Rich DellaRosa talks about the Other Zapruder film.

[JC Mahoney]

[quote=Charles Drago][quote=JC Mahoney]

Operation fart away the day suspended - context classified.

[JC Mahoney]

Directly relevant to this thread, is another thread here in which investigative journalist and DPF member Cheri Seymour discusses being shown another JFK assassination film and names those who showed it to her.


Note that in the thread dedicated to her important book, The Last Circle, which deserves to be read in its entirety, Cheri discusses in post #72 her sincere reservations about the veracity of that other JFK assassination film.

Thank you Jan.

Yes Thanks and please continue your solid counter-recounter-spy program things. Crap did I type that? Crap. Crap.

[Albert Doyle]

Seems to be enough evidence out there that credible non-nut conspiracy insiders saw something that was different in the assassination film they viewed. This seems to overcome any hasty accusations of "fantasy" imo.

[Peter Lemkin]

Mahoney Baloney...and interestingly timed entrance to our Forum, IMHO! I have photos of the events of Dallas I've never released [and have good reasons I can't go into publicly for that]...and there are many who I trust [Greg and Rich and another I can't name being three] who have seen the 'other film'. I have NO reason at all to doubt them or the others I do not know, as they all saw the same things - reported independently. The timing and placement of the 'showings' being 'strange' are NO stranger than the august [sic] meetings of the Warren Omission. Mahoney's doubt and 'dare' is just well disguised disinfo, IMHO.

[JC Mahoney]

Seems to be enough evidence out there that credible non-nut conspiracy insiders saw something that was different in the assassination film they viewed. This seems to overcome any hasty accusations of "fantasy" imo.

Holy crap I typed words thinking you people were not schizophrenic.

[Greg Burnham]

JC,

You made some interesting comments. One of those is very naive, perhaps several. The first rather shallow notion that comes to mind is your belief that [paraphrased]: "If this evidence was made public, it would blow the lid off of the cover-up."

What makes you think that? Are you aware of the many examples of evidentiary bombshells that have been uncovered over the years, all of which should have made the front page of the New York Times, and/or made the top of the NBC Nightly News, and/or caused a revolution? There are dozens. Here's one example. After the LBJ oval office tapes were released quite a few interesting things were exposed. They didn't get the time of day ANYWHERE.

When Hoover had a memo made of his conversation with LBJ, at one point he dictated it thusly:

J. Edgar HOOVER:


"The President [LBJ] then asked, if Connally had not been in his seat, would the President [JFK] have been hit by the second shot? I said yes... he no doubt would have been hit by ALL THREE SHOTS!"


Later LBJ asks: "So, if Connally hadn't *been in the way* would the president have been hit by all three shots?" Again, Hoover replies: "YES"

=========

Now, JC, we all know that Connally was in the seat in FRONT of JFK. At no time was Connally ever in-between JFK and the 6th Floor TSBD window. Therefore, the only way that Connally could have taken a bullet for JFK was if one or more of the shots had originated FROM THE FRONT. This conversation, which is a matter of PUBLIC RECORD, had absolutely NO EFFECT on the continuing health of the cover-up. None. Yet, it demonstrates that it was known that at least one shot originated from the front and that the president of the United States [LBJ] and the Director of the FBI [HOOVER] discussed this fact within the first week following the event.

There are other bombshells within this same recorded conversation that had no effect, as they didn't garner any attention whatsoever from the media. Had this information been known contemporaneously we would no longer have this form of government, which is perhaps not a good alternative. But, it was kept secret. When it was released a little over a decade ago, it still had no effect on the belief in the MBT and the lone gunman nonsense. Yet, it SHOULD have destroyed the cover up. It did not.

Here's a link to a page I wrote on the subject in about 1999. At the time many were convinced that this would be all it took to blow the lid off. I wasn't so sure.

http://www.just-think-it.com/lbjeh.htm

[JC Mahoney]

Mahoney Baloney...and interestingly timed entrance to our Forum, IMHO! I have photos of the events of Dallas I've never released [and have good reasons I can't go into publicly for that]...and there are many who I trust [Greg and Rich and another I can't name being three] who have seen the 'other film'. I have NO reason at all to doubt them or the others I do not know, as they all saw the same things - reported independently. The timing and placement of the 'showings' being 'strange' are NO stranger than the august [sic] meetings of the Warren Omission. Mahoney's doubt and 'dare' is just well disguised disinfo, IMHO.

Yeah you're onto me. I'm here to spread disinformation. Way to use your noggin. It's not like any of my questions are reasonable.

This is getting pretty amazingly ridiculous.

[JC Mahoney]

JC,

You made some interesting comments. One of those is very naive, perhaps several. The first rather shallow notion that comes to mind is your belief that [paraphrased]: "If this evidence was made public, it would blow the lid off of the cover-up."

What makes you think that? Are you aware of the many examples of evidentiary bombshells that have been uncovered over the years, all of which should have made the front page of the New York Times, and/or made the top of the NBC Nightly News, and/or caused a revolution? There are dozens. Here's one example. After the LBJ oval office tapes were released quite a few interesting things were exposed. They didn't get the time of day ANYWHERE.

When Hoover had a memo made of his conversation with LBJ, at one point he dictated it thusly:

J. Edgar HOOVER:


"The President [LBJ] then asked, if Connally had not been in his seat, would the President [JFK] have been hit by the second shot? I said yes... he no doubt would have been hit by ALL THREE SHOTS!"


Later LBJ asks: "So, if Connally hadn't *been in the way* would the president have been hit by all three shots?" Again, Hoover replies: "YES"

=========

Now, JC, we all know that Connally was in the seat in FRONT of JFK. At no time was Connally ever in-between JFK and the 6th Floor TSBD window. Therefore, the only way that Connally could have taken a bullet for JFK was if one or more of the shots had originated FROM THE FRONT. This conversation, which is a matter of PUBLIC RECORD, had absolutely NO EFFECT on the continuing health of the cover-up. None. Yet, it demonstrates that it was known that at least one shot originated from the front and that the president of the United States [LBJ] and the Director of the FBI [HOOVER] discussed this fact within the first week following the event.

There are other bombshells within this same recorded conversation that had no effect, as they didn't garner any attention whatsoever from the media. Had this information been known contemporaneously we would no longer have this form of government, which is perhaps not a good alternative. But, it was kept secret. When it was released a little over a decade ago, it still had no effect on the belief in the MBT and the lone gunman nonsense. Yet, it SHOULD have destroyed the cover up. It did not.

Here's a link to a page I wrote on the subject in about 1999. At the time many were convinced that this would be all it took to blow the lid off. I wasn't so sure.

http://www.just-think-it.com/lbjeh.htm

​Have you ever watched modern family? I dont get it.

[Greg Burnham]

I appreciate the text, and it's compelling, like most things in this case.

Well, that is just about the most understated comment I have ever read on this forum!

Still - it does not even remotely compare to a high quality video that differs from the Zapruder film in every way that disproves a lone gunman.

Gimme a break. Even the extant Zapruder film appears to disprove a lone gunman shooting from the rear... "back and to the left...back and to the left...back and to the left" --

Another film would prove that Zapruder was tampered with, that multiple arms of government were involved, and it would be directly in the face. A quote from 2 dead people doesn't compare.

This quote from "two dead people" (as you put it) isn't a quote from "just ANY 2 dead people" -- it is from the President of the United States and from the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation--the latter upon whose investigation the Warren Commission based its ill conceived Lone Nut and Single [magic] Bullet Theory conclusions! So, yes THIS SHOULD HAVE MADE THE HEADLINES, without question! Now, I would be naive if I actually believed that this evidence would have seen the main stream media's "light of day" -- but, it SHOULD have. I can assure you, this evidence (gleaned from the oval office tapes) lends itself to a much more compelling argument for perfidy and complicity within the highest levels of government, including obstruction of justice, than ANY film ever could! The fact that the populace is "visual" does not hold water here. The legal system is not visual. In fact, Justice is Blind.

I gave a presentation on this [LBJ Oval Office Tapes] at the 2000 NID JFK-LANCER Conference in Dallas. I think Charles was also a presenter that year. I was on the Intelligence Connections Panel with Larry Hancock. Much to my surprise, although this was the first time this information had been presented in Dallas, even JFK researchers did not seem to understand its significance!

Now - you certainly have the ability to prove me wrong. Out it. Let's see if it's viewed with the same indifference.

What makes you think that I have that ability? You are perhaps drawing pseudo-inferences even in the absence of supporting evidence. In case you truly are unaware of the broad circumstances, let me be clear:

1) Other than for the stated purpose [training] for which it was displayed, I was unaware of the significance of what I was viewing until many years after I had viewed it. I do not know who was in possession of it at the time(s) of viewing nor who ordered it as a part of the training. All I knew was: "This is an example of what NOT to do when protecting a client."

2) At the time, I was not aware that this was an item of evidence beyond what had already been publicly known.

3) Even if I had known it was "special" (which I did not) I would have been in no way capable of absconding with the film. It would have been literally IMPOSSIBLE, even if I had understood its importance.

Having said that, I believe that IF it becomes available at some point, it will not be for the right reasons. Re-read what Jan posted earlier. It is spot on, in my view. If the details that I have publicly left out of my account (specific circumstances) were to be revealed it would not shed even a scintilla of light on the big picture.

[JC Mahoney]

[quote=Greg Burnham]

Agent X3174 - terminated.