I don't know exactly where the Zapruder film was altered. Some say it was at a secret CIA photo lab in Rochester NY, but it may have been at multiple places, and over a period of years. But, it was surely a top-down operation. The CIA's National Photographic Interpretation Center was a euphemism. They were just as bent on photographic manipulation as interpretation. And the work that was done at this level, and with so much at stake, surely went to the top. Do you really think that CIA artists were working on the Zapruder film in Rochester without the approval of Arthur Lundahl, who was Dino Brugioni's boss at the NPIC? That Lundahl and Brugioni were bamboozled along with everyone else? The CIA is a quasi-military organization.
Thursday, February 18, 2021
I'll draw a parallel to my research on the Moorman photo, and on that I had a physicist helping me; one with a specialty in Optics, who lectured other physicists on Optics. And he determined that the Moorman photo was taken at a diagonal angle from behind. Mary always claimed and demonstrated that she took her photo when the Kennedys were right across from her. So, photographically, her angle was perpendicular, not diagonal from behind.
Mary said that after she went home with her photo late that Friday night, and well after dark, that they kept coming back to her to "borrow" her photo. Why did they do that, when they not only made copies, but made a negative of it? So, what did they need her original for, again and again? They needed it in order to alter it. And finally, they gave up on it and replaced it with a crop of one that was taken at a diagonal angle from behind by Babushka Lady.
And that's when the white thumbprint went on. You don't believe the story that that was a mishap, do you?
But, the point is that it happened over time, we need to stop thinking that the Zapruder film was edited within days. It may have begun within days; easy stuff, like removing frames to hide the slowing and near-stopping of the limo. But, when you consider the totality of what was done to the film, there is no way they did that within days. There were probably aspects of film manipulation that didn't exist, the development of which were spurred by the needs that they had. For instance, they moved the Croft people, who were African-American, who were down the hill past the Obelisk, up almost all the way to the corner.
Look at this frame 21. You see the short, AA woman in the blue dress, right? I put an arrow to her.. She is the same woman as in Croft. Look how close she is to the corner.
But, they are in different locations. In Zapruder, she is at the top of the hill, close to the intersection. In Croft, she is down below the Obelisk. Croft is the one that is accurate. But, Croft was highly manipulated too. JFK was hit in the back a split-second before Croft was taken. If you watch the Z-film closely, you can see that JFK stopped waving before he reached the freeway sign. And the Z-film shows him putting his hand over his face, which nobody ever said he did.
But, notice that he's not waving in Croft either. And he isn't waving in the Betzner or Willis photos either, and the limo was moving. So, for all that distance, JFK had stopped waving. He was a politician on a political outing, so why would he stop waving? Because: he was shot in the back. That happened high on the hill, and the Z-film showed it, thus destroying the SBT. Hence, they had to do Frankenstinian surgery on that film. It wasn't done in a week or a month or even a year.
This is a lot to serve-up at one time, so I'm going to quit. But, everything I have said here is rock-solid. The biggest alteration to the Zapruder film was cutting out a huge swath of JFK riding down that hill shot in the back. The area of the plat in red is the part that they cut out of the Zapruder film, which they did because it showed him reacting to being shot in the back, where he stopped smiling and waving and acquired that "quizzical" look on his face that Jackie described.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.