Len Colby

LOL You make laugh Jack, you are a very funny guy! Your contention that your debunkers (who you are so paranoid as to think are government agents) don't attack your lunatic theories on their merits is as baseless as the theories themselves. You are the one who refuses to debate the facts simply by directing character assassination against your detractors. The list of threads and posts you haven't replied to is lengthy (and the list of unreplied to questions and points in them is even longer). Resorting to insult normally beings on YOUR side of the aisle. A case in point was you saying Evan didn't have credebility because he correctly quoted your position that the Moon landings were faked.

Funny how Healy pavlovily continues to cite Fielding even though the man has gone on record as saying he (Healy) is dead wrong and our VIDEOgrapher friend can't cite a single sentence from Dean Fielding's writings that support his theory!

David, I said what I was quoting and gave a link, do you think the average "lurker" is retarded? It's germane because it's the opinion of the man who invented the type of film used (Kodachrome II) as to why for technical reasons the Z-film could not be a print and thus could not have been altered as alleged in TGZFH Answer the question asked for once in your life! Aren't you fond of that saying comparing opinions to assholes? Got any facts to back your theories? I didn't see any clock cleaning there David, are you so desperate for citations for backing that you have to cite the same page twice (see above) a page that proves nothing at that. Did you guys ever get around to debunking the pov-ray argument? Nope David never wanted to go into filmmaking, nice name dropping though. It wouldn't surprise me that a VIDEOGRAPHER would attend meetings of the Society of Motion Picture and TELEVISON Engineers. What does your attendance at such meetings prove? C'mon Dave you copping out again you hinted that you would cite specific articles I guess that was more smoke (which is about all we get out of you). I know that many articles are cited in Fielding's book. I want to know which ones YOU think support your unfounded theory that such fakery was possible and undetectable, Fielding can't tell me that only YOU can. 1) I sent him an e-mail and some PM's awhile back and he never got back to me. 2) Do you not know or are you "not at liberty to disclose that information". ??????????"Esertetic" is not a word in the English or any other language. 1) Yeah he is a particle physicist who spent his entire career until (perhaps) a few month ago teaching math and science to school children, never published a peer review paper, has no demonstrable qualification related to film/photo analysis, made glaring errors, and seems to be a paranoid nutcase. Is he really the best you guys have to offer? He must be because Fetzer called him "the foremost technical expert" on the film. 2) What record is he on? Is he a musician? I'm willing to bet anyone on this forum (except for the Fetzer Bunch) that, Healy never will: 1] prove he has any substantive experience in FILM compositing using optical printers 2] name a recognized optical printing/film compositing expert who backs his claim that such effects were possible back in '63 3] cite a quotation from Fielding's book, SMPE/SMPTE publications or any other authoritative source establishing that the types of effects alleged in TGZFH could have been done "back in the day" and could have been done so undetectably. 4] name a movie from before or about the time of the assassination that has effects similar to what was supposedly done to the Z-film. Anyone willing to take me up on it? (John / Andy if for any reasons you object to a wager being proposed on this forum let me know and/or erase it.) Len

David your 'debating' style is reminiscent of White's and Fetzer's, you dodge questions, change the subject use straw men He admitted what to whom? Do you have a citation for that? 1) He didn't really distance himself he said in no uncertain terms that you guys are wrong and he said it again recently. 2) That little blurb you quoted was cute but unsubstantiated and no where does it degenerate Zavada's authority let alone Fielding's. It's still the opinion of a videographer against 2 of the World's leading FILM experts (not to mention Stone and Groden among others) I've never denied you were an authority on video production. You mean other than Zavada, Fielding, Stone, Groden etc? How about YOUR side comes up with an optical film printing expert to say you're right!!! SOSM – David, Same Old Straw Man. For the umpteenth time NO ONE IS SAYING THAT OPTICAL EFFECTS DON'T PREDATE THE Z-FILM. What is in dispute is if the type of effects your co-authors allege were used were possible at the time and if they could have escaped detection. OK 'smarty pants' tell me which films were nominated the special effects Oscars those years (easy enuff just look it up on IMDB) and (now come the hard part) tell us what scenes in those movies have effects such as having people's arms and legs move around differently, realistically enough that it doesn't look obviously fake and technically perfect enough to escape detection. ????????????????????? Of course you say you "ain't buying" it. But you don't have a reply now do you? Nor arms or legs indeed. I'm surprised you were dumb enough to bring this up when you still haven't fulfilled your earlier promise to make your "formal claim, SOON". Until then STFU!

1- Do you really think you're on the same level as Feilding and Zavada? Don't fool yourself, If any one half as authoritative as them supported your position it would have a little but of credibility. Since you don't even claim to have any FILM post production experience you just don't cut it. 2 - David you’re like a quadruple amputee on this issue not only don’t you have a leg to stand on you don’t have any hands to grasp at straws. You promised to make your “formal claim soon” on January 19* (74 days ago). 33 days later on Feb. 21 Zavada said he would “…take the time to put together a dissertation… Further this project will not be done “tomorrow” – it will take some time.” Personally I would expect something that a person said ‘would not be done “tomorrow” ’ and ‘would take some time’ to take at least twice as long as something promised soon. So let’s do it like this. First we’ll wait for you to present your “formal claim”, well count how many days it took you double that and that many days after Feb. 21 (2006) you can semi-legitimately ask Zavada where his ‘dissertation’ is. Even if you submit your “formal claim” tomorrow that gives Rollie till July 19. Until then just shut up about it instead of continuing to make an ass of yourself. And with all your braying for Zavada to submit a new thesis on why the Zapruder film can’t be a fake you haven’t even dealt with his last one from 2 ½ years ago in which he stated at the conclusion of a 6 page paper, *http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=5708&view=findpost&p=51765 and WTF did you mean by “formal claim”? I’ve never heard that phrase used outside a legal context. 3 - The way you keep bleating out "SMPE/SMPTE periodicals" one could not be faulted for wondering if you suffer from Turret’s syndrome or maybe a better comparison would be to Pavlov and his dogs each time you see someone question the possibility of Z- film alteration you reflexively bark out “SMPE/SMPTE”. I like what Joe Durnavich said a few months ago “I'm not a drinking man, but I think you could make one of those drinking games for Healy. You know, take one drink every time he mentions "optical printer", take two drinks every time he mentions the SMPTE, and so on.” So when are you ever going to get around to actually citing a specific issue? Or better yet quote a passage from an article (or even Fielding’s book) to support your little theory. 4 – Back to the original topic of this thread, just what is Costella’s mysterious new job? Or is that information on "a need to know basis" (LOL) it isn't like John Nash’s "job" with the federal government is it? He dropped the disclaimer, did he get canned? Len

I imagine the 63 in all three numbers referes to the year. So in one case it was 272 and the other 352/356

A month ago (March 1 to be exact) on another forum Fetzer promised to reveal Costella's new job "in a few weeks" but so far he hasn't said anything. Below is the text of a post I made in that forum

Herb, You should have tried growing up Jewish in the South. My sister's name is Audrey, we once had "Here lives Audrey, the Christ killer" painted on the sidewalk in front our house! Len

Chris, Was it just that woman or did others join her? This story in a way is worse I would have expected that Brits were less racist than Americans Len John, Herb, was the new member I was refering to. Len Herb, Welcome to the forum Len

In the future such doubts can be cleared up at two free online dictionaries. http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/ and http://m-w.com/ Both have definitions for ‘wetback’. Both are primarily American English dictionaries, can anyone recommend a good free online British English dictionary?

Applause for the assassination? My sister who was 8 when JFK was shot told me some of the kids in her school in North Carolina cheered and applauded when they heard the announcement. A new member of the forum has a similar recollection. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...036entry59036 Has anyone else heard of or witnessed similar incidents?

My sister who is 10 years older than me was in grade school in North Carolina when JFK was shot, she also remebers some appaluse and cheers when they got the annoucment.

That operation really is "top secret" only Jack White knows about it!!! I Googled "operation parasol" +chemtrails and got zero hits, then I googled "operation parasol" +"edward teller" and struck out again!!!! Operation Parasol was a humanitarial mission to help Kosovar refugee children and bring them to Canada. I did get a lot of hits for "edward teller" +chemtrails but nothing from or citing a reliable source. Is it asking too much for Jack to provide any sort of source for his myriad of wild claims?h I wrote the following about the theory that chemtrials are being use to stop global warming on another forum

It indicates that any government is capable of such acts. All it takes is for the people to do nothing about it, using whatever excuses they have, such as "the government wouldn't do such a thing." In any case i don't dispute that "Baby Doc" Bush and cohorts would be capable of such an act, but the evidence just isn't there that there was an "inside job"

Like I already said MY experience IS irrelevant, ironic that you continue to ask me about mine, and question Bill about his, yet continue to refuse to answer questions about yours. David what do you mean by "printers"? Back when I worked at the B &W photo lab we didn't use 'printers', did you mean enlargers or processors? Sorry but after 17 years I don't remember the makes or models of the equipment, I think the enlarger might have been a Beseler but I'm not sure. The name of the joint was Ferranti-Dege. How is any of this relevant? It isn't of course, just more smoke which you try to use to cloud the weakness of your case and your own lack of any relevant experience. LOL - You have Oliver Stone's phone number, yeah right another bullxxxx claim. You don't have Feilding he disagrees with you, he said so in the e-mail I posted here previously. If you doubt it ask him. If you think his book proves you case provide some quotes. As for Stone ( http://www.assassinationscience.com/mack2.html ). Ironic that you don't think his opinion is worth anything because he is obviously more qualified than you to answer such questions. .I sure then that Fielding is aware of them, if they prove your case why does he disagree with you? Why don't you specify which articles/issues support your argument or better yet quote some passages from them. You continued refusal to do so indicates that you're just blowing smoke again. As stated above he made his views quite clear in his e-mail to me I posted on another thread. I seached my e-mails and found NO reference to that phrase, is this leading anywhere or is it more of your pointless BS I quit the lab 17 years ago. What contributions did you make to JFK research when you were in Nam? I'm not the only one ignores Jack makes up all manner of excuses not to reply when people debunk his lunatic theories. Tell us, do you believe his theories about Apollo and 'chemtrails' or that Bush watched flight 11 crash into 1 WTC on a secret satellite feed in his limo, or that the Bushes personally sabotaged John-John's plane etc etc. If our points were so weak he should have no problem refuting them. Can you provide any quotes to that effect? How does the fact that we all disagree with you support the notion that it was possible? I never indicated I was "proud" of my work at the lab, you asked me question and I answered it. You seemed quite obsessed with my work at the lab, I mentioned it once in response to your question and you brought it up repeatedly in a single message. I used the single quote marks to indicate those weren't your words. That was the obvious implication of your announcement. When have I ever "put words in your mouth"? No nervousness on my part, the continued dodging of the issues by you and White further convinces me your arguments are bunk. A few more weeks? You promised to make it "soon" 10 weeks ago. How many months is "soon" in your lexicon? Many years of video production, are you EVER going to tell us about your FILM post production experience. A straight answer would be nice rather than your usual snide remarks. But I guess that won't be forthcoming, it you had any experience to speak of you would have told us by now David rarely if ever has anything of value to say. Zavada made the same point as Groden and since he invented Kodacrome II we should assume he knows what he is talking about. None of the alterationist have addressed this yet, I think they are afraid to, it really destroys their case and they donn't have a good counter argumnt

????????????????????????????? No you having expertise in FILM post production is essential to you being able to say with any kind of authority that alteration was possible. Your continued discuss your experience reinforces the impression you don't have any to speak of.

Sounds like you were in New England that's the only part of the US that calls long sandwiches 'grinders'. What does "grinder" mean in Britain? Shag for dance must have been a bit archaic even in the 70's. Regional differences can cause confusion in the US. In most parts of the country a 'milk shake' is milk and ice cream mixed together in a blender, so I was surprised when I ordered a strawberry-banana milkshake in Boston and was served bits of those fruit and milk blended together. When I asked where the ice cream was they told me I should have ordered a'frappe'. Another time I was in Boston a friend of mine told me to me him at "the spa" on a particular block. I looked in vain for a health club or a place called "The Spa" till I figured out that 'spa' meant convience store in Beantown

What it proves is that the government is perfectly capable of such things, has contemplated it, and at least part of that government has been more than willing. But that's not the point that the author made, he seemed to see ON as a blueprint for 9/11 and mentioned what he considered to be 6 parallels between the two. I jusy wanted to show that his comparisons were spurious. I never denied that Bush and Chenney etc. would be capable of carrying out such a plan, just that the evidence of an "inside job" and controlled demolition of the WTC is very weak. I don't think ON proves much. The German government didn't just think about but actually carried out attrocities far worse that 9/11 and ON, would that indicate the German government decades later would be capable of similar acts?

I e-mailed Zavada and he told me he is still working on it. He promised to complete it but wouldn't commit himself to a date. He has other fish to fry. Since Healy promised us some sort of 'Earth shattering' "formal claim", that would stump the non-alterationists, "soon", over 2 months ago he and White don't have much right to complain about Zavada. So David, when exactly can we expect to see your "formal claim"? Maybe you chickened out!!!

There are various variations of the joke about a Brit who comes the US and asks where he can get some 'fags' (1) or goes into a stationary store and wants to buy a 'rubber'(2). When I went on a road trip to Canada with some friends we were quite amused by the sign we saw at gas stations that read "We’ll rotate your rubbers for $ 10". Now that we're on the subject the French city of Condom has serious problem with British tourists who keep stealing their signs. When I was in London I saw a sign for the 'subway' and ran down the steps hoping to catch a train and was quite disappointed to see nothing but a staircase leading up to the other side of the street when I remembered I should have been looking for signs for the 'underground' I hope this part isn't deemed in appropriate for this forum. I won't go into the details but years ago I was quite confused when my English girlfriend said something about her 'fanny' (3) we learned then to our amusement that it refers to entirely different parts of the anatomy in American and British English. 1. In the US it means homosexual males, in Britain cigarettes. 2. In the US it means condom, in Britain it means eraser, in Canada it means tire 3 In the US it means buttocks, in Britain it means and organ she has but I don't

Just wanted to give this thread a bump

Another pointless post from Mr. Healy, par for the course at this point. We’re STILL waiting for your “formal claim”. Is that coming anytime in the near future? See if you can give a straight answer to that question. Your are the one purporting to be an expert on film post production yet you refuse to answer any questions about your experience. My experience unlike yours IS irrelevant because I don’t claim any expertise. I consider myself an “advanced amateur” photographer but I have done a few paid job over the years. Long ago I did darkroom work at a “semi-pro” lab in Boston and at a fashion catalogue in NYC. I do have some videography experience but that like yours is irrelevant. So are you every going to offer any evidence that compositing as sophisticated as your buddies think was done to the Z-film possible? Saying “Read Feilding’s book” doesn’t really cut it now that Fielding himself says you’re wrong. I’m not “speaking for” Ray Fielding he already said that what you claim was possible wasn’t and would be detectable. OK embarrass me provide a link to where any of you have rebutted Zavada. Jack suggested that you’d be able to ask questions he couldn’t answer. No you stumped me, who said it? Why should I care? That’s a good tactic, I make a point your friend doesn’t have a good comeback for and you change the subject! What donations (sic) have Fetzer, Costella, White and the lot of you made other than mudding the water with spurious claims? I never claimed to have made any such contributions, if I made one it was helping debunk the nonsense you guys call research. Jack – Let us know when you’ll be replying to that backlog of unanswered messages, what happened did you “chicken out”? Len Obligation as in "burden of proof" your are the closest thing the "alterationists" have to a film post production expert. You claim 2nd (or 3rd) generation copies coupies have been made and pass as originals. It's up to you to show that (among other things) is was feaseable with the filmstock used. Not only can't you prove alteration, you have failed to offer any evidence that it was possible.

LOL He promised that a few weeks ago and didn't say when he would complete it. Healy on the other hand promised a "formal claim" "soon" over two months ago. I doubt your videographer friend could ask any questions the inventor of Kodachrome II couldn't answer. 1) the only evidence Healy has ever cited to support the notion that such fakery was possible was Feilding's book and unspecified copies of the SMPTE journal; now Feilding has said, like Zavada and Oliver Stone, that such sophisticated compositing was not possible at the time and if attempted would be easily detectable. 2) None of you guys have yet to reply to Zavada's critique of TGZFH (see link in "the Rifle" thread) 3) You guys aren't even able to answer questions I ask, I can't imagine Healy could stump Zavada. You are hardly one to criticiize someone else for chickening out there are at least 20 threads in which people have questioned your theories and asked you questions that you refuse to reply to. Len

Are you really trying to equate Life and other magazines touching up the backyard photos for publication with theories that they were doctored or don’t show the same carbine found at the TSBD? What does one have to do with the other? If the photos were faked this would had to have been done before the assassination, Life retouched them after. Zavada said he would produce a "disertation" a few weeks ago but didn't give a deadline for when he would complete it. You on the other had promised some ground breakinng revelation "soon" over 2 months ago. We're still waiting. What's the problem still getting ir proof read. LOL what a joke! You and the other alterationists have yet to adequately respond to his last paper* on the subject anyway. Since you have his email and are anxious to hear what he has to say why don't you ask him when his paper will be ready? Len *http://home.earthlink.net/~joejd/jfk/zaphoax/zavada-hoax-comments-r1.pdf

Gee, there are some superficial similarities between parts of Operation Northwoods and some of the wilder 9/11 CTs, I guess that proves PNAC did it LOL. Compare any roughly similar events (terrorist attacks on the US) and you will, if your look hard enough, be able to find similarities. The Lincoln and Kennedy assassinations are a case in point. Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846. John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946. Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860. John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960. Both were particularly concerned with civil rights. Both wives lost their children while living in the White House. Both Presidents were shot on a Friday. Both Presidents were shot in the head. Both were supposedly assassinated by Southerners. Both were succeeded by Southerners named Johnson. Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808. Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908. John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln, was born in 1838. Lee Harvey Oswald, who supposedly assassinated Kennedy, was born in 1939. Both assassins were known by their three names. Both names are composed of fifteen letters. Lincoln was shot at the theater named 'Ford.' Kennedy was shot in a car called 'Lincoln' made by 'Ford.' Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials. A month before Lincoln was assassinated he was in Monroe, Maryland. A year before Kennedy was assassinated he was in Marilyn Monroe. Does this prove something sinister? They also proposed sinking an American warship in a Cuban harbor (Guantanamo Bay) Is that evidence that American agents were responsible for sinking the Maine? 1) Using plastic explosives There is no evidence plastic explosives were used on 9/11. In any case using explosives in a terrorist attack is hardly unusual. I would expect they were used in about 80% of terrorist attacks and most of those involved plastic explosives. No know plastic explosives could have brought down the WTC because it would have been imposible to plant them and prep the buildings with out being noticed. Also CTist make much of the “molten steel” plastic explosives DON’T melt steel. 2) Planting aircraft parts There is no evidence parts were planted. 3) Using air defense exercises as a cover Where in the official explanation does it say that they were unable to intercept the planes because of air defense exercises? IIRC 'war games' played a very different role in Operation Northwoods. 4) Radio controlled detonation of an aircraft I’ve never even heard that CT, who is claiming the planes were detonated? It seems obvious they exploded due to impact. What evidence is there of radio detonation 5) Conducting funerals for mock-victims There is no evidence of mock victims; I guess all the relatives of those mock victims were fake too, as were those profiles of them in the local papers. Just because some lunatics in the JCS proposed something forty years ago doesn’t mean that it was feasible then, let alone now. Even back then they were worried about the truth coming out, ‘ ''Any of the contrived situations described above are inherently, extremely risky in our democratic system in which security can be maintained, after the fact, with very great difficulty,'' a memo said.’ http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:ajVBOGbhnvMJ:www.hannibal.net/stories/013198/Castro.html . If one wants to believe there were no people on those planes the number of people “in on” the conspiracy would be enormous, it would have to include dozens of people from United and American airlines and Logan, Newark and Dulles airports and the mock relatives of the mock victims. If no one was aboard flight 93 where did the “about 1,500 mostly scorched samples of human tissue” come from?” 6) Having an attack in D.C. Wow, two terrorist attacks on the US (one fake, one real) both included attacks on the nation’s capital, what an amazing coincidence. The IRA and al-Qaeda both bombed London so did the Germans during WWII, ETA and al-Qaeda both attacked Madrid. The Allies bombed Berlin and Tokyo. The British attacked D.C. in the War of 1812, the Confederates tried during the Civil War and the Union tried to take Richmond etc etc. If a country or terrorist group wants to attack a country, the country’s capital is the most obvious target. IIRC, the Pentagon, White House and Capitol (building) were NOT mentioned as targets in “Operation Northwoods” This also an example of “missing the forest for the trees”, it didn’t contain “every element of 9/11 in detail” it didn’t even include the two most distinctive features of those attacks: 1) the hijacking of civilian aircraft in order to fly them into iconic targets and 2) the collapse of large office buildings killing thousands of innocent civilians. The site does have some value though. It makes a good case that 757 parts were found at the Pentagon. http://www.pentagonresearch.com/757debris.html ROTFLMHO