Editor's NOTE:
Jim Fetzer forwarded a link to the following piece which I strongly encourage readers to peruse. It addresses several new questions about the "Zapruder Film" which I find fascinating including whether:
--First, even if the Z-film was a complete and totally accurate depiction of events in Dallas Texas on November 22, 1963, should it have been legally possible to obtain a personal copyright for it?
--In Fetzer's words; "The second is that if the film has been altered and is no longer an accurate film of an historical event, especially when is marketed as genuine, does it deserve copyright protection?"
Fetzer and Pincer argue in the negative on both accounts.
The interested reader will find a good dose of other very interesting information in the article including a detailed algorithmic presentation of how to determine Zapruder Film Fakery.
For those who are not familiar with the latest thinking re: the Z-film, Dr. Fetzer is saying that while Abraham Zapruder did take a film of the JFK motorcade in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963, the original "out of camera" film has been so completely reworked and altered by the conspirators that it no longer bears any resemblance to what actually occurred that fateful day in several crucial respects.
--Dr. J. P. Hubert
DID ZAPRUDER FILM “THE ZAPRUDER FILM”?
Jim Fetzer (with Mike Pincher)
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
At first consideration, the question sounds very odd on its face. How could Zapruder have not taken “the Zapruder film”? So here is some background. As many readers may be aware, I organized a JFK research group in 1992 of the most highly-qualified persons to ever study the case, including a world authority on the human brain, who was also an expert on wound ballistics; a Ph.D. in physics who was also an M.D. and board-qualified in radiation oncology; another M.D. who had been present in Trauma Room #1 when JFK was brought in for care and, two days later, was responsible for the treatment of his alleged assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, in Trauma Room #2; a legendary photo-analyst, who had testified before the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) and later advised Oliver Stone on the production of "JFK"; and another Ph.D. in physics, this time with a specialization in electromagnetism, which includes the properties of light and of optics and images of moving objects.
We discovered that the autopsy X-rays had been altered to conceal a massive blow-out at the back of the head; that another person's brain shown in diagrams and photographs at the National Archives had been substituted for that of JFK; and that the most famous footage in history, the Zapruder film, had been recreated by the removal of some frames and by the introduction of others, using the sophisticated techniques of optical printing and special effects applied to original footage to create a new film. I organized and moderated the first symposium on the authenticity of the film in Dallas in 1996 and would subsequently organize and moderate a conference on this subject in Duluth in 2003. (The conference is now available on YouTube in 66 segments, under the heading, “Zapruder Fakery”.) Later that year, I would publish my third collection of studies by experts on different aspects of the case, THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX (2003), one of the greatest photographic scams of history. MORE...
For additional related information see THIS...
Jim Fetzer forwarded a link to the following piece which I strongly encourage readers to peruse. It addresses several new questions about the "Zapruder Film" which I find fascinating including whether:
--First, even if the Z-film was a complete and totally accurate depiction of events in Dallas Texas on November 22, 1963, should it have been legally possible to obtain a personal copyright for it?
--In Fetzer's words; "The second is that if the film has been altered and is no longer an accurate film of an historical event, especially when is marketed as genuine, does it deserve copyright protection?"
Fetzer and Pincer argue in the negative on both accounts.
The interested reader will find a good dose of other very interesting information in the article including a detailed algorithmic presentation of how to determine Zapruder Film Fakery.
For those who are not familiar with the latest thinking re: the Z-film, Dr. Fetzer is saying that while Abraham Zapruder did take a film of the JFK motorcade in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963, the original "out of camera" film has been so completely reworked and altered by the conspirators that it no longer bears any resemblance to what actually occurred that fateful day in several crucial respects.
--Dr. J. P. Hubert
DID ZAPRUDER FILM “THE ZAPRUDER FILM”?
Jim Fetzer (with Mike Pincher)
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
At first consideration, the question sounds very odd on its face. How could Zapruder have not taken “the Zapruder film”? So here is some background. As many readers may be aware, I organized a JFK research group in 1992 of the most highly-qualified persons to ever study the case, including a world authority on the human brain, who was also an expert on wound ballistics; a Ph.D. in physics who was also an M.D. and board-qualified in radiation oncology; another M.D. who had been present in Trauma Room #1 when JFK was brought in for care and, two days later, was responsible for the treatment of his alleged assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, in Trauma Room #2; a legendary photo-analyst, who had testified before the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) and later advised Oliver Stone on the production of "JFK"; and another Ph.D. in physics, this time with a specialization in electromagnetism, which includes the properties of light and of optics and images of moving objects.
We discovered that the autopsy X-rays had been altered to conceal a massive blow-out at the back of the head; that another person's brain shown in diagrams and photographs at the National Archives had been substituted for that of JFK; and that the most famous footage in history, the Zapruder film, had been recreated by the removal of some frames and by the introduction of others, using the sophisticated techniques of optical printing and special effects applied to original footage to create a new film. I organized and moderated the first symposium on the authenticity of the film in Dallas in 1996 and would subsequently organize and moderate a conference on this subject in Duluth in 2003. (The conference is now available on YouTube in 66 segments, under the heading, “Zapruder Fakery”.) Later that year, I would publish my third collection of studies by experts on different aspects of the case, THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX (2003), one of the greatest photographic scams of history. MORE...
For additional related information see THIS...
