+- 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: Rich DellaRosa talks about the Other Zapruder film. (/Thread-Rich-DellaRosa-talks-about-the-Other-Zapruder-film)
Rich DellaRosa talks about the Other Zapruder film. - Peter Lemkin - 04-09-2013
Michael Cross Wrote:Jim Hackett II Wrote:Who knows? I do not.
The wide turn and the insistence on a lingering FULL STOP were the emphasis of the first description I ever heard,
the quote is "the m******'ers were waiting for the kill shot and it took a while....."
Both issues destroy the illusion of the Ztoon.
If we are to take the existence of this film on faith, then debating the alteration of the zfilm is wasted energy; let's expend said energy in other areas.
There are two divergent interpretations [and reactions] to what I read you wrote. I don't understand which you meant. Kindly explain clearly and more fully. However, I see NO REASON to not discuss both the 'other film' and what all seemed to see within it AND alteration of the Z-film [which is the only film the average person will likely ever see]. I don't get what is behind your sentence, above. One interpretation is benign - the other could be rather sinister and a diversion of the entire exploration of the JFK assassination. Lately, this forum has been inundated with new people - that is not a problem; however, IMO, many of them came from Mockingbird Central. I'm not saying you did..I'm asking for clarification. Your seeming request to neither 'waste time' on EITHER the 'other film' or alternation of the Z-film strikes me as tantamount [unless I misread] to saying 'hey everyone - ignore all films of the events of 11/22/63 and take the authorities selective to false WORDS and totally false proofs as the basid on which to form an opinion. I'll explain further my reaction to your 'on faith' statement, along with the rest of the short but 'pithy' stab after you reply. I sense this forum, and what it stands for, is currently under attack. It is not immediately clear which of the new persons here are only naive or mis-interpreted, and which are part of the attack...but I believe it will soon become very clear. IMO. If I have misread your post, my apologies. If I have not, expect a stronger follow-up statement.
Rich DellaRosa talks about the Other Zapruder film. - Michael Cross - 04-09-2013
Peter Lemkin Wrote:Michael Cross Wrote:Jim Hackett II Wrote:Who knows? I do not.
The wide turn and the insistence on a lingering FULL STOP were the emphasis of the first description I ever heard,
the quote is "the m******'ers were waiting for the kill shot and it took a while....."
Both issues destroy the illusion of the Ztoon.
If we are to take the existence of this film on faith, then debating the alteration of the zfilm is wasted energy; let's expend said energy in other areas.
There are two divergent interpretations [and reactions] to what I read you wrote. I don't understand which you meant. Kindly explain clearly and more fully. However, I see NO REASON to not discuss both the 'other film' and what all seemed to see within it AND alteration of the Z-film [which is the only film the average person will likely ever see]. I don't get what is behind your sentence, above. One interpretation is benign - the other could be rather sinister and a diversion of the entire exploration of the JFK assassination. Lately, this forum has been inundated with new people - that is not a problem; however, IMO, many of them came from Mockingbird Central. I'm not saying you did..I'm asking for clarification. Your seeming request to neither 'waste time' on EITHER the 'other film' or alternation of the Z-film strikes me as tantamount [unless I misread] to saying 'hey everyone - ignore all films of the events of 11/22/63 and take the authorities selective to false WORDS and totally false proofs as the basid on which to form an opinion. I'll explain further my reaction to your 'on faith' statement, along with the rest of the short but 'pithy' stab after you reply. I sense this forum, and what it stands for, is currently under attack. It is not immediately clear which of the new persons here are only naive or mis-interpreted, and which are part of the attack...but I believe it will soon become very clear. IMO. If I have misread your post, my apologies. If I have not, expect a stronger follow-up statement.
Peter,
I was afraid that I might have been vague in what I wrote. Sorry.
I'm not asserting that studying the Z film is a waste of time. I spent this past weekend at my in-law's in a small rural town. Doing so afforded me some time to think about the "other" film, and what its existence means. As such, the one definitive conclusion I reached is that in the presence of this accurate or more accurate film, the argument about whether or not the Zapruder film has been altered would be over. Zapruder, if this other film exists, has been altered. Therefore, I'm not sure debating alteration with those that defend the Z film is worth the time - especially in light of the amount of disinformation purveyors that lurk about. Is that more clear?
As for my "on faith" comment, I hold no delusion that I will ever get to see this "other" film. I must rely on the accounts of those that have seen it and their reputations to reach my conclusion about the veracity of the film's existence.
I apologize for being vague in my first post. I understand your concern for the integrity of DPF and do not consider your response to have been pithy.
Meditating on the existence of this other film has "rocked my world".
M.
Rich DellaRosa talks about the Other Zapruder film. - Jan Klimkowski - 04-09-2013
Michael Cross Wrote:Peter,
I was afraid that I might have been vague in what I wrote. Sorry.
I'm not asserting that studying the Z film is a waste of time. I spent this past weekend at my in-law's in a small rural town. Doing so afforded me some time to think about the "other" film, and what its existence means. As such, the one definitive conclusion I reached is that in the presence of this accurate or more accurate film, the argument about whether or not the Zapruder film has been altered would be over. Zapruder, if this other film exists, has been altered. Therefore, I'm not sure debating alteration with those that defend the Z film is worth the time - especially in light of the amount of disinformation purveyors that lurk about. Is that more clear?
As for my "on faith" comment, I hold no delusion that I will ever get to see this "other" film. I must rely on the accounts of those that have seen it and their reputations to reach my conclusion about the veracity of the film's existence.
I apologize for being vague in my first post. I understand your concern for the integrity of DPF and do not consider your response to have been pithy.
Meditating on the existence of this other film has "rocked my world".
M.
Michael - thank you for your considered and thoughtful post.
Meditating on the existence of the "other film" does indeed rock worlds....
Rich DellaRosa talks about the Other Zapruder film. - David Josephs - 05-09-2013
Jan Klimkowski Wrote:Michael Cross Wrote:Peter,
I was afraid that I might have been vague in what I wrote. Sorry.
I'm not asserting that studying the Z film is a waste of time. I spent this past weekend at my in-law's in a small rural town. Doing so afforded me some time to think about the "other" film, and what its existence means. As such, the one definitive conclusion I reached is that in the presence of this accurate or more accurate film, the argument about whether or not the Zapruder film has been altered would be over. Zapruder, if this other film exists, has been altered. Therefore, I'm not sure debating alteration with those that defend the Z film is worth the time - especially in light of the amount of disinformation purveyors that lurk about. Is that more clear?
As for my "on faith" comment, I hold no delusion that I will ever get to see this "other" film. I must rely on the accounts of those that have seen it and their reputations to reach my conclusion about the veracity of the film's existence.
I apologize for being vague in my first post. I understand your concern for the integrity of DPF and do not consider your response to have been pithy.
Meditating on the existence of this other film has "rocked my world".
M.
Michael - thank you for your considered and thoughtful post.
Meditating on the existence of the "other film" does indeed rock worlds....
I have to add that the description I received about this other film comes from a source I feel is extremely reliable... Add to that Rich D. and the others and it gets even stronger...
One has to ask though.. WHY allow anyone to see this film and live to tell about it... other than to cause problems for "our" community?
As Michael so clearly states... I[B]F this exists, THEN this "original" created the COPY in the Archives... and is most likely the film from which Dino created boards for the "customer" - the SS - and for McCone[/B]
HOW, WHEN and WHERE is the minutia our friend Salandria reminds us about...
The choices are limited:
1 - they DIDN'T see this film and made up the entire thing to independently appear as if they were corroborating each other
2 - they DID see the film but it was made FROM the extant one (IDK, but possible)
3 - they DID see the film and it was a copy of the out-of-camera original
4 - they DID see the film and it was made entirely independent of the extant Zfilm
5 - they DIDN'T see the film yet were all made to believe they had
There are difference is the memories of these films between viewers... which may simply be what was focused upon when seen... OR evidence of multiple versions from the in-camera original STAGES of alteration if you will.
That the film called 0183 in the Archives has been altered is without question... we do NOT have a complete side B with about 33 feet of exposed film..
There is a physical splice after 2'7" of BLACK film following the 75" of assassination footage.
There is another physical splice after 19'3" of BLACK film and
there are two strips of BLACK film joined by splices between and after them for a total of 11'10"
with yet another 6'9" of "light struck leader"...
ALL of thes pieces could not have come from 0183 out of the camera... so WITHOUT A DOUBT what we have in the Archives does not resemble what KODAK wound as a 16mm film..
So the question becomes,
WHAT evidence is there that the 75" of film was the same film developed as 0183 on 11/22 at KODAK in Dallas?
There is NONE.
There is NO processing labratory edge print on this 75" section
There is no 0183 attached to this 75" section
As Horne tells us when viewing the SS copies emulsion side up the "processed by" and "date codes" read backwards
In fact, the evidence suggests the opposite and requires excuses and non standard procedures to be explained away...
the more one rereads the Zavada Report, the more one is struck with the observation that the report REINFORCES that the 75" of film and 0183 had little if anything to do with each other.
DJ
Rich DellaRosa talks about the Other Zapruder film. - Dawn Meredith - 05-09-2013
Martin White Wrote:Charles Drago Wrote:... And I have been told on extremely good, second-hand authority that the Clintons, at a location that is familiar to everyone on DPF, offered what may or may not have been an accurate version of events to an individual who had the Kennedy family's collective ear.
Are you able to elaborate on what that scenario was Charles?
That is not surprising as one of Hillary's top aids was Sid Blumenthal who was known as GK (Grassy Knoll) in the White House.
Dawn
Rich DellaRosa talks about the Other Zapruder film. - Martin White - 05-09-2013
At the risk of seeming naïve Dawn, why was he given that moniker?
Rich DellaRosa talks about the Other Zapruder film. - Michael Cross - 05-09-2013
From the Los Angeles Times, 2/26, 1998 (during the Kenn Starr "investigation"):
"Indeed, Blumenthal has been willing to cite a right-wing conspiracy as the source of many of the Clintons' problems. Others look at an assortment of conservative talk show hosts, Clinton-haters on the Internet, partisan foes in Congress and other critics as mutually reinforcing on a certain level, but see no conspiracy. Rahm Emanuel, a senior White House aide, quickly dubbed Blumenthal "G.K.," after the grassy knoll that figures prominently in theories of a conspiracy behind the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Emanuel on Wednesday said he came up with the moniker because of Blumenthal's 'penchant for theories that don't normally come to mind. And seeing connections that you normally don't see'."
Link:
http://articles.latimes.com/1998/feb/26/news/mn-23397
Rich DellaRosa talks about the Other Zapruder film. - Peter Lemkin - 05-09-2013
Michael Cross Wrote:Peter Lemkin Wrote:Michael Cross Wrote:Jim Hackett II Wrote:Who knows? I do not.
The wide turn and the insistence on a lingering FULL STOP were the emphasis of the first description I ever heard,
the quote is "the m******'ers were waiting for the kill shot and it took a while....."
Both issues destroy the illusion of the Ztoon.
If we are to take the existence of this film on faith, then debating the alteration of the zfilm is wasted energy; let's expend said energy in other areas.
There are two divergent interpretations [and reactions] to what I read you wrote. I don't understand which you meant. Kindly explain clearly and more fully. However, I see NO REASON to not discuss both the 'other film' and what all seemed to see within it AND alteration of the Z-film [which is the only film the average person will likely ever see]. I don't get what is behind your sentence, above. One interpretation is benign - the other could be rather sinister and a diversion of the entire exploration of the JFK assassination. Lately, this forum has been inundated with new people - that is not a problem; however, IMO, many of them came from Mockingbird Central. I'm not saying you did..I'm asking for clarification. Your seeming request to neither 'waste time' on EITHER the 'other film' or alternation of the Z-film strikes me as tantamount [unless I misread] to saying 'hey everyone - ignore all films of the events of 11/22/63 and take the authorities selective to false WORDS and totally false proofs as the basid on which to form an opinion. I'll explain further my reaction to your 'on faith' statement, along with the rest of the short but 'pithy' stab after you reply. I sense this forum, and what it stands for, is currently under attack. It is not immediately clear which of the new persons here are only naive or mis-interpreted, and which are part of the attack...but I believe it will soon become very clear. IMO. If I have misread your post, my apologies. If I have not, expect a stronger follow-up statement.
Peter,
I was afraid that I might have been vague in what I wrote. Sorry.
I'm not asserting that studying the Z film is a waste of time. I spent this past weekend at my in-law's in a small rural town. Doing so afforded me some time to think about the "other" film, and what its existence means. As such, the one definitive conclusion I reached is that in the presence of this accurate or more accurate film, the argument about whether or not the Zapruder film has been altered would be over. Zapruder, if this other film exists, has been altered. Therefore, I'm not sure debating alteration with those that defend the Z film is worth the time - especially in light of the amount of disinformation purveyors that lurk about. Is that more clear?
As for my "on faith" comment, I hold no delusion that I will ever get to see this "other" film. I must rely on the accounts of those that have seen it and their reputations to reach my conclusion about the veracity of the film's existence.
I apologize for being vague in my first post. I understand your concern for the integrity of DPF and do not consider your response to have been pithy.
Meditating on the existence of this other film has "rocked my world".
M.
I understand a bit better now your thrust, and put my sword back in its sheath. However, 1] Most people will never see the 'other film' - most, in fact, are unaware of its existence - let alone believe it might be real. 2] Even were the 'other film' to exist [which I think is most likely]; or to not exist [and be an intel psyop again the research community] - it STILL matters, IMO, if the Z-film the government claims is 'real' has been altered or not.....because all of the seeming alterations [without exception] make it more like the official fairy tale, than the reports of witnesses and other photos and films! That's important to help tell what happened and perhaps more important to point to government malfeasance and cover-up [not to mention complicity in the conspiracy]. I hope it is obvious why: it shows yet one more attempt to fudge the 'evidence' to comport with the pre-constructed and desired scenario; and not have the scenario of what actually happened comport with the facts and evidence, witnesses et al. The Z-film tampered with; the autopsy tampered with, along with JFK's body; witness statements and witnesses tampered with with threats and some with DEATH; the evidence of rifles, bullets, windshields and on and one tampered with or fabricated out of whole cloth; the phony investigations controlled by players or proxies for the conspirators; the obstruction of justice with the Garrison investigation and anything edging toward the truth; the murder of Oswald to silence him; the murder of Nagell and many others; the refusal of the CIA and other agencies to release relevant documents - or the destruction of them; the controlled media and the propaganda efforts....and I could go on for a few hundred pages. So, the tampering [and lying about it not being tampered with] is yet another very important knife in the back of the Big Lie.
Obviously, were the 'other film' out, then the Z-film would have little importance over its changes - it like is entirely a 'changed film'...a fictional creation out of 'real' but highly manipulated images - creating a lie to stand as the baseline and clock for what was supposed to have happen - but did not.