blasted open at Z286. If you look at Z286 you see Babushka Lady's shadow. From the midpoint of her shadow, flying up and to the left, is the two inch chunk of bone and hair just blasted out the back of JFK's head.
"Mary Moorman photo"~Jackie Ow,
You can't be serious. The entire rear of JFK's head is in deep shadow. At the very top of his head there are two glints of sunlight on his hair.
In both Z342 & 343 nothing is shown as Kennedy's head is in deep shadow. You can't even see Jackies face clearly it is in such deep shadow!
You are reaching for straws and hallucinating, seeing what you want to see.
I enlarged the frames to about 8x10 and it is nothing but deep shadow.
The head shot came at Z-313 hitting Kennedy in the right temple and exiting at the right occipital-parietal..the wound seen by all the doctors and nurses at Parkland Memorial Hospital.
The Zapruder film was not altered.
The Zapruder film, which captured the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, was processed at Eastman Kodak's Dallas film processing facility on November 22, 1963, later that evening. Jamieson Film Company later made three copies of the processed film:
In the immediate aftermath of the JFK assassination on November 22, 1963, Abraham Zapruder worked with Jamieson Film Company to produce copies of the Kodachrome film on which he recorded the shooting. Jamieson Film Company, based in Dallas, Texas, processed the film and created three additional copies, which were then sent to Washington. The Zapruder film became a key piece of evidence in the investigation and remains a significant historical document.
The FBI copy of the film was sent to the Rochester 'Hawkeyeworks' for one singular purpose; to make 8x 10 still photographs of the sequence from the throat shot to the headshot for analysis. There was no alteration of the film there as Douglas Horne claims.
The Z-film alteration theory is utter bullshit..
\\][//
The JFK head gouge new at Z343 is in front of Jackie's glove. You are looking in the wrong place so of course you don't see the gouge. Jackie is clearly screaming at Z343 but not Z342. As explained in "37 Shots in Dealey Plaza" there were four head shots and the one at Z313 wasn't from the front, as proved by the lack of a big rear hole at Z316 with the Mary Moorman photo. The Zapruder film was massively altered as proven by John Costella in his nine-part youtube series and by Douglas Horne in "Altered History." Even a child can look at the front tire on the yellow car in Z155 and see how it was suddenly faked and enlarged. Or the upper right corner of the sign in Z220 which is flattened near Jackie's hat instead of rounded as in before and after frames. Due to hurried cutting and pasting to further fake Zapruder. These are only two instances of faking, and there are many others.
For instance you can see in Willis Photo #5 how small the Stemmons sign was, but in Zapruder it is faked to be four times the size, to cover up JFK as he was shot in the shoulder and the throat 0.77 seconds apart, which proves a second sniper. In reality, as Willis shows, Umbrella Man was 10 feet downhill from the sign and standing in back of it. Zapruder fakes the story to put Umbrella Man in front of the sign and standing next to it, pretending he didn't wave the umbrella to signal for more shots. But two dozen witnesses saw him waving the sign.
Look hotshot,
I have watched John Costella in his nine-part youtube series. The guy is a crank and a charlatan who knows NOTHING of film, but quite a bit about digital CGI. There is absolutely nothing in Costella's presentations that hold water.
In the Zapruder film JFK passes by Stemmons sign with it in front of him. So when the limo emerges from behind the sign Kennedy had already been hit in the throat, The sign is large because it is in the foreground.
Z-155 is a double exposure of the yellow car in the sprocket hole area of the film and the film itself to the right of the sprocket hole image. Look at the size of the yellow car on the left compared to the same car on the right.
There is nothing about the Zapruder film that is fake, but the narrative of the alterationists. It is all bullshit blabaloni.
The umbrella man was forward of the sign. WTF?!?!?
Willis Photo #5 is from the other side, showing the Simmons FWY sign in the distance. This is a still photo with a totally different lens setting than the Zapruder film camera. You cannot successfully compare distances by such diverse lenses and settings,
JFK was shot in the back at the level of the third thoracic vertebrae, after the throat shot from the front. He was hit in the head at the right temple and perhaps in the hairline just above his right eyebrow...almost simultaneous shots like from a firing squad. There was no shot to Kennedy's shoulder.
Why you are making all of this crap up is beyond comprehension.
Again, Douglas Horne does not know shit about movie film or film making equipment, cameras. projection systems, travelling mattes or emulsion chemistry. He is as clueless as you are.
I was a special effects artist in Hollywood for some 20 years. I know everything there is to know about film effects. I have read Raymond Fieldings book on cinamatic special effects. and worked on such effects myself on many sci-fi movies.
The ignorance of the 'alterationist cult' is pathetic. The so-called "Hollywood experts" that Horne refers to work with 35mm film stock or larger. They have no experience with 8mm film. There are no special effects systems like travelling matte composite machines in 8mm.
There are no 8mm processes as in larger formats like 35mm to 70mm.
In film and visual effects, travelling matte composite machines refer to the techniques and equipment used to create composite images by combining separately filmed elements, where the mask or "matte" defining the foreground element's shape changes over time.
How it works (traditionally):
Filming: An actor or subject is filmed against a contrasting background, typically a blue or green screen.
Mattes creation: The footage is then processed to create a black and white silhouette (the "matte") of the subject. This matte changes frame by frame as the subject moves.
Compositing: The matte is used as a mask during the optical printing process (where separate film strips are combined) to block out the unwanted background and allow the foreground subject to be seamlessly integrated with a separately filmed background.
Key Aspects and Technologies:
Chroma Keying: A well-known method for creating traveling mattes by removing specific background colors (blue or green).
Williams Process: An early black matte process using high-contrast film to create silhouettes against a black background.
Optical Printer: A crucial piece of equipment in the film era for combining multiple film strips to create composite images using traveling mattes.
You should view my responses as educational rather than being insulted.
:ook up this information for yourself on the internet. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain.
\\][//
Dino Brugioni was the Chief Information Officer (the briefing board czar) at the CIA's NPIC (National Photographic Interpretation Center) prior to, and after, 1963. When he retired circa the early 1980s, he was the world's foremost photo-analyst. He told me in 2011 in a recorded video interview that the head explosion in the film he saw (the unaltered Zapruder film, the true out-of-camera original) was much higher in the air than the so-called "head explosion" (i.e., artwork) in frame 313 of today's Z film, and that it was a different color: white, not red or pink. He also said that some frames were missing from the film in the head-shot sequence, and that something had been "cut out of the killing." The Zapruder film in the Archives today, and the one you see in documentaries, is not the true out-of-camera original: it is the altered---sanitized---film created on November 24, 1963, at the "Hawkeyeworks Lab" at Kodak Headquarters in Rochester, N.Y.
This is utter bullshit Horne, Dino Brugioni was a CIA asset who duped you into believing the Zapruder film was altered to bring suspicion on the film as it proves shots from the front, the headshot hitting JFK in the temple and blowing out the rear of his head at the occiplital-parietal. The scenes of Jackie climbing on the trunk of the limo to pick up pieces of skull and brain material proves the headshot came from the front.
Frame 313 plainly shows the blood spray fountain from the top of JFK's head going up and to the rear.
The question becomes Mr. Horne why you would want to throw doubt on the most important visual evidence proving shots from the front, thus a conspiracy.
What ARE your motives Mr. Horne?!?
\\][//
If Dino Brugioni were a faker, he wouldn't be blowing the whistle on the CIA faking the Zapruder film. Your feeble lack of logic makes no sense whatsoever. There is no such thing as "the" headshot, since JFK experienced four headshots as outlined in "37 Shots in Dealey Plaza." The spray from Z313 and Z314 is up and forward, due to the bullet coming from the rear and the sum of vector forces. It actually inherently tilted further forward, except the wind was blowing 10mph into the faces of the limousine occupants. I've been following the JFK assassination since the first news bulletins said "stay tuned for a new bulletin" and Douglas Horne has done the best job of anyone in unmasking the fakery behind Zapruder. What is your motive in helping the CIA peddle the obvious thinly-veiled trash that makes up the Zapruder fakery? I also passed two medical pathology classes from Earl Rose, so I know things about anatomy, autopsy, ballistics, and wound analysis that are obviously beyond your comprehension.
Dino Brugioni wasn't "blowing the whistle on the CIA, he was fabricating a false narrative to sew suspicion as to the validity of the Zapruter film.
It is YOUR feeble lack of logic makes no sense whatsoever.
I have no motive beyond explaining the truth about the Zapruder film from the perspective of a special effects expert.
I don't believe you you passed any pathology classes of Earl Rose, he died May 1, 2012. Are you now claiming you live in Dallas, Texas?
Having studied the JFK assassination for the past forty plus years I learned about ballisitics as an autodidactic on my own. As an artist I have always known anatomy of mammals, especially human anatomy. There is nothing one cannot learn on the Internet.
Within an hour after the assassination, Johnsen was given the bullet by Parkland hospital security director O.P. Wright, after orderly Darrell Tomlinson found it by a stretcher. Like Johnsen and Rowley, neither Wright nor Tomlinson could identify the bullet.
_______________________________________________________________
The first 4 links in the chain of custody of the bullet found a Parkland are unable to identify it as CE399.
They are:
1. Orderly Darrell Tomlinson >>
2. Parkland hospital security director O.P. Wright >>
3. SS Agent Richard Johnsen >>
4. Agent Rowley (Secret Service Chief).
A break in the chain of custody at this proximate point proves that the bullet of record, CE399 is NOT the bullet found at parkland, and therefor CE399 is a planted bullet by the highest authorities themselves.
Let me remind you once again: A memorandum from the FBI office in Dallas on June 20th to J. Edgar Hoover contains the statement, “neither DARRELL C. TOMLINSON [sic], who found bullet at Parkland Hospital, Dallas, nor O. P. WRIGHT, Personnel Officer, Parkland Hospital, who obtained bullet from TOMLINSON and gave to Special Service, at Dallas 11/22/63, can identify bullet”
http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=59607#relPageId=29
http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=59607#relPageId=86
\\][//
You didn't see what Dino Brugioni saw in Nov. 1963 so you are in no position to pretend to know better. You claim to know special effects, but you can't name the production company you allegedly worked for. Nor can you name any movies for which you did the special effects. So you have zero credibility. The pathology classes were obviously before 2012, so your inability to figure out the before and after is another proof you don't have a clue how to think or do any kind of logical reasoning. If you haven't worked with cadavers in three dimensions, your autodidact methods help explain your pathetic lack of knowledge. The bullet was placed on the stretcher by Secret Service Agent Sam Kinney. You obviously know very little about the bullet. It had a copper jacket and the tip was lead, but soon enough it was stolen and replaced by a fake second CE399 which was all copper and rounded tip. The original fake CE399 had six sets of grooves when a Carcano bullet actually has four, so the second and fake CE399 was replaced by a third fake CE399 with four sets of grooves, by people getting into police evidence lockers and faking the evidence. You can list a chain of custody on a fake bullet, but it is still a fake bullet. You again don't have a clue what you are talking about, nor do you have a clue about Sam Kinney originating the bullet, or when or where or why. And since you have no production history as to movie special effects, nor film credits you can provide, your entire story line has zero credibility and you meander from one irrelevance to another spouting non sequiturs as you go. Your lack of focus indicates you need to see a neurologist about potential Alzheimer's problems.
One of us is on "the wrong side of history." I think it is you.
You must be very upset because I just testified before Congress and talked about the altered Zapruder film. Is this the official "blowback" from the Deep State? Your angry, mean-spirited pushback? Go attack someone else.
Why don't you answer me back Mr. Horne?
Why don't you address the facts provided by Roland Zavada about the edge code markings on the Zapruder film? This is firm undeniable proof that the Z-film is authentic. These edge codes on the film show where and when the film was manufactured as well as where and when the film was processed.
The Zapruder film, which captured the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, was processed at Eastman Kodak's Dallas film processing facility on November 22, 1963, later that evening. Jamieson Film Company later made three copies of the processed film.
The film ended up at Hawkeyeworks Lab" at Kodak Headquarters in Rochester, N.Y. for one purpose; to make 8x10 enlargements for analysis by the FBI. The film was NOT altered ad Rochester. Buglioni was lying to you! He was an effing CIA asset for crying out loud.
\\][//
If you knew anything about film you would know that copies can be counterfeited to cover the criticisms you pretend to make. Various copies were made including fake copies you clearly have no awareness of. Simply because you can't see the far side of the moon doesn't mean it isn't there.
You sound increasingly desperate, and angry. You don't have a connection with Kodak, do you?
I have found it is not worth my time to engage very much with "trolls."
No Mr. Horne, I have no connection to Kodak but Rolland Zavada does, and I have read his report on the Zapruder film and Rolex 8mm movie film camera.
Why do you think I am angry Mr. Horne? Simply because I disagree with you?
Zavada explains in his report on the Zapruder film that there are edge marking codes on the film that indicate where and when the film was produced as well as codes where the film was processed.
The Zapruder film, which captured the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, was processed at Eastman Kodak's Dallas film processing facility on November 22, 1963, later that evening. Jamieson Film Company later made three copies of the processed film.
Both of these processing facilities were in Dallas, Texas. The only time the FBI copy was in Rochester Hawkeye facility was when the FBI copy was used to make 8 by ten still photos to study of the pertinent frames of the assassination. There was no film alteration there just splicing out the relevant frames to enlarge them.
I am a retired special effects expert working in Hollywood in the 1980s.
Aslo as a teen I used a Bell and Howell 8mm movie camera to do in-camera effects. So my experience is two fold as an amateur when I was young and as a professional as an adult.
So yes I am quite qualified to speak to the validity of the Zapruter film.
What is YOUR expertise in film Mr. Horne?
I find it very profitable to engage with ignorant 'Z-film alterationists', who have no experience with film making or film making equipment.
All you can do now is try to ignore me. But you should answer my observations if you have the nerve.
What are you going to do? Call Roland Zavada a liar? His information blows your theory of alteration out of the water.
Your tone is pejorative and angry, not collegial. You seem intent on confrontation and combat! This kind of anger is unhealthy for you. You should take a pill, and chill out.
He is showing many of the symptoms of Alzheimer's.
No Horne,
I asked you a question didn't I? I asked if you think that Roland Zavada is a liar?
I don't need to chill out Mr. Horne I am not in anyway upset. Did you comprehend my expertise in special effects cinematography?
what is YOUR expertise in film? Just your reliance on a CIA asset telling you a fairytale about alerations to the Zapruder film.
Your condescending attitude is rude and uncalled for.
\\][//
I concur Doug.
"Your tone is pejorative and angry, not collegial. You seem intent on confrontation and combat!"~Douglas Horne
That is a baldfaced lie. I simply laid out the facts that you have never successfully rebutted.
You claim Zavada knows nothing of film special effects. Well, Raymond Fielding disagrees.
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 19:42:19 -0800 (PST)
From: "len colby" <lenbrasil@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Zavada
To: RAYRfielding@xxxxxxxx
Mr. Fielding, (Can I call you Raymond or Ray? )
Thank you for getting back to me. Do you have any interest in getting involved in this lunatic debate? You can ask Rollie for his estimation of David Healy but in my opinion he is an obnoxious.... (I won't finish that sentence because I don't know you sensibilities). he now wants to debate Zavada and you. I kid you not.
See below text of a message he left on a forum which is also indicative of his winning personality. As you can see wants me to forward your e-mail message to him. Is that OK with you? This would mean he would have your e-mail address.
Len
All
I've got some free time after this weekend ... Its been brought to my attention -- Mr. Colby has received a message from Raymond Fielding, author of 'The Technique Special Effects Cinematography.'
[…] (see David's message above for full text Len)
Might John Simkin grant this debate bandwidth?
David Healy
Quote
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 09:59:21 -0500
From: rayrfielding@xxxxx x
Subject: Re: Zavada
To: lenbrasil@xxxxxxxx
Mr. Colby:
No, my e-mail message and its address is only for you. I have no
further interest in this debate. What a waste of time.
Ray Fielding
https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/6155-fielding-zavada-attn-john-simkin/
\\][//
From: RAYRfielding@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 17:53:52 EST
Subject: Zavada
To: lenbrasil@xxxxxxx
Mr. Colby:
I apologize for my delay in responding to your e-nail. I have been out of the city for the last couple weeks and am only now catching up with my correspondence.
I agree with Rollie Zavada that the Zapruder film could not have been successfully manipulated in 1963 with the technology then available, and had it been attempted, could not possibly have survived scrutiny. You may quote me.
Raymond Fielding
https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/6155-fielding-zavada-attn-john-simkin/
\\][//
You don't seem to realize that all the "evidence" you invoke can be easily faked. You can furnish no production company name you allegedly worked for, nor can you identify any movies you allegedly worked on. Thus, you have zero credibility.
"What I am going to do," Mr. Whitten, is dismantle your claims that the Zapruder film is not an altered film. Tom Whitehead, a Hollywood post-production editor, says the Zapruder film is altered. Seventy-two (72) out of seventy-five (75) post production experts he showed his digital scans to (his 6k and 4k and 2k scans of individual Z frames) say the film has been altered. (They were directors, colorists, and film restoration experts.) In 2013 Whitehead interviewed two Hollywood film experts "on camera" (Paul Rutan, an independent restoration expert, and Garrett Smith, a man with over 25 years with Paramount), and they both invoked their professional expertise and said that in their opinion, the Z film we know today is definitely an altered film. I have this interview on video. Mr. Ned Price, the former Head of Restoration at Warner Brothers, has indicated that he believes the film is altered, for a number of reasons. I was present in the editing bay at Deluxe Labs in 2009 when he first stated this. In his seminal textbook "The Special Effects Techniques of Cinematography," professor Raymond Fielding has explained the commonly used visual effects technique that I am convinced was used to alter the film at HAWKEYEWORKS---namely, "aerial imaging," using an aerial optical printer with an animation stand. Mr. Paul Rutan explained in his 2013 interview that he was confident that an aerial optical printer was used to alter the Zapruder film, and said it could have been done "overnight." Mr. Zavada of KODAK only analyzed the edge print on the Z film; we (at the ARRB) specifically did not want him to analyze image content because he was not qualified to do so. He was a film chemist, not a visual effects expert. All he ever concluded was that the edge print was "consistent with" his finding that the film was authentic. His finding was not conclusive proof, by any means. He exhibited a bias in favor of his former employer, Kodak. The three "first generation copies" that exist today exhibit definite bracketing---in exposure---that proves they are not the 3 first day copies developed in Dallas on 11/22/63. Why? Because the three first day copies exposed in a contact printer at the Jamieson lab in Dallas were NOT BRACKETED. This was stated to Zavada by Jamieson and his lead lab technician. The same light and filter pack was used, in the Jamieson lab contact printer, for all three first day copies exposed for Mr. Zapruder. Today's three bracketed first generation copies are proof that they are the "swaps" made at HAWKEYEWORKS on 11/24/63 from the altered film after it was sanitized. Just another indication of fraud in this case. The forgers screwed up and "bracketed" the swap out copies when they shouldn't have! The alteration activity at HAWKEYEWORKS on 11/24/63 was with the camera original film that Dino Brugioni of NPIC had examined Saturday night in Washington D.C. I could go on and on...but what would be the point? A person who does not want to be persuaded and does not have an open mind...cannot be persuaded. The developing edge print on the Zapruder film "first generation copies" proves nothing, since the edge print could be altered or changed in an optical printer, according to David Healey. This about all the time I have for you. Have a nice day.
Yes indeed Mr. Horne,
I have professor Raymond Fielding's book "The Special Effects Techniques of Cinematography" and every one of those techniques are/were used with professional grade movie film of 35mm to 70mm film stock which can be used in professional film processors. like travelling matte projectors and optical printers. None of these systems were ever made for 8mm film.
So which technique from Fieldings book do you think was used to alter the Zapruder 8mm movie film?
Zavada had a "bias for his former employer"? What sort of bias? Like the emulsion chemistry for Kodachrome II Daylight film that he was involved in inventing?
You say "The developing edge print on the Zapruder film "first generation copies" proves nothing, since the edge print could be altered or changed in an optical printer" But again Mr. Horne there were never any optical printers manufactured for 8mm home movies.
\\][//
Mr. Horne,
You said, "since the edge print could be altered or changed in an optical printer, according to David Healey"
Again Mr Horne, there were never optical printers manufactured for 8mm home movies.
\\][//
What B.S…. “They” sent another “asset” to impugn you because why? Because they fear you. Don’t engage them.
Dino Brugioni was a CIA asset who duped Doug Horne into believing the Zapruder film was altered to make it seem like the evidence of shots from numerous directions evident in the film would be questionable.
Douglas Horne doesn't know diddly squat about film or movie making equipment.
I am a 20 year veteran of doing special effects in Hollywood in the 1980s. I know every technique that would have been used to alter the Zapruder film. NONE of them are possible in 8mm film format. There are no process printers for travealling mattes available in 8mm.
\\][//
The Hawkeye Lab in Rochester NY had equipment you obviously didn't have. No wonder your knowledge of it is less than zero. Where did you do your 20 years of special effects for Hollywood? The 1980's is ten years, so how do you have 20 years of veteran experience in a ten-year period? Do you even know how to count to ten?
I already posted this to you:
My first film was 'The Howling' 1981
The last film I worked on was 'Dreamcatcher' in 2003. That is 22 years.
I met Morgan Freeman on 'Dreamcatcher'.
Now, I have posted the information for Roland Zavada that gives a detailed explanation of why the Zapruder Film cannot possibly be a fake, altered version of the original film from November 22, 1963.
Until you or anyone else on this thread can address these critiques of your loony theories, you should keep your pie holes shut.
I challenge Douglas Horne to rebut Zavada's critique of the alteration cult.
See: https://williamw.substack.com/p/roland-zavada-comments-on-the-zapruder
\\][//
JFK was hit three times from the front and three times from the rear, from at least five different sniper positions. Most of the shots were from silencer rifles. Details in "37 Shots in Dealey Plaza." The assassination was originated by the CIA and Joint Chiefs. Cubans and mafiosi were added later to be standby patsies in case the Oswald gambit fell through.
Oswald thought it would be a sham assassination like practiced with Gen. Walker, it would scare JFK into invading Cuba, and Oswald would be left as the resuscitated hero spiffy spy boy of the CIA once rescued from the Texas Theater.
Great. One genocider speaking to another.
Mamet is correct. The Parallax View is the best movie about the string of assassinations in the 1960s. Mae Brussell is also a must read. Watergate could be the Rosetta Stone for Dallas. Loose threads were cleaned up in the 1970s. Watergate, the killings of Momo Salvatore Giancana and John "Handsome Johnny" Roselli just before they were scheduled to testify at the Church Hearings.
It’s quite clear that Lee Harvey Oswald, & Lee Harvey Oswald alone, assassinated JFK.
There was no CIA/Mafia/Communist conspiracy (take your pick) behind the assassination.
What there likely WAS however was a conspiracy to cover up the fact that Oswald was an informant (& probably a low level one at that).
The CIA/FBI panicked when they realised their own informant had murdered the president, & covered it up in a desperate attempt to avoid the blame.
The irony is that the cover up did far more damage to their reputations, and the public’s trust in them, than if they’d just been honest and admitted their mistakes.
PoliticalGee,
You obviously are utterly ignorant that the ballistics and forensic medical evidence proves conclusively that Lee Oswald could not have fired a rifle in Dealey Plaza that day.
Oswald was not a CIA informant, he was an agent of ONI, the Office of Naval Intelligence who had worked at Atsugi Naval Base in Japan during the Cold War. He was sent on the mission to the Soviet Union to assess their technological capacities. Which he did and brought back to the United States when he returned with his Russian wife Marina.
You 'Lone Nut' theorists are generally utterly ignorant of the actual facts of the JFK case.
\\][//
😂 Abuse (“you are obviously utterly ignorant”) speaks for itself.
The reality is no document has come out of the declassification process that points to a conspiracy behind the assassination, because there was none.
Yes, I’m aware there remains documentation still to be declassified, but I confidently predict none of it will prove the smoking gun you’re hoping for.
Which will leave you with one recourse: to claim the relevant documents were destroyed. This is possible, of course, but so is anything and won’t be provable either way.
I choose the simpler explanation, but you are free to believe what you want.
P.S. note I choose to respond politely and feel no need to insult you, but you do you
PoliticalGee,
I need no documents to prove JFK was shot from numerous directions. The ballistic and forensic medical evidence proves shots from the front, from the rear..level with the limousine, and shots from the side hitting Gov. Connally.
Saying you are ignorant is not an insult Mr. Gee. It is merely the preamble to my further remarks. Your "confidence" is misplaced. The official narrative posited by the Warren Report has been disproven for decades by independent researchers. Even the HSCA reported that the assassination was likely the result of a conspiracy:
The HSCA (House Select Committee on Assassinations) concluded that President Kennedy's assassination was "probably a result of a conspiracy". While they found a high probability of multiple gunmen, they were unable to definitively identify other perpetrators or fully outline the extent of the conspiracy. The HSCA did conclude that the Warren Commission had failed to adequately investigate the possibility of a conspiracy.
You are way behind the curve on the facts of the JFK assassination. That is not an 'insult' that is a fact.
\\][//
Sorry, but I’m going to just have to disagree with you.
You discount the Warren Commission because you don’t like it, but have faith in the HASC, because it suits your view of what happened.
None of what you say has been proven with regard to the number or angles of shots fired.
So called 9/11 truthers do this with 9/11 - claim things have been proven, which haven’t been.
Just as the official narrative is right about 9/11, it’s right about JFK, and the fact you’re already preparing an answer for what happens when no smoking gun emerges from the declassification process, speaks volumes.
In case you assume I always believe the official narrative on things, I don’t. But evidence is needed. A great example is WMD and Iraq, or the link between al Qaeda and Saddam. Both were pushed by the US government prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq and both were comprehensively debunked by reputable journalists who unearthed indisputable evidence.
But no such evidence has ever, or will ever, emerge to debunk the official narrative of either 9/11 or the Kennedy assassination, because in both those cases the official narrative is true.
Look Gee,
I have studied the JFK assassination for 40+ years. And 9/11 deeply.
https://williamwhittensspace.quora.com/9-11-SIMPLE-PHYSICS-NIST-Fraud
FORENSICS & BALLISTICS JFK
CHAINS OF CUSTODY
“In this article I address the chain of custody for the so-called “magic bullet,” otherwise known as Commission Exhibit 399 (or CE399). According to the Warren Commission, this bullet wounded both President Kennedy and Governor John Connally.
In fact, the chain of custody for this central piece of evidence is non-existent. The true and amazing story about the near-pristine “magic bullet” found at Parkland Hospital shortly after JFK’s assassination has been carefully pieced together by analysts such as Sylvia Meagher in the ’60s and John Hunt in the past few years.
Although Secret Service agent Richard Johnsen received the bullet in Parkland Hospital by about 1:30 p.m., an hour after the assassination, Johnsen’s initials are nowhere on the magic bullet, despite regulations mandating Secret Service agents to initial forensic evidence.
Johnsen handed the bullet to the Secret Service Chief James Rowley at Andrews Air Force Base at about 7:30 p.m., who didn’t initial it either. Neither Johnsen nor Rowley could identify the bullet when shown it later.
___________________________________________
The chief of the Dallas police crime lab, Carl Day, said he initialed all three hulls found on the sixth floor at about 1 pm on the afternoon of November 22.
When Day testified on 4/22/64 to the Warren Commission, he had to admit that he did not initial any of them during the time that they were found at the 6th floor of the book depository.
As the hulls are nondescript, initialing them is essential if anyone hopes to recognize such an item again. Detective Richard Sims wrote that after Day took pictures of the hulls, he picked up the “empty hulls”, Day held open an envelope, Sims dropped them in. Sims held onto an unsealed envelope with three hulls in it at 2 pm; at some point, homicide chief Will Fritz was given the envelope by Sims. Fritz later gave the envelope to a sergeant, who eventually brought one hull back to Fritz and the other two hulls back to Day.
Day admitted during his Warren Commission testimony that he only initialed the two hulls in the unsealed envelope when he got it back at 10 that night. Day passed the shells on to FBI agent Vince Drain in the early morning, and I am similarly unaware of any record of Drain initialing any of these materials before he passed them on to firearms expert Robert Frazier at the FBI lab. Frazier’s testimony doesn’t mention anything about these shells being initialed by either of these men.
These hulls should have been excluded based on the failure to have a reliable chain of custody.”
Darrel Tomlinsen told Josiah Thompson in an interview that this is what the bullet looked like that he had found on the stretcher at Parkland. It looks like a 30-30, and is certainly not CE399.
http://history-matters.com/essays/frameup/EvenMoreMagical/EvenMoreMagical.htm
The Parkland Bullet & Broken Chain of Custody to CE399
Within an hour after the assassination, Johnsen was given the bullet by Parkland hospital security director O.P. Wright, after orderly Darrell Tomlinson found it by a stretcher. Like Johnsen and Rowley, neither Wright nor Tomlinson could identify the bullet.
_______________________________________________________________
The first 4 links in the chain of custody of the bullet found a Parkland are unable to identify it as CE399.
They are:
1. Orderly Darrell Tomlinson >>
2. Parkland hospital security director O.P. Wright >>
3. SS Agent Richard Johnsen >>
4. Agent Rowley (Secret Service Chief).
A break in the chain of custody at this proximate point proves that the bullet of record, CE399 is NOT the bullet found at parkland, and therefor CE399 is a planted bullet by the highest authorities themselves.
Let me remind you once again: A memorandum from the FBI office in Dallas on June 20th to J. Edgar Hoover contains the statement, “neither DARRELL C. TOMLINSON [sic], who found bullet at Parkland Hospital, Dallas, nor O. P. WRIGHT, Personnel Officer, Parkland Hospital, who obtained bullet from TOMLINSON and gave to Special Service, at Dallas 11/22/63, can identify bullet”
http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=59607#relPageId=29
http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=59607#relPageId=86
Warren Commission Testimony vol. VI
TESTIMONY OF DARRELL C. TOMLINSON
The testimony of Darrell C. Tomlinson was taken on March 20, 1964, at Parkland Memorial Hospital, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Arlen Specter, assistant counsel of the President’s Commission
http://jfklancer.com/docs.maps/tomlinson.html
However, at the time Tomlinson was questioned by Specter, he had not seen CE399. When Tomlinson finally did see CE399, he said that it was not the bullet he found at Parkland.
The Parkland Bullet is a distinct and different bullet from CE399.
Read the entire illustrated article at the following URL:
https://williamw.substack.com/p/forensics-and-ballistics-jfk
\\][//
https://williamw.substack.com/p/forensics-and-ballistics-jfk
https://williamw.substack.com/p/forensics-and-ballistics-jfk
\\][//
“I have studied the JFK assassination for 40+ years. And 9/11 deeply.”
Wait, are you a 9/11 truther?
Also, before we take this any further, just checked out your first link. Are you a QANON adherent, too?
My analysis of the Zapruder film, in "Why Jackie Scowled", indicates that the film is unaltered and consistent with Oswald shooting from the TSBD. The key is to separate horizontal panning from vertical startles, as shone by Zapruder's aim points. There are exactly three sudden vertical accelerations of Zapruder's aim points.
Exactly. Conspiracy theorists take every slight inconsistency and instead of analysing it logically, they spin it to suit their narrative.
To be clear, sometimes the official narrative is wrong or a lie (e.g. WMD in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion) but when it is, it’s usually proven to be so by credible people.
I’m sure there are such cases which are yet to be exposed, and maybe the JFK assassination will one day be exposed as such. But I doubt it, so far the evidence points to the official narrative being true, and many of the people who believe otherwise are the same conspiracy theorists who believe in other unproven theories.
The glaringly unsophisticated appreciations by Mamet and Maher of the JFK assassination conspiracy are simply unworthy of serious consideration.
And Mamet's choice to confer with mile wide-inch deep Jim DiEugenio, a shameless regurgitator and marketer of long-established facts who has yet to offer a single meaningful insight into the origin and deep purposes of the assassination, speaks to the playwright's intellectual laziness and impenetrable naivete.
Has Mamet even heard the names Peter Dale Scott and James W. Douglass?
With few but important exceptions, the "stars" of JFK research are in retrograde motion. The illumination cast by the late Vincent Salandria, George Michael Evica, Sylvia Meagher, and other first and second generation researchers is in a spectrum beyond the perception of today's Elm Street Irregulars.
David Mamet made an important statement in his discussion with Bill Maher: namely, that the Zapruder film is an altered film, and that the "head explosion" in frame 313 is fake, i.e., painted on in that frame (and that other frames associated with the "headshot" are missing from the film). Unfortunately, Mamet made three mistakes about the Z film when talking about his unproduced screenplay about the Z film's alteration: mistake #1 was when he said the original film was not developed in Dallas; actually, it was, and the ARRB commissioned a report that proved this as an undeniable fact; mistake #2 was when he said that the film was altered in Los Angeles. The film was actually altered at Kodak's R&D laboratory called "Hawkeyeworks" in Rochester, N.Y. at Kodak Headquarters, on November 24, 1963. You can read all about this in chapter 14 of my book, "Inside the ARRB." Mistake #3 was when Mamet claimed that the Zapruder film was shot at a speed of 24 frames per second; in actuality, Zapruder's Bell and Howell camera was designed to operate at 16 fps, and ran a bit fast, according to the FBI, at an average of 18.3 fps. [The 24 fps cited by Mamet is the operating speed for commercial motion pictures, not home movie cameras like Zapruder's.] I would love to see Mamet make such a film, but the actual tale of the film's interrupted chain-of-custody and alteration the weekend of the assassination is already dramatic enough; it doesn't need to be fictionalized in a way that introduces errors into the story. The real story is dramatic enough. Viewers should watch two YouTube programs to learn about this: "L'image 313," and "The Zapruder Film Mystery." They both recount what happened to the film the weekend of the assassination, based on my 2011 video interview of the CIA's Dino Brugioni, and interviews of other CIA personnel by the ARRB staff. Mamet should become more familiar with the FACTS surrounding the film's alteration---I don't think he is familiar with the actual facts, as revealed by his misstatements. David Mamet should rewrite his screenplay based on the factual account of what happened to the Zapruder film the weekend of the assassination, instead of creating a completely fictional story centered on Hollywood. I believe it was hubris on Mamet's part to make Hollywood the center of the alteration story; he should become acquainted with the true facts of the alteration, and make a film about those dramatic events. END
Thank you, Douglas Horne!
You're Welcome. Hollywood "bullshit" needs to be countered whenever it appears. We don't need the true story of the film's alteration diluted by a fictional account full of errors.
The "bullshit is yours Horne,
You don't know diddly squat about movie making equipment, nor film and film emulsions. You were duped by Dino Buglioni, a CIA asset who wanted to put the most important visual evidence in the JFK in question. You fell for his bullshit because you yourself are utterly ignorant of film processing.
Roland Zavada who examined the film and camera for the ARRB, found that the in-camera-original had all of the proper edge code markings of where and when the film was manufactured and also the edge codes and leader codes show where and when it was processed.
\\][//
Nonsense Mr. Horne,
The Zapruder film, which captured the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, was shot at an average of 18.3 frames per second (fps). The camera used, a Bell & Howell Zoomatic Director Series Camera, had a standard frame rate of 16 fps, but the FBI later tested Zapruder's camera and found that it filmed at an average of 18.3 frames/second.
I was a special effects artist in Hollywood in the 1980s, I know special effects in and out. There is no possible way to make a fake Z-film using Kodacrome II Daylight film as a copy film. The emulsion on Kodachrome II is made specifically for daylight, using artificial light, the artificial light of any projection system alters the color, hue and contrast. The artificial light would cause the blue sky to turn out green and the green grass would appear orangish brown like dead grass.
But more importantly Roland Zavada who examined the film and camera for the ARRB, found that the in-camera-original had all of the proper edge code markings of where and when the film was manufactured and also the edge codes and leader codes show where and when it was processed.
The extant Zapruder film is in fact the very film that Zapruder shot on November 22 in Dealey Plaza. There is no doubt about that fact.
\\][//
What makes a playwright an assassination expert? An over abundance of imagination?
Bill the shill is Zionist piece of shit
Wow both of these guys, Mamet and Maher are total crackpots!
What a howler! David Mamet claims that Zapruder was in the OSS!!!
There is no evidence to support the claim that Abraham Zapruder was in the OSS (Office of Strategic Services), the U.S. intelligence agency during World War II.
Abraham Zapruder was a clothing manufacturer who happened to be filming President John F. Kennedy's motorcade in Dallas on November 22, 1963, when the assassination occurred. His amateur film captured the tragic event and became crucial evidence in the investigation and a famous historical artifact.
The Zapruder film, which captured the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, was shot at an average of 18.3 frames per second (fps). The camera used, a Bell & Howell Zoomatic Director Series Camera, had a standard frame rate of 16 fps, but the FBI later tested Zapruder's camera and found that it filmed at an average of 18.3 frames/second.
I was a special effects artist in Hollywood in the 1980s, I know special effects in and out. There is no possible way to make a fake Z-film using Kodacrome II Daylight film as a copy film. The emulsion on Kodachrome II is made specifically for daylight, using artificial light, the artificial light of any projection system alters the color, hue and contrast. The artificial light would cause the blue sky to turn out green and the green grass would appear orangish brown like dead grass.
But more importantly Roland Zavada who examined the film and camera for the ARRB, found that the in-camera-original had all of the proper edge code markings of where and when the film was manufactured and also the edge codes and leader codes show where and when it was processed.
The extant Zapruder film is in fact the very film that Zapruder shot on November 22 in Dealey Plaza. There is no doubt abouty that fact.
The National Archives has a database of OSS personnel. Zapruder is not on it. The database is available for public viewing and downloading at https://www.archives.gov/files/iwg/declassified-records/rg-226-oss/personnel-database.pdf
I wish I knew more about photography or digital manipulation, but I don't. My background is as a psychologist. It is from that standpoint that I have something to say about David Mamet's assertion that Lee Oswald was a "CIA throwaway," or a patsy (just like Oswald said he was).
My most recent article here at Substack both confirms my previous research and extends it, showing that the Warren Commission panel organized to help construct a psychological profile of Oswald, and make a case for his motivations as a purported assassin, was itself two-thirds staffed by CIA-linked psychiatrists. One of them, Dr. Howard P. Rome, of the Mayo Clinic, was a CIA contractor and/or consultant for the Agency's Artichoke and MKULTRA programs. The other CIA-linked psychiatrist was the Superintendent of St. Elizabeth's Hospital in Washington, D.C., Dale C. Cameron, who had an agreement with the CIA for the Agency's use of hospital facilities.
Initially, the Warren Commission first contracted with Dr. Winfred Overholser, Cameron's predecessor at St. Elizabeths. Overholser himself also had intelligence links, and led the OSS's WW2-era "truth serum" experiments, some of which occurred at St. Elizabeth's itself. It was under Overholser that the first of the agreements with CIA re placement of CIA "patients" at the hospital were first made. Overholser had to bow out of helping the Commission when he developed heart issues. He died in later 1964.
There is much in my new article to show that this psychiatry panel was key in helping provide a pseudo-scientific basis for some of the WC's claims, such as that Lee H. Oswald wanted to kill Kennedy as part of a desire to become a "great man" of history. The CIA links to the psychiatrists working with the Warren Commission were hidden for decades, really until my investigations revealed them.
I believe my research to be highly pertinent, and I would hope that it could factor in to ongoing investigations and commentaries about the intelligence links to Oswald and to the assassination in general.
The URL for my article: https://open.substack.com/pub/kayej/p/historic-cia-artichoke-meeting-reveals?r=2t45z&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
Zapruder was a member of the group that invited JFK to Dallas and demanded he take that route. And then he just happened to be filming right where the shooting occurred. So lucky!
Jefferson, might you do a technical summary post(s) on what the claims are about the authenticity of the Zapruder film? Seems like there’s some controversy there that could be illuminating to clarify.
I watched "Parallax View" and the theme seems to be that the corporate assassins have various targets though the overall objective of the assassinations is unclear.
Lee Harvey Oswald was run by the Russians. His wife was his handler and he communicated through Cuba. Stop pushing bullshit and lies.
The Zapruder film was processed at the Eastman Kodak Dallas processing plant on November 22, 1963, shortly after it was filmed in Dealey Plaza, Dallas. Following the assassination of President Kennedy, Abraham Zapruder, who filmed the event, initially sought to have the film developed at WFAA television station, but their equipment was incompatible. He then took the film to Kodak's Dallas facility where it was processed and three copies were made.
The original Zapruder film never went to Hawkeyeworks in Roschester, the FBI copy was taken there for enlargement stills to be made for presentation purposes.
Original film location: Abraham Zapruder kept the original film. It was later purchased by Life magazine. The original film and a first-generation copy are now held by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
FBI copy: The FBI had a copy of the Zapruder film. It's plausible that this copy was sent to Hawkeyeworks for the creation of enlarged stills used for various purposes, potentially including the investigation and presentations.
\\][//