Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely

[Jan Klimkowski]

I don't know why this has become such an uncompromising issue for some people. We disagree about many aspects of this case, too many to list, but we all still accept that the official story is wrong. Why does the question of Z-film alteration have to be "you're either for us or agin' us"? Suddenly this has become a religion, and if you don't accept the immaculate conception or the Holy Trinity, you will be burned at the stake. The equivalent here is to be accused of being a disinformation agent. I find that really offensive.

What if I insisted that there was a shooter on the roof of the County Records Building, and anyone who disagrees with me is working for the other side? What if I declared that the head shot came from the South Knoll because Sherry Fiester's book "proves" it, and it's a fact and everyone who disagrees is now THE ENEMY? It's pretty ridiculous, right?

Is that what we want to do here? Think about it, people.

I'm with you Tracy 100% It is offensive. And ridiculous. We don't sign up lone nutters or keep known provocateurs. Different views are completely acceptable and I say welcomed. This is not some sort of cult where non believers from the one true faith will be persecuted to the ends of the earth. There are real enemies in this world and they are not here. By all means discuss the issues, explore them, test them, try them out from different angles, keep them or throw them away but keep it to the subject matter and not the person. None of us are ever going to be in full agreement on any thing let alone everything. If you have a problem with a particular person either ignore them, live with it or take it to the moderators with some substantial evidence not just an opinion but keep it off the forum. Use your minds and not your egos. As for the deep political knowledge of some people here it will vary from practically none to very deep indeed. However if people cannot stand to be in the same room with you then you have reduced your ability and opportunity to educate an otherwise willing person to zero. As for 'acceptable' qualifications I think this is complete red herring. One does not need any qualification in any thing to be a member here. I hope the DPF is a place of learning for us all. There are people here with excellent qualifications in all sorts of areas and we welcome their expertise and take on things. There are also people with out any qualification who also bring valuable insights to the forum. In fact in the areas of JFK in particular I would say the best evidence has been found, documented and put together and dots connected by complete amateurs in the best sense of the word. We know that the so called qualified experts did their best not to advance the case. And those with no qualifications or experience in areas sitting in judgement of those that do... well, what can I say? I could say a lot but I will let it be. Anyway, it's not rocket science guys. I am very pissed off to say the least that we have lost a fine member because of the poor attitude and social skills of some members here. This is getting very tiresome and the future of the DPF is at stake.

An unspeakable crime is about to be unleashed on the people of Syria and that region. While here some are trying to shine some light on things others are arguing if the torch is even the right brand. Lets work together and allow other to get on with their thing for the greater good.

Thus spake Magda Hassan.

I've been away.

I've returned briefly and read this thread.

Some noble and principled posts.

Some behaviour worthy of a pigsty.

The following is not an argument from authority. It is an argument from some direct technical knowledge.

But so what, eh?

Having made network broadcast documentaries on both film (briefly), various tape formats and digital drives, I do not believe that the travelling matte Z film is technically possible, even with non-public domain "covert" technology in 1963.

I do believe it is possible that the Z film has been altered, with frames being removed. I am particularly suspicious of the red blob frame, and suspect it may have been altered.

In short, I believe in a limited, relatively easily deliverable, alteration of Zapruder to obscure the true nature of the head shot or shots.

I also believe it is possible that there is another longer version of the Z-film, as described by Rich DellaRosa and Greg Burnham - amongst others.

Finally, and fundamentally, I believe that the level of vitriol hurled at Jeff Carter in this thread is completely and utterly unacceptable.

I, unlike others in this community, have not been subjected to decades of harassment by the professional contortion artists of history

You're on to something very important here. Those of us who have toiled in the fields of JFK assassination research -- in some cases for decades -- are all too familiar with the cover-up Facilitators' tactic of re-introducing long-settled arguments for the purposes of spreading disinformation, prolonging the faux debate, and stirring up old, research community-fracturing disagreements.

In the past I have been, shall we say, other than avuncular in my reactions to those who, in my opinion, service the cover-up in such a manner. I will neither speak for nor attempt to condone the behavior of those who reacted violently to Jeff -- researchers whose Z-film work (and indeed their very characters) have been savaged by the Facilitators who troll the Internet. Rather, I simply point out that decades of conflict can harden a person and stifle the better angels of his or her nature.

But perhaps the time for me to part company has also arrived.

To those of you with whom I have exchanged what I believe have been friendly and fruitful words, my gratitude.

Please reconsider this course of action, Albert. I submit that we are at war with the killers of JFK and the monstrous perpetrators of other deep political acts considered on DPF. If need be, withdraw from the field to a rear area for a brief time. But your services, sir, are required on the front lines.

Your comrades await.

To which I reply, Jeff Carter did not kill JFK and the attacks on him are not proportionate.

And Albert Rossi has contributed much in his short time here at DPF. I share his disgust at the manner in which the arguments in this thread have been made.

Researchers need thick skins.

Hypotheses need testing against the known and potential evidence.

Researchers don't need abuse from the research community.

And that is what I see here.

:monkeypiss: :thumbsdown: