JFK: “Parkland”, the Charles Crenshaw Interview, and “Executive Action”

07 Sep

JFK: “Parkland”, the Charles Crenshaw Interview and “Executive Action”

Richard Charnin
Sept. 7, 2013
Updated: Oct.5, 2014

Click Reclaiming Science:The JFK Conspiracy to look inside the book.

JFK Blog Posts
JFK Calc Spreadsheet Database

The new film Parkland is just another perpetuation of the 50-year JFK coverup. It fails to cover the most critical fact of all: the Parkland doctors said in press conferences that the shots came from the front. Tom Hanks will forever regret his involvement in promoting a film full of factual omissions – as will its fine actors. Why did they agree to do it? Were they unaware of the facts at Parkland? As professionals, they should have done their homework and voiced their objections to the glaring omissions.

Before Burt Lancaster and Robert Ryan decided to make Executive Action in 1973, they first needed to convince themselves that there was in fact a conspiracy. They did so by familiarizing themselves with the evidence. THEY WERE NOT INTIMIDATED. THEY FELT THAT THE FILM HAD TO BE MADE. That was forty years ago. The evidence was overwhelming then; it is even more so now.

These graphs are mathematical proof of a conspiracy.

Dr. Charles Crenshaw
Parkland doctor Charles Crenshaw was there, trying to save JFK. He was interviewed by ABC years back. But how many Americans are aware of it? It was indeed a Conspiracy of Silence, the title of Crenshaw’s book. The YouTube video must go viral. If it does, the debate will be over. Take 10 minutes to learn the truth. This interview says it all.

The Single Bullet Theory
The Warren Commission claimed that the throat wound was an exit wound. A single bullet hit Kennedy in the back, exited the front of his neck, and then changed direction to hit Governor John Connally (sitting in front of Kennedy) in the back, wrist and leg. WC member Rep. Gerald Ford (R-MI) changed the position of JFK’s back wound to conform to the single-bullet theory.

In July 1997, pages from the original draft of the Warren Report were released, describing the path of the famous single—or magic—bullet. The memo stated: “A bullet had entered his back at a point slightly above the shoulder to the right of the spine.” In pen, Ford changed the report to read, “A bullet had entered the back of his neck at a point slightly to the right of the spine,” thus making the single-bullet theory plausible.

The Gaping Exit Wound
Parkland surgeon, Robert McClelland, MD. described JFK’s skull exit wound in a drawing first published in the book, “Six Seconds in Dallas” by Josiah Thompson. The image, reprinted from “High Treason” by authors Robert Groden and Harrison Livingstone, includes a letter from Parkland professor Paul Peters, MD, corroborating the location Dr. McClelland gave for JFK’s gaping skull wound. It was reproduced in ARRB Medical Document #264.

The Small Throat Wound
The throat wound was made by the first of the two (or possibly more) bullets that struck Kennedy. It was not the fatal wound. The physicians who performed the autopsy did not see this wound in its original state, because it was obliterated by one of the Parkland doctors, Dr. Malcolm Perry, when he made a surgical incision over it in order to perform a tracheotomy. Therefore, only the doctors and nurses at Parkland hospital had a view of this wound in its original state. All of the Parkland doctors and the nurse who offered an opinion on the throat wound characterized it as an entrance wound:

On November 22, 1963, millions of Americans heard radio and TV networks report that Dr. Malcolm Perry, a Dallas Physician who was with the President in the emergency room when he died, said there was a bullet entrance wound situated on the front of Kennedy’s neck. He said “there was an entrance wound below the Adam’s apple.”

Tom Wicker with the New York Times: Dr. Malcolm Perry, an attending surgeon, and Dr. Kemp Clark, chief of neurosurgery at Parkland Hospital, gave more details. Mr. Kennedy was hit by a bullet in the throat, just below the Adam’s apple, they said. This wound had the appearance of a bullet’s entry…

Dallas News reporter John Geddie: Dr. Perry said, “in the lower portion of Kennedy’s neck, right in the front, there was a small puncture”.

Dr. Ronald Jones in his Warren Commission deposition explained why the doctors considered the throat wound to be an entrance wound: “The hole was very small and relatively clean-cut as you would see in a bullet that is entering rather than exiting from a patient”.

Dr. Paul Peters testified at the Warren Commission Hearings: “We saw the wound of entry in the throat and noted the large occipital wound, and it is a known fact that high velocity missiles often have a small wound of entrance and a large wound of exit…”

Dr. Charles Baxter noted that such a wound (to have been an exit wound) would be “unusual… ordinarily there would have been a rather large wound of exit.”

Dr. Charles Carrico: On the afternoon of November 22, Dr. Carrico described the throat wound in his medical report as “a small penetrating wound of the ant. (front) neck in the lower 1/3”.

Nurse Margaret Henchliffe testified to the Warren Commission: “It was just a little hole in the middle of his neck… about as big around as the end of my little finger… that looked like an entrance bullet hole…”

Dr. Robert McClelland told the Post-Dispatch: “It certainly did look like an entrance wound.” He explained that a bullet from a low velocity rifle, like the one thought to have been used, characteristically makes a small entrance wound, sets up shock waves inside the body, and tears a big opening when it passes out the other side.

Dr. McClelland conceded that it was possible that the throat wound marked the exit of a bullet fired into the back of the President’s neck… “but we are familiar with bullet wounds,” he said. “We see them every day – sometimes several a day. This did appear to be an entrance wound.”

McClelland noted in the same interview, having been informed that Lee Harvey Oswald had shot the President from behind: “We postulated that if it was a wound of entry, as we thought it was… he would have to have been looking almost completely to the rear”.

McClelland testified to the Warren Commission: “At the moment… it was our impression before we had any other information… that this was one bullet, that perhaps had entered through the front of the neck and then in some peculiar fashion which we really had… to strain to explain to ourselves, had coursed up the front of the vertebra and into the base of the skull and out the rear of the skull”.

Dr. Robert Shaw said that the doctors were “a little baffled” by the throat wound:“The assassin was behind him, yet the bullet entered at the front of his neck. Mr. Kennedy must have turned to his left to talk to Mrs. Kennedy or to wave to someone”.

“Doctor, describe the entrance wound. You think from the front in the throat?”
DR. PERRY — “The wound appeared to be an entrance wound in the front of the throat; yes, that is correct. The exit wound, I don’t know. It could have been the head or there could have been a second wound of the head. There was not time to determine this at the particular instant.”

Three Great JFK Films
Executive Action:
JFK is the Oliver Stone classic starring Kevin Costner as Jim Garrison:
Thirteen Days shows how JFK handled during the Cuban Missile Crisis:

Conspiracy Mathematical Proof
An actuary engaged by the London Sunday Times calculated 100,000 trillion to one odds against 18 material witness dying within three years of the assassination (thirteen died unnaturally by homicide, accident and suicide, 3 by heart attacks, 2 by natural causes). The calculation has been confirmed.

The reference Who’s Who in the JFK Assassination contains summaries of 1400+ material witnesses. Based on the national average total mortality rate (0.010193), approximately 214 would be expected to die in the 15 years from 1964-78. Given the national average unnatural mortality rate (0.000822), only 17 unnatural deaths would be expected, but there were 78 officially ruled unnatural deaths (the actual number is probably close to 100). The probability of 78 unnatural deaths in a randomly-selected group is E-27 (ZERO). It’s even lower (E-62) using the JFK-weighted witness rate (0.000247).

Convenient deaths spiked in 1964 (Warren Commission) and 1977 (House Select Committee).

JFK Calc is a spreadsheet/database of 122 suspicious deaths from 1964-78. At least 78 were unnatural (34 homicides, 24 accidents, 16 suicides, 4 unknown). Of the 122, 95 are included in Who’s Who.

These deaths, categorized as homicides in the database, were officially ruled as suicides (Stockdale, Ferrie, Pitzer, De Morenshildt, Craig, Underhill, Surrey); sudden cancers (Ruby, Martin, Artime, Dyer); illnesses (Smith, Carter); accident (Sherman).

These deaths were officially ruled as accidents (Sullivan, Sherman, Kilgallen, Bowers); heart attacks (Regis Kennedy, Howard) There were many others. But they may very well have been homicides.

If any of the official “accidents”, “suicides” and “heart attacks” were actually homicides, the probabilities would be lower still. But it’s a moot point since the probability is ZERO given the official cause of death.

It is important to note that the 1964-78 average homicide rate was much lower than accidental deaths and suicides, therefore comparing unnatural deaths to the expected number is not nearly as dramatic as comparing homicides. Nationally, homicides comprised 10% of unnatural deaths, but 34 of 78 officially ruled JFK-related unnatural deaths (44%) were homicides.


Posted by on September 7, 2013 in JFK


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

35 responses to “JFK: “Parkland”, the Charles Crenshaw Interview, and “Executive Action”

  1. Frankie Vegas

    September 10, 2013 at 6:24 am

    I hope Hanks gets to read this. I hope his ears are burning.

  2. Anthony

    September 19, 2013 at 7:53 pm

    Appreciate it, Ample knowledge.

  3. John Strange

    March 1, 2014 at 4:49 am

    If the bullet that struck Kennedy did not proceed to hit Connally in the back then why was the entrance wound to Connally’s back elliptical? A bullet does not start to yaw for no good reason.
    Look, I know you want there to have been a conspiracy. You might think it makes you a hit at cocktail parties and confirms some ideological bias of yours but all the serious researchers (unless you consider people like Jim Marrs, Robert Groden and Richard Belzer “serious”) now accept that Oswald, alone, assassinated Kennedy.
    Why don’t you move on to a more likely conspiracy like a faked moon landing or Sandy Hook being a false flag operation. I’m sure you can get gullible people to believe those too!

    • Richard Charnin

      March 3, 2014 at 4:36 pm

      Look, I know you are paid to disinform.
      So go ahead, disinform THIS
      These are the facts you cannot dispute.

    • hybridrogue1

      December 12, 2014 at 10:54 pm

      “If the bullet that struck Kennedy did not proceed to hit Connally in the back then why was the entrance wound to Connally’s back elliptical?”~John Strange

      It doesn’t matter whether the bullet’s wound was elliptical. The critical matter is that Kennedy’s back wound was not dissected to prove that bullet path. The generals and admirals in the gallery ordered Dr Fink to move on and not do such an examination. This is clearly improper intervention of standard autopsy procedures and must be viewed with the height of profound suspicion.

      The neck wound was also not dissected for the same reason – non medical orders to the doctor performing the autopsy. It is these provable facts that show malfeasance by the military, not the old tired arguments of a “stolen body” or “faked x-rays and autopsy photos”

      Mr Strange and Mr Charnin both need to get up to speed on the latest developments and discoveries in this case.

      • Richard Charnin

        December 13, 2014 at 12:50 pm

        The neck wound was a wound of entry. You are delusional. The limousine stopped. The probability that 93 witnesses would claim the shots came from the knoll would ALL be wrong is ZERO. Shots came from the right front. I know who you are, Mr. Bradford. I will allow the 4 comments you made today to stand, but after that, forget it. I will not allow further comments from you.

  4. John Strange

    March 1, 2014 at 4:58 am

    How could McClelland now claim there was this large exit wound to the back of Kennedy’s head if, in his testimony before the Warren Commission, he swore that at no time did any if the Parkland staff turn Kennedy over to examine his back wounds? The fact is, at the autopsy, they found only a small entrance wound to the back if Kennedy’s head. This was confirmed on the photographs and x-rays. Geez, you can see on the Zapruder Film Kennedy has no exit to the back while the exit to the front (along with the blood splatter) is obvious.
    You need a new line of work.

    • Richard Charnin

      March 3, 2014 at 4:33 pm

      You need to do your homework. You are very strange.
      ALL 44 Parkland and autopsy witnesses described a gaping wound to the right rear of JFK’s head.

      Don’t bother replying. You are not serious. You are a McAdams wannabee.

      • hybridrogue1

        December 12, 2014 at 10:43 pm

        I would also like to point out how misguided this old argument is, in face of the fact that modern ballistic analysis revealed by CSI Sherry Fiester proves that the autopsy photos and photographs are in fact exactly what one would find from a shot from the front with a high powered rifle.

        It is only your lack of modern forensic knowledge that leads you to believe that the autopsy evidence proves a shot from behind – it doesn’t. It is time for YOU Mr Charnin, to do some new homework.

      • Richard Charnin

        December 13, 2014 at 12:52 pm

        Sherry wrote her book before the final proof of alteration came from Doug Horne and Brugioni. The back of the head was painted in. You are delusional. The limousine stopped. The probability that 93 witnesses would claim the shots came from the knoll would ALL be wrong is ZERO. Shots came from the right front. I know who you are, Mr. Bradford. I will allow the 4 comments you made today to stand, but after that, forget it. I will not allow further comments from you.

    • hybridrogue1

      December 12, 2014 at 10:23 pm

      “How could McClelland now claim there was this large exit wound to the back of Kennedy’s head if, in his testimony before the Warren Commission, he swore that at no time did any if the Parkland staff turn Kennedy over to examine his back wounds?” ~John Strange

      Charnin responds with; “You need to do your homework.”

      Mr Strange has done his homework, it is a fact that McClelland swore that at no time did any of the Parkland staff turn Kennedy over to examine his back wounds.

      ARRB MD #264 is titled “Dr. McClelland’s Drawing “, but it is in fact not initialed by McClelland, nor any of the other Parkland medical staff. I would like to have proof that McClelland,or any other staff actually saw this drawing.


  5. david t. krall

    March 10, 2014 at 7:26 pm

    from: david t. krall

    “Executive Action” is good movie…I know its on video…I have a copy…I only wish a DVD
    extended version or a DVD with bonus “deleted” scenes is available…could such a
    “directors” or “producers” cut ever be made available??? Most younger people don’t know about this movie, made about 18 years before :JFK”. Also, about 10 or 11 years BEFORE the making and release of “Executive Action”, actually in 1962, a prominent American voiced serious concerns
    and insights about a “possible” coup de’tat and/or “major” political assassination inside/within the
    United States of America. This person (among others) knew very well and was exposed to the harsh realiites of such power and its equally stealthful and deceptive proclivities, “potentialities”,
    habits, behavior, goals and self-serving agends. He knew and saw such power…
    No its wasn’t Pres, Ike, who saw first hand “such power” & who warned us of such “possibilites”…
    No it wasn’t Pres. DeGaulle of France who may have become so upset that he took or tried to
    take France out of NATO, partially because of at least one attempt on his life and/or against
    his government by his own domestic enemies who found “support” from “foreign interests”
    in this one (of many…) attempt to displace/remove him from Power…
    No it wasn’t President Fidel Castro of Cuba who during the Summer of 1963, supposedly
    “warned” U.S. officials of such “actions and activiites and that they (U.S.) officilas would not be safe
    from such “actions and activities”….could this not have been some kind of warning and not a threat
    but a VIELED WARNING, such as.” hey you better tighten the leash, call off these dogs before
    you know it, they will turn on you!”, control and shutdown or “put down” these guys or they will
    come after you, if they haven’t tried already to come after you to be “putdown”???…
    Was this same person the one who may have “fed” a byline to at least one media outlet in Oct. of 1963 that secret forces within the US and the US government had amassed enough influence & becoming capable of formenting and carrying out “some-type” of coup d’etat within the US??? The same person who highly recommended and suggested that the political thriller/novel “Seven-Days-In-May” be adapted to the big screen and be made into a full-length major motion picture by a major Hollywood Studio, AS A WARNING TO THE NATION, HIS FELLOW CITIZENS THAT “IT” CAN HERE….
    THAT PERSON WAS PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY…AND HE WAS ASSASSINATED ON 11/22/63, in broad daylight on an Amrican Street with deadly and vicious impunity…and that is not a conspiracy “theory”….

  6. david t. krall

    March 10, 2014 at 8:19 pm

    from: david t. krall

    sorry for the typo…at bottom,…THAT “IT” CAN HAPPEN HERE…& …Amercian Street…

    as an “addendum”, I seriously doubt if anyone ever doubted or questioned the motives, reasons and/or “explanation” for the removal of NK in the USSR in October of 1964, as that was also
    the result of a power struggle and “conflict resolution” within the bowels, interlocking power-sectors and epicenter of the Sov.. Goverrnment….Big Conspiracies don’t exists???
    how about Operation Mongoose and JM/Wave…just to name a few? Tell that to the people
    in Chile who lived before, during and after Allende? Tell that to Lon Nol and Diem !!!
    Tell that to those who witnessed & lived during the assassinations of Sadat and Aquino?
    Tell that to those who suffered under the boot and oppression of Stalin and Hitler.and all their
    henchmen…I guess the Nurmberg Trials and The “behind closed door recognition” in the USSR in 1956 regarding the crimes Stalin are just Conspiracy “Theories”…..

  7. david t. krall

    March 11, 2014 at 11:44 pm

    from: david t. krall

    one point that needs mentioning is that in the early 1960’s and especially in 1963, Dallas, TX
    was one of the most, if not THE most violent city in the United States, and was near the top
    regarding shootings and deaths by gunfire…If anybody knew from first hand, with deliberate
    and precise medical background ,and experience, it would have been the Doctors at Parkland…
    like Dr. Houts (correct spelling?) stated in his book, “Where Death Delights” written and published not long after the President’s murder, “many top-shelf expert forensic pathologists were “waitng for the call’ in order to contribute their expertise….those calls never came”…keep in mind the phototgraghic and film evidence “parallels” and is consistent with witness accounts and the
    medical observations at Parkland Hospital that shots were fired at JFK from the front/side
    and also from the rear. Those who claimed to hear a shot or shots from the TSBD were correct
    and is the best indicator of more than one-guman when coupled with statements from the
    best witness, those near and/or at close proximity to the death-car and it’s victim, right in front of them, which were many….In my opinion the number of shots fired, in such an abbreviated time-frame, were taken as “shots”, when they were actually vollys in “quick-time”, in extreme short & rapid and (just about) simultaneous order…6 maybe 8, or poss. 10 seconds..

  8. david t. krall

    March 15, 2014 at 2:34 pm

    from: david t. krall

    Common sense, rational thinking and a clear, lucid and objective, knowledge and accurate
    historcal perspective literally cryout for justice and truth all over Dealy Plaza and spanning the
    history of out country over the past 50 years…not just for JFK but for the truly loyal personell of the
    intelligence and armed services, and thier families of those who lost thier lives, were wounded,
    became MIA’s,& POW’s and all those honorably served their call and duty, regardless
    and subsequent to, due to the myopic views that took hold, especailly visibley and more entrenched when JFK’s heart and brain stopped functioning and LBJ became President…Professor
    and Presidentila Historian Neustadt in one of his many books years ago stated the be believed that
    JFK, in regards to SE, would have kept the bombers and troops away and would have avoided
    the temptation and the “trap” of a major US war and commitment .in SE Asia.
    In regards to the overall peramiters and dimensions of the actual “enterprise”/effort, in planning
    and bringing to fruition the murder of the 35th president of the United States, one has to be aware of and it is vital to understand the :”behind-the-scenes” protocol and interlocking procedures
    and steps taken, since at least 1940, and certainly since the end of the Second World War
    to ensure the travel, safety and protection of the President of the United States.
    For someone to say that “someone is looking for a conspiracy” is indicative of a blind
    unawareness, being casually aloof, or very self insulated and subjective views…DA’s,
    prosecutors, lawyers. police and law-enforcement investigators and even defense attorneys
    always build “scenarios” test theories, cross checking, etc and build a case based on facts, and infomed, enlightened educated “hunces” and interconnected ideas, facts, and relevant and related circumstances. If deeply concerned Americans, and others around the world have
    questioned and looked into the facts rergarding the death of President Kennedy, based
    on our own, The U.S. Government own many, many documents and reports, then “one needing to look for and find a conspiracy” need not look very far…Since WWII,.the US, like all world
    powers had and has developed the capacity to “captivate” and carry out many small and large
    “quite” wars and clandestine operations on a wolrdwide level. “One not need to look for
    a conspiracy”, if phobic to that word. think in terms of corruption, collusion and criminally
    unaccounatble with, in this case, THE JFK murder, a proclivaty and propensity, as well as
    a pre-existing pattern of behavior and procedures to conduct similar enterprises away from our own shores and borders, now, in 2014, as well as even diring WWII and after it…”one does not need not look far”, as reported by OUR OWN GOV’T (See various SEN. FRANK CHURCH and
    REP OTIS PIKE REPORTS to name just a few…& lets not forget the 30(?)-some volumes of the
    Pentagon Papers –that only saw the light of day due to Daniel Ellsburg and his lawyers)
    No need to look far…the closer the “problem” the bigger the “blowback”. Operation Mongoose,
    JM/WAVE, & one or two ONI/CIA “Task Forces” operaing on parallel and combined tracks
    as well as “Executive Action” involving and adjoining corrupt corporate and criminal elements
    to attempt to murder and to assassinate with “extreme prejudice” foreign leaders, especially
    Fidel Castro,and other Cuban Marxists Leaders. It is not a stretch if within such a large
    constellation or “political solar” system of orbiting agends, parallel and conflicitng goals,
    and power-struggles, that such an “effort” from such a segment or enclave was not “TURNED INWARD” against an American President, if that President was usurping, infringing upon
    and “putting the heat” on some of these elements and was perceived as either or both
    betraying them and “bumping heads” with them… I can only say for someone in this day of
    2014, who continues to live in that fatasmagoric world of lone nuts,,,you won’t and can’t
    even find them in the snack section of your local super-market,,,,ther don’t come alone…
    and the pun IS INTENDED!!!
    from: david t. krall

  9. david t. krall

    March 15, 2014 at 2:41 pm


  10. david t. krall

    March 16, 2014 at 1:35 pm

    from : david t. krall

    for anyone interested in “bringing up” to 2014 the level of the Mechanics of Influence & Power”
    that showed it’s hand on 11/22/63 I strongly advise and suggest doing a “search” on
    an individual by the name of Douglas Hagmann…money moves nations and it is the “arms and legs” of power…always follow the money trail…JFK like every other president wanted to grab the
    :sword of power from the holy grail…but unlike other president’s, JFK tempted fate and
    attempted to manuever in “dangerous waters”, and seek new avenues and/or repave existing ones
    regarding war and peace and finance/monetary/fiscal/regulatory-law enforcement policies, thus he chose the risks, fatally, of ignoring or “taking a chance” that this sword of power from the holy grail did not become a deadly “sword of damecles”…we know the rest of story…at least those of us who are concerned and so moved enough to care…see “DOUGLAS HAGMANN”…

  11. hybridrogue1

    December 12, 2014 at 11:27 pm

    “While President John F. Kennedy’s assassination is the most studied murder investigation in American History, it remains plagued by a variety of theories that have developed into myths. In a comprehensive and science based analysis of the assassination evidence, “Enemy of the Truth” debunks the following prevailing myths—not with biased counter opinion, but with forensic truths.

    The Myths:

    >Dallas Police Department followed protocol
    >Ear witnesses are reliable
    >The blood in the Zapruder home movie is faked
    >Ballistic test prove a single shooter
    >The limousine stopped
    >The fatal head shot originated from the Grassy Knoll
    >There are two simultaneous head shots
    >The single bullet theory is correct”

    ~Sherry Fiester CSI
    . . . . .

    • Richard Charnin

      December 13, 2014 at 12:47 pm

      The limousine stopped. The probability that 93 witnesses would claim the shots came from the knoll would ALL be wrong is ZERO. Shots came from the right front. I know who you are, Mr. Bradford. I will allow the 4 comments you made today to stand, but after that, forget it. I will not allow further comments from you.

    • Richard Charnin

      December 13, 2014 at 12:49 pm

      The limousine stopped. The Zapruder film was altered. The probability that 93 witnesses would claim the shots came from the knoll would ALL be wrong is ZERO. Shots came from the right front. I know who you are, Mr. Bradford. I will allow the 4 comments you made today to stand, but after that, forget it. I will not allow further comments from you.

    • Richard Charnin

      December 13, 2014 at 5:59 pm

      Sorry, I assumed you were a Lone Nutter because you post the same tripe as Bradford and I believe I saw your name on google commenting on my blog..
      Don’t bother commenting on this blog. I have already trashed your last 4 posts.
      I KNOW that you do not know what the hell you are talking about.
      Do you really expect me to believe that you know more than Dino Buglioni who saw the original Zapruder film on Nov.23 . He was the LEADING photo interpreter for the govt. who located the missiles in Cuba. Do you really expect me to believe that you know more than the Hollywood film experts who have verified the film was altered? You are a shill and nothing more. STAY OFF OF MY BLOG, POSEUR! You can post your garbage on Facebook in any of the many JFK forums – and ne sure to identify yourself by name. But I will not accept you as a member on the Best Evidence group which I administer. Make your case on Facebook and l will enjoy watching you exposed as just another charlatan.

      • hybridrogue1

        December 13, 2014 at 6:11 pm

        I don’t expect you to “believe” anybody Charnin, I expect you to use your own brain and figure it out for yourself.

        “Do you really expect me to believe that you know more than the Hollywood film experts who have verified the film was altered?”

        Name them.

        ~Willy Whitten \\][//

  12. hybridrogue1

    December 13, 2014 at 6:02 pm

    I see you have deleted my commentary wherein I identify myself as an expert in special effects cinematograpy and identify myself as Willy Whitten; showing you were grossly mistaken in claiming I was Bradford.

    I have come to expect such underhanded manipulations from your and your ilk Charnin.

    You also deleted the link to my article which successfully rebuts all all of the bullshit you have posted on this page.

    This proves you to be the charlatan I suspected you were in our first encounters here.

    I am quite certain this will not show up here but you can be certain it will be reposted on my own blog:


    • Richard Charnin

      December 13, 2014 at 6:14 pm

      Go ahead and direct your rebuttal on the Z-film alteration to Dino Brugioni and Doug Horne. You will be exposed for the shill you are.

      Go ahead, wise guy, rebut this:

      Don’t come back here unless you can totally refute 1) Douglas Horne and Dino Buglioni’s evodence of Z-film alteration (read the link), 2) the 33 eyewitnesses who said the limo came to a full stop, 3) that the autopsy photos were altered to hide the head exit wound and 4) 93 witnesses who saw or heard shots at the grassy knoll were wrong, 5) Dr. Crenshaw’s account of the neck and head exit wounds and his conclusion as to the source of the shots.

      • hybridrogue1

        December 13, 2014 at 6:25 pm

        Dino Brugioni is a government agent, as you yourself note.

        Doug Horne doesn’t know ANYTHING about special effects cinematography. The same applies to Lew Rockwell.

        I have no further interest in your cheesy blog Charnin.


        ~WW \\][//

  13. hybridrogue1

    December 13, 2014 at 6:28 pm

    “Do you really expect me to believe that you know more than the Hollywood film experts who have verified the film was altered?”

    Name them.

    This is the second time I ask for you to name these so called Hollywood film experts who have verified the film was altered.

    • Richard Charnin

      December 14, 2014 at 11:13 am

      RC: hybridrogue1,

      You just apologized to Jim Fetzer on another blog. You admitted that you were wrong. Good for you. You now agree the Z-film was altered – after reading my links to Doug Horne and Dino Brugioni. And you will eventually come around to seeing that I was right on all the other issues as well. You already implicitly agreed that you were wrong about the Limo FULL stop; it was removed by the Z-film alteration.
      December 14, 2013 at 9:49 pm

      Okay, I have been reading more of the articles that Jim advised we read here. I must now admit that this take on the extent of the manipulation of the “extant Z-film” is likely the truth of the matter.

      Sorry to give anyone ulcers during the exchange here.

      My kudos to you for once Jim. You convinced me on this one.
      I offer my apologies as well.

      I deserve an apology as well. I refer readers to the comments you made on my blog:
      I only apologize for assuming that you were another troll named Bradford.
      I will gladly post your apology on my blog…
      This is the comment you made on “Truth and Shadows” before you apologized to Fetzer. You neglected to mention Horne and Brugioni, both of whom you dismissed as experts which was a big error on your part.
      hybridrogue1 – December 13, 2014 at 6:28 pm

      “Do you really expect me to believe that you know more than the Hollywood film experts who have verified the film was altered?”~Charnin

      Name them.

      This is the second time I ask for you to name these so called Hollywood film experts who have verified the film was altered.~WW
      * * * * * * * * * *
      It has now been over three hours and still Charnin has made no attempt to answer this question.

      I KNOW the answer already, this “Hollywood Group” of Horne’s never followed through with their Report.

      • hybridrogue1

        December 14, 2014 at 12:58 pm

        “You just apologized to Jim Fetzer on another blog.”~RC

        You are a year after the fact, thus the word “just”, as in “just now” is misapplied. That apology to Fetzer was given on December 14, 2013 at 9:49 pm – as seen in your current post above.

        It is today exactly one year past the sell date on that apology.

        Upon further reflection and deeper digging, that year has passed with my realizing that I was in grave error to have accepted Jim’s arguments. That deeper digging was into the many “proofs” that Fetzer and his cohorts offered, and going to original sources to check the so called “facts” that build this argument concerning the Z-film.

        If you will follow that blog page, you will see that I retracted my acceptance of Fetzer’s arguments:

        hybridrogue1 – November 18, 2014 at 8:08 pm
        Readers may interpret this as my recanting my grudgingly agreeing with Fetzer last year on this thread on T&S.~\\][//

        Also if you follow the commentary from that point forward, you will find the reasons and data I used to make an argument for my retraction. In that section you will find the arguments that are now put to the page on my blog titled: THE ZAPRUDER FILM: An Accurate Representation of The Kennedy Assassination posted on December 12, 2014 at 6:57 pm.

        This is essentially the same argument I made on Truth & Shadows from November 18 forward. Plus additional information I continue to discover on the topic.

        Now: I have asked you a question twice that remains unanswered. I asked this question of Fetzer several time on the T&S blog as well, and he answered with hostility rather than an answer

        Currently that question remains, and I repeat it here one more time:

        The Hollywood film experts who have verified the film was altered? Name them!

        ~Willy Whitten \\][//

  14. hybridrogue1

    December 14, 2014 at 1:25 pm

    One more note Mr. Charnin,

    I am not of nature belligerent, but I can give it back as given.

    I have found James Fetzer to be one of the most belligerent, hostile cretins I have ever dealt with in argumentum on the blogs. I find this so called “Professor Emeritus” to be little more than a brow beating thug, and most disingenuous with his mode of dishonest and spurious argumentation.

    I find that you are showing a tendency to follow in Fetzer’s footsteps here. You did apologize for mistaking me for Bradford, and although that is appreciated, your behavior from that point has remained unduly hostile and rude. You have in sequence, banned me, and then continued to make commentary and ask questions of me.

    You should make up your mind one way or the other. I disagree with you and your findings on the JFK event. Indeed I do, but I do not see having a disagreement as an excuse for rude behavior.
    If you wish to continue a discussion with me, that would be possible sans insult and threats.

    In the meantime I remain open to such discussion, the choice is yours.

    • Richard Charnin

      December 15, 2014 at 10:14 am

      No further discussion is necessary. You are a professional shill. You must be to spend all that time and effort on spouting disinformation.

      Now, regarding those Hollywood experts, you can read Horne’s book. In the meantime, you can read the Horne article.

      Altered Head Wound Imagery:

      California resident Sydney Wilkinson purchased a 35 mm dupe negative of the Zapruder film from the National Archives in 2008 — a third generation rendition, according to the Archives — and with the assistance of her husband, who is a video editor at a major post-production film house in Hollywood, commissioned both u201CHDu201D scans (1920 x 1080 pixels per scan) of each frame of the dupe negative, as well as u201C6Ku201D scans of each frame. Because the Zapruder film’s image, from edge to edge, only partially fills each 35 mm film frame obtained from the Archives, the so-called u201C6Ku201D scan of each frame is therefore u2018only’ the equivalent of a u201C4Ku201D image, i.e., 4096 x 3112 pixels, for each Zapruder frame imaged. Each Zapruder frame scan still constitutes an enormous amount of information: 72.9 MB, or 12.7 million pixels per frame. These u201C4K equivalentu201D scans of the Zapruder film used by this couple to conduct their forensic, scientific study of the assassination images are 10-bit log color DPX scans, otherwise known in common parlance as u201Cflat scans.u201D These logarithmic color scans bring out much more information in the shadows than would the linear color normally viewed on our television screens and computers. Therefore, much more information in each Zapruder film frame is revealed by these logarithmic scans, than would be revealed in a linear color scan of the same frame.

      As reported in the author’s book, numerous Hollywood film industry editors, colorists, and restoration experts have viewed the u201C6Ku201D scans of the Zapruder film as part of the couple’s ongoing forensic investigation. In the logarithmic color scans there are many frames (notably 317, 321, and 323) which show what appear to be u201Cblack patches,u201D or crude animation, obscuring the hair on the back of JFK’s head. The blacked-out areas just happen to coincide precisely with the location of the avulsed, baseball-sized exit wound in the right rear of JFK’s head seen by the Parkland Hospital treatment staff, in Dallas, on the day he was assassinated. In the opinion of virtually all of the dozens of motion picture film professionals who have viewed the Zapruder film u201C6Ku201D scans, the dark patches do not look like natural shadows, and appear quite anomalous. Some of these film industry professionals — in particular, two film restoration experts accustomed to looking at visual effects in hundreds of 1950s and 1960s era films — have declared that the aforementioned frames are proof that the Zapruder film has been altered, and that it was crudely done. [35] If true, this explains LIFE’s decision to suppress the film as a motion picture for twelve years, lest its alteration be discovered by any professionals using it in a broadcast.

      The extant Zapruder film also depicts a large head wound in the top and right side of President Kennedy’s skull — most notably in frames 335 and 337 — that was not seen by any of the treatment staff at Parkand Hospital.

      The implication here is that if the true exit wound on President Kennedy’s head can be obscured in the Zapruder film through use of aerial imaging (i.e., self-matting animation, applied to each frame’s image via an animation stand married to an optical printer) — as revealed by the u201C6Ku201D scans of the 35 mm dupe negative — then the same technique could be used to add a desired exit wound, one consistent with the cover story of a lone shooter firing from behind.

      The apparent alteration of the Zapruder film seen in the area of the rear of JFK’s head in the u201C6Ku201D scans is consistent with the capabilities believed to have been in place at u201CHawkeyeworksu201D in 1963.

      In a recent critique of the author’s Zapruder film alteration hypothesis, retired Kodak film chemist (and former ARRB consultant, from 1997-1998), Roland Zavada, quoted professor Raymond Fielding, author of the famous 1965 textbook mentioned above on visual special effects, as saying that it would be impossible for anyone to have altered an 8 mm film in 1963 without leaving artifacts that could be easily detected. I completely agree with this assessment attributed to professor Fielding, and I firmly believe that the logarithmic color, u201C6K,u201D 10-bit, DPX scans made of each frame of the 35 mm dupe negative of the Zapruder film have discovered just that: blatant and unmistakable artifacts of the film’s alteration.

      Critics of this ongoing forensic investigation in California have tried to dismiss the interim findings by displaying other, dissimilar images from the Zapruder film that have been processed in linear color (not logarithmic color), and in some cases are also using inferior images of the Zapruder film of much poorer resolution than the 6K scans, or images from the film in which the linear color contrast has been adjusted and manipulated (i.e., darkened). Saying that u201Cit just isn’t sou201D is not an adequate defense for those who desperately cling to belief in the Zapruder film’s authenticity, when the empirical proof (the untainted and raw imagery) exists to back up the fact that it is so. Anyone else who purchases a 35 mm dupe negative of the Zapruder film from the National Archives for $795.00, and who expends the time and money to run u201C6Ku201D scans of each frame, will end up with the same imagery Sydney Wilkinson has today, for her scans simply record what is present on the extant film in the National Archives; she and her husband have done nothing to alter the images in any way. Their scans simply record what is present on the extant film.

      The Missing Car Stop:

      One final imagery-related indication that the Zapruder film has likely been altered is the simple proof that about sixteen persons in Dealey Plaza indicated that the President’s limousine stopped, very briefly (for approximately one-half second to one-and-a-half seconds), during the head shot sequence on Elm Street. No such u201Ccar stopu201D is seen on the extant Zapruder film. And yet, many of the witnesses who claim the limousine stopped were those closest to President Kennedy when he was killed, including Jean Hill, Hugh Betzner, Bill Newman, Mary Woodward, Roy Truly, Phil Willis, Alan Smith, DPD patrolmen Earle Brown and J. W. Foster, and DPD motorcyclists Bobby W. Hargis and James Chaney. [36] (Incidentally, none of them recalled seeing the violent back-and-to-the- left u201Chead snapu201D seen in the extant Zapruder film today, which reinforces the likelihood that it is an optical artifact in the extant film, created by the removal of several exit debris frames during optical editing at u201CHawkeyeworks.u201D)

      If Abraham Zapruder was really operating his movie camera at 48 frames per second (the accelerated frame rate required to play back the film in u201Cslow motionu201D on a home movie projector — three times the normal speed), vice 16 frames per second (the normal frame rate), then anyone engaged in altering the film would have had a much easier time optically excising frames of exit debris, and removing the car stop, through use of an optical printer. All that was required to operate Zapruder’s Bell and Howell camera at the accelerated frame rate of 48 fps was a slight downward pressure on the trigger with the operator’s index finger.

      It could have happened this way — consider this: the extant film (that is, the assassination movie, not the Zapruder family scenes present on the two Secret Service copies) in the National Archives (not counting leader) consists of a strip of film 8 feet, 10 inches long (of which only 6 feet, 3 inches contains the imagery of the assassination film, and 2 feet, 7 inches is black, unexposed film with no image showing); then there is a physical splice; then there is a segment of black film containing no imagery that is 19 feet, 3 inches long; then there is another physical splice; then there is another segment of black film containing no imagery which is 5 feet, 8 inches long. Summarizing, after the first splice at the end of the assassination segment, there are a total of just over 24 feet of black film with no image showing. If the camera-original film had actually been shot at 48 frames per second — three times normal speed — then conceivably it would have required approximately three times the length of film in the present assassination segment (i.e., 3 x 6 feet = 18 feet). Currently, there is more than 18 feet of black film that is not contiguous with the assassination movie — that is, there is actually 24 feet of black film that has not been shot, but the problem is, it is not physically connected to the assassination film. The rhetorical question becomes, how do we know the actual, camera-original Zapruder film wasn’t shot at 48 frames per second, and then edited down to normal speed during the alteration process by removing two thirds of the frames when the new film was created in an optical printer? The answer is, we don’t know that — there is room for subterfuge here — because the black, unexposed film on the reel of the extant Zapruder film has been attached with a splice. [37]

      • hybridrogue1

        December 15, 2014 at 11:57 am

        Look Charnin,

        Sydney Wilkinson & her husband. That is two verified names. I already know that.

        Your quote:
        “As reported in the author’s book, numerous Hollywood film industry editors, colorists, and restoration experts have viewed the u201C6Ku201D scans of the Zapruder film as part of the couple’s ongoing forensic investigation.”

        Horne says, “numerous Hollywood film industry editors, colorists, and restoration experts…”

        Mr Charnin, don’t you understand that this is vague meaningless information?

        WHO are these numerous Hollywood film industry? Horne said that they were going to make a report. This was in 2001, it is now close to 2015, and there is still no report, no names but the original husband and wife team mentioned; that’s it, nothing more. So continuing to sight that, “there are numerous Hollywood film industry experts”, while in fact you only can cite two people; Sydney Wilkinson & her husband – leaves your claim of “numerous” as disingenuous hyperbole.

        You keep making argumentum verbosium here to bury the fact that you cannot identify any but two so-called “Hollywood experts”. Anyone experienced in reasoned debate can see right through such spurious hand waving.

      • hybridrogue1

        December 15, 2014 at 12:46 pm

        “The implication here is that if the true exit wound on President Kennedy’s head can be obscured in the Zapruder film through use of aerial imaging (i.e., self-matting animation, applied to each frame’s image via an animation stand married to an optical printer) — as revealed by the u201C6Ku201D scans of the 35 mm dupe negative — then the same technique could be used to add a desired exit wound, one consistent with the cover story of a lone shooter firing from behind.”~Horne

        This very paragraph proves that Horne has no grasp of special effects cinematography: “self-matting animation, applied to each frame’s image via an animation stand married to an optical printer.” There is no such thing as “self matting” using an animation stand. An animation stand is what is used to create mattes; an entirely different and lengthily process: One involving several previous processes to separate elements from each and every frame before the mattes can be created.

        Horne quotes Zavada mentioning Raymond Fielding’s book on special effects cinematography – but it is quite obvious that Horne has not read the book himself. I have, I still own my original hard bound volume.

  15. hybridrogue1

    December 14, 2014 at 4:20 pm

    Here is a “hohoho” for you Mr Charnin,

    David Lifton actually said this in his address to Bismark State College in 11/7/2013. It is just at the very end of his talk…“when the body was first put on the autopsy table, Kennedy’s right arm was in the position of a Hitler salute.”

    See: Address to Bismark State College 11/7/2013: The presentation is available on YouTupe.
    It is, like I say just at the very end of his talk.

    When the body was first observed on the autopsy table…”~Agents Sibert & O’Niell FBI; did not say that Kennedy’s right arm was in the position of a Nazi salute! He and his partner were present throughout the entire autopsy.

    Let’s face it, if Kennedy’s arm was in such a position, his body would not fit in any ‘body bag’ ‘shipping coffin’ nor the bronze casket it was actually in.

    If you don’t get a chuckle out of this you have no sense of humor!


  16. hybridrogue1

    December 15, 2014 at 12:23 pm

    Dino Brugion

    Arthur Lundahl was the western world’s foremost photoanalyst from 1954 to 1973. Dino Brugion worked for Lundahl – it was Lundahl who was the expert. And first and foremost; both are government agents – spooks.

    Bottom line on Brugion: He pronounced the Oswald in the backyard with the weapons and commie magazines is real. Even amateurs can see the splice point at the chin, the shadow anomalies, and use of exact same face shot pasted on three separate body poses, to realize that the Oswald backyard photos are fake. So how could anyone buy anything Brugion has to say about anything – especially the Z-film?



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: