| JFK Index Page | clintbradford.com | The Hunger Site |

An Open Request of Noel Twyman

June 19, 2001

Mr. Twyman - It has been several years since you attended a private meeting back East with several fellow JFK assassination researchers and historians. You were shown evidence that proved your published conclusions regarding alleged tampering of the Zapruder film to be incorrect. And you admitted to the group that the conclusions published in your book, Bloody Treason, were, indeed, incorrect.

When will you be telling us your true beliefs regarding alleged tampering of the Zapruder film?

Private email link ONLY for Mr. Twyman to respond.

Fetzer's Follies
aka: When Will He Learn?

"Fetzer has been playing fast and loose with this case since at least 1993. He has misrepresented evidence, used more respected researchers to enhance his own prestige, and consistently defined those who saw through his patent bullshit as "disinformationalists" ..." -From my inbox recently

UPDATED 05/05/2001: Here are some notes from others who have opinions on Fetzer's works:
Fetzer Feedback

Updated May 5, 2001 - The Amazon.com reviews I wrote that James Fetzer so vehemently decries appear below. Not only has he threatened to sue me for their content, a source at Amazon.com advised me that Fetzer threatened her staff, too, for maintaining these reviews. And here is a link to Vince Palamara's article that Fetzer publicly misrepresents (as recently as 04/01/01): "59 Witnesses: Delay on Elm Street." Vince's respected report summarizes eyewitness accounts of the presidential limousine's movements in Dealey Plaza.

"Clint Bradford is the biggest disinformation agent I know ... He wrote negative reviews of my books on Amazon.com..."

- Jim Fetzer, April 1, 2001

When Fetzer released his book Assassination Science in 1988, I saw flaws and wrote about them. The concept of "free thought" bothers Fetzer: When he read this mini-review on Amazon.com, he called me on the telephone and threatened to sue me if I didn't retract my writing. I didn't retract a word.

Zapruder Film a Fraud?, August 9, 1998
Reviewer: clintbrad4d@earthlink.net from Mira Loma, CA

I find a great deal of Assassination Science to be un-objective and unSCIENTIFIC.

One author's "proof" that the Zapruder film was altered is his list of nine "anomalies" that appear on his Robert Groden slide set. NONE of these "anomalies" appear on the new MPI Home Video release, nor on any of the 12 renditions from several sources of the Zapruder film that Groden himself offers on the video, "The Assassination Films." Yet we are to believe this author's ONE slide set and its alleged "anomalies" to prove tampering. I don't buy it.

Another author shouts, "The Zapruder film is tampered!" - yet fails to define the heritage of what he is looking at! (He has promised, though, to clarify his chapter for future printings of this book.)

A common theme among a couple chapter authors is that they see Secret Service Greer's head turn around in a super-human manner. In one frame, or 1/18th of a second, they claim. Again, this "proof" of tampering is not apparent in many, many copies of the Zapruder film. Greer's one head turn lasts from Frame 300 to Frame 306 - and is VERY natural and fluid, albeit quick.

These authors want us to believe, I guess, that if we see any copy of the Zparuder film that shows a natural head turn by Greer, and the Presidential limousine slowing down right before the moment of the final head shot(s), then we must be looking at altered film, because THEIR copies don't show it.

And another major chapter author has promised to amend future printings of this book to eliminate his accidental mis-quoting of witnesses and mis-attributed citations.

We deserve better. Maybe future printings will be better on this topic. We need to work together and advance the cause of justice for our dead President.

Then Fetzer compiled another book on the JFK assassination. And I wrote another piece for Amazon.com.

Here We Go Again..., September 7, 2000
Reviewer: S CLINT BRADFORD from Mira Loma, CA United States

You would think that Dr. Fetzer would bring respected researchers to this new volume ... especially after being shown the errors of his ways in his previous mis-titled tome, "Assassination Science."

Instead, to "prove" photo alteration, he offers a lunatic who publicly rants that all films shot in and around Dealey Plaza that fateful day were mysteriously seized and sinisterly altered. Further, this "renowned researcher" now tells us that Abraham Zapruder couldn't have possibly shot his film because he believes that Marilyn Sitzman was blocking his view of the Presidential limousine.

Fetzer describes this researcher's studies as "useful in exposing image alteration by government custodians in their effort to distort the evidence and subvert our ability to discover the truth." Well, Dr. Fetzer didn't do his homework when he included Jack White's "research" in this new book. Repeatedly Fetzer has been shown the errors of White's rants. Why would a responsible editor support and promote such work?

If anyone is to believe this researcher chosen by Fetzer to explain the photographic evidence, the many photographic exposures taken by Bond, Nix, Muchmore, Bronson, Towner, Hughes, Bell, Martin, Grant, Bothun, Burroughs, and Murray (and probably others I have missed) have ALL BEEN SINISTERLY TAMPERED WITH - *all* altered to prove wild theories of flying people, liquid signs, disappearing people, et al ad nauseum.

As in his previous compilation, I wish Dr. Fetzer - as "editor" - would better research the researchers he promotes.

Clint Bradford, http://www.jfk-info.com

UPDATED 05/05/2001: Here are some notes from others who have opinions on Fetzer's works:
Fetzer Feedback

And here are some background papers on Zapruder film authenticity:
The Zapruder Film is Authentic

What's my personal "bottom line" in all of these "attacks" on the good doctor? It's simple - and has remained unchanged for years:

No matter how many letters you have after your name ... no matter how many books you have published ... no matter how many degrees are hanging on your office wall - document your claims, substantiate your assertions, and check out others who you decide to promote. And be ethical enough to admit your mistakes, do what is necessary to correct them, and move forward.

It's a simple doctrine ... one that I use in my personal life, too. I am not a "distrustful" person. I just want those who promote themselves as "researchers" to fully document their works. Self-proclaimed "researchers" who refuse to accept constructive criticism and blindly promote the works of questionable people are to be exposed for what they truly are: They are a disgrace to the true assassination research community, and are disrespectful of the memory of our late President.

- Clint Bradford, April 2001


Comments? Questions? Critiques? Please send email.


Main JFK Page