+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/Forum-Deep-Politics-Forum)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/Forum-JFK-Assassination)
+--- Thread: Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely (/Thread-Technical-Hurdles-Suggest-Extensive-Z-Film-Alteration-Highly-Unlikely)
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - Phil Dragoo - 30-08-2013
I've seen 2001: A Space Odyssey, Mr. Zapruder, and you're no Stanley Kubrick
Since seeing the film in the mid-seventies I've come to have a handful of objections:
The limo pops onto Elm from another space-time continuum, through a portal from the Terminator series, et cetera
The dramatic slowing described by 59 witnesses is absent
Head turns by Greer and Kellerman are too, too fast
The bubble-gum wound--ye gods and little fishes
The blackened back of the head at 317 and elsewhere--Groden's count is eighty-one who saw The Wound--and it includes Hill and others present in the Plaza
David Joseph's initial suggestion it was shot at 48 fps and edited fits with a turnaround from the two NPIC events which were compartmentalized and in the second involved an unslit film--a paradox as the film was previously split
Chris Davidson adds reference to
Filmed at 48 Frames Per Sec.
Frame removal pattern is keep 2 , discard 3. A 60% reduction.
Playing at approx 18 fps.
David Healy has presented a lengthy overview of a technique which should have been available at the Hawkeyeworks
So in my view the limited editing was possible given the time and equipment
I think the disagreements arose out of arguing at cross-purposes, extensive versus limited, definitions, et cetera
A few years after the assassination in 1969 a friend with a 16mm Beaulieu put it on a tripod so I could make an animation I'd envisioned
I set up the easel with three elements of the American flag each in primaries secondaries black white and he took four frames of each of the arrangements on the easel
It took four hours to get a minute of footage for the light show
The Zapruder film had about as many frames as I had prepared for, although the number used was about 240
It was just the effect I wanted
Contrast a pair of rank amateurs with a single camera to a team of professionals with state of the art equipment and I posit a 26 second 8 mm film could be "improved" over that weekend
This is a part of that enormously funded pack of liars which included one E Howard Hunt who was tasked by his superior to "improve" the cable traffic
So the man "improved" it to the point he had Kennedy ordering rather than opposing the murders of Diem and Nhu
A tactical adaption was made within 48 hours removing the worst of the evidence of crossfire
Of course the head snap was denied by the haughty Dulles--Lifton told of it in Best Evidence
and the quack hired gun "expert" ascribed it to "jet effect"
These aren't artists; they're killers
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - Jim DiEugenio - 30-08-2013
Phil, Jeff dealt with those herky jerky motions already.
And they have been dealt with elsewhere too.
Duke Lane did a very nice analysis of the 59 witnesses.
They are not 59. In reality, they are something like less than 20% of that sum: 12 or 13.
Everyone sees the jump cut in the film of course. And most people think its a start, stop. I mean, what could be hidden there? I have heard some of the things floated, but where is the witness corroboration?
And no, it was not a "courtesy visit" I paid to the Wilkinsons. You don't drive 50 miles one way with the price of gasoline being what it is out of "courtesy". They really strike me as being credible people, since they work in the industry every day. And they have done their homework. They have one significant technical problem to overcome. And I look forward to the end result of that endeavor. But during our talk, it became clear to me that they don't buy the wholesale alterationist concept. And that, in this regard, Horne misrepresented who they were and what they are about.
Too often in this so called research community, people recycle what other authors have written without doing any kind of proper check up on what is on the page. It then gets repeated and it then becomes acceptable. Even though it should not be. Remember, Garrison being in bed with the Mafia? Complete and utter balderdash. But it lasted for 25 years. That is how great our "research community" is on peer review.
I am in neither camp on this issue. I have alway said that I was agnostic on this point. And I await the end game for the Wilkinsons.
But I don't know what is achieved by the almost fascist zealotry of the radical alterationist school here. So far you have driven out Rossi, who is going to Greg Parker's site. And I consider that a big loss to DPF. Jeff Carter is not posting. And his contributions to 50 Reasons are indelible. I mean on a five dollar budget with almost no time allowed, to come up with what they did on that is really something.
And when these things happen, what is the creed the radical alterationist follower recites? Most of the time its something like, well there are infiltrators in our midst.
Uh, will someone please explain to me how Bob Groden is an infiltrator? Gary Aguilar? Lisa Pease?
In other words, if you disagree with someone about a particular issue, then this translates into being a CIA agent?
Well, I hate to tell everyone, but the highest rating the critics ever got with the public was after Oliver Stone's movie came out. Remember, "back and to the left"? Yep, he said it five times. Maybe Stone was a CIA agent? Or maybe it was Zach Sklar?
Or was it Albert Rossi?
No one has done more work on this concept of jackals in our midst than I have. I did it in the Second Edition of Destiny Betrayed at length. And I did it in my essay, "How Gary Mack became Dan Rather". But there is one big difference. I did it with strong evidence. And in some cases, this rose to the threshold of proof. Disagreements about whether or not the Z film is genuine does not constitute proof. Just like disagreements about George H. W. Bush being in on the Kennedy caper does not constitute proof of being a spook.
Unless you are John Hankey of course. Hankey actually called me a CIA agent because CTKA printed Seamus Coogan's critique of Hankey's crappy movie. Now if you are in his camp, why don't you guys go to Santa Barbara in November instead of Dallas. And you can listen to the likes of Fetzer, Cinque, and Janney. I mean Janney accused Lisa and myself of being the Real Deal, yep, Nazis, because we did not like his book on Mary Meyer.
Yep, that is what this "research community" has come to. In the immortal words of Kevin Costner in The Untouchables, "I have become what I beheld and I am convinced I have done right."
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - Tracy Riddle - 30-08-2013
I totally agree, Jim. Too many of the people associated with Fetzer have a cult-like mentality. They push ideas like the Altgens photo being altered, though it was put out on the AP wires just 30 minutes after the assassination. Then they delete comments on Youtube videos from people trying to point that out. Over on the 9/11 side, they seem to think that every bit of photographic footage from that day is faked. Seriously? These kinds of extreme, absolutist positions only serve to discredit the whole critical community and drive ordinary people towards the official story.
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - John Mooney - 30-08-2013
Tracy Riddle Wrote:Over on the 9/11 side, they seem to think that every bit of photographic footage from that day is faked. Seriously? These kinds of extreme, absolutist positions only serve to discredit the whole critical community and drive ordinary people towards the official story.
I think it's their job.
Seriously.
I have plenty of good questions about 9/11 (we probably all do) but I got sick of debating with no-planers and people pushing "September Clues".
They drowned the 9/11 truth movement with crap.
Same as the Apollo Moon hoax.. designed to make us all look stupid by association.. because "all conspiracy theorists are crazy".
Mission accomplished.
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - Tracy Riddle - 30-08-2013
You may be right, John. I encountered one troll on another forum who was simultaneously pushing the Driver Shot JFK and the Zapruder Film is Fake theories. When I pointed out to him that the two theories cancel each other out, he disappeared. Don't they train these people better?
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - Dawn Meredith - 30-08-2013
Jan Klimkowski Wrote:I am good friends with yet another who saw a different Z film. And described to me in detail what she saw.Peter Lemkin Wrote:I had EXTENSIVE email exchange with yet another who saw the 'other film' and their report was essentially the same as that of Rich and the others. One can question if it is 'real' in the sense of accurate, but it does seem to be out there and IMHO comports more with the evidence than does the 'Z-film', leading me to believe it is the untampered with version. N.B. the person that detailed to me what they saw in the film was [and likely still is] involved in intel, with some very big players of the time and places related to the Big D. [no, not Plumlee] I related this on Rich's forum long ago. I also trusted Rich highly - a man of great integrity who I can't imagine inventing the story of the 'other film'.
Peter - thank you for sharing.
You are a researcher we can trust implicitly, and when you choose to withhold an identity, we can respect your decision absolutely.
Case is closed on this subject for me. These people are not liars.
Dawn
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - Charles Drago - 30-08-2013
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Umm, David, as I said, there is no Hollywood Group.
What there is is the Wilkinsons.
You just won't come to your senses, will you?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/group
group noun, often attributive \ˈgrüp\
1: two or more figures forming a complete unit in a composition
2: a number of individuals assembled together or having some unifying relationship
and
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/group
group n.
1. An assemblage of persons or objects gathered or located together; an aggregation: a group of dinner guests; a group of buildings near the roa
2. Two or more figures that make up a unit or design, as in sculpture.
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Well, I hate to tell everyone, but the highest rating the critics ever got with the public was after Oliver Stone's movie came out. Remember, "back and to the left"? Yep, he said it five times. Maybe Stone was a CIA agent? Or maybe it was Zach Sklar?
Or was it Albert Rossi?
Another cheap shot.
No one -- repeat, NO ONE -- at DPF has made any such suggestion regarding Messrs. Rossi, Stone, and Sklar.
And for the record, no one has done more than I've done to try to convince Albert Rossi to stay on DPF.
You, on the other hand, seem pleased and better served by his exit and the opportunities for I-told-you-so's that it provides.
But perhaps I'm mistaken. Please share with us how you attempted to keep Albert within the DPF fold.
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:[The Wilkinsons] have one significant technical problem to overcome [in re their back-of-head blackout work]. And I look forward to the end result of that endeavor. But during our talk, it became clear to me that they don't buy the wholesale alterationist concept. And that, in this regard, Horne misrepresented who they were and what they are about.
At last, Jim, a prime example of deep political analysis in progress. Of course it originates with the Wilkinsons.
As I tried to explain to you on two previous occasions:
"Deep political analysis of Z-film alteration arguments suggests that some of the most easily refuted were made to diminish all of the most easily demonstrated."
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - Dawn Meredith - 30-08-2013
Tracy Riddle Wrote:I totally agree, Jim. Too many of the people associated with Fetzer have a cult-like mentality. They push ideas like the Altgens photo being altered, though it was put out on the AP wires just 30 minutes after the assassination. Then they delete comments on Youtube videos from people trying to point that out. Over on the 9/11 side, they seem to think that every bit of photographic footage from that day is faked. Seriously? These kinds of extreme, absolutist positions only serve to discredit the whole critical community and drive ordinary people towards the official story.I too agree with you Jim. In fact I kept away from this issue for years because of the cult- like approach. But too many have described the car almost stopping, etc. Of course the head shot is accurate, back and to the left.
My rationale for avoiding this issue is that it does not really advance the case. In my opinion at least. It leaves us in the land of "microanalysis". With all the books and advances since ARRB we need to get beyond petty arguments. After this anniversary I feel this case will fall away into the abyss. The ptb have a serious game plan with many avenues of lies.
What are we doing to conteract that?
Dawn
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - Tracy Riddle - 30-08-2013
Anyone who has reported seeing another Z-film since 1992 may very well be watching something pieced together from footage/outtakes of the Dealey Plaza sequence in Stone's JFK. Some stills and clips I've seen from it have fooled even me. Just something to consider.
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - Charles Drago - 30-08-2013
Tracy Riddle Wrote:Anyone who has reported seeing another Z-film since 1992 may very well be watching something pieced together from footage/outtakes of the Dealey Plaza sequence in Stone's JFK. Some stills and clips I've seen from it have fooled even me. Just something to consider.
I may be wrong, but at least one of the alternate Z-film viewings took place long before JFK was a spark in Stone's cerebral cortex.