Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely

[Daniel Gallup]

Sheery Fiester suggested a reason why the Z film doesn't show the reward ejecta is that it would have had a greater velocity than the back spatter that we do see. It may not have registered on the film at the speed of 18 fps. As to the front vs rear, these terms are not specific enough, IMO. What we see on the Z film is a fracturing and blow out of the scull in the temporal region, which is above the ear and slightly to the front of it, but still on the side of the head. I always took Jackie's expression to mean his face was intact. I find Horne's evidence of the two events at the NPIC in conjunction with the accounts of the "other film" to be persuasive as to alteration. For me the question is to what degree and to what intent. If the technical facility was present to remove the evidence of rear ejecta, a full limo stop, and two distinct head shots, why was the obvious rearward head snap left in? Was the purpose of alteration to fool the people at Time, the WC, or the public? Those involve three different time frames; 12 hours, two months, and 10 years, respectively.

Gordon, Sheery Fiester is so off base it is laughable. It might be possible for a piece of bone to travel at a very high velocity so as to be missed by the camera, if the bone was directly hit by the exiting missile. But peripheral tissue, esp blood and brains? No chance. The ejecta was removed because the rear wound, as seen at Parkland, had to be removed from history. Let us be very, very clear about this. The alteration of the film to remove evidence from a frontal shot went hand in hand with the removal from the autopsy camera's eye of the rear exit wound seen at Dallas. Notice the autopsy photos hide the Dallas wound. Now to answer your question: the plotters were not magicians. The cost of removing the considerable amount of blood and brains exiting the back of Kennedy's head was the " head snap." Should the film ever come to light, and at the time the plotters may have thought this eventuality would never come to pass, the head snap could be explained away, precisely because there was no evidence of ejecta exiting the back of the President's head. Neuromuscular reaction or some other nonsense. The film hides the limo stop; but even more, it hides the fact that blood and brains left the President's head in a spray that was visible to everyone except the extant Z-film. See Debra Conway's groundbreaking interview with Toni Foster, the running woman, in KAC summer 2000, for her eyewitness view of the ejecta.

[Phil Dragoo]

Hargrave had blood and brains on his windshield and person to the extent he thought he'd been hit

Very right to lay the coverup of occipital wounding on the Zapruder film beside that of the Bethesda photos

Groden tallies eighty-one who saw what Nurse Bowron swore under oath she'd seen (ah to be civilian)

Where's that halo of blood and brain around the president

Where's that dramatic slowing, stopping (police know the various rationalizations of stop sign violation)

Horne's two events, David's use of 48 fps, the delay in "full" access to the film

And, face it, the relatively simple task

Yes, he snaps back and to the left

But we may have a very misleading 33-1/3% of the picture

I, too, take Jackie's "from the front there was nothing" to mean there was none of the sledge-hammering to the right parietal seen at Bethesda

The back of the head in Zapruder at 317 was airbrushed with the finesse of an LA graffiti artist

The Bethesda back of head photo blended pre-mortem image of the president with the base post-autopsy shot

The Zapruder film must be appraised in light of the other evidence

Witness the phone call by Mantik to Ebersole; see how the mention of the 6.5 mm artifact in the AP skull ended the conversation

When these poseurs are caught, they are outraged and exit in a huff

Stay in the room and take what you get

With Zapruder you get a limo which POPs into view

Which NEVER stops or even shows signs of slowing

A head with no wound ejecta--yet an avulsive wound seen by eighty-one

Head turns out of The Exorcist

The film was closely held--who was that CD Jackson anyway, what does a psychological warfare chief do

The absence of edge markings, the anomaly of intersprocket images, the numbering which sends 0183 to the memory hole

Believe, believe, believe

Fifty years of this crap

Oh no it wasn't altered and the coin under your pillow came from the Tooth Fairy

Who lives in a big house with all the shrieking fairies of journalism who dare not question

[Charles Drago]

[Should the film ever come to light, and at the time the plotters may have thought this eventuality would never come to pass, the head snap could be explained away, precisely because there was no evidence of ejecta exiting the back of the President's head. Neuromuscular reaction or some other nonsense.

We must consider the possibility -- indeed, in my view the near-certainty -- that the "plotters" insured that the altered Z-film, with all of its waiting-to-be-discovered evidence of tampering was shown publicly in order to stir immediate and lasting controversy, further Balkanize the research community, serve as a prime component in the multi-doppelganger gambit that runs throughout this case, and most importantly prolong debilitating doubt.

[Dawn Meredith]

This unpopular opinion should, I suppose, be its own thread. Here is what I have to say on this topic:


5) other than a possible patch on back of JFK's head and perhaps something at Z313, there is no visible evidence or trace of any alteration work.

There is an important problem that you did not address, and which has received little quality attention from defenders of the authenticity of the Z-film. ITEK determined long ago that the extant Z-film shows no ejecta leaving the back of Kennedy's head. Yet the doctors at Parkland were witness to an avulsive wound with the bones sprung open and a great loss of brain in the back of the head. So we have an effect without a cause, if the present Z-film is authentic. In fact it gets worse. In the present film we see a great loss of brain from the front - right of the skull (and presumably a great loss of skull as well). It's right there in the film. But what did Jackie say? "from the front there was nothing..." . So then we have an cause (a bullet seeming blasting the right front of Kennedy's skull) without an effect (no such wounding was viewed not just by Jackie or Hill but also at Parkland). No matter how much one tries to defend the extant film, there is simply no answer to this conundrum other than film alteration.

In 1975 I did my second research paper for college on this case. This paper was a direct challenge to one of the many CBS/Dan Rather bs "docudramas" on the case. CBS also relied on Cambridge- based ITEK and I was able to demonstrate that ITEK was little more than a CIA and front corp. for the Rockerfellers. So I would not trust any analysis by ITEK.

Just sayin'

Dawn

[Dawn Meredith]

[Should the film ever come to light, and at the time the plotters may have thought this eventuality would never come to pass, the head snap could be explained away, precisely because there was no evidence of ejecta exiting the back of the President's head. Neuromuscular reaction or some other nonsense.

We must consider the possibility -- indeed, in my view the near-certainty -- that the "plotters" insured that the altered Z-film, with all of its waiting-to-be-discovered evidence of tampering was shown publicly in order to stir immediate and lasting controversy, further Balkanize the research community, serve as a prime component in the multi-doppelganger gambit that runs throughout this case, and most importantly prolong debilitating doubt.

Exactly, CD! One more thing to argue about. Lack of unity in the community has served the plotters well.

Dawn

[Daniel Gallup]

This unpopular opinion should, I suppose, be its own thread. Here is what I have to say on this topic:


5) other than a possible patch on back of JFK's head and perhaps something at Z313, there is no visible evidence or trace of any alteration work.

There is an important problem that you did not address, and which has received little quality attention from defenders of the authenticity of the Z-film. ITEK determined long ago that the extant Z-film shows no ejecta leaving the back of Kennedy's head. Yet the doctors at Parkland were witness to an avulsive wound with the bones sprung open and a great loss of brain in the back of the head. So we have an effect without a cause, if the present Z-film is authentic. In fact it gets worse. In the present film we see a great loss of brain from the front - right of the skull (and presumably a great loss of skull as well). It's right there in the film. But what did Jackie say? "from the front there was nothing..." . So then we have an cause (a bullet seeming blasting the right front of Kennedy's skull) without an effect (no such wounding was viewed not just by Jackie or Hill but also at Parkland). No matter how much one tries to defend the extant film, there is simply no answer to this conundrum other than film alteration.

In 1975 I did my second research paper for college on this case. This paper was a direct challenge to one of the many CBS/Dan Rather bs "docudramas" on the case. CBS also relied on Cambridge- based ITEK and I was able to demonstrate that ITEK was little more than a CIA and front corp. for the Rockerfellers. So I would not trust any analysis by ITEK.

Just sayin'

Dawn

Fair enough, Dawn. But I see nothing in the extant film to contradict ITEK's findings.