David G. Healy
-
Posts
3,622 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by David G. Healy
-
-
of course....
-
okay, donated..... please inform me when the subscription is due and what the individual monthly requirement is.
Varnell is correct, Easy-peezy. In most cases this board is better and more entertaining than television, certainly over-the-air MSM television... And a bit of education thrown in to boot...
-
1 hour ago, Jim Glover said:
[...]
If you think it was Faked? Convince me.
[...]
There is no proof about much in this case.
[...]
Happy Spring!
.
Convince you? WHY? Knock yourself out.
We poured over these images years ago. Day in day out... There was NO composite with LHO in any window, ever. Jesse Curry would give his eye teeth to have that when he wrote his book...
Unless you (or someone else) can provide where this image came from and can then provide another copy of that same image with its bonfires and verification, it's a complete waste bandwidth...
I suspect this little misdirection was created in the past 12-18 months... Simple stuff in Photoshop takes maybe 10 minutes (if that). LMAO!
-
3 hours ago, Jim Glover said:
I agree David Healy,
I could be wrong but I read recently that the original negative was lost somehow by a congressional investigation. One of our friends here has asked for the negative from the Paper in Dallas that published it. If someone could ask Tom Dillard, if alive, that would be great. And if someone could ask Wesley Frazier who he thinks Prayer Man is that might help with more puzzles of the case for us. Thanks!
Imagine that, right along with the rest of them... It's of no use asking Dillard anything except where is the negative? If he can't deliver the original negative or the current owner can't/won't deliver it, it's a wasted exercise--I assume BS.
There is enough medical evidence right now to blow this case right out of the water. Have a nice Easter, Mr. Glover...
-
On 4/16/2019 at 9:04 AM, Jim Glover said:
OK Keyvan,
I wonder what the Photographer Dillard would say to his Photo being manipulated. He printed it when he got back from the Hospital so where would he get a negative of Oswald and If he had time to do what you think why would he or someone put in a photo of Oswald that is so faint nobody saw it? http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/dillard.htm
here's how to get to the bottom of this: where is the original in-camera Dillard negative? Who owns it? Document the negatives lineage, acquire access to it, make arrangements for a thorough review of the negative-then print it! Then, compare with what is circulating today.
Just another useless rabbit hole till someone does.
-
30 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:
Well, David H., the facilities at Jaggars were certainly there and available for Oswald to use (if he, indeed, knew how) during that brief 6-day period in question (April 1-6, 1963, just before he was fired).
And if it could somehow be proven that Oswald did, indeed, develop the backyard pictures himself (which can probably never be done), then it would certainly eliminate for all time the decades-old (and also unproven) notion that the backyard photos are fakes.
Because, as you yourself implied, why would Oswald himself be creating and developing a series of fraudulent composite pictures that implicate himself? That idea, of course, is nuts.
nearly as nuts as the Single Bullet Theory.... What Lab did the Hester's work at in Dallas, again?
-
4 hours ago, David Von Pein said:
[...]
Mr. Bugliosi was probably right about LHO developing the backyard photos himself while Lee still worked at Jaggars (what with Lee having easy access to the photo-processing facilities at Jaggars just after the pictures were taken—and what with Lee also being such a cheapskate and all), but given the way Marina testified above, I think Vince should have probably phrased the relative sentence on page 685 of his book in this manner instead:
[...]
nah, LHO creating composites that implicates himself? Common sense Sherlock. He'd of burned up a ton or print paper getting the composites aligned and correct. And it would take time... lots of time. All that ruby work? And that's before he got to the lab. No this took a pro. Are you sure it wasn't Dale *wanna see my EMMY* Myers who wrote this nonsense you quote?
-
19 hours ago, Denis Morissette said:
By the way, there was no Mauser on the 6th floor. I've discussed with several DPD officers and deputy sheriffs who were on the 6th floor early in the afternoon that day, and no one remembers 2 rifles.
ya think!
-
32 minutes ago, Jim Harwood said:
[...]
The other thing I like about Trump is he is anti drugs.
nah, but, I bet he'd be anything but 'anti' if he was around a drug cartel leader, he's be looking for a ring to kiss and a jock to carry... ya just wish Lyndon LaRuskie, was the Trumpeter, any fascist-commie in a storm, eh...
-
On 4/5/2019 at 4:03 AM, Jim Harwood said:
Kirk, my apology for offending your sensibilities. By the way your avatar, or your pose in your photo has always reminded me of that news photo from 20 plus years ago depicting the leader of that 'Heaven's Gate" cult . He also was photographed with his head half cocked looking upward at the sky. Your pose and photo is a dead ringer for that guy, now long dead.
Is this you JHarwood? :
-
2 hours ago, Cory Santos said:
I had another thought while in the plaza- I was in Dallas to judge the pay per view fights at AT&T Stadium- as I was adjusting for some photos, a lady asked me where the film was made. She meant Zapruder. I showed her the pedestal right next to me was where he stood with the help of his secretary. Two things occurred to me that were odd. First, Why did he need to stand on it? Standing right next to it you have a fine view of the cars going down elm. It was not that crowded and because of the downward angle of the street, he would have had a fine film standing on the ground. Actually, he could have stood in several places including the steps right next to the pedestal and got the same film. Really, why did he not go right down to the street and film him? Why? Second, the pedestal he stood on is not flat. Probably for an older person, it would be tricky to stand on it. I know, I tried. I am in my forties and a former college athlete and still in good shape. It is tricky.
These two oddities I believe are not "strange coincidences" the term I have so often used here and in my lectures.
I know; conspiracy thinking. But, really, the fact he stood where he did defies common sense and rational thinking.
a question I asked myself sitting on that pedestal nearly 37 years ago...
speculation: imagine what you could do with this camera shooting the same KODAK film in addition to Zap's camera on the pedestal that afternoon?
-
24 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:
Joe, did you read his deposition that Jeff linked to?
Can you please show me where and when he was convicted in court?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Statement_of_the_offense.filed.pdf&page=11
he did 14 days in a Fed lockup, this should shed a bit more light:
-
1 hour ago, Robert Wheeler said:
There is the first problem with your theory, the universe does not allow for any combination of the highlighted words.
you forget, this is a reality tv show... lmao!
-
35 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:
[...]
Barr's history of helping
RepublicanBush presidents in legal crisesmaydoes not explain why Trump brought him back in to head the Justice Department.If you don't want to go down any conspiracy paths, the thinking would be that Barr is just a regular honest guy and was picked by Trump to be AG because he would sail through confirmation. That is a little hard to swallow as Trump and the Bush family have never gotten along.
[...]
Or, the GOP went to the Bush family? And begged for help. it doesn't take a rocket scientist to come up with a plan to massage a thief/thug's ego, eh? Especially, when one just might witness, up close and personal, the demise of the Republican Party. Picture it, the Green Party out maneuvering the GOP for the next 30 years. A Barr type should of been expected. And I'm not so sure, he wasn't.
The alternative: Lincoln might just as well been a horse and buggy hack in Chicago as rather president.
Here's a conspiracy path for ya: Nancy Pelosi back channeled the idea about Barr to the GOP and suggested they ring up George Bush and see how they can help the Donny. Now THAT would be worthy.... and a stroke of brilliance.
-
31 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:
[...]
In this article by Bob Parry, which was published almost two years ago. He predicted that this would go just about nowhere.
It was a bunch of unrelated loose threads that showed no evidence of a conspiracy. And that the MSM was showing no standards for journalism in dumping everything they could and saying things they could not prove.
[...]
Hi Jim,
Nowhere? The liberal media is alive and well, it went EVERYWHERE... and then the conservative media has FOX, there's the letdown. Kinda reminds me of the old days where every city/town of decent size had two newspapers. One was the liberal rag (morning?), the other the conservative rag (afternoon?). Multiple editions daily in some metro areas. And they dumped on each other daily. Now we have that on a grander scale and we don't even need ink or paper, 24/7. And FOX is raking it in...
THEN: If it's gonna sell papers print it! NOW: If its gonna garner clicks/views post it! The next chapter on the journalistic beat? TRUTH and decisions dealing with "standards of journalism" issue/none issue.
Prove? The real publishing issue has always been 'advertisers,' not proof. When the media is looking for legitimacy or cover, THEN they'll dust off TRUTH.
-
1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:
[...]
And that is why Mueller reports to the DOJ.
For those that don't know, or even care to know: WHO is the report for, Jim?
-
4 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:
Trump has been in the public eye for 40+ years. His boorish behavior is nothing new to those of us in the NY Media Market. It is certainly acceptable to not vote for the guy if you think his boorish behavior, or constant self promotion, or whatever, are indicative of character floors that should not be allowed in the White House.
I was never much of a fan of him myself, or that style of politicking. On the other hand, I prefer his "what you see, is what you get public persona" from the duplicitous Hillary persona. You will never hear Trump effect an African American accent while speaking to a predominantly black crowd. On the other hand, that is Hillary's shtick.
I can also imagine that Trumps persona, and any character flaws that might be implied, is partially due to a lack of familiarity with a pretty standard New York Stereotype. If you spend enough time in New York, you will run into plenty of loud braggarts like Trump, whether they are successful millionaires or the guy you get your coffee from on the corner.
Character and persona is important. Hilary's ability to talk out of both sides of her mouth is what made me vote for Trump. Bernie Sanders politics were definitely more to the left of Hillary than my preferences. He does not evoke the type of visceral distrust I have with Hillary and I doubt if it had been him, instead of her, I would not have been as motivated to vote for Trump as enthusiastically as I did.
oh brother, spare us...
-
On 3/23/2019 at 11:53 PM, David Von Pein said:
That's what's so great about being a conspiracy fantasist ---- you never run out of "suspects".
what a lousy investigation buys ya, champ!
-
5 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:
Yes, what they talked about was the addition of paint to remove the gaping occipital wound and move it to above the ear.But my point was regarding Horne's timeline that gives only 12 hours time to alter the film. I used the word "remove" instead of "add" because most the needed alterations can be described as needing removal:
- Removal of the occipital wound.
- Removal of brain matter flying backward, some of it possibly hitting the trunk of the car.
- Removal of the stopping of the limousine.
immediately, individual frames were altered for LIFE magazine release (were they numbered?) Removal of brain matter? WOW here's a quick way of doing that add more contrast to the frames, POOF!
Removal of the limousine? They had till the middle of Feb '64, the first schedule appearance of the full Zap film shown to the WC to remove that.
Frankly I could care less what was done at Hawkeye works, that's Doug's purview.
And before the question comes up, there has never been a side by side Z-film comparison of known and dated prints running along side of the alleged Z-film in-camera original... and never will be much to our chagrin.
-
On 2/21/2019 at 11:53 AM, Sandy Larsen said:
[...]
And yes, from everything I have read about Z-film alteration, it seems that there are many things that would have had to be removed. It's hard for me to believe it could be done in a twelve hour period that Horne says it was done in. But his Hollywood contacts say otherwise, so it's hard for me to argue the point.
What Hollywood contacts (Wilkerson & Whitehead and other Z-film researchers) in this instance state, what was added to a frame in the Z-film, not what was removed.
-
21 hours ago, Douglas Caddy said:
Director Oliver Stone claims JFK's death was an inside job
Oliver Stone is a veteran of the USArmy, not the Marine Corps. This simple miscue should set off a few bells.
-
32 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:
Andrew Weissmann is leaving "Team Mueller" soon, so I don't think Team Mueller is going to be indicting anyone of any importance soon.
Andy Weissmann, formerly of ENRON fame has been running the show on Team Mueller for over a year now. Robert Swan Mueller III has been mailing it in since the Strzok/Page texts came out last year.
There will certainly be indictments of people of importance, just not by Team Mueller.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/14/us/politics/andrew-weissmann-mueller.html
"WASHINGTON — One of the key prosecutors in the special counsel’s investigation into Russian election interference is leaving the team soon, the Justice Department said Thursday, in another signal that the inquiry is winding down.
The prosecutor, Andrew Weissmann, who helped lead the cases against the former Trump campaign officials Paul Manafort and Rick Gates, “will be concluding his detail to the special counsel’s office in the near future,” said Peter Carr, the special counsel’s spokesman..."
They'll ALL be concluding their services soon. MSM predictions have been less than stellar concerning this debacle. What makes you think Weissmann is throwing the towel in?
-
On 11/26/2018 at 12:48 AM, Cory Santos said:
Lol why? All he should have cared about was the condition of the patient.
it's called "conspiracy," more than one shooter. I suspect Hoover was a tad bit curious.
-
30 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:
What does anything you just uttered have to do with my general (and factual) comment about the Internet autopsy photos not being "first generation" images (and thus, not to expect very high quality from them)?
~shrug city~
There is absolutely no reason as to why we can't have 1st generation imagery and films for research/discussions.
What you want to do here is sell 5th-10th image generation as acceptable. It's NOT. It's a farce.
And then there's the issue(s) re films, x-rays and photos (including autopsy photos) that are missing. POOF! Where are they?
Damage to the Limo
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted · Edited by David G. Healy
then you'll explain that huge round object appox 6.5mm in size in the X-ray of JFK skull, eh Einstein? You can explain that can't you?