+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely (/thread-11235.html)
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - Tracy Riddle - 30-08-2013
So, we either have: a) an authentic film that shows evidence of a conspiracy, or b) a faked film that shows evidence of a conspiracy.
Same thing with the autopsy: a) either the wounds were altered and some witnesses were pressured to lie or b) the photos and x-rays were altered and some witnesses were pressured to lie.
And we're fighting about this? No wonder some people think we're kooks.
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - David Healy - 30-08-2013
Tracy Riddle Wrote:So, we either have: a) an authentic film that shows evidence of a conspiracy, or b) a faked film that shows evidence of a conspiracy.
Same thing with the autopsy: a) either the wounds were altered and some witnesses were pressured to lie or b) the photos and x-rays were altered and some witnesses were pressured to lie.
And we're fighting about this? No wonder some people think we're kooks.
well, its kinda like that when lone nuts (posing as researchers landing on the conspiracy side of the equation) whom get on serious forums. Especially forums with researchers and wherewithal....
Yep, nutters, as predictable as .john smelly socks... I'm not surprised at all, are you, Tracy Riddle?
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - Tracy Riddle - 30-08-2013
David Healy Wrote:Tracy Riddle Wrote:So, we either have: a) an authentic film that shows evidence of a conspiracy, or b) a faked film that shows evidence of a conspiracy.
Same thing with the autopsy: a) either the wounds were altered and some witnesses were pressured to lie or b) the photos and x-rays were altered and some witnesses were pressured to lie.
And we're fighting about this? No wonder some people think we're kooks.
well, its kinda like that when lone nuts (posing as researchers landing on the conspiracy side of the equation) whom get on serious forums. Especially forums with researchers and wherewithal....
Yep, nutters, as predictable as .john smelly socks... I'm not surprised at all, are you?
You keep insinuating that we have LNers posing on the conspiracy side. Maybe you'd like to name names. Maybe you include me in this category. If you can read everything I've posted on this forum and still conclude that I'm a lone-nutter, then you have a case of galloping paranoia.
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - Dawn Meredith - 30-08-2013
Tracy Riddle Wrote:So, we either have: a) an authentic film that shows evidence of a conspiracy, or b) a faked film that shows evidence of a conspiracy.
Same thing with the autopsy: a) either the wounds were altered and some witnesses were pressured to lie or b) the photos and x-rays were altered and some witnesses were pressured to lie.
And we're fighting about this? No wonder some people think we're kooks.
Amen. Some people need to argue for argument's sake it would seem.
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - David Josephs - 30-08-2013
Quote:See Brugioni saying, they could do anything at Hawkeye, to me that is not evidence. What is "anything"? But yet Horne hangs his hat on this in reply to all the technical arguments Zavada makes in his 30 page letter.
Then there is the first day quandary: About five people saw the film in Dallas. Would they not have said something if the film had been radically altered in some way?
Jim... your comments on Healy's Technical Aspects would be appreciated. Not so much the traveling matte concepts, but the "from movie A to Movie B" process... frame by frame.
Do you subscribe to the notion that DH is correct or not?
ANYTHING was not necessary... taking segments of a movie at 48fps and creating that same segment at 18.3 fps
THAT is not "anything"... that is a simple process of photographing the desired frames onto the new "original" movie.
In THAT process the frames can be enlarged to 35mm
In THAT process a plate or matte can be introduced to MATERIALLY CHANGE the appearance of the image on the frames - ie cover up a hole in JFK's head or add an injury not seen by anyone.
At the end we have 486 18.3fps frames with obvious signs of alteration...
---
Now Jim... who are these 5 people (the number is actually closer to 25) - any "citizens" who have something to gain by telling a different story?
The main players were: Zapruder, Schwartz, McCormick, Chamberlain, Blair, and 10 or so more KODAK employees (some of which are named, some not - no chance of a KODAK employee in Dallas that day being connected to anything sinister, right?)
who see a 4x speed 16mm "master" shown once.
We also have Sorrels and the FBI (Sorrles to Kelly to Bookout to Barnett to Shanklin) who see "A" film (0186)
I'll ask again - who of this group would or could say anything in 1975 when the film is finally shown to the world?
Seems to me only the KODAK employees....
But not so... enter Erwin Schwartz's interview by Twyman... Horne p.1295
Erwin tells us that the film HE SAW ON 11/22 at KODAK in 16mm format at (2 to) 4x speed showed debris being ejected "back and to the left" of JFK.
p1296 we have Livingstone's interview with Breneman who supposedly sees the same thing in the frames given to him by LIFE with debris flying to the rear of the limo....
Would LIFE provide anyone with ACTUAL FRAMES from the orignal film on 11/25? IDK.
What does Chamberlain say?
http://www.jfk-info.com/zat1-11.pdf He recalls (in the late 70's) the top of JFK's head blown off... working the 16mm machine with the FBI Saturday morning... and never seening the Zfilm again.
Elmer Todd pressured Perry to recant his professional observations...
You feel confident that any one of these non-players would say anything in 1975? Where any of them called to the HSCA?, ARRB? (I don't think so, but I need to go look)
The filom was not "radically" altered if you had seen and remembered the shot that killed JFK - the most VIVID memory from the film - and seeing again 12+ years later we see a shot hitting JFK in the head...
It's very possible, if not probably that 0186 was sliced up for viewing that morning... that a limo stop or severe slowing, pause and take-off would simply not be noticed as you wait for that explosion to JFK's head...
No one has EVER asked the question, "did you see the limo stop" to these viewers... did Twyman? (not that Horne mentions - and one would think he would)
The names of those that DID say it stopped: p.1300-1 - DPD Courson(mid-motorcade), DPD Dale(mid-motorcade), Johnson(on overpass), DPD Brown(on overpass)
DPD Hargis, DPD Chaney, DPD Foster(overpass), Willis, Woodward, Smith(pergola), Truly(top of Elm), Lovelady(TSBD steps), Newman)on Elm feet from limo), Brehm(feet from limo)
This is no where near a complete list... yet these represent a variety of angles from which to see the limo... they're all dreaming?
No one asks whether they saw Chaney motor up immediately.
No one asks how far did they see Hill running...
We LIVE with this film burned into our brains... these people did not.... I'm doing my best to find reasons NOT to think this film was altered...
You have any other than what you posted?
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - John Mooney - 30-08-2013
Tracy Riddle Wrote:No wonder some people think we're kooks.
The name of the game.
Welcome to the 1984 Floor Show.
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - David Josephs - 30-08-2013
Dawn Meredith Wrote:Tracy Riddle Wrote:So, we either have: a) an authentic film that shows evidence of a conspiracy, or b) a faked film that shows evidence of a conspiracy.
Same thing with the autopsy: a) either the wounds were altered and some witnesses were pressured to lie or b) the photos and x-rays were altered and some witnesses were pressured to lie.
And we're fighting about this? No wonder some people think we're kooks.
Amen. Some people need to argue for argument's sake it would seem.
Yup... or some of us want to understand the processes so we can identify the cast members to figure out the players from the played.
The only people who think we're kooks are the same people barring us from Dealey Plaza... you believe they will EVER take this anymore seriosuly than branding us kooks as often and as loudly as possible?
They call us kooks out of fear and from established tactics... Seeing these threads as FIGHTS rather than debates contributing to the knowledge base is frankly surprising.
===
Surgeon General of the Navy Kenney was with Humes and others when the 6:35 body arrived and thru the "alteration of the wounds"..... player or played?
Admiral Galloway delayed McHugh out front and got into the "decoy" ambulance with the casket... player or played?
Admiral Burkley - too many things to even name... player or played?
Chief Rowley has an 8mm film the night of the assassination which disappears to history... player or played?
Chief Rowley invents CE399... player or played?
Zapruder copies begin with 0185 and end with 0187, both of which do NOT appear on the films... player of played?
These are the DEEP questions from the DEEP POLITICS FORUM.... telling us the SPRING and FPS are the causes for the film in the Archives is insulting to anyone with a brain...
he was called on it... Help us or defend him... I posted how willing I am to learn anything that is offered with sufficient backing..
He stands by his posts.
Dawn...
Ask please once,
ask please twice,
ask yet again to please expand and explain... HELP us understand
and we get "sorry, that's your problem - I stick by what I posted"
what would you have us do... say thanks and let it stand?
If the posting members themselves cannot differentiate between "fighting" and "debate" in order to clarify the record... or expose attacks
what are we doing here...
----
Tracy -
what we have is a film that is regarded as THE most accurate representation of the assasination with not only a dubious possession chain, but obvious alterations from what was seen on the film that weekend as well what was seen on the ground and corroborated by multiple witnesses.
Let's just say for a second it IS authentic... AND shows evidence of more than one shooter, a conspiracy. Since 1975 not a single Mass Media entity has said so, has even tore it apart to SHOW us.
Have you seen the Discovery Channel's, "How the Zapruder film PROVES there was a conspiracy" TV special? of course not cause there will never be one...
The conspiracy is NOT the film or the autopsy report which are the props, the minutia... the conspiracy is, "You're going to believe US, NOT your lying eyes" for coming on 50 years...
and you have no idea who US is...
----
I will apologize now if my style and passion for the subject matter has offended anyone...
I felt I was polite and direct in my replies and requests until it became obvious there was another agenda...
I was then joined by those with much more experience with that kind of situation... with the same requests for the substance behind the thoughts
Do we maintain some minimum standard for the information posted here AS FACT...
or should we simply nod approvingly at anything thrown against the wall...
If not here, where?
If not now, when?
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - Tracy Riddle - 30-08-2013
David Josephs Wrote:The conspiracy is NOT the film or the autopsy report which are the props, the minutia... the conspiracy is, "You're going to believe US, NOT your lying eyes" for coming on 50 years...
and you have no idea who US is...
I agree with the first part, and I think I have a pretty good idea of who US is. Who do you think US is?
Also, as I've said before, my concern is with the mass of Americans who are not firmly in either camp (LN or CT), and who may consider us kooks because we fight tooth and nail over very small aspects of this large and complicated case.
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - David Josephs - 31-08-2013
Tracy Riddle Wrote:David Josephs Wrote:The conspiracy is NOT the film or the autopsy report which are the props, the minutia... the conspiracy is, "You're going to believe US, NOT your lying eyes" for coming on 50 years...
and you have no idea who US is...
I agree with the first part, and I think I have a pretty good idea of who US is. Who do you think US is?
Also, as I've said before, my concern is with the mass of Americans who are not firmly in either camp (LN or CT), and who may consider us kooks because we fight tooth and nail over very small aspects of this large and complicated case.
Agreed... we could definitely use a bit more unity.... (the minutia will wear you down...)
Within the framework of the S-F-M model used here (although I am also thinking about this within a somewhat different model)
but within this framework...
One of the KEY aspects to the conspiracy was what the people would know about it... At the ownership levels of these comapnies (working back to the 50 or so comapnies in the 60's that owned most media) THESE companies and their ownership and operating boards contain decision makers that restricted the information offered thru their owned media outlets.
In the early sixties each major city had only a couple of papers and the Big 3 TV stations who in turn had owned the radio stations.
The Westinghouse Electric and Manufacturing Company entered broadcasting with the November 2, 1920
General Electric sold NBC to Comcast... yet owned many of the media outlets of the day
If there are SPONSORS who were able to control the message as well as the investigation, it was those who moved from Congress/Military to the private sector who in turn diversified these companies to also own media.
(before TV and even mass radio, the same group running the Federal Reserve and moving the CFR owned the majority of the only source of info - newspapers)
[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
The Big Six[SUP][1][/SUP]Media OutletsRevenues (2009)[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NBCUniversal/Comcast[/TD]
[TD]NBC and Telemundo, Universal Pictures, Focus Features, 26 television stations in the United States and cable networks USA Network, Bravo, CNBC, The Weather Channel, MSNBC, Syfy, NBC Sports Network, Golf Channel, style., Esquire Network, E!, Cloo, Chiller, Universal HD and the Comcast SportsNet regional system. Was a joint venture in which Comcast held a controlling 51% stake and General Electric a 49% stake in from January 2011 to March 2013, now wholly owned by Comcast. Comcast also owns two sports teams, the Philadelphia 76ers and Philadelphia Flyers through a separate subsidiary.[/TD]
[TD]$157 billion[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]The Walt Disney Company[/TD]
[TD]Holdings include: ABC Television Network, cable networks ESPN, the Disney Channel, SOAPnet, A&E and Lifetime, 277 radio stations, music and book publishing companies, production companies Touchstone, and Walt Disney Pictures, Pixar Animation Studios, the cellular service Disney Mobile, and theme parks in several countries.[/TD]
[TD]$36.1 billion[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]News Corp/21st Century Fox[/TD]
[TD]Holdings include: the Fox Broadcasting Company; cable networks Fox News Channel, Fox Business Network, Fox Sports 1, National Geographic, Nat Geo Wild, FX, FXX, FX Movie Channel, and the regional Fox Sports Networks; print publications including the Wall Street Journal and the New York Post; the magazines Barron's and SmartMoney; book publisher HarperCollins; film production companies 20th Century Fox, Fox Searchlight Pictures and Blue Sky Studios; numerous websites including MarketWatch.com; and non-media holdings including the National Rugby League.[/TD]
[TD]$30.4 billion[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Time Warner[/TD]
[TD]Largest media conglomerate in the world, with holdings including: CNN, the CW (a joint venture with CBS), HBO, Cinemax, Cartoon Network/Adult Swim, HLN, NBA TV, TBS, TNT, truTV, Turner Classic Movies, AOL, MapQuest, Moviefone, Warner Bros. Pictures, Castle Rock and New Line Cinema, and more than 150 magazines including Time, Sports Illustrated, Fortune, Marie Claire and People.[/TD]
[TD]$25.8 billion[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Viacom[/TD]
[TD]Holdings include: MTV, Nickelodeon/Nick at Nite, VH1, BET, Comedy Central, Paramount Pictures, Paramount Home Entertainment, Atom Entertainment, and music game developer Harmonix. Viacom 18 is a joint venture with the Indian media company Global Broadcast News.[/TD]
[TD]$13.6 billion[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]CBS Corporation[/TD]
[TD]Holdings include: CBS Television Network and the CW (a joint venture with Time Warner), cable networks CBS Sports Network, Showtime, TVGN; 30 television stations; CBS Radio, Inc., which has 130 stations; CBS Television Studios; book publisher Simon & Schuster.[/TD]
[TD]$13.0 billion[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Although Viacom and CBS Corporation have been separate companies since 2006, they are both partially owned subsidiaries of the private National Amusements company, headed by Sumner Redstone. As such, Paramount Home Entertainment handles DVD/Blu-ray distribution for most of the CBS Corporation library.
Others of note[edit source | editbeta]
Discovery CommunicationsOwns Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, Destination America, The Hub, Science, Military Channel, Investigation Discovery, Velocity, 3net, and distribution rights to BBC America and BBC World News.E. W. Scripps CompanyOwns Food Network, HGTV, Travel Channel, and Great American Country.DirecTVOwns Audience Network, Root Sports, and GSN. DirecTV has some ownership ties to News Corporation, but antitrust restrictions limit News Corporation's influence on DirecTV.Companies tied to Cablevision and the Dolan familyOwn AMC, IFC, MSG, Fuse, the Cleveland Indians, the New York Knicks and the New York Rangers.Oaktree Capital ManagementOwns the former assets of Westwood One (which includes Transtar Radio Networks, NBC Radio, and the Mutual Broadcasting System), Jones Radio Networks, Waitt Radio Networks, Townsquare Media (which owns Regent Communications, Gap Broadcasting, Millennium Broadcasting, and Double O Radio) and Dial Global, and joint owner of the Tribune Company (with Angelo, Gordon & Co. and JPMorgan Chase).Clear Channel CommunicationsOwns Premiere Networks (which in turn owns The Rush Limbaugh Show, The Sean Hannity Show, The Glenn Beck Program, Coast to Coast AM, American Top 40, Delilah, Fox Sports Radio, and The Jim Rome Show, all being among the top national radio programs in their category), a portion of Sirius XM Radio, and previously held a stake in Live Nation as well as several television stations (later under the management of Newport Television, and now owned by separate companies). Parent company Bain Capital also owns a share in The Weather Channel.On the Military/Congressional side of things - "US" is the ONI, DIA - who in my opinion frames the CIA as scapegoat knowing they could cover themselves and no one would get thru to the real MILITARY SPONSORS (in the model here they would be Facilitators... which is one of my disagreements with the model.) Those at IMMIGRATION also had to be told to stand down... Whether these are SPONSORS in the model's sense of the word, I'm really not sure...
I have yet to see the list of SPONSORS for consideration... only the definition of the term. If Charles has a few interested parties in mind, please share... As I've written before, I firmly believe that the SPONSOR level takes advantage of situations since they don't necessarily involve themselves in the actions themselves. This in turn creates uncertainty... so bets are hedged.
At the end of the day, there had to be a motivation for those men at Bethesda to do what they did. Were they aware of the cross-fire... ?? Did it make sense to do a tracheotomy on a man with a skull as described by Boswell?
Adm Anderson and Gen LeMay and even Adm Taylor were all treated poorly by this PERSON... JFK. a 45 year old Commie sympathizer who was selling the Cold War down the river...
Could LeMay have been a SPONSOR? ANDERSON? Seems to me it was very possible given this definition.
SPONSORS -- Those with the authority andmotive to sanction the assassination and the connections to engage facilitatingagents and systems.
So that's my take on the US of the assassination from the Evica-Drago model.
===============
The other model involves seeing the SPONSORS as the opportunistic and greedy people they were... and not necessarily those that Sanctioned it... Harvey ran attacks while told to stop... Hunt and others (Angelton) continued to do what is the best interest of their country as they saw fit. Killing JFK may have been a lower level idea (Phillips, Hunt, Morales, Barnes, etc...) in which the cover-up was built-in. Too much would be exposed if a real investigation was to take place... Mafia, Cubans, Drugs, weapons, Private citizens, corporations... The SPONSORS - knowing it would happen, eventually (Tampa, Chicago) were in a position to exploit it.... and they did.
the onion has too many layers to be sure, EVER imo... suffice to say a bunch of very bad people did a (and many more) bad things under the guise of US patriotism and the fight against the enemy de jour... Some for love of country, some for love of profit, some for love of power.
and the wheels on the bus go round and round...
Thanks for asking.
DJ
Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely - Gordon Gray - 31-08-2013
Tracy Riddle Wrote:I'd have to say, if an average citizen with doubts about the assassination, one of the 80% who believe it was a conspiracy with govt. involvement, but with little knowledge of the salient facts, were to read this thread, I think they would be driven into the LN camp not by the kookiness of the opinions expressed but by the by the kookiness of the behavior exhibited.David Josephs Wrote:The conspiracy is NOT the film or the autopsy report which are the props, the minutia... the conspiracy is, "You're going to believe US, NOT your lying eyes" for coming on 50 years...
and you have no idea who US is...
I agree with the first part, and I think I have a pretty good idea of who US is. Who do you think US is?
Also, as I've said before, my concern is with the mass of Americans who are not firmly in either camp (LN or CT), and who may consider us kooks because we fight tooth and nail over very small aspects of this large and complicated case.