It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

JFKs black limo flag?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 06:47 AM
link   
Does anyone know why Kennedy had a plain black flag on his car along with an American flag? What's the significance of a black flag? I haven't heard any reference to that yet and only just noticed it myself recently.

Seems kind of ominious to me. Kennedy must of know that trip was going to be his last with all the signs.


from
www.assassinationscience.com...

The link above does a great job of examining the missing and edited frames from what's called the 'original' print of the Zapruder film.




posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 06:57 AM
link   
I think that it is the Great seal of the President of the United States, its flapping so you cant see the seal its self.
If memory serves the flag is dark blue, i may be wrong tho.
Infact looking at it again you can just make out part of the seal.


[edit on 26-1-2006 by Janus]



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 07:15 AM
link   
You're right. It's the Seal. It was put up on Ebay, but the limo always has the Seal on one side and the American Flag on the other.



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
You're right. It's the Seal. It was put up on Ebay, but the limo always has the Seal on one side and the American Flag on the other.


Someone put the Seal of the President on ebay?
Christ is nothing sacred?



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 05:38 PM
link   
They had both flags from the limo. Just proof that you literally CAN find anything on Ebay. It's kinda disgusting actually.



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 05:44 PM
link   
Yeah its the seal, If it looks black boost the gamma on it.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
They had both flags from the limo. Just proof that you literally CAN find anything on Ebay. It's kinda disgusting actually.


Those could not have been the real thing not surprising at all when you consider it was on EBay.

The actual flags from the limo recently sold for 450,000 at auction and reportedly came from a Kennedy admirer who befriended the president's secretary and inherited much of the memorabilia from her when she died.

newsfromrussia.com...



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 04:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by Zaphod58
They had both flags from the limo. Just proof that you literally CAN find anything on Ebay. It's kinda disgusting actually.


Those could not have been the real thing not surprising at all when you consider it was on EBay.

The actual flags from the limo recently sold for 450,000 at auction and reportedly came from a Kennedy admirer who befriended the president's secretary and inherited much of the memorabilia from her when she died.

newsfromrussia.com...


Im not an American, but shouldnt stuff of historical importance like the car flags (hell even the car! ) be in a museum or your National archives?
I dont know, selling these things off kinda cheapens Kennedys death in a way.
I know he wasnt the most Popular President with everyone in the States, contrary to popular belief, but he was still the head of state.



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Janus
Im not an American, but shouldnt stuff of historical importance like the car flags (hell even the car! ) be in a museum or your National archives?


The car is in the ford museum in Michigan, just how the actual flags got removed is beyond me. :shk:

I agree they should be with the car.

www.hfmgv.org...


I know he wasnt the most Popular President with everyone in the States, contrary to popular belief, but he was still the head of state.


I would disgree with you there, I think he was a very popular president in his day.



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 10:01 AM
link   


It's interesting to note, these pictures on John Costella's site are of higher quality than the usual Zapruder stills floating around. They still show inconsistencies as shown in the above blow up picture.

The main dispute I have with this picture is the "black man" at rears rear neck. Its green, as green as the grass, as a matter of fact he has no back neck, the grass pixels continue well into his neckline.

There is more things pointed out in reference to that particular still here www.rejectz.com... They include the face on the man at the front as compared to the back of his neck and head.

Costella used this particular frame to examine what he called the blur effect, which can be found here www.assassinationscience.com...



There are some frames of the Zapruder film and othermedia taken that day that show the emblem on the flag much more clearer.



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 03:33 PM
link   


It's interesting to note, these pictures on John Costella's site are of higher quality than the usual Zapruder stills floating around. They still show inconsistencies as shown in the above blow up picture


Mayet...are we honsetly supposed to be able to see anything in that picture you posted? It looks like an abstract expressionist painting. If there's a man in that picture, I can't see him!



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 07:14 PM
link   
The Patterson stills were better and they were supposed to show a bigfoot. All I see is a blob. If ya stare at it long enough you can see the face on Mars. Go ahead try it. You can see quite clearly the brow and nose , the slit for the mouth and the chin.
So maybe NASA was behind it.
No wait hear me out.
They didn't have the technology to pull it off so they had to get rid of JFK to stop the Moon initiative and LBJ saw his opening to escalate the Vietnam War. If he could keep the worlds attention on the race to space then noone would notice his troop buildups in SouthEast Asia. So he actually forced NASA to fullfill JFKs promise by shovelling more money their way under the radar. This would have worked except the guys dieing in a foreign country noticed(I"m a Vietnam Vet BTW).
They also knew that they had to stack the Warren Commision because they needed to make Nixons transition into the White House smooth. This also meant hiring some nobody to execute Robert because he was in the way.
By putting Gerald Ford on the Warren Commission they knew they had a fall guy for Nixons later illegal activities.
Oh and Mayet- T&C #9, not supposed to promote your own website here.



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by MayetIt's interesting to note, these pictures on John Costella's site are of higher quality than the usual Zapruder stills floating around. They still show inconsistencies as shown in the above blow up picture.

That's "high quality"... what are we looking at?


The main dispute I have with this picture is the "black man" at rears rear neck. Its green, as green as the grass, as a matter of fact he has no back neck, the grass pixels continue well into his neckline.

Serious photo analysis of that detail is never attempted on heavily compressed images (JPEG).

Where is the original?



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 08:00 PM
link   
Image Interpolation



Here's the problem with blowing up digital images using interpolation.

At the left, I blew it up to nearly the same scale as yours, but without using any interpolation. Yours at the right has been "interpolated" and as a result, there are new pixels that can distort the reality of what you're seeing. The interpolation process attempts to create colors and pixels that are not in the original.

Your best bet, when trying to make heads or tails of any digital image is never to blow it up using interpolation.



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Most of the JFK assassination researchers on the web today use jpg's to illustrate their points.

In the image above you posted with and without interpolation it still shows the anomalies I have spoken of. Including the fact that the man at the rear of the photo has grass growing where his "black" neck should be. It still shows the anomalies between the front of green mans face and the back of his head that even with "shadows" cannot be accounted for.

Edited to add. The original photo posted here in the first post also shows the anomaly without having to bow up the picture.





[edit on 28-1-2006 by Mayet]



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
Most of the JFK assassination researchers on the web today use jpg's to illustrate their points.

Because that's all that is available unless you have the negatives.



the man at the rear of the photo has grass growing where his "black" neck should be.

It's impossible to know these things for certain with JPEG images. The compression "averages" large areas of pixels to obtain smaller file sizes. What appears to be some green in his neck may only be an area of pixels that have been averaged.

JPEG does not offer the type of detail needed for this level of analysis. Ask anyone experience in photo analysis, or even photo editing.



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

The main dispute I have with this picture is the "black man" at rears rear neck. Its green, as green as the grass, as a matter of fact he has no back neck, the grass pixels continue well into his neckline.

Serious photo analysis of that detail is never attempted on heavily compressed images (JPEG).


I might note here that Valhall herself used Jpg images to present her own serious analysis of the Zapruder film. www.abovetopsecret.com... Conspiracy Masters

Valhall used JPGs to state a point as I have used jpgs to state another point.

Also many other scientists and researchers have come to the conclusion that the film was faked. here we find a physics PHD John Costella speaking



The scientists also proved that Zapruder’s film was not just changed a little bit. The whole film is a fake!
A movie film is just a strip of little photos (“frames”). The fake film was made by cutting and pasting real photos and film frames together to make new frames.
Because the Zapruder film is only 27 seconds long, less than 500 photos needed to be made. The forgers had almost a year to create them, before they were published. This was not difficult to do in 1963 and 1964. People had been creating high quality fake photos since the 1850s!


and then this one



The numerous indications of alteration in the Zapruder film naturally raise some disturbing questions. The answer to the question of why the film was altered is fairly apparent--to conceal obvious evidence of a frontal shot, of multiple gunmen, and of more than three hits. But, who performed the alteration? Whoever they were, they were very well connected (so as to gain access to the film) and had at their disposal considerable technical expertise. It would seem self-evident that those who altered the Zapruder film were either working with or following orders from the men who were responsible for the assassination of President Kennedy.
A declassified CIA document indicates the Zapruder film was detoured to a sophisticated CIA photographic lab relatively soon after the assassination, and quite possibly on the night of the shooting. Professor Phillip Melanson has discussed this declassified document and what it reveals about the handling of the film in his famous article "Hidden Exposure: Cover-Up and Intrigue in the CIA's Secret Possession of the Zapruder Film" in The Third Decade, November 1984. A summary of the main points of Melanson's findings is included in Assassination Science.
Though many researchers have long suspected the Zapruder film was altered at the CIA, there is some indication that at least part of the alteration might have been done at the FBI.

karws.gso.uri.edu...
Evidence Of Alteration of the Zapruder Film.

Due to the chain of evidence, if the film is proven to be fake, the CIA and the FBI are the two organizations that had the film in their possession. As shown above the film was detoured to a CIA laboratory, the film was in the possession of Government departments. How will the people feel if after all these years they find out they have in fact been lied to? That their own government departments were involved in the cover up at least of the assassination of JFK. Would the people be still compacent and accepting? What will they do? I can therefore understand why there would be certain quarters trying their utmost to argue against any of the mounting evidence that the flm was faked. i mean it would be huge a massive hoax perpetrated upon the people. Who else but the perpetrators of this assassination and coverup stand to lose by the proving this film is fake?

Since the 1990's the evidence has been steadily mounting regarding the faking of the film. In the links above that I have given much of that evidence is shown for all to see. Look for yourselves. See and examine for yourselves. I am here saying "everyone take a look at the big picture here". Take a look for yourselves at the zapruder film with evidence produced along wth the links to other evidence that other people including scientists have produced. See both sides but ask WHY?




All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Arthur Schopenhauer
German philosopher (1788 - 1860)

www.quotationspage.com...


[edit on 28-1-2006 by Mayet]



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
Also many other scientists and researchers have come to the conclusion that the film was faked.

I'm not well-versed in JFK research and don't really have an opinon on that.

However, I am very experienced in digital image formats and analyzing photo manipulation. The JPEG formate is inappropriate for the kind of detailed analysis (is there a little green from the background in his neck?) you're attempting.

So... any research (JFK or not) attempting detailed pixel-level analysis of images from JPEG is going to have problems. From what I saw of Val's analysis, she wasn't digging into pixel-level details like you were.



posted on Jan, 29 2006 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Now this is supposed to be just 1 man,personally i see several ways in which it is 2 men and cant even comprehend how it could be only 1 man,the 2 heads,2 necks,2 collars and is that 2 left arms.






Now again we have DCM's hand somehow turning into a face,this doesnt just happen on 1 frame..theres several.So do we just pretend were still brainwashed or do we continue to make notes on all the strangeness that occurs in Zapruder and try to understand the big picture and realize these anomalies exist and the reason they exists is so that any work done with the evidence will bring you no closer to the truth.

The truth does not exist on whats left of the evidence.





posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
However, I am very experienced in digital image formats and analyzing photo manipulation. The JPEG formate is inappropriate for the kind of detailed analysis (is there a little green from the background in his neck?) you're attempting.


The green neck is an alert to things not being qute right. It is one of many many things about the Zapruder film that are "not right". Many more can be found at the link.

To Note This following quote again in regard to the picture I am showing here.


www.assassinationscience.com...
The scientists also proved that Zapruder’s film was not just changed a little bit. The whole film is a fake!
A movie film is just a strip of little photos (“frames”). The fake film was made by cutting and pasting real photos and film frames together to make new frames.
Because the Zapruder film is only 27 seconds long, less than 500 photos needed to be made. The forgers had almost a year to create them, before they were published. This was not difficult to do in 1963 and 1964. People had been creating high quality fake photos since the 1850s!


We are not sitting here and saying an orange lady shot the president, or James Files shot the president or even Lee Harvey oswald shot the president.
What we are saying is that the Zapruder film is edited. You could argue picture quality and various points all week but what it comes down to is that the same poor picture quality film has been used as the bible and textbook evidence of the assassination for years. Its only now when photo programs, slow motion and enlargments are available to the average everyday person that the truth can be seen. Since the 90's there are more and more voices standing up and saying the Zapruder film is fake.

I first watched the Zapruder film thinking the same as the many others who have seen it, that the film was a real film. It was only after studing the film that I began to think that there was much "not right" about the film.

In the picture below the photo above has been put through Photoshop filters. This particular filter is 'solar" .




So... any research (JFK or not) attempting detailed pixel-level analysis of images from JPEG is going to have problems. From what I saw of Val's analysis, she wasn't digging into pixel-level details like you were.


Our comment on that is the analysis was taken of a film taken to be a truthful chain of events. Our own analysis is that the film is edited. This is not just "pixel level details". The scope of our analysis goes much wider than that. As said I for one walked in believing the film was real. No one had said to be hey this film is fake, so if anything I was examining the film with the bias that it was true and correct. I soon denied that ignorance real fast.

JPG or not JPG, low quality or high quality, what I do see in the picture is a few sunglass shapes that SHOULD NOT be there.....You can argue them away as "blobs' you can argue them away as being of poor quality. But the film is "not right"



new topics




 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join