27-08-2013, 11:10 AM
Straw Man: The Movie
Supposedly Abraham Zapruder went and got his camera, and had his assistant hold him so he could film, but the limo just jumps in there.
Then, where's the dramatic slowing described by 59 witnesses.
Inhumanly rapid head turns.
Many anomalies.
So, extensive, or not so much. It isn't the real thing.
Doug Horne devotes about 1100-1300 of volume IV and serves more than Zavada can return, even given the after publication back and forth.
I've seen David Healy's long and detailed article which I linked above. So no one is going to say it couldn't be done.
Something was done, because what exists has deep and damning flaws.
David Josephs has an interesting and simple solution to the odd configuration of the current film and the lack of a number 0183 I believe.
That it's been altered is not debatable.
Extensive is a needlessly subjective term.
The film was tightly held, with a miserly few frames released--and the significant ones reversed--Hoover's clerical error.
That it was in the hands of C.D. Jackson's operation is perfect. It seems Donald Gibson named the Life/Time/Fortune axis as a main Kennedy enemy--and Jackson was Ike's WWII psy ops as well as his two-term POTUS psyop chief.
The two events described by Brugioni and McMahon present evidence of revision of an other than innocent nature.
The inconsistent appearance of intersprocket images is beyond reasonable explanation.
And yes, I mentioned the backyard photos. They, with the film, are part of the cover up, and creation of a false story, a legend.
And yes, Hany Farid has great credentials. And he found nothing wrong with Oswald having a big square jaw below a glaring seam line.
The deeper analysis shows "Oswald" holding a rifle he never ordered and wearing a revolver he never ordered--it's all there in the John Armstrong article in this JFK section, in the work of Gil Jesus and George Michael Evica.
Yet the photo(s) is/are certified authentic by a credentialed professor.
The Zapruder film chain of custody is such that it would be excluded at trial.
And we have a number of people, Rich De La Rosa I believe, Greg Burnham, others, who saw a different version.
So to believe that what is presented today as "The Zapruder Film" is just as it was etched by lightning bolts on the stone tablets, seems imprudent.
Supposedly Abraham Zapruder went and got his camera, and had his assistant hold him so he could film, but the limo just jumps in there.
Then, where's the dramatic slowing described by 59 witnesses.
Inhumanly rapid head turns.
Many anomalies.
So, extensive, or not so much. It isn't the real thing.
Doug Horne devotes about 1100-1300 of volume IV and serves more than Zavada can return, even given the after publication back and forth.
I've seen David Healy's long and detailed article which I linked above. So no one is going to say it couldn't be done.
Something was done, because what exists has deep and damning flaws.
David Josephs has an interesting and simple solution to the odd configuration of the current film and the lack of a number 0183 I believe.
That it's been altered is not debatable.
Extensive is a needlessly subjective term.
The film was tightly held, with a miserly few frames released--and the significant ones reversed--Hoover's clerical error.
That it was in the hands of C.D. Jackson's operation is perfect. It seems Donald Gibson named the Life/Time/Fortune axis as a main Kennedy enemy--and Jackson was Ike's WWII psy ops as well as his two-term POTUS psyop chief.
The two events described by Brugioni and McMahon present evidence of revision of an other than innocent nature.
The inconsistent appearance of intersprocket images is beyond reasonable explanation.
And yes, I mentioned the backyard photos. They, with the film, are part of the cover up, and creation of a false story, a legend.
And yes, Hany Farid has great credentials. And he found nothing wrong with Oswald having a big square jaw below a glaring seam line.
The deeper analysis shows "Oswald" holding a rifle he never ordered and wearing a revolver he never ordered--it's all there in the John Armstrong article in this JFK section, in the work of Gil Jesus and George Michael Evica.
Yet the photo(s) is/are certified authentic by a credentialed professor.
The Zapruder film chain of custody is such that it would be excluded at trial.
And we have a number of people, Rich De La Rosa I believe, Greg Burnham, others, who saw a different version.
So to believe that what is presented today as "The Zapruder Film" is just as it was etched by lightning bolts on the stone tablets, seems imprudent.