Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
Thomas Marcuson, Allan Fritzke and 16 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?  (Read 4261 times)

Offline Jack Trojan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 100
  • Thomas Arthur Vallee
Re: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?
« Reply #80 on: April 01, 2018, 01:30:16 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Questions:

Give me the name of just one ballistic expert who agrees with this?

Name me just one ballistic expert who disagrees with this?

Quote
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.

WTF are you talking about?

Quote
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]

Just use some common sense and logic, which you are struggling with to refute me.

Quote
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.

Blow-outs yes, explosions no.

Quote
I suspect you won’t answer my questions, but if you did give an honest answer, I think it would be something like this:

yadayadayada

Quote
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.

Why wasn't the sunlight reflecting off of ANYTHING else on JFK? Sorry, this was NOT sunlight.

Quote
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.

If you say so. What ballistic expert agrees with you? Waiting...

Quote
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.

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...

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?
« Reply #80 on: April 01, 2018, 01:30:16 AM »


Offline Joe Elliott

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
Re: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?
« Reply #81 on: April 01, 2018, 02:09:57 AM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Name me just one ballistic expert who disagrees with this?

If you say so. What ballistic expert agrees with you? 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.





You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Why wasn't the sunlight reflecting off of ANYTHING else on JFK? Sorry, this was NOT sunlight.



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?



You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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...


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.

Offline Jack Trojan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 100
  • Thomas Arthur Vallee
Re: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?
« Reply #82 on: April 01, 2018, 03:36:05 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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?

Sorry, I just don't know what you are getting at.

Quote
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.


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.

Quote
Frames 314, 315, 316 and 317 all show a small bright source of light on the bloody tissues.

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?

Quote
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?


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.

Quote
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.

Do my laser experiment and say that. I dare you.

Quote
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.

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.

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 457
Re: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?
« Reply #83 on: April 01, 2018, 04:17:50 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
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.

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.

(...)
« Last Edit: April 01, 2018, 04:22:44 AM by Bill Chapman »

Offline Joe Elliott

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
Re: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?
« Reply #84 on: April 01, 2018, 05:56:53 AM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Sorry, I just don't know what you are getting at.


Of course you do.



You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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.


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.


You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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?


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.



You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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.


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? [


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?
« Reply #84 on: April 01, 2018, 05:56:53 AM »


Offline Joe Elliott

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
Re: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?
« Reply #85 on: April 01, 2018, 06:01:12 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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.

(...)


Yes. This is correct. The WCC/MC, FMJ bullet does not explode. It only broke into 3 major fragments. But it does cause a bursting wound (when it travels through a skull at near muzzle velocity). Larry Sturdivan referred to this as an “explosive wound”. The head basically explodes, expelling pieces of bone, brain tissue and blood away from the head. But the bullet itself never explodes.

Offline Jack Trojan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 100
  • Thomas Arthur Vallee
Re: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?
« Reply #86 on: April 01, 2018, 09:04:20 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Of course you do.

No, I don't.

Quote
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.

If you are going to cite them then quote their arguments that support your claims and keep in mind that their opinions aren't facts. You don't expect me to read their books, do you?

Quote
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.

What I need is the opinion from an expert that knows what they are talking about. I'll know one when I see one. An expert needs to come forward and explain whether the copper powder in a frangible bullet emits light after exploding and whether the explosion lasts >1/8th of a second. Have any of your experts explored that? Then cite their arguments and I will gladly eat crow.

Quote
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.

The other comparable bright spot is the patch of sunlight reflecting off of Connally's forehead, which is very specific. If Connally had moved his head the lit spot would disappear. What we see with JFK was the lit spot move with him as he reacted to the shot. That indicates this was not sunlight and that brain matter would not show up that bright on film. So what else then?

Quote
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.

I'm not an expert in chemical explosions, I merely ask the question, does the copper powder that explodes in a frangible bullet produce light and if so, for how long?

Quote
My one and only question is:

Can you site a respectable source that says an explosive bullet, fired from a rifle, produces plasma? [


The most popular gun in history that fires frangible bullets is called the "Fireball". Fire is plasma. Does igniting copper powder produce plasma? Looks like it to me. Let me know what your experts think.

Online Mike Orr

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Re: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?
« Reply #87 on: April 02, 2018, 01:52:57 AM »
In a video interview by Doug Horne, Dino Brugioni says that he and his team examined the 8 mm Zapruder film of the John F. Kennedy assassination the evening of Saturday 23 November 1963 and into the morning of Sunday 24 November 1963, when he was the weekend duty officer at the CIA's National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC). Dino and his team projected the film for two members of the Secret Service several times, and they indicated which frames they wanted prints made from, which in turn should be included on the briefing boards. Dino indicated in the interview that he was positive that they had the original film, and that when they projected it for the two members of the Secret Service, it was the first time they had viewed the film. After creating the required duplicate negatives from the desired frames, the film was returned to the two members of the Secret Service, and that approximately 3 AM they left the NPIC facility. He and his team then made up two identical sets of Briefing boards, one set for CIA Director John McCone and one for the Secret Service. Each set was consisted of two boards, hinged in the middle, and contained between 12 and 15 prints of frames from the film, with the frame number indicated on the board. Mr. Brugioni prepared identical one sheet of notes that that accompanied each set of Briefing Boards , which included the name of each person who had seen the film and worked on the production of the prints and the Briefing Boards. When the work was complete , Dino Brugioni reviewed the Briefing Boards and notes with his superior, Arthur Lundahl, whom he had called and requested to come to the facility. The Briefing Boards and notes were then turned over to Arthur Lundahl. Brugioni said he was not aware of a "Second examination of the film at NPIC the night of Sunday 24 November and the early morning of Monday 25 November, by a completely different team. Apparently the team that worked on the 2nd examination was given "16 mm" film and made up another, and possibly larger , series of frame prints, and that another set of briefing boards was also created. Mr. Brugioni thought the Zapruder film in the National Archives today, and available to the public, has been altered from the version of the film he saw and worked with on November 23-24. The version he recalls had one or more frames than the version now available to the public. Additionally, he is adamant that the set of briefing boards available to the public in the National Archives is not the set that he and his team produced on November 23-24, 1963 . Brugioni and his team had their prints on 2 Briefing Boards and the Briefing Boards at the National Archives consist of " 4 " Briefing Boards . Brugioni also said that the blood spray from Kennedy's head was 3 to 4 feet into the air and lasted several more frames . Brugioni said there was no way that the blood spray would have only been contained on frame 313.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?
« Reply #87 on: April 02, 2018, 01:52:57 AM »


Online Allan Fritzke

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?
« Reply #88 on: April 16, 2018, 07:12:58 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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.

   

                               

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!

 

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



the impossible to fake ghost image in the sprocket area is an accurate representation of images captured with Zapruder's type of camera



and upon microscopic examination the Zapruder film shows the correct and overall consistent grain level for the relevant Kodak film stock.






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!

« Last Edit: April 16, 2018, 07:20:47 AM by Allan Fritzke »

Offline Royell Storing

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 172
Re: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?
« Reply #89 on: April 16, 2018, 03:17:22 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
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. 
« Last Edit: April 16, 2018, 03:19:22 PM by Royell Storing »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: How long does it take to alter hundreds of frames of film?
« Reply #89 on: April 16, 2018, 03:17:22 PM »