JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
JFK - How "They" killed the 35th President! Volume 2
Allan Fritzke:
I was interested that people were starting to dig into the real truth and not follow the Lee Harvey Oswald Rabbit Trail which is what you are supposed to do. When you see the shots come in and break the windshield at frame 322 and frame 329, you know you don't have a bolt action rifle in play! If you look closely at each of the Zapruder's frames now available on the internet, you will have to draw the same conclusion I have. No lone gunman and a massive amount of people were involved in the storyline and coverup!!!
Background
The Warren Commission used the Zapruder Film to convict Lee Harvey Oswald by using z-313 and z-314. You were not supposed to see the rest of the film/ frames and is the reason why it wasn't released for almost 12 years. There was no head movement before and after this frame 313 as the president's head remained slumped through it all and remains in the same position before and after. Note the impact should have moved the head forward but it didn't. Between z-314 and z-330, They painted a white blob in front of the front part of his head and then re-introduced a red blob over his head (z-331) after the real head shot came in at z-329. Clearly through the frames around z-313, there is no movement of back of his head, thereby revealing that it was painted in! Can you believe how this was done? You can clearly see the smudging/painting to make it look like a head explosion! Hawkeye Productions from Rochester, NY were on the scene very quickly to modify and edit in as a professional manner as they could in the day. Remember we are told there is an original film and 3 copies made - none of which varies on frames z-313/314!
If you agree, they were painted in by animation experts to prove a bullet from behind theory, where did the bullets come from if in fact you believe it was an inside job to overthrow the government (Coup d'etat)? Look at the neck wound coming from behind the sign (out of view of Zapruder's camera) and then about 5.5 seconds later, look at the 2 bullets which hit the president at frame 322 and 329 which come through the front windshield - clearly visible in the Zapruder film. No change in the president's position up until near frame 322. You can also look up the Zapruder Frames created from the original film and study and zoom in and you can see what I have said in my video is true. It was such a farce! The link below is a restored frame by frame of an original "Costella" copy produced from the Dealey Plaza Museum film we are told. If you were to download it and look at it with a picture viewer, you almost can see it play before your eyes in slow motion. You can also zoom in on frames which is what I did a lot of!
https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/
Again study the lack of change in his head position which does not change around frame 313. After suffering a neck wound, 5.5 seconds earlier (z-226 to z-322, 18 fps), the president was slumped over from that point forward until he sees the obvious shot coming in at frame 322!
He was conscious enough to "wince" back and raise his arm slightly to shield himself from this second shot at frame 322. Judging from the glass spray, (where Kellerman is supposed to be sitting), behind the windshield, it looks like it hit him in the upper chest. There was no more movement from him after that indicating a likely fatal blow. There was no one to protect him for this entire period of time (5.5 seconds), after hearing a reported shot by all and him grabbing his neck. Of course most of the incident was masked in motorcycle engine roar which I would imagine helped distract the sound. Distraction noise from grassy knoll could also distract crowd from looking at the President (a magician's trick!)
After the third and final shot at frame 329, Jacqueline Kennedy wants to climb out. Frame 329 was likely the first gory mess on the trunk in my opinion and she realized if no one is protecting for 6 seconds, it is time to leave.
You can watch the driver line himself up for these last 2 shots with a white marker in the grass. How come people can't see the obvious? He winces when shot comes through windshield just prior to frame 322! Connally and Kellerman have ducked below seat level so that Kennedy sees the shot coming in from front. Assassin rolls out of way of car and has been left in the film!
No investigation of car, no pictures of crime scene. Naturally if you want to hide things, you have to hide the evidence. Testimony given by Nelly Connally, the wife of John Connally embellishes the attack on her husband. Did she never sleep with her husband and see his wounds? She keeps on saying the wounds were the size of a baseball and located in the middle of his chest and putting her hands over them to stop the bleeding! Looking at his suit jacket on display, this is obviously doesn't even match her description or where he points in his first interview! Obviously Nelly never saw her husband's wounds if he had any at all!! His speech 5 days later from a hospital bed, further clarifies his storyline. Obviously, he has been told to say the shot came from behind, so he points to his upper right shoulder towards the back! At that point, he obviously didn't feel any pain in his chest or he would have pointed to the most obvious painful spot!
This in my opinion is the Truth! Watch my video and you will see that Lee Harvey Oswald shooting a bolt action rifle, (specialty marksman!) , from a window far away from the scene was framed as a patsy and was groomed for months before the assassination ever occurred. It would have been very risky to fire at least 3 bullets in 6 seconds with a bolt action rifle in the car and risk hitting others! We are told to look at that though and ignore the truth and the powers behind it. It involved a very large coordinated effort to make the lone gunman theory into a believable story! you needed the Zapruder film to convict!
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1LOy810q48
John Iacoletti:
The Malcolm Summers clip that you claimed was from 2014 was not from 2014. That's just when somebody uploaded that clip to Youtube! It's from the 1988 Nova program.
Allan Fritzke:
Look at your frames that you have provided. Where do you see Connally and Kellerman - so obscured that you can't see them in a position that would block the frontal assault on the President which occurred. Obviously Connally's head is already below "shot line" and Kellerman's head is "blobbed" in over on Greer's door panel with Greer grimacing nicely! Look at even the pictures you are providing - look at Nellie's flowers and look at Connally's head position! Tell me exactly where you see them and I will tell you they are below seat level!!!!!
I am not only basing it on the obvious triangular pattern of the light reflection across a "flat black" surface, but I am also basing it on the composite of the frames below. Look also closely in the frame you provided. The hand raised and the head moved in the back position at z-322 - clearly a reactionary pose to what was coming at him from the front. Not a rearward reaction to a "brain blowout" 8 frames earlier, 1/2 a second earlier. Look again, Jacqueline's non-reaction until after z-331 when Jacqueline wants to leave the car and the red blob is painted in once more!!! Huge discrepancy - the frames are showing exactly what I am proving, Jacqueline did not see the z-313 head plume (6 feet high) blowout as it never occurred!!!!
https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z313.jpg
https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z321.jpg
https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z331.jpg
Lightbox film recreation, certainly can see the "redrawn" in red blob over the President's head as well which seems to be a carryover from z-313/314 for some reason. Note it seems to coincide rather nicely with a windshield shot coming in at z-329 and no one present in the front seat passenger side in other words, ducked down yet! I wonder why, nicely blurred as well!
Again look at the re-occurring red blob reappearing on the President's head at z-331! As I said, they done some serious editing in these frames to provide evidence that Connally and Kellerman were in fact in positions to make a frontal assault not possible. If it wasn't glass shatter that caused the light reflection, what was it - a finely polished black suit jacket or Greer's suit jacket? You don't catch glimmers of light for no reason or for translocation of shiny surfaces elsewhere in the car!! It doesn't add up - glass shards do make nice evidence however!!! That is absurd to think you are going to get a reflection off a black suit jacket - this is not a polished painted suit jacket surface lol! It doesn't reflect light! Never mind you see the assassin roll into the picture mere frames later. Top that off with lacking photographs from non-existent newsman in front of him, never providing a photograph. Films misdeveloped obviously! Moorman's polaroid is all you get -lol!! Drink the kool-aid if you like!!
Additionally, look at Nellie Connally's testimony and how according to her, there was a wound the size of a baseball in her husband's mid chest. Now compare that to his testimony 5 days later from the hospital bed pointing to his shoulder as his biggest "pain" spot. Compare this to his provided suit jacket on the internet - obviously this lady has never seen his scars!!!!!! (He was told to make sure you indicate the shots come from behind!) She was married to him - I guess she was never intimate enough to know the difference between a frontal chest shot and a "side shot" as evidenced by his suit jacket and the misevidence she gives. Where is the truth or is it neither because she forget her story and never saw either?? I bet you never seen him in public again showing his war wound in a swin suit - lol! I know they disallowed removing anything from Connally's body during an autopsy when he died - that was off limits! They could have dissected his body even with a mere x-ray if it was allowed to even determine that there were no fragments left in his thigh which someone had sought to gather. I have seen this in a newspaper - autopsy denied! Obviously if you could take pictures of his body and not find scars, there is a problem in the whole story and it unravels!
Allan Fritzke:
Again, if you look at his testimony closer, he was standing on the grassy knoll - not on the island. I pointed this out clearly in my video as HE stated it when asked in the "History Channel" interview. It is not much different than the original Jean Hill testimony which you John have vehemently denied as false!! This, I pointed out to you last year (December) before all threads were deleted!! She had clearly stated that they were on the same side as the President - can't dispute those remarks in the original interview done before the FBI talked to her!! Do you want me to paste in the quote again of her entire interview proving this for clarity of what she said? I can also paste what Malcom Summer's said in his interview, should you want to refute what he said as well.
In the case of Malcom Summers, the interviewer tried to "pigeon hole" him as being the assassin that rolled across the Zapruder film. He did not take the bait!! You have no logical explanation as to why the assassin ended up rolling in the grass and why the camera man in front of him stays absolutely rigid. Obviously the assassin was running from the front of the car and his momentum was carrying him in that direction - it was not a mere duck - it was a rollover!!!!! That "pox-faced" imposter introduced to youtube in 2014 that you claim is Malcom Summers was an imposter! Quote your original Nova proof of 1998 to start adding some credibility behind your argument!! Look at the 2 pictures and you can't tell me they are the same people! Surely you can open your eyes and see this! Who do you work for? Obviously not someone that wants the truth to come out and wants to keep people from knowing the real story!
Furthermore, why would Malcom Summers have a rather lengthy interview in 2002 and then have someone introduce footage about him in 2014 to contradict that interview and then later say it came out in 1998?? Talk about smoke and deception! That doesn't make sense to introduce that 12 years later on a youtube video unless you want to discredit the original interview! Why wait that long? Obviously you wait that long until the original person is dead before you introduce that as evidence to confuse the situation and dissuade the original person's testimony! In parallel, this is about as bad as having it come to light that Senator-elect Moore was having sex with underage girls - introduced 2 weeks before his election and using events occurring 40 years earlier - pretty bizarre and suspect!!
Look at the evidence - obviously you are not suggesting a logical sequence like I am. No one knows the identity of the rolling assassin and you would be a fool to suggest that it was Malcom Summers after watching his interview!! Obviously this testimony was ignored just as Jean Hill's original testimony was! Pretty Sad!!
John Iacoletti:
--- Quote from: Allan Fritzke on January 15, 2018, 03:22:47 AM ---Again, if you look at his testimony closer, he was standing on the grassy knoll - not on the island.
--- End quote ---
Gary Mack: "Let's make sure we've got the terminology straight. The grassy knoll is the area up on the hill by the fence. You were down on the grass by the street."
Malcolm Summers: "Yes sir, yes sir. I'm sorry I referred to it...but I could have crossed the two islands somewhat out there that separated between Main, Commerce, and Elm.
--- Quote --- I pointed this out clearly in my video as HE stated it when asked in the "History Channel" interview. It is not much different than the original Jean Hill testimony which you John have vehemently denied as false!! This, I pointed out to you last year (December) before all threads were deleted!! She had clearly stated that they were on the same side as the President - can't dispute those remarks in the original interview done before the FBI talked to her!!
--- End quote ---
Jean Hill didn't say they were on the same side as the president. She said "he was on our side of the street, and the President and Mrs. Kennedy were in the back seat".
--- Quote ---You have no logical explanation as to why the assassin ended up rolling in the grass and why the camera man in front of him stays absolutely rigid.
--- End quote ---
The "camera man" was James Altgens. You should probably learn more about the case if you want to convince anybody that you have it all figured out.
--- Quote ---Obviously the assassin was running from the front of the car and his momentum was carrying him in that direction
--- End quote ---
Obviously. ::)
--- Quote --- - it was not a mere duck - it was a rollover!!!!![/b] That "pox-faced" imposter introduced to youtube in 2014 that you claim is Malcom Summers was an imposter! Quote your original Nova proof of 1998 to start adding some credibility behind your argument!!
--- End quote ---
I guess you don't know how Youtube works. If somebody creates a video with a clip from a program and uploads it to Youtube in 2014, that doesn't mean the material itself was created in 2014.
If you don't believe me then watch the entire Nova program this was lifted from here.
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oHAbCu_LbM
It was broadcast in November, 1988.
--- Quote --- Look at the 2 pictures and you can't tell me they are the same people!
--- End quote ---
What makes you think they're not the same person?
--- Quote ---Look at the evidence - obviously you are not suggesting a logical sequence like I am. No one knows the identity of the rolling assassin and you would be a fool to suggest that it was Malcom Summers after watching his interview!! Obviously this testimony was ignored just as Jean Hill's original testimony was! Pretty Sad!!
--- End quote ---
There's nothing logical about anything you've said. "Rolling assassin". LOL.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version