Bob believes that eyewitnesses, either eyewitnesses at Dealey Plaza, or an early witness of the Zapruder film, overcomes the most logical of arguments. There is no way the eyewitnesses could be mistaken. Either as a group, or as an individual, like Dan Rather.
It does not matter that the eyewitnesses disagree with each other. The fact that the eyewitnesses disagree with the Zapruder film shows that this film was faked.
Can the film be faked in a few days using 1963 technology? Of course, it could. The eyewitnesses show us it did happen and so was possible.
Another example of CTers entertaining multiple and sometimes mutually exclusive realities. In some cases, they rely upon the Z-film as proof of a conspiracy (e.g. "back and to the the left"). In others, that the film is faked or altered to avoid showing evidence of a conspiracy. The Alamo defense of all CTer claims ultimately boils down to suggesting that all evidence is faked or the product of intentional lies. The Catch-22: Any evidence of Oswald's guilt is suspect and dismissed for that reason alone.
The only car close enough to the limo to fulfill Rather's description.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4613/24715922567_fa8a3bd384_b.jpg)
| (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/normal_Snapshot021.jpg) | (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/normal_daniel03.jpg) | (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/normal_jfkMcIntire_Crop.jpg) |
Except his reference is to the film he just watched, not what was viewed from where he was standing.
The white lead car most likely appeared in the same footage as the limo turn onto Elm St, which was eventually excised.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4676/38688494315_2041425522_b.jpg)
Any editing done to the film to remove contradictions to the LN scenario would have been done with an optical printer like they used for practically all movies at the time for FX. This would include:
1) Speeding the limo up by removing frames before and after the head shot. Easy peasy.
Jack does not understand simple Physics.
The limousine can only slow down so much. It can only lose about 0.5 foot per second per frame.
snip..
Jack does not understand simple Physics.
I'm a physicist. ;D
Limo Speed from CE884 Z161-z166:
18.3frames/5frames = 3.66 x .9ft = 3.294ft per sec / 1.47 = 2.24 mph
13.44mph - 2.24mph = 11.2 mph = Shaneyfelt
Mr. SPECTER. Is that a constant average speed or does that speed reflect any variations in the movement of the car?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is the overall average from 161 to 313. It does not mean that it was traveling constantly at 11.2, because it was more than likely going faster in some areas and slightly slower in some areas. It is only an average speed over the entire run.
I already replied to this thread but it got wiped out by the LNers because I was getting too close to home. ;D
Chris Davidson is on the right track. There are only 2 questions needed to be answered to resolve this one:
1) Where is the "original" Z-film? Life got a COPY.
2) Why was the film "edited"?
There were at least 2 splices in the film, which the FBI must have created and they removed an entire section of the turn onto Elm. Zapruder said he never recalled letting his finger off the trigger at any time after he started filming. So why was this footage removed? And why are there splices in the film? And most importantly, where is the original film and why did the FBI keep it?
Any editing done to the film to remove contradictions to the LN scenario would have been done with an optical printer like they used for practically all movies at the time for FX. This would include:
1) Speeding the limo up by removing frames before and after the head shot. Easy peasy.
2) Blackening the back of JFK's head for a few dozen frames. Piece of cake.
3) Cut out the turn onto Elm where the limo barely navigated the turn. Just another splice, which they botched.
So to ans the OP of how long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film is...a few hours max. Which is exactly what they did. Otherwise, why did they modify it at all?
I already replied to this thread but it got wiped out by the LNers because I was getting too close to home.
Any editing done to the film to remove contradictions to the LN scenario would have been done with an optical printer like they used for practically all movies at the time for FX.
1) Speeding the limo up by removing frames before and after the head shot. Easy peasy.
2) Blackening the back of JFK's head for a few dozen frames. Piece of cake.
3) Cut out the turn onto Elm where the limo barely navigated the turn. Just another splice, which they botched.
I'm a physicist. ;D
(https://media.tenor.com/images/06c659bdf93677d7c8bf81cdee92b9b1/tenor.gif)
What are my objectives on this forum, Mytton?
What are your objectives on this forum? What makes you try so hard? What are you trying to accomplish?
"If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the coverup."
Are YOU part of the coverup?
What are my objectives on this forum, Mytton?
What are your objectives on this forum?
What makes you try so hard?
What are you trying to accomplish?
This was explained to you in the other thread, as soon as images are combined in an optical printer you have a degraded image with additional layers of grain. The special effects in movies at the time were locked off matte shots or blue screen work and not suitable for Zapruder type alterations.
The Zapruder frames reveal no build up of Film grain and thus the film was exposed in Zapruder's camera.
As soon as even one frame is removed you introduce an obvious stutter but throughout the Zapruder film is silky smooth. In the following gif only one frame was removed and the resulting lack of fluidity is plain to see.
You do realize that blackening one frame requires the exact correct pigment of black to match the surrounding level of black and then when you start a series of frames then you have to consider how your black is affected by the movement and constantly changing lightsource that have a direct effect on your black, so in other words without advanced computer cycles to calculate the various intensities of black you're not going to provide anything close to photorealistic.
Or maybe because an 8mm camera only takes a limited amount of film and Zapruder had already used some of the film so was simply saving film for Kennedy.
Yeah I thought it was hilarious too, now he's physicist who is also a photogrammetrist on the side.
Too bad all the old posts got scrapped because the list of what professions Trojan magically morphed into to support any number of his arguments was staggering.
He claimed to be a photo something or other expert but didn't know the about the difference in size between 35mm still and motion picture film then he put the sprockets on the wrong side, he tries to bluff his way through but keeps getting busted.
JohnM
It's just too easy. You are in no position to comment since it has been shown time and again that you don't have a clue about film. An optical printer adds no more grain to film than it does when it makes a copy. Who the hell said anything about overlays and matting? Give your head a shake and get in the game at least. How the hell can you analyse the grain on a copy of the original and tell me an optical printer wasn't used to create it? Duh.
Super BS.
You mean like this? ;)
(http://www.readclip.com/images/Z317_Z320.gif)
This is why only a few alternating frames can be removed to speed up the limo without a perceptible herky jerkiness. And I never claimed the limo was sped up, only that I have concerns and that it could have been done, easy peasy. But why did it slow down in the first place smart guy? I won't hold my breath for your obfuscation.
Are you serial? Hahaha!
Not according to Zapruder, but what would he know?
You are in no position to comment since it has been shown time and again that you don't have a clue about film.
An optical printer adds no more grain to film than it does when it makes a copy.
Geo-physics->Geomatics->Photogrammetry
There are lots of us out there in the GIS world, dufus. Just ask Google Earth. You should try taking a course sometime instead of spending countless hours spouting LNer obfuscation on a JFK forum.
I'm a physicist. ;D
This is what I was talking about, delusions of self grandeur are rife in your community.
This was explained to you in the other thread, as soon as images are combined in an optical printer you have a degraded image with additional layers of grain. The special effects in movies at the time were locked off matte shots or blue screen work and not suitable for Zapruder type alterations.
The following two frames were filmed directly on set but the robots fighting picture was processed with multiple passes through an optical printer for added special effects like lasers and starfields which creates a much softer grainier image whereas the Zapruder film was just exposed once on the correct film stock.
(http://notonbluray.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Black-Hole-Infinite-Power-Cast.png)
(http://notonbluray.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Black-Hole-Laser-duel.png)
The Zapruder frames reveal no build up of Film grain and thus the film was exposed in Zapruder's camera.
(https://s17.postimg.org/qa7xzaor3/film_grain_Zapruder.jpg)
As soon as even one frame is removed you introduce an obvious stutter but throughout the Zapruder film is silky smooth. In the following gif only one frame was removed and the resulting lack of fluidity is plain to see.
(https://s17.postimg.org/n1iu1ulkv/zapz313in-out1_zpsfe80c426.gif)
You do realize that blackening one frame requires the exact correct pigment of black to match the surrounding level of black and then when you start a series of frames then you have to consider how your black is affected by the movement and constantly changing lightsource that have a direct effect on your black, so in other words without advanced computer cycles to calculate the various intensities of black you're not going to provide anything close to photorealistic.
Or maybe because an 8mm camera only takes a limited amount of film and Zapruder had already used some of the film so was simply saving film for Kennedy.
JohnM
Sure you are. And Rob Caprio is the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics.
I recall someone trying to tell an actual physicist back then that Kennedy was hit from the front and he responded with 'No physicist would tell you that'
And I wonder why Trojan hasn't prepared a white paper and published amongst his peers. Oh, wait.. his peers are the rest of CT wonder world where everyone becomes an instant expert in anything & everything.
I can't wait for his press conference.
By my count, there's at least the Zapruder, Nix, Muchmore, Bell, Bronson, Dorman, Hughes, and Towner films that show JFK in Dealy Plaza.
To those of you who believe the Zapruder film has been altered, it might help everyone to understand your position if you could tell the rest of us two things:
* Which of these films do you believe have been altered ?
* Which of these films do you believe have not been altered ?
Many thanks...
LOL !
You're not distracting from my point - you're making my point.
If someone says that one or more of the other assassination films - other than Zapruder - are authentic
Then the burden is on them is to show the inconsistencies between that unaltered film and the altered Z-film...we should be able to see the inconsistencies, right ?
If someone says the opposite, that in addition to Zapruder none of the other films are authentic
Then the burden of proof is on them to show how films like Muchmore or Nix are in perfect sync with the Zapruder film - yet somehow were publicly available within days after the assassination despite going through very different chains of custody
If the alterationists can demonstrate how either one of the above is even *possible* - let alone probable - then I'll be the first guy to listen.
If they can't, then what they're suggesting has no possible basis in fact, and I tend to disregarded it as illogical...
LOL !
You're not distracting from my point - you're making my point.
If someone says that one or more of the other assassination films - other than Zapruder - are authentic
Then the burden is on them is to show the inconsistencies between that unaltered film and the altered Z-film...we should be able to see the inconsistencies, right ?
If someone says the opposite, that in addition to Zapruder none of the other films are authentic
Then the burden of proof is on them to show how films like Muchmore or Nix are in perfect sync with the Zapruder film - yet somehow were publicly available within days after the assassination despite going through very different chains of custody
If the alterationists can demonstrate how either one of the above is even *possible* - let alone probable - then I'll be the first guy to listen.
If they can't, then what they're suggesting has no possible basis in fact, and I tend to disregarded it as illogical...
Are you really claiming that there is enough resolution and definition (not to mention the camera angle) in the Muchmore film to declare that it shows the "EXACT same headshot"?
John - go ahead and point out the differences between the headshot in Muchmore vs the headshot in Zapruder.
1. If you *can* point out the differences - then my claim that they are an EXACT match falls from its own lack of merit.
2. If you *can not* point out any differences, then my statement cannot necessarily be disproven, can it ?
Hey, I'm nothing if not teachable - and open to facts and evidence.
Over to you...
I'm asking you how you can tell that they are exactly the same.
Oh, well that's easy... I just put my assertion out there that the Muchmore/Zapruder headshots are "exactly the same" and dare anyone to disprove it.
If, after a week or so on this forum (with all its experts) no one can disprove my assertion, then it must be a fact.
But, in all seriousness, I'd say this is one of those cases where a lack of evidence is in fact evidence.
Either they are different, or they are the same.
<facepalm>
LBJ knew about the assassination in advance. I dare you to disprove that.
LBJ didn't know about the assassination in advance. I dare you to disprove that.
The Muchmore film and the Zapruder film are 100% consistent. I dare you to disprove that .
Well now you're watering down your original claim, which was that they show the EXACT same headshot. "Consistent" just means that you can't rule something out.
If Muchmore showed a different headshot than Zapruder - conspiracy theorists and Robert Groden and all the rest would have been shouting it from the house tops for 50+ years.
I'm sure they would. That, however, doesn't demonstrate that they show the EXACT same headshot. Honestly, if Muchmore was the only thing you had to go on, you wouldn't even know that the guy was shot.
It seems to me that saying a film doesn't contradict the Zapruder film - and there's nothing I can see in Muchmore that does - is not the same as saying it corroborates it.
With all due respect, Steve, I'm not just "saying that a film doesn't contradict the Zapruder film", am I ?
My previous post details four points of absolutely correlation between Z and Muchmore, doesn't it ?
I'm going to have to disagree with you, as I do believe that Muchmore's film and Zapruder's film show the EXACT same headshot, and indeed the EXACT same scene - obviously taking in to account the different perspectives of the photographers.
As far as your "if Muchmore was the only thing you had to go on, you wouldn't even know that the guy was shot" comment... seriously ? There's clearly a halo of blood and brain matter ejecting from JFK's head just as is seen in Zapruder.
I'm going to have to disagree with you, as I do believe that Muchmore's film and Zapruder's film show the EXACT same headshot, and indeed the EXACT same scene - obviously taking in to account the different perspectives of the photographers.
I can see NO inconsistencies.
I can see 100% correlation between things like:
* JFK's head being positioned forward and to the left
* Jackie's right elbow immediately behind JFK's left shoulder
* Moorman's position in the background
* Kellerman's head pointed straight ahead
As far as your "if Muchmore was the only thing you had to go on, you wouldn't even know that the guy was shot" comment... seriously ? There's clearly a halo of blood and brain matter ejecting from JFK's head just as is seen in Zapruder.
I think a reasonable person can conclude that both photo's are depicting the EXACT same event and the EXACT same instant.
You don't see a wound of any kind in Muchmore. How could you possibly determine that they are EXACTLY the same?
Clearly you jest. How is this "clearly" a halo of blood and brain matter?
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-K1gaaoWeIYY/V75l_75PxOI/AAAAAAAAAGg/rwKDaAx-4JIuq3vA2q6t57LvGCfRzJilACLcB/s1600/Muchmore.jpg)
The point is that you are overstating by claiming that they depict the exact same head shot when you really mean that you don't see any obvious discrepancies between the two.
And one could always speculate that we may not have ever seen Muchmore if there were any.
Speaking of JFK's head exploding...why does frame 317 look like a fireball blew out a perfectly circular hole on the RIGHT SIDE of JFK's head when the shot supposedly came from the TSBD?
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/PDVD_178.jpg)
And when does a FMJ bullet explode in the 1st place? And why didn't the MB explode, let alone show up on the wrong stretcher with no trace of DNA in swimming pool condition?
The twofer didn't hit any large bone nose first
The head shot hit the hard bone of the skull
You do to math
And you call yourself a physicist LOL
You've convinced me John.
I was mistaken.
And your right, that cloud coming out of JFK's head could be anything.
Thanks for setting me straight.
Take care.
And you call yourself a physicist LOL
For what it is worth, here is an analysis of the limo speed for the Zapruder and Nix films on a frame by frame basis. Limo speeds are relative to photo units and actual speeds can be calculated by using physical rulers in each film (i.e. tire diameter) to establish a pixels/foot ruler.
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/ZapNixLimoSpd.PNG)
Speaking of JFK's head exploding...why does frame 317 look like a fireball blew out a perfectly circular hole on the RIGHT SIDE of JFK's head when the shot supposedly came from the TSBD?
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/PDVD_178.jpg)
And when does a FMJ bullet explode in the 1st place? And why didn't the MB explode, let alone show up on the wrong stretcher with no trace of DNA in swimming pool condition?
You've convinced me John.
I was mistaken.
And your right, that cloud coming out of JFK's head could be anything.
Thanks for setting me straight.
Take care.
It's obviously blood and brain matter.
Muchmore GIF
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qB64sjleNYw/WGMqFkG690I/AAAAAAAAAaQ/8jtXjjfWtIIR3i_DnSuPDLCUOIIknhvQgCLcB/s640/Muchmore%2B2.gif)
Nix Zoomed
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UpVHD04f4jw/WE_27UHWZII/AAAAAAAAAQk/yJK5XwOLMucDfCtzzzcPs3nPtzw6bvEAQCLcB/s1600/NixSlowZoomed.gif)
You've convinced me John.
I was mistaken.
And your right, that cloud coming out of JFK's head could be anything.
Thanks for setting me straight.
Take care.
Can you site a single Ballistic Expert, one who does real world tests of bullets with ballistic gel who holds any of these opinions of yours about ?fireballs?, bullets held in cloth pockets for several minutes which fail to retain blood traces or DNA? [/b]
It's obviously blood and brain matter.
We know this from the other evidence.
If we're going to look at every single piece of evidence in isolation, removed from the other evidence, then you're going to wind up nowhere.
Which is where John Iacolletti is. Contrarian nowhere land.
There is no fireball.
The entrance wound was on the back of the head and the exit wound, along with the much larger explosive wound, was on the right side of the head. As expected from a shot from the TSBD, with JFK?s head turned significantly to the left at z312.
Question:
Can you site a single Ballistic Expert, one who does real world tests of bullets with ballistic gel who holds any of these opinions of yours about ?fireballs?, bullets held in cloth pockets for several minutes which fail to retain blood traces or DNA?
The Muchmore film shows what it shows, which isn't much detail.
Sorry, but there isn't a straight line path from the TSBD to the head shot as you describe it. If you contend that a FMJ bullet entered the back of JFK's head and exited his right temple, blasting out the right side of his skull, then use my laser experiment to show that it was possible. Providing you are even interested in the truth. Just ask dufus Myttonhead, because he must have done my laser exp and choked on the results, which is why he has STFU lately.
You don't need to be an expert to use logic and common sense. When does a FMJ bullet create an explosion when it strikes anything non-combustible? FMJ bullets don't explode, ever. So if you see "light" or a "flash" or the skull explodes then this was NOT a FMJ bullet, it must have been a frangible bullet.
Are you serial re the bullet not retaining DNA after it was in a cloth pocket? And exactly why was it in a cloth pocket and not a plastic bag? Was that standard forensic protocol? Then ask yourself why you're ok with Cappy Fritz picking up evidence with his bare hands and putting it in his pocket? Why isn't that either a conspiracy or insanity?
Remember, the eyewitnesses - Brennan, Markham, Brewer, Postal et al. - lied. All just flat out made up their stories.
And the physical evidence is not believable. The fingerprints are not believable, handwriting experts are wrong, the photographic experts are wrong, the forensic experts are wrong, the ballistics experts are wrong.
And circumstantial evidence is meaningless. Lots of men leave their wedding rings behind. And nearly all of their money. Men who work in the building where people saw a gunman fire? Men who have expressed deep hatred of the US? Men with radical views? Men who left the building three minutes after the shooting? Men who....well, never mind we're not supposed to consider other evidence; we just look at each piece individually.
But remember: they're here to discuss the evidence with you. Honest.
And he's not a conspiracy believer. You're just making unfair assumptions.
Questions:
Give me the name of just one ballistic expert who agrees with this?
If all of the ballistic experts in the United States are under control of this massive secret conspiracy, give me the name of one outside the United States.
If you can?t give me a such a reference, have you fired at skulls fired with animal brains or some jelly to confirm that FMJ bullets do not cause skulls to ?explode?? Or is this just an armchair conclusion you have drawn? [/b]
Ballistic experts, who have done real world experiments with bone, skulls, ballistic gel, etc. all conclude that FMJ bullets can and do cause explosive head wounds.
I suspect you won?t answer my questions, but if you did give an honest answer, I think it would be something like this:
And by the way, I don?t see any ?light? or ?flash? in any of the Zapruder frames. Just the sunlight reflecting off of bloody tissue.
Here?s a clue. If you see a bright point of light in just one frame, much brighter than any you see in the other frames, that might be some sort of explosion. If you see it in multiple frames, it isn?t multiple explosive bullets flashing in different frames. It?s the reflection of sunlight off of bloody tissues.
And here?s another clue. If a head is struck by an explosive bullet, you don?t see a flash. Because the explosion takes place inside the skull. You can?t see it. Unless the ?bullet? is a bazooka shell.
Name me just one ballistic expert who disagrees with this?
If you say so. What ballistic expert agrees with you? Waiting...
Why wasn't the sunlight reflecting off of ANYTHING else on JFK? Sorry, this was NOT sunlight.
Or the frangible bullet blows out a hole in the side of JFK's head, which couldn't possibly be an exit wound if the shot came from the TSBD. Otherwise show the trajectory. Waiting...
Well, there is no need to keep you waiting long. Larry Sturdivan. Luke Haag. Michael Haag. Robert Frazier.
If you say ?They are all lying?, can you name a ballistic expert who is not? Do you really want to admit to being a Large-Secret-Conspiracy believer by stating that all the ballistic experts in the world are in on it?
Question:
Now, what real world ballistic expert thinks the Zapruder film shows evidence of an explosive bullet? Can you name one or are you going to keep us waiting? Not a self-described ballistic expert but one who is employed to do real world testing with targets consisting of bone, ballistic gel and other appropriate materials.
Frames 314, 315, 316 and 317 all show a small bright source of light on the bloody tissues.
Question:
Do you believe that some sort of Continuously-Exploding-Bullet was used? Which is why we can see it ?exploding? in frames 315, 315, 316 and 317?
With JFK?s head turned to the left, yes, it could be an exit wound on the right side of the head. A straight line from the sniper?s nest would hit the center of the back of the head and exit the side of the head, closer to the front. It would not exit the face.
Also, the wound on the right side of the head is both an exit wound and an explosive wound. Initially, there was a small exit wound. Within 5 to 10 milliseconds, there was a large explosive wound that blew out several square inches of skull and expelled blood and brain tissues. This is common with head wounds caused by rifle bullets, even FMJ rifle bullets.
Sorry, I just don't know what you are getting at.
I'm still waiting for you to show me a ballistic expert that claims this was NOT an explosion. Make sure to quote them and not just their names.
By bloody tissues, you mean brains because that is what we are talking about. You actually think that what you are seeing is sunlight on brain tissue?
Ans: It's because you don't understand anything about explosions. A fireball is a plasma ball and like any fireball it lasts over several frames.
Do my laser experiment and say that. I dare you.
Sure, FMJ bullets can blow out skull fragments (tho not usually tangential to the trajectory) but they NEVER disintegrate and scatter fragments and they don't blow out most of your brain unless they explode. Face it, a FMJ bullet would not have done the damage we see here. This MUST have been a frangible bullet. Just ask the magic bullet.
Sorry, I just don't know what you are getting at.
I'm still waiting for you to show me a ballistic expert that claims this was NOT an explosion. Make sure to quote them and not just their names.
By bloody tissues, you mean brains because that is what we are talking about. You actually think that what you are seeing is sunlight on brain tissue?
Ans: It's because you don't understand anything about explosions. A fireball is a plasma ball and like any fireball it lasts over several frames.
Seems the missile didn't actually explode.
The Head Shot
Citation Ken Rahn
[EXCERPTS]
(...)
High-velocity missile wounds of the head are especially destructive because of formation of a temporary cavity within the cranial cavity. the brain is enclosed by the skull, a closed rigid structure that can relieve pressure only by "bursting."
Thus, high-velocity missile wounds of the head tend to produce bursting injuries. That these bursting injuries are the result of temporary cavity formation can be demonstrated by shooting through empty skulls. A high-velocity bullet fired through an empty skull produces small entrance and exit holes with no fractures. The same missile fired through a skull containing brain causes extensive fracturing and bursting injuries.
(...)
Of course you do.
Robert Frazier, Larry Sturdivan, Luke Haag and Michael Haag all support the theory that JFK was shot by non-explosive bullets, made by the Western Cartridge Company. Larry Sturdivan wrote a book about the ballistic science of the JFK assassination, ?The JFK Myths?.
Can I dig up a quote that they stated the Western Cartridge Company bullets (WCC/MC) were not explosive bullets? I don?t think so. Nor can I dig up a quote saying the bullets were not made mostly from arsenic (to act as a poison?), or not made of gold, or not made of silver (A wolf? Maybe, but not a werewolf). But they all support the notion that these bullets were ordinary WCC/MC bullets which were not explosive bullets.
You are being disingenuous to imply that, perhaps, one or more of these experts do support the notion of an explosive bullet causing the wounds to JFK.
I am no medical expert but it looks like I am seeing sunlight reflecting off of the interior of the scalp. I would guess it is covered in blood and the sunlight if reflecting off of the blood.
Chemical explosions are not powerful enough to produce a plasma. Nuclear explosions can but not chemical explosions. Lightning can produce plasma, but it requires an enormous cloud and needs to generate temperatures of 28,000 Kelvin to do so. No chemical explosion is powerful enough to do this.
And even the plasma produced by a lightning strike typically only lasts 10 to 100 milliseconds, covering perhaps 3 Zapruder frames at most. And I can?t believe that a small explosive bullet could produce plasma at all, let alone for as long as the plasma produced by a powerful lightning strike.
My one and only question is:
Can you site a respectable source that says an explosive bullet, fired from a rifle, produces plasma? [
So, what is your point? You have just pointed out in your discussion that the only shots that aren't shown are actually the important ones???? Doh! You don't need to alter hundreds of frames - that is absurd!
Life magazine printed 30 frames from the Zapruder film a week later in the 29th of November 1963 issue and considering the time it took to get the film and then the time it takes to organise, write, format, print and then get the magazine distributed across the country left the amount of time the conspirators had to do any alteration to be a couple of days at most.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-emFM6cquXgM/VHzuOcmo57I/AAAAAAABB6w/A3jh2k1oy7Y/s1600/Life-Magazine-November-29-1963--04.jpg)
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bv3zdhgEPkQ/VHzuOu0yuAI/AAAAAAABB60/qoEcZCWAhp8/s1600/Life-Magazine-November-29-1963--05.jpg)
In the following gif the Life magazine photos have superimposed over the original Zapruder Film and all the way through the most important events we get a perfect match to every image which means that to add a new element across a number of frames then there will be a knock on effect to these surrounding frames. The only frames we don't see are the actual headshot and the resulting back and to the left but if you had the time wouldn't these frames be the ones you would alter? Doh!
(https://s17.postimg.org/xl5r04a2n/Zap_life.gif)
So in conclusion these Life Magazine photos published a week later are all the proof anyone needs to show no Zapruder fakery.
But in addition to this powerful evidence there is;
perfect synchronization between the Muchmore/Nix and the Zapruder films
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/FkJltN832PY/hqdefault.jpg)
the impossible to fake ghost image in the sprocket area is an accurate representation of images captured with Zapruder's type of camera
(https://pmcvariety.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/zapruder-film.jpg?w=700&h=393&crop=1)
and upon microscopic examination the Zapruder film shows the correct and overall consistent grain level for the relevant Kodak film stock.
(https://s17.postimg.org/qa7xzaor3/film_grain_Zapruder.jpg)
JohnM
So, what is your point? You have just pointed out in your discussion that the only shots that aren't shown are actually the important ones???? Doh! You don't need to alter hundreds of frames - that is absurd!
Wouldn't the missing ones be the ones to alter? Absolutely. That is why they aren't shown. The shown frames are uninteresting and not altered!
Frame Z313/Z314 don't contain anything "except paint" and they don't show those anyway. The rest in the sequence after those are of utmost importance to show the actual sequence of events and the kill shots. I cover the logic of this statement that I am making with the following list of 11 points. I cover why the missing pictures are the most important ones and will never give a conflict with those that were shown. There never will be a conflict as those AP photos shown are the "non-issue" undoctored ones anyway! You could also advance the argument that they aren't going to use them all anyway for their paper and that is why none of those ever showed up!
Look at the photographic evidence presented:
1) There is absolutely no reaction by Mrs. Kennedy at Z313/314 and no jiggle or reaction in Zapruder's camera. Could you imagine being 18 inches beside a spray of blood and brain matter and what her face would look like after going through a volley like that? She would have been blinded and would have immediately raised her hands and wiped her eyes clean so she could see. No evidence of that whatsoever. Policeman on bikes claimed they were hit with brain matter. What about her? No reaction as she continues to show concern as she did from the time of the neck shot.
2) Those 2 frames were the incriminating evidence that was used to incriminate a dead Lee Harvey Oswald who supposedly fired his bolt action sniper rifle from the "sniper's nest"! The first neck shot occurred at about Z224 and produced no visible damage other than the President raising his hands to his neck and slumping forward. Then LHO takes another shot or two from the 6th floor of TSBD building at Z313. LHO was dead so remained unquestioned, NO alibi and NO statement was taken when he went to police stations and spent considerable time there - very questionable and concerning that police would neglect to take a statement! A very convenient couple of picture with "blood plume" have gun, gun casings, ownership papers and lead bullets. That makes a conviction conviction de facto. Never mind he had no motive - unless he did it for his handlers.
3) Given that no one wants to testify that JFK's head moved back about a foot and that he raised his arm in a defensive maneuver after this supposed shot - should lead you to question once more that there is a contradiction in visual evidence. If you put yourself in JFK's shoes and you actually saw the shooter at the front of the car, imagine what your reaction would be? The testimony of James Altgens, an AP reporter, (issued into the WC report about 6 months after the shooting), failed to see this obvious movement. His testimony reported that he was about 15 feet away at the time of the fatal shot but he failed to snap the shutter! He did get a picture of the bacj if the limousine a little farther down though which was headlined in many newspapers across the world. That particular picture which an astute AP News Reporter should have taken has never shown up and disappeared. What he did note in his testimony 6 months later was that there was a slight frontal movement of Kennedy's head. Obviously this is collaborating evidence to suggest a bullet coming from behind pushing the head forward!!! He failed to note the rather obvious movement back and the raising of the arm - which you obviously can't miss when you look at the Zapruder's film. There has been no attempt by anyone to justify the head or arm movement. It was just considered a nerve reaction to having the "massive" head injury at Z313.
4) The "fireball" appearing on JFK's head quickly disappears and leaves a white face behind. Again the coloring of the "fireball" is fairly close to Mrs. Kennedy's dress and overlaps (blending colors) with an added enhancement of catching the "light of course". All evidence of "fireball" is removed by Z321.
5) At Z322, there is light piercing through the windshield which I have suggested is a bullet which shatters glass and issues a spray seen in the sunlight. The secret service man is below the dash or beside this glass shatter. Certainly tracing his head movement, he looks like he was in the motion of ducking in the previous frames. The "projectile" appears to be low and doesn't strike Kennedy in the face as the face continues to be white and uninjured, although the arm drops down and becomes lifeless.
6) At Z329, a mere 1/2 a second later than this, you see a head shot that you just can't miss. A huge explosion in the windshield and large shatter in the light and a very large "red fireball" / blur at a position where the President's "white face and head" were in the frames just prior.
7) Zapruder was very close and it may have just shocked him and he shook his camera and that is why it became blurred at that instant.
8) Look closely at Z335 and you can see Jacqueline's eyes grow as big as saucers. We still don't see any evidence of anything in her face or eyes which suggests that it was a frontal shot with the debris field behind the vehicle, not the front. Closely examining this photograph and zooming in on JFK's head it appears that they clearly "wiped off" the front of his head and replaced it with her dress with some blending.
9) Anyone that looks at that frame and can't see that it was doctored is really naive and doesn't want to know the truth when it is starring them right in the face! It is an abrupt interface. There is a distinct line between face and no face!
10) Note also that the white marker in the grass lines up very nicely with Z322 and Z329 - just a coincidence of course that someone left that in the grass for the driver to look at for cue-ing!
11) Blow this evidence of as farcical and you might as well continue to be a LNer. It might help to laugh a bit at how inconceivable this cockamamie explanation is! More than one shooter - absolutely! Have a lone gunman bear it alone - absolutely! He was just simply an expert marine marksman and a nut case to boot!
The Kill Shot Explosion which resulted in blood and brain matter going Far Forward onto/across the hood of the JFK Limo, Backward onto Motorcycle Officer Hargis riding on the (L) rear of the JFK Limo, as well as all over ASAIC Kellerman and SA Greer in the front seat & the Connally's riding in the jump seats/mid Limo, should have also resulted in Jackie's face displaying at least traces of this same blood and brain matter. She was in front of and within inches of JFK's head/face at the time of the Kill Shot Explosion. Yet, as we see on the Current Zapruder Film, there are No Traces of any blood and or brain matter on her face following the Kill Shot. Starting with the start/stop/start Gap in the Current Zapruder Film, it continues to Disprove its' authenticity.
Name me just one ballistic expert who disagrees with this?
WTF are you talking about?
Just use some common sense and logic, which you are struggling with to refute me.
Blow-outs yes, explosions no.
yadayadayada
Why wasn't the sunlight reflecting off of ANYTHING else on JFK? Sorry, this was NOT sunlight.
If you say so. What ballistic expert agrees with you? Waiting...
Or the frangible bullet blows out a hole in the side of JFK's head, which couldn't possibly be an exit wound if the shot came from the TSBD. Otherwise show the trajectory. Waiting...
It does not disprove its' authenticity, it disproves the carefully scripted witnesses statements involved in the plot/scheme to assassinate the President. You have just fallen into my hands. Really, the FBI, CIA and Secret Service find themselves caught between a rock and a hard place. You can't have the cake and eat it too! They need to discredit the rest of the film but keep Z313/314 as they really need that for de facto evidence to complete the framing of a lone dead gunman LHO who did it all!
So in your opinion, you can't use the Z313/Z314 frames as they are not authentic. How do you convict LHO? These frames are produced as the infallible evidence used to convict LHO of a crime he didn't commit. I would not go so far to say that he wasn't somehow involved, but I don't think he realized he was going to be killed for his sins in the plot! We know that he must have had serious ties to his handlers as he had trips to Russia and Cuba that must have been funded by someone! Those 2 slides collaborate the evidence of finding a sniper rifle in the sniper's nest in TSBD building! A few frames were released at the time showing this to the WC but the bulk of the film wasn't released for 10 years into the public domain. The public cried for some pictures so some had to come out! Why do you suppose this was done? By saying what you have stated in your statement, you are admitting someone had wrongfully used this film as the concrete evidence to convict LHO. What was the purpose of not letting the American Public see this film at the time? The cameraman who took the pictures of the TBSD window, bus, theater and others entered as evidence is just too coincidental to have been real. He was never even interviewed but disappeared from the scene!
You have just admitted to a real conspiracy - whatever statement you make debating its authenticity points the fingers to those who held this film for many years and chose not to let people see it in its entirety! Who had a "copy" of it? How many were made and how was it kept from being "leaked" out?
I will admit its authenticity must be questioned because of the modifications made to it. That is why you have to ask who would want to modify and why was that necessary? Z313, Z314 and look at Z335 where you see part of the President's head "erased" and blended in by a blouse. You can't say the film wasn't modified. Anyone that says that is lying! As you said, overwhelming evidence that Jacqueline face and eyes were not covered in brain matter, blood spatter from the Z313/Z314 supposed "plume shots with explosive bullets is not there. The reason it wasn't there is because it didn't happen that way! If you look at the film without looking at individual slides, you will miss the modifications made. Playing the film back, you don't see any problems with the storyline as it happens so fast! Nelly Connally even goes so far to say that Jacqueline Kennedy had the President's brain in her hands if you watch her interview! This film was modified. If you admit that, you have to question why was it necessary if you are seeking the truth and why a coverup was necessary?
You can Not cherry pick. If the well has been poisoned, IT is poisoned. Once you agree that the Current Zapruder Film lacks credibility, you have cast doubt on the Entire film.
Why wasn't the sunlight reflecting off of ANYTHING else on JFK?
> The brain matter was wet
It does not disprove its' authenticity, it disproves the carefully scripted witnesses statements involved in the plot/scheme to assassinate the President. You have just fallen into my hands. Really, the FBI, CIA and Secret Service find themselves caught between a rock and a hard place. You can't have the cake and eat it too! They need to discredit the rest of the film but keep Z313/314 as they really need that for de facto evidence to complete the framing of a lone dead gunman LHO who did it all!
So in your opinion, you can't use the Z313/Z314 frames as they are not authentic. How do you convict LHO? These frames are produced as the infallible evidence used to convict LHO of a crime he didn't commit. I would not go so far to say that he wasn't somehow involved, but I don't think he realized he was going to be killed for his sins in the plot! We know that he must have had serious ties to his handlers as he had trips to Russia and Cuba that must have been funded by someone! Those 2 slides collaborate the evidence of finding a sniper rifle in the sniper's nest in TSBD building! A few frames were released at the time showing this to the WC but the bulk of the film wasn't released for 10 years into the public domain. The public cried for some pictures so some had to come out! Why do you suppose this was done? By saying what you have stated in your statement, you are admitting someone had wrongfully used this film as the concrete evidence to convict LHO. What was the purpose of not letting the American Public see this film at the time? The cameraman who took the pictures of the TBSD window, bus, theater and others entered as evidence is just too coincidental to have been real. He was never even interviewed but disappeared from the scene!
You have just admitted to a real conspiracy - whatever statement you make debating its authenticity points the fingers to those who held this film for many years and chose not to let people see it in its entirety! Who had a "copy" of it? How many were made and how was it kept from being "leaked" out?
I will admit its authenticity must be questioned because of the modifications made to it. That is why you have to ask who would want to modify and why was that necessary? Z313, Z314 and look at Z335 where you see part of the President's head "erased" and blended in by a blouse. You can't say the film wasn't modified. Anyone that says that is lying! As you said, overwhelming evidence that Jacqueline face and eyes were not covered in brain matter, blood spatter from the Z313/Z314 supposed "plume shots with explosive bullets is not there. The reason it wasn't there is because it didn't happen that way! If you look at the film without looking at individual slides, you will miss the modifications made. Playing the film back, you don't see any problems with the storyline as it happens so fast! Nelly Connally even goes so far to say that Jacqueline Kennedy had the President's brain in her hands if you watch her interview! This film was modified. If you admit that, you have to question why was it necessary if you are seeking the truth and why a coverup was necessary?
You only have to ask yourself 1 question. Where is the original Z film? Life and Z got copies. There are at least 2 obvious splices in the copies, which can only mean 1 thing: The FBI conspired to edit the film to "scrub" out any contradictions to the LN narrative. Otherwise, why else would the FBI hide the original film? And where the hell is it?
Cherry pick? Poisoned Well? Not really! The film's origin was authentic. Abraham Zapruder filmed it and his position is well known and can be verified. Someone modified it to support the story line and framing of the lone gunman LHO. That is true and I agree 100%.
It is authentic and it was not a Hollywood Production done years later. Some frames match the originals posted in the Life article. Only ones that never had modification applied to them were used however! The important ones like Z313 and on and the real kill shots were not part of the Life Magazine article. I am sorry. Therefore it can't be said that the film is not credible and crucial piece of evidence to solve the mystery.
No, the film is real and the lack of brain matter and blood spraying in Jacqueline's face is also real. It never happened. Frame Z313 shows a distinct line at the front of JFK's face going up at an angle and would be indicative of a shot coming from behind (although it looks like a ruler line). If that didn't spray her with brain and blood matter, there was no bullet - plain and simple and it was drawn in! In fact it doesn't look authentic!
Furthermore, dead men with a massive head shot like that shown on Z313, don't move back in their seat and raise their arm just prior to the real shots coming in. Having no one report that move from any witness is also telling. There are many theories that the shots came from the front and so the human blood and brain matter would exit out of the rear of the skull. In this case, the front remains relatively clean. This makes sense as to why Jacqueline is able to continue to observe her husband without being blinded. Kennedy's move after being hit in the neck behind the sign many frames earlier means that he was maybe a little slow in reaction but still very conscious at Z322! No, this film is very credible.
Modifying or removing frames just means corrections were made to match the "frame job of LHO" and to keep the volley of bullets hitting the car coming only from the 6th floor TSBD building. Withholding the release of the film, it further points the finger at someone not wanting it to be in the public domain and for good reason. Modification points a finger at the Department of Justice and other internal organizations that are not accountable to Congress or Government. After all why was the killing of a President investigated by a handpicked Warren Commission and not a Grand Jury?
Yes, there is a well that was poisoned but it is not the Zapruder Film! It is the SYSTEM. That well is deep and involves a number of organizations that operate above the law, meddles and controls world affairs and the politics of other countries, start wars and keeps the governments in perpetual debt to it. Like JFK, anyone that threatens it, is removed! The Kennedy's and the likes of Trumps are not supposed to be in politics period as they interfere with the NWO.
The left side of JFK's brain was virtually undamaged as I understand it. The injury was a referred in some quarters a shattering type, partially blowing out the right side and top of the head, apparently. Clearly seen in Zap. This, arguably, explains why Jackie avoided a bloody face-wash.
Look at the facts once more:
1) The plume visible in Z313 at an angle distributed 6 feet above the car clearly shows an incredible and unavoidable mist at the front of his head. The view of her face is blocked by the spray.
2) The car movement forwards would also help scatter this on her face. It is shown in Z313 as a massive cloud which would have had to have distributed itself!
3) The reports of motorcycle policemen passing behind on Jacqueline's side also reported being struck with body tissue (6 to 8 feet away)
4) Jacqueline's distance a mere 12 to 18 inch distance without even a flinch in the film sequence just following Z313 pretty much dismisses a right side blowout coming from the TBSD (up and behind) and staying on his side of the car! Her face was facing his direction too!
5) She has no reaction until after Z329/Z330 upon which time she notices something very much has happened and that unusually matches the red blur masking the President's entire head! As I said earlier, JFK's face goes from white to that of dark red. (Just after you see the massive windshield glass shatter reflected in the light. Clint Hill is in ducking motion and out of way by Z322 to avoid being hit.
6) The mere fact that JFK goes back in his seat and raises his right arm is too coincidental with Clint Hill ducking and going forward at the very same instant. If there was hard braking of vehicle, you could say Clint Hill lurched forward as a result. However that motion is exact opposite to a supposed limp Kennedy's reaction. Weakened by an earlier visible neck shot when he stops wavings and places his hands near his neck, he reacts in the exact opposite Clint Hill!
Bullets from the front explain rather nicely why Jackie avoided a bloody face-wash, please and thank you! You would be foolish to think that an explosive round such as that exhibited in Z313/Z314 complete with a lingering mist in those frames could miss Jacqueline's face. There was lack of expression change just after Z313 as well but before Z329 indicating nothing has changed other than her trying to figure out where he was injured in the neck shot. Could we not draw a conclusion that inbound bullets never occurred there? Remember that is evidence only required to frame LHO and make it look like the shots came from behind!
You can't help but see the expression change in Z335 when she decides to leave the car - wondering if she is going to survive! Her clean face with eyes getting very large and in shock - no indication of splatter and there are some very clear Zapruder frames in this area. Look closely at Z335 and you can see Jacqueline's left shoulder in the frame, see the position of Kennedy's ear and absolutely nothing in front of it. It sure looks like an edited picture to me! His head is cut off! Kind of a "wet" gold nugget (sunlight reflection of course) below Jacqueline's clearly visible shoulder. If that frame wasn't edited, Kennedy had no head at all from the ear forward to try to save at hospital or to even take a picture at a morgue. It was edited out of the picture obviously as you can't reconstruct that big of a mess and end up with a head later on for a funeral! That was a rather serious edit on that particular frame!
You couple that with the man coming from the front of the car (some would like to call him Macolm Summers) having his head totally scratched out of the frame on Lightbox Z347 (intentionally obliterated???) leads a conspiracist to question that maybe this man who rolls into the grass has more to do with a windshield shot than meets the eye and is a key character in the assassination scene! At frames z363 the family with the small child remains virtually motionless and emotionless - that is unexplained! Why is there only one massive reaction (movement done by one guy rolling across from the front of the car - my assumption) while everyone else close remains motionless in the pictures? You would have thought the next couple with the child would have some reaction after hearing gun shots and seeing a man rolling in the grass. Wouldn't the child be covering his face in horror? Instead no responses. They missed looking over and seeing the guy beside them running and rolling?
Again, Kennedy's hand and head movement is extremely meaningful if he is reacting to something he saw at the front of the limousine. Who would think that a shot taking out his entire front of head at Z313 would cause his head to move back in the seat (about a foot) against the bullet flow and at the same time causing him to raise his right arm up. That looks like a pure defensive move to me! Tie it together and you have a very close frontal shot, no splatter on any occupant's in the car and a dead President! No one else hurt!
Of course, no eye witnesses observed or ever recorded that very obvious head movement and arm lifting visible in the Zapruder Frames! Maybe it was all masked by the cloud of misty vapor? I would guess it was a well executed script to thwart out the possibility of having to deal with more than just one lone gunman who was killed before he could talk and proclaim his innocence. Yes, it had to be a deranged nut with no motive at all!
LOL
Same goes for the rest of your post
Seek help
Dino Brugioni worked on the original Zapruder film Saturday night Nov. 23 ( Reply 87 on this subject page 9 ) Brugioni says the head shot spray of blood goes 3-4 feet in the air and that the spray which starts on Z313 goes well into the next several frames. This work was done at the CIA's National Photographic Interpretation Center ( NPIC ) . Brugioni said the Z-film was very clear . They were shocked at what they saw. Brugioni's team used " 2 " briefing boards which contained between 12 and 15 prints . Not known by Brugioni was the fact that later that evening Nov. 24th , another team came in to do another (4) briefing boards which are the boards that are seen at the National Archives . This tells us that Brugioni's 2 briefing boards must have shown some prints that the CIA did not want anyone to see. The second team actually finished their work on their 4 briefing boards early Monday morning the 25th day of November and the day that JFK was laid to rest.
The left side of JFK's brain was virtually undamaged as I understand it. The injury was referred to, in some quarters, as a shattering-type wound, partially blowing out the right side and top of the head, apparently. Clearly seen in Zap. This, arguably, explains why Jackie avoided a bloody face-wash.
Bill's Response to my offered explanation:
Kennedy's hand and head movement is extremely meaningful if he is reacting to something he saw at the front of the limousine
LOL
Same goes for the rest of your post
Seek help
I was counting on you to enlighten me - "Seek help from you"!!
So Bill ..... you can start by giving your opinion as to why no one notes that rather large head and arm movement in any reports! Why there is no splatter on Jacqueline's face? I guess you answered that one by saying it was on the RH side of the face so the spray was directed only to his side and up and that is "shattering type" injury was in a direction in every other direction than on Jacqueline's face. If anything the wind blew it in the direction of the grassy knoll I guess! The mist floated in that direction only - even though others all over the car reported something different! No testimony from Jacqueline herself. Witnesses more reliable than the picture evidence presented as it doesn't match their scripts would be your suggestion I could only assume! The visual image is very much at odds with testimonial evidence from those closes to the scene!
I guess you just classify the "Kennedy move" as an involuntary movement do to a bullet strike from behind - must be nerves? It was a "knee jerk reaction" against the force propelling him forwards from the bullet's impact! Who wouldn't push back against when you are missing your head as shown in frame Z335! (Even though a fully present face was seen again after the mist subsided. The face was present until Z329!)
Did you even look at the frames Z313/314 ,Z322, Z329/330, Z335 and Z347 or are you just talking through your hat? Your attempt at a reply is to knock down the writer rather than refute the evidence. Witnesses more reliable than film I would have to assume is your statement of facts? You are obviously making a rhetorical statement because you don't have any worthwhile rebuttal or answer and are only playing the devil's advocate!
Post something worthwhile: - a rebuttal would have been nice rather than posting for the sake of posting! Of the 454 posts you have made this year, How many posts have you offered as solutions? "Any statement that is intended to not have any feedback, output, or response is known as a rhetorical statement and useless. A good starting point for a LNer! This is exactly what you did here! No solution is offered except to suggest that it is a wildly outlandish cockamanie statement! Put some facts behind your dismissal of the film's evidence and its tampering please! Paint us a coherent picture of this part of the film's scene and interpret it - I beg you! Give us the whole story! "You might even want to include the driver's 1/18 of a second neck turn and the white marker in the grass! How was that all possible if not tampered with?
Here are the visual cues from the images that I would like to see you include in your story line! It would be good to include, lack of spray on Jacqueline's face 12 inches away from an explosive bullet, large head and arm movement of JFK, Clint Hill quickly moving forward in a ducking motion at same instant, glass shatter seen in light and the front of head totally missing in Z335. Include a rendition of a wipe out of a face in lightbox Z347. Give it a whirl, as I need a coherent rebuttal statement so I can adjust my statement of logic of what took place in those 3 or 4 seconds of Zapruder's film. Give more than a rhetorical statement! We can reach synergy - unfortunately that doesn't seem to be your goal to find a mutually agreeable solution based on presented facts in photo images!
I meant seek help of a psychological nature. You are batspombleprofglidnoctobuns crazy, son. Possibly an Alex Jones fan?
In any case, we have matter that was blown forward and upward as seen in the Zapruder film, Nix film, Muchmore film, and Bronson films.
We have matter blown forward into the front seat as observed by Roy Kellerman. (2H78)
We have matter blown forward onto the back of William R. Greer. Fred Newcomb interview with William R. Greer, cited in Murder From Within, p.139)
We have matter blown forward onto Governor Connally. (4H133), and Mrs. Connally.(4H147)
We have matter blown forward onto the inside surface of the limousine windshield.
We have "Blood, tissue, or bone frag. scattered over interior of car and on the hood and on visors (both sides of rt visor)" (Notes of FBI Agent Robert Frazier, 11/23/63, 1:30AM), Clay Shaw trial testimony of Robert Frazier.
We have matter that was blown to the right and right front. (Zapruder film frame Z-313, William Newman and Abraham Zapruder interview, 11/22/63, WFAA TV)
In fact, blood and brain matter was blown every which way including some of what you said.
The Gore in Dealey Plaza
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/exploded.htm
So tell me again who is batspombleprofglidnoctobuns crazy? Everyone in the car got hit with debris except Jacqueline Kennedy whose face was 6 to 12 inches away from him, sitting slightly to the front of his position and facing directly toward him according to Z312/313/314? Policeman on LHS rear was also hit so hard with debris that "he thought he was struck by a bullet"! I seem to see that you are missing that witness in your "hellbound" argument to prove that the debris field was only on the RHS of car and to the front! Although you did mention Mrs. Connally! I guess you are continuing to avoid answering my post as it is beyond your reasoning power to try and tie it all together for a logical argument. Really the only reason she is kept clean is because the bullets flew front to back! You could also have maybe voiced an argument that there was a strong wind from hell blowing that day!
You seem to think the answer to what I asked you lies with saying everyone else got hit with brain matter in the car front and right - except Jacqueline because she was to the left. Look at her closely in each frame and see that she was no more or less concerned with JFK up until about Z329. She remained "unblinded" by debris and continued to look after her husband in the same manner throughout that sequence. In other words, she was unreactive to the misty cloud formed inches from her face (Z313) if you want to believe what you have saw in that frame!
Who answers visual presented evidence with scripted witness statements? I guess you do as you don't have access to the "still" seeing the heavy mist over Jacqueline in Z313! You can hardly see her in the picture for mist! You are a true LNer that uses rhetorical statements, avoids answering the difficult questions and the visual imagery laid out before you . As a true LNer with no answers other than to call people batspombleprofglidnoctobuns crazy! "Witnesses are only to be trusted and way more reliable in your opinion than photographic evidence!"
As a furtherance of that argument, even President Bill Clinton issued statements denying his sexual misconduct with Lewinski in the oval office in front of cameras rolling. Did he lie? She was paid off when semen stains on her dress were brought in as evidence. He was impeached but never removed! I guess it would be safe to say witnesses or the President for that matter will say what they have to in order to protect themselves for a number of reasons - even under oath. They may be under pressure to protect their organization, their job and reputation, or even may be offered some money. Being under oath doesn't mean you are going to die if you tell a lie. You have to believe in God first and that he will strike you down for telling one!
Pictures don't lie, witnesses can and do if their skin is involved and there is money involved - Stormy Daniel's as an example! She was paid off and admitted it. We could only hope that FBI, CIA and Secret Service never have lied to the American people and never will. That is a very noble thought on your part! These people are always chosen for their moral scruples, integrity and ability to always tell the truth under oath no matter what and in all circumstances! They have been hand chosen for the job and are the "incorruptibles" - model citizens always!
Well....then there is modern day Comey, Mccabe, Strzok, Paige, Mueller and maybe Rosenstein to name a few. Certainly don't think there is anything new under the sun and what goes on now has gone on in the past even in the era with J.Edgar Hoover at the helm for 48 years of service. Having a fired Allen Dulles appointed to the Warren Commission could be likened in a modern day setting to having someone like James Comey on a Commission in an ensuing investigation of a Donald Trump affair. I don't think there would be any love lost there either!
Back to your collaboration of evidence of the various films. You suggest that the other films Bronson, Nix and Muchmore Film "all show matter being blown forward and upward". I would have to call you on that one! That is pretty wishful thinking on your part as none show anything close or similar to what the Zapruder Film Shows with a plume in Z313 extending 6 feet above the car! Then again only the Zapruder Film was used as evidence in the trial. I think I can call you batspombleprofglidnoctobuns crazy as well for figuring you have an irrefutable argument in that consensus of those films lol! You better go see a psychiatrist for help yourself!
I meant seek help of a psychological nature. You are batspombleprofglidnoctobuns crazy, son. Possibly an Alex Jones fan?
In any case, we have matter that was blown forward and upward as seen in the Zapruder film, Nix film, Muchmore film, and Bronson films.
We have matter blown forward into the front seat as observed by Roy Kellerman. (2H78)
We have matter blown forward onto the back of William R. Greer. Fred Newcomb interview with William R. Greer, cited in Murder From Within, p.139)
We have matter blown forward onto Governor Connally. (4H133), and Mrs. Connally.(4H147)
We have matter blown forward onto the inside surface of the limousine windshield.
We have "Blood, tissue, or bone frag. scattered over interior of car and on the hood and on visors (both sides of rt visor)" (Notes of FBI Agent Robert Frazier, 11/23/63, 1:30AM), Clay Shaw trial testimony of Robert Frazier.
We have matter that was blown to the right and right front. (Zapruder film frame Z-313, William Newman and Abraham Zapruder interview, 11/22/63, WFAA TV)
In fact, blood and brain matter was blown every which way including some of what you said.
The Gore in Dealey Plaza
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/exploded.htm
Let's back the bus up here. Where at Any Point are we seeing, "Matter that was Blown Forward and Upward" on the Bronson Film ???
And what would be the explanation for Motorcycle Officer Hargis riding closely on the LEFT Rear of the JFK Limo getting hit so hard with blood and brain matter that he thought he had been hit with a bullet?
Back that chuckwagon up, Tex.
Are you expecting a tsunami of bloody gore?
Hargis said he"rode""run through" the material as it came down.
Hargis: "We were moving at the time, and when he got hit all that stuff went like this, and of course I run through it."
He also said this: "If he'd [JFK] got hit in the rear, I'd of been able to see it. All I saw was just a splash come out on the other side. "
He saw no exit hole in the back of the head; all he saw was a "splash" coming out of the other, i.e., right side.
The Connallys said they were hit by blood and brain; Kellerman said he was hit; Greer said he was hit. Blood and brain matter were found all on the interior of the limo, all in FRONT of where JFK was.
Question: If the exit was in the back of the head how did this material/matter land in front of where JFK was?
Hargis source: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/hargis.htm
The link you provided referenced Tink Thompson and his "Six Seconds in Dallas" book. The theory proffered in that book was that the JFK kill shot = 2 bullets, fired from 2 different locations, striking the head of JFK at almost the same time. This would explain the multiple directions that material/matter was expelled + the head explosion.
I thought later Thompsomn backed away from this theory when he looked at David Wimps information in the early 2000's
The link you provided referenced Tink Thompson and his "Six Seconds in Dallas" book. The theory proffered in that book was that the JFK kill shot = 2 bullets, fired from 2 different locations, striking the head of JFK at almost the same time. This would explain the multiple directions that material/matter was expelled + the head explosion.
And what would be the explanation for Motorcycle Officer Hargis riding closely on the LEFT Rear of the JFK Limo getting hit so hard with blood and brain matter that he thought he had been hit with a bullet?
Once again: Hargis said he saw no exit wound in the back of JFK's head. He saw no splash exiting JFK's head in the back. Only the side.
He was right behind JFK: if there was an exit wound caused by a second bullet why didn't he see it? And there is no exit wound seen in the Zapruder film. Or splash from the rear of the head. And there is no exit wound in the head shown in the autopsy x-rays and photos.
You can say that Hargis (somehow) missed it but if you do that then you open yourself up to questioning about what the other eyewitnesses said they saw re a exit wound. We all agree that eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable. Unless they're corroborated by other evidence we can't rely on them. In this case Hargis's account is corroborated - for me - by the other physical evidence.
The physical evidence is the problem for those that say there was a exit wound in the back of the head.
Post something worthwhile: - a rebuttal would have been nice rather than posting for the sake of posting! Of the 454 posts you have made this year, How many posts have you offered as solutions? "Any statement that is intended to not have any feedback, output, or response is known as a rhetorical statement and useless.
Chapman is really adept at cutting and pasting from McAdams, though.
If the information is factual, who cares what website carries it?
Once again: Hargis said he saw no exit wound in the back of JFK's head. He saw no splash exiting JFK's head in the back. Only the side.
He was right behind JFK: if there was an exit wound caused by a second bullet why didn't he see it? And there is no exit wound seen in the Zapruder film. Or splash from the rear of the head. And there is no exit wound in the head shown in the autopsy x-rays and photos.
You can say that Hargis (somehow) missed it but if you do that then you open yourself up to questioning about what the other eyewitnesses said they saw re a exit wound. We all agree that eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable. Unless they're corroborated by other evidence we can't rely on them. In this case Hargis's account is corroborated - for me - by the other physical evidence.
The physical evidence is the problem for those that say there was a exit wound in the back of the head.
I think you just answered your own question.
That's an answer for Tim.
Again, why do you fear C&P..
The "Turkey Shoot Point" (Z313) was intended to disguise multiple shots if the Mauser didn't score a head shot before then. The umbrella man signaled the shooters, otherwise, simple geometry disproves the head shot came from the TSBD.
Below shows an overhead view of JFK's orientation at Z313 if a shot from behind blew out the right side of his head. According to this view Zapruder could not have filmed JFK's profile at the TSP, when clearly he did. LNers?
(http://www.readclip.com/images/JFK_headshot.png)