Files and Zapruder exit routes
Re: Files and Zapruder exit routes
Great discussion.If Files was misled by Roselli regarding the abort, one would assume Roselli to have fired a weapon but Files said only his Fireball and Nicoletti's rifle needed cleaning that night. I suspect Roselli met with mob contact Ruby because he knew from Sam and Nicoletti that the mob was not going to abort. Since he was the liason between the mob and CIA, he had to appease his CIA bosses.The alternative is more damaging to understanding the assassination. If Files made up the abort story, his account collapses for lack of integrity. Tosh Plumlee's testimony about the abort also collapses his story and to a lesser degree, Chauncey Holt's, who said it was only going to be a "demonstration" instead of a hit.You've given me food for thought. I appreciate that.
Re: Files and Zapruder exit routes
Looks like I may be the first to do this analysis of Files and Zapruder's movements and timing. Maybe it will bring clarity to this shadowman mystery.
Re: Files and Zapruder exit routes
Bob Jonas wrote:Great discussion.If Files was misled by Roselli regarding the abort, one would assume Roselli to have fired a weapon but Files said only his Fireball and Nicoletti's rifle needed cleaning that night. I suspect Roselli met with mob contact Ruby because he knew from Sam and Nicoletti that the mob was not going to abort. Since he was the liason between the mob and CIA, he had to appease his CIA bosses.The alternative is more damaging to understanding the assassination. If Files made up the abort story, his account collapses for lack of integrity. Tosh Plumlee's testimony about the abort also collapses his story and to a lesser degree, Chauncey Holt's, who said it was only going to be a "demonstration" instead of a hit.You've given me food for thought. I appreciate that.Yes, this discussion is really what this forum is all about. That is why people are attracted to it. Especially if they have been in other JFK assassination forums where name-calling and behavior of that ilk are often the norm.In terms of Jimmy Files and his truthfulness, I still believe the majority of what he has said about the assassination. But just like with E. Howard Hunt's deathbed confession, there is always some disinformation sprinkled in there. That's just the way it is for people who have worked for the CIA. It's double for people who have worked for both the CIA and the Mob like Files has. Likewise for someone like Chauncey Holt, who did the same thing.When it comes to researchers, I agree with a lot of the information Wim has uncovered. The same holds true with folks like Jim Marrs, Jim Fetzer, Jim DiEugenio, Doug Horne, Michael Calder and John Hankey. If you look at the list of people I just named, there have been some very spirited and nasty debates between some of them. I don't believe that serves our cause the right way.What I try to do is look at all the information out there and then form an opinion about what went down on 11/22/1963. It's a work in progress, as new books and information seem to come out every year. An example is the work of Horne, with his Inside the ARRB volumes. Volume IV proves conclusively to me that the Zapruder film was indeed altered and that the CIA had their hands on the film the very weekend of the assassination. Horne actually met with some of the people who attended those meetings.There were two separate NPIC (National Photographic Interpretation Center) events where the original Zapruder film was shown. One on the 23rd and one on the 24th. Dino Brugioni was at the event on the 23rd. Homer McMahon and Ben Hunter were at the event on the 24th. Horne interviewed all of them. All of this...and much more (like what really occurred at Bethesda the night of the assassination) is in Volume IV of Inside the ARRB.Brugioni (the Chief Information Officer at the CIA's pre-eminent photographic analytical laboratory) says the Zapruder film we see today is nothing like the film he saw, especially with the head-shot sequence, which he said lasted much longer in terms of frames.Like I said, this is a work in progress. What I believe today may change tomorrow. The key is to keep searching for the truth and never stop that endeavor.
Re: Files and Zapruder exit routes
It couldn't be Zapruder, the whole form, etc. of the person is not like him. You just shot the President with full robotic like actions to get the $35K payday. The guy had a lot of experience with similar hits and had discussed the actions necessary with other killers. You have full support of the authorities to give you cover. If you get caught you will be killed by the conspirators. No feeling is involved just automatic actions. I don't know that we have a profile picture of Files at the time. Too bad that artificial intelligence and computers can't solve the puzzle with high percentages of statistical certainty.
Re: Files and Zapruder exit routes
Why is files picture just a blur shadow and not an actual picture?
Re: Files and Zapruder exit routes
Focus; I don't think anyone has questioned it as a real untouched picture.
Re: Files and Zapruder exit routes
Slav that was my questioned asked last week, see above post. No one has answered that question yet. Why is everything else in the picture a clear image and this so called person is a shadow????
Re: Files and Zapruder exit routes
I don't think "Shadowman" looks any more blurry than the trees around him. Keep in mind, this is in the background of the photo. Images closer to the camera will be clearer. Plus, he's in the shadow and is moving so you'd get SOME blur. All things considered, I think it's pretty clear.
Re: Files and Zapruder exit routes
Bob Jonas, I have to respectively disagree with that analysis. Look at page one of this thread which shows the motorcycle cop, and the picture is taken across the street and everything all the way to the pagoda is clear, which is further away than the "shadow man" something doesn't add up here!
Re: Files and Zapruder exit routes
I would compare "shadowman" with other items around him such as the tree trunks. Comparing it with items in other parts of the photo is not probably the best of methods...but I'm no photo analyst expert. To me, it appears to be a man in the shadow of the trees walking to the east away from the scene. Nothing more. Nothing less. Speculation as to who it is is just that, speculation. It's possible that it's Files but there is simply no way to prove it.