I was informed that I may have offended some folks by stating my opinion on the Zapruder film alteration theories as "hogwash".
Well, that is indeed my opinion. I find the ample discussions on it (whole books have been written about it) a waste of resource and energy. As unfortunate as the discussions on whether the driver Bill Greer turned around and shot JFK in the head with his service pistol.
Let me first discard that myth once and for all. Or better yet, let Robert Harris do it, as I could not do it better:
Here I shall lay out my case that the Zapruder film was not altered.
Most of this Zapruder alteration hogwash comes from Jack White. This is the same man who thinks to see - in blobs of light and shadows - a firing policeman (or "badgeman") and an acomplice in the Moorman picture. But he never shows us the size of these "human figures" in relation to their surroundings:
Things get more complicated when we look at the film frame-by-frame. As the bullet hits, JFK's head first moves forwards:
This makes things confusing. There seemed to be three possible explanations:
1. He was hit by two bullets at almost the same time (one from behind and then one from the front).
2. He was hit from behind, and a jet of brain matter exploding from the front caused his head to recoil backwards.
3. He was hit from behind and some sort of muscle reaction caused his head to fly backwards.
People tried to figure this out for three decades. Instead of clearing up the mystery, Zapruder's film just made things more confusing.
In the 1990s, researchers started to realize that there was a fourth possible explanation. Zapruder's film might also be a part of the lies and cover-up that agencies of the U.S. Government had weaved around the JFK assassination!
Costella takes his reader by the hand as if he were a child, inviting the child to do its own thinking with some help of Costella. He gives three possible explanations. Ofcourse the first explanation is a perfectly logical and possible explanation, but this is ignored and neglected by Costella. He does not want his reader to entertain this thought as a logical explanation. He wants to force his reader to accept his explanation:
Zapruder's film is a very good forgery. It is almost perfect. Some mistakes took almost 40 years to find.
The scientists also proved that Zapruder's film was not just changed a little bit. The whole film is a fake!
Costella and White claim that the whole film is a fake. Not changed just a little bit, but a magician's show performed by special effects people from the 1960's that could compete with the best of the current experts at Steven Spielberg's studios, along with illusionists of the stature of David Copperfield.
If there was fakery applied to the film, then we first would have to ask ourselves: What was the motive of this fakery? Well, the conspirators would first like to conceal the fact that JFK was fatally hit from the right front, more specifically from the grassy knoll. Hence, they would want to conceal that JFK moved back and to the left as a result from the impact from such a shot.
However, they failed to conceal that movement. Why? Why did they not do that, if they had the extensive skills, attributed by the alteration theorists? When the Zapruder film was made available to the public in the mid seventies, thanks to Robert Groden, it made such a big splash, because anyone could see the movement of JFK as a result of the grassy knoll shot. Famous now for the blockbuster movie JFK, with Kevin Costner playing Jim Garrison: Back and to the left, back and to the left, back and to the left ........
So again, we need to ask ourselves: Why was that movement not hidden through the alleged fakery of the film? My answer: Because it was not faked! It was only kept away from the public to not enlighten the public on the obvious fatal shot from the knoll.
Now let us focus on another claim of Jack White and allies. That claim is that the Zapruder was faked to hide the fact that the JFK limousine came to a full stop. The evidence for that claim is a (very) few witnesses that said the car stopped. In other words they recall the car came to a full halt, before speeding away. In fact, the alteration theorists claim that the whole film was manipulated to conceal a complete stop of the car. I ask you: How is such a fakery done technically? But moreover: Why was that done? If the car came to a full stop, why would that need to be hidden?
Apart from the cumbersome task to achieve such a forgery with 1960 technology, the true answer is: It did not need to be hidden....... Because it did not happen! This is easily and undeniably provable by the other three films from the other side, that show the car at the time of the assassination: The Hughes, the Muchmore and the Nix film. In order to maintain the claim that the Zapruder film was altered to hide the stop of the car, you do in fact claim that that the other films were altered too. To the extent that all these films were altered to conceal the limousine coming to a full stop. However, you never hear the alteration theorists claim that! Why is that? Because it makes their claim preposterous. There is no article or book written on the "great Nix film hoax", or the "great Muchmore film hoax". In fact, those films show EXACTLY what the Zapruder film shows. Up to the almost simultaneous forward and backward snap of JFK's head (in my opinion the result of two almost simultaneous headshots, from the back and front).
Which brings me to the next issue: Why was the Zapruder film (and the other films) not altered to hide the head movements, the forward and backward movement a split second apart? You cannot even see the forward movement with the naked eye if the Zapruder film is played at normal speed of 18 frames per second? So why?
The answer here is again: Because nothing was altered and the Zapruder film portrays the movements as they happened. A shot in the back of the head (tilting the head forward) and immediately after a shot in the right temple from the knoll (blowing the head backwards).
From the interview with James Files 2003:
J - where were you aiming?
JF - Oh, I was aiming for his right eye, which to me is the left side of his head looking head on. But for him it would be his right eye, and when I pulled the trigger, and I'm right in on it, and it's almost like looking 6 feet away through the scope. As I squeezed, take off my round, his head moved forward, I missed and I come in right along the temple. Just right behind the eye.
J - Here or in the hairline?
JF - Well, I'm not sure, you know I can't see the penetration, I know I hit him right here (pointing at temple). I know I hit behind the eye. Somewhere within a half inch diameter right there (pointing again).
W - So there were actually two shots almost simultaneously?
J - You think he got hit as you squeezed?
JF - What I believe is this : ….. And I got my readings as a marksman, I'm a good shooter, always was, I'm not bragging on my stuff, don't get me wrong, but that's what got me my start with David Phillips. Because of something that I did in the service, and I made a mark there and it's on record and it's recorded, for headshots, for what I did, and the things that I did. But anyway, to make a long story short, as I am preparing to squeeze off my round, Kennedy's head moved forward, just as I squeezed. It was already in process, the head started forward. To me … what I believe is, … and I did not see, let me clear the fact now, I never saw Mr. Nicoletti shoot Kennedy, but I know he was the man in the Daltex building, the man supposed to be doing the shooting. Therefore the head started forward and as far as I am concerned Mr Nicoletti hit him at that point. As I squeezed off my round, the head started forward, I hit it and blew the head backwards.
Quote from JFK assassination researcher James Fetzer:
I agree that the metallic fragments in the lateral cranial
X-ray could have been mercury from a bullet like the one Files says he
used, which counts in Files favor. But he did not report the limo
stop, which was arranged to make sure that JFK would be killed. If he
had been there, he would have reported it, since it set up his shot.
So I do not believe Files.
Quote from JFK assassination researcher Robert Groden:
There is absolutely nothing fake about the Zapruder film. All that b.s. paranoia gives so much aid and comfort to the guilty.
It's so irresponsible for those who don't know an f-stop from a bus stop to try to disregard the single most important piece of evidence that we have.
McAdams must be laughing his ass off. Shame on you.
Give your (anonymous) opinion in this poll:
COPYRIGHT 2003 jfkmurdersolved.com All Rights Reserved