David G. Healy
-
Posts
3,622 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by David G. Healy
-
-
Josiah Thompson wrote:
I don't know if you remember but the Media FBI office was broken into on the evening of March 21, 1971 and all their files stolen by persons unknown. These files were then copied and released selectively to the press over the next six or eight months. The documents obtained and then released to the press contained the first clear, indisputable evidence of the existence of the COINTELPRO program. They also showed that many members of the Swarthmore College administration were reporting regularly to the FBI on the political activities of students and faculty. Ditto for the athletic trainer at Haverford College.
I believe some of these documents evidenced a continuing interest in me and "Six Seconds" by the FBI and Hoover. I have been sent various FBI documents obtained under Freedom of Information Act requests which evidence an intense interest on the part of Hoover and the FBI concerning me and "Six Seconds." These largely come from the late 1960s and show the FBI closely following the reception the book received and how it fared under the onslaught from Time Incorporated.
Back then did I believe that any other critics were agents? No. Some I judged to be thoughtful and careful. Others I judged to be harebrained. But I never thought any were agents. Maybe some were. I never thought much about it.
Good answer. Your 1 million is in the mail. Keep your fingers-crossed that that pesky ghost of Angleton doesn't get it.
Seriously. Do you have any inside knowledge of the Media break-in? Here the FBI was totally exposed, totally humiliated, and yet not one person was arrested. This is astounding. Since the White House was trying to get rid of Hoover at this very same moment in time, and since Colson was hiring Hunt at this very same time, I'd harbored a suspicion that this was an early adventure of the "plumbers". A few months back, however, I can't remember where, I was reading a book on sixties radicals, and one of the journalists interviewed, who'd been one of the recipients of the stolen files, claimed he knew the members of the "Committee to Investigate the FBI" or whatever they called themselves, and said they were local radicals?
Do you know whether they were, in fact, members of the left? Did you know them? I think the statute of limitations is up. Were you one of them? Maybe if you "out" yourself, Salandria can be swayed on your bona fides.
On the other hand, everyone knows the spooks hate the feebies...
Federal prosecutors are very adept at finding ways around any statute of limitations... for example, a continuing conspiracy to aid and abet the first conspiracy, various overt acts on behalf of keeping the first conspiracy secret. In terms of answering your questions, the best I can do is quote from a book I published in 1988 called Gumshoe. It is non-fiction, a kind of memoir describing the change from being a college professor to being a PI:
At the outset everything had gone on in an atmosphere of earnest respectability. Nancy and I had come early to the antiwar movement, organizing marches and vigils in 1965 and 1966. I'd been arrested in the usual well-mannered ways in Philadelphia and Washington. Consistently polite to the authorities, we'd even permitted members of the Philadelphia police civil-disobedience squad to attend our premarch meetings. There'd been little violence; it had all been a battle of words.
When had things changed?
It was probably in 1970.
probably have debate on that '70 date, especially from the SF bay area standpoint. In particular Univ. of Cal-Berkeley and San Francisco State. It certainly wasn't a "battle of words" on those campuses! Having ended up in a few emergency rooms while shooting news footage.
SFState's, S.I. 'sleepy time' Hiyakawa did have a nice golfcart and his TAM was a great touch. Only academic I saw who could quell a near riotous crowd [thousands], of students.
Evidently the SDS missed your part of the country, the SDS & FBI sure as hell didn't miss the bayarea.
We'd spent that academic year in Denmark, where I'd read the Danish papers for news of Cambodia and Kent State. We'd returned to Haverford in the late summer and you didn't have to be an Eric Sevareid to recognize that the balance had shifted. Resistance had replaced dissent; criminal conspiracy had taken the place of political organizing. On the one hand, there were draft-board raids and sabotage missions: in March 1971 the files of the Media FBI office were elegantly stolen and selectively released to the press. On the other hand, there was the ever-present danger of government phone taps and penetration by informers. For a brief moment, respectably middle-class citizens could function as criminals, backed not only by moral purpose but by the vocal enthusiasm of the intellectual community.
The wheeling columns of uniform-clad young men performing their maneuvers "for God, for Country and for Yale" had receded into the past. The society was no longer integral or obviously worthwhile. Our attention turned to the "good Germans," the Circle of the Rose, or, alternatively, to Camus and Sartre and their compatriots in the French resistance. My Navy training in commando and demolition raids could be used to advantage. It was a time of secret meetings and secret plans, of coded phone messages and watching one's rear-view mirror. When Haverford's president announced he might honor the FBI's request to examine the college's Xerox machines, I helped shift the offending roll to the president's personal machine. When Hoover's short-haired undercover operatives appeared in Powelton Village, a neighborhood warning system of hand-held sirens alerted the troops. It was David against Goliath. We were the best of our generation, we told ourselves, ready to take risks and do things others only thought about.
Had I been happy? Yes. It was an engrossing "story."
Gumshoe: Reflections in a Private Eye (New York: Little, Brown & Company, 1988) pages 72-73.
The line above about us thinking "we were the best of our generation" just caught my eye as I typed it. What incredible hubris! None of us had ever seen the inside of a federal prison. In some sense, we may have believed we were untouchable. After all, we were intellectuals of various stripes. The government wouldn't dare touch us.... Or would it? It was.... to use Sartre's own concept... a time of incredible "bad faith," a time of massive self-delusion, of wading deep into the stream of ideology. And now... unbelievably... one pops one's head up and recognizes it was all over thirty years ago.
-
Evan Burton wrote:
Mr Fetzer,
Do bother to read the replies to your posts? Do you automatically switch off if it tries to set you straight? It seems that way; you just continue to sprout your own ill-conceived theory no matter what anyone says.
It comes down to the probability that two qualified pilots would have simply lost track of their airspeed and altitude and allowed the plane to crash when there was a loud stall warning system to warn them.
Yes, because the probability of that happening is greater. It's happened in the past, many times. I even showed you a report from an almost identical aircraft and crew in very similar circumstances. They just flew into the ground - ignoring the visual and audible warnings from the RADALT.
The NTSB's own simulations contradicted this result because, using a simulator with a weaker engine and flying at abnormally slow speed, they were unable to bring the plane down.
This is twisting the truth. The simulation proved it was possible to fly out of the situation, NOT that it was impossible to crash. There is a distinct difference, as any aircrew can tell you.
Not to mention that the plane was off course, flying the last few minutes along azmuth 268 when it should have been on 276.
This demonstrates they were not paying proper attention to the instruments. Even on the wrong radial they would still flying towards the VOR. Instead they were tracking to the left of the VOR, demonstrating that they were not monitoring the CDI.
So they would have had to neglect not only their air speed and altitude but also their CDI and the stall warning alarm. That's quite a lot to swallow, even for the greatest apologist for THE NTSB REPORT.
As has been pointed out numerous times previously, that exact circumstances has happened before and will no doubt happen again. If you knew anything about aviation you'd understand that.
Even Richard Healing, a member of the NTSB team that signed the report, admitted that they had no idea what had caused the crash and were merely speculating.
That's because they cannot absolutly say that because there is no DIRECT evidence (such as a CVR). With the available evidence, it is the most probable scenario.
I can see exactly how you'd work this. If he had said "Yes, that's exactly how they were killed" you'd attack his statement, asking how he could say such a thing when there wasn't any direct evidence of it. Mr Healing's biggest mistake was even talking to you; as soon as he opened his mouth it would be distorted and twisted to suit your desires.
Surely it makes more sense to infer that these things happened to two qualified pilots because the aircraft was no longer under their control than to suppose they were more incompetent than pilot trainees.
No, it doesn't because there is nothing to support your view whereas there is a wealth of historical data documenting where trained, competent, qualified and current aircrew have made errors that have resulted in anything from a hard landing to the loss of hundreds of lives.
Perhaps it's necessary to post details from worldwide statistics, showing just how many crews have made the very mistakes you say do not make sense.
Plus they may have been lured into the "kill zone" through the manipulation of the directional data.
Again, there is no proof of this occuring, nor an indication of HOW it could be done.
I could easily claim that the aircraft was intercepted by undetectable UFOs. The crew and passengers were subject to medical experimentation during a 'pause in time' which, although leaving no trace, eventually killed most of them. Returning them to normal space disrupted the aircraft electrical systems and the aircraft crashed.
Why is that scenario any less valid than yours? It has as much proof as yours. Any "evidence" you say supports your claim also supports mine.
Why isn't my claim more valid? Because, like yours, it's just plain silly.
This guy has no idea how many crashes were "due to pilot error" unless he has actually investigated them! Numbers that are fake or fabricated or otherwise inaccurate prove nothing.
So you are now claiming that the details of air accident statistics around the world have been manipulated? All so it invalidates your own theory? That sounds suspiciously like paranoia.
Even Burton suggested that an "electrical arc" might have ignited the fire.
Once again twisting the truth. I said that the POST-CRASH fire could have been easily started by electric arcing or from hot engine components igniting fuel.
An electrical fire would have been a predictable outcome of the use of a directed-energy weapon, which not only takes out the electronics but overwhelms the electrical systems of targets it hits.
Not only can you not demonstrate the existance of any such weapon, you now claim to know the 'predictable outcome' (or result) of using such a hypothetical weapon.
The smoke from the Wellstone crash was bluish-white, as I have confimed by viewing aerial photos of the scene while it was still burning and as Gary Ulman and various "first responders" have reported.
And I showed you images of a helicopter crash site that was producing white smoke. The colour smoke simply indicates that the fuselage or similar was buring and producing that colour smoke. It says nothing about the cause of the accident.
Your source, "JayUtah", whose background is in mechanical engineering, does not appear to have qualifications that are appropriate to address these issues. You are eager to cite someone with no qualifications in either electromagnetism or electrical engineering as though he were an "expert", while denying the expertise of someone with both a Ph.D. in electromagnetism and an honors undergraduate degree in electrical engineering
I think you'll find he has very credible qualifications. Perhaps Craig would get permission to post them?
Speaking of qualifications, yourself and Mr Costella have none in the field of aviation.
You seem to have quietly overlooked by offer to have the report evaluated by a former senior air accident investigator with the ATSB, and a person who performs a similar role for the Navy.
Want to hear what they say?
Raytheon, which manufactures the plane, is also in the business of manufacturing weapons of these kinds.
You are accusing Raytheon of making the non-existant weapon which supposedly brought down the aircraft? I'm sure their legal department would love to know that - and I shall pass it on to them.
It is interesting that you raise this question, because, while the NTSB said they lost track of their airspeed, that cannot occur without a commensurate loss in altitude.
This statement vividly demonstrates your complete lack of aerodynamics and aviation. An aircraft can bleed off speed by raising the nose, pulling back power, and still maintain a constant alitude.
__________________
dgh01: what we have here Holmes, is pure speculation/theory on EVERYBODYS part. NTSB, former whomever's, makes not one wit of difference as to who has 'flight' experience, Fetzer, Costella or Orville Wright... It's best guess, yes?
From yours (Evan) above:
quote on
"That's because they cannot absolutly say that because there is no DIRECT evidence (such as a CVR). With the available evidence, it is the most probable scenario"
quote off
"probable scenario", sounds like 'pure' speculation to me...
-
James,
Am I mistaken, or is this "Tania" photo actually one of Patricia Campbell "Patty" Hearst, who assumed the name "Tania" with the so-called Symbionese Liberation Army in California in the 1970's...rather than one "Tania" who toiled alongside Che?
Or was that post meant to be humorous, and I simply missed the point?
Not a photo of Patty Hearst, Mark...
-
Len, you and Hobo, have done such a brilliant job of exposing the "Fetzering" of the Great Wind from the North, I regret that it can't be just moved over to this board. No, I believe you.
I hold the copyright to "Six Seconds" and the rights to publish the Zapruder film deriving from Judge Wyatt's decision back in 1968. I'm sort of old-fashioned and would like a new edition to published like a regular book by a kind of standard publisher. I would write an update section. I think the project is viable. I just haven't found a publisher yet who would want to take it on. But I'm still trying.
I wish Hobo could be persuaded to move over and join us.
Hobo would love to join but he really has a need to keep his name and image from being placed here on the forum. He told me he contacted the mods but I have not heard back from him since. Of course it is their forum and if they require his name and picture then it might be impossible for him to join.
And so -- ANOTHER legend begins, the LEGEND of HOBO!
WOW, not even, good theater!
-
Tim Gratz wrote:
[...]
I recall that "Life" was one of the first major media to raise questions about the Warren Commission. I am sure many people in the US first began to doubt the Warren Commission because of "Life" magazine.
[...]
Can you cite ANY main stream USofA media that've raised questions about the accuracy, and/or the WC investigation as a whole?
-
LenC penned:
I just got another e-mail from the US Airways Pilot
Funny how people who know what they are talking about consistently disagree with Fetzer.
Len,
After reading thru the NTSB report, this sounds like an unfortunate case of the pilot getting behind and never catching up, started by a late turn-on by the controller to intercept the approach.
[...]
____________
Care to post the pilots name, his/her email address is fine, Len?
And how do we know he/she a pilot for US Airway's [arent they in bankruptcy or were in bankruptcy recently]? Yours or Craigs word, I guess... Hell, how do we know, for sure what Evan does? What he's presumed to do?
-
I have to disagree with you about a detail, Len. You wrote:
"Obviously that assertion with regards to Tink is absurd. While he was writing one of the first books to challenge the Warren Report, you were a Vietnam era volunteer [?] Marine officer."
Actually, Fetzer skedaddled out of the Marine Corps as soon as Vietnam heated up and headed off to graduate school in 1966. He had been NROTC at Princeton. Remember his claim to have "piloted a jet?" Remember how he magically transformed being taken up in a jet by a real pilot ("Here Jimmy, you can put your hands on the stick for a few seconds.") during NROTC summer camp into being a jet pilot and familiar with aviation? Fetzer was obliged to go into the Marine Corps and did so, spending his first several years sitting on his ass in Okinawa and his last year or so minding statistics at a recruit base in San Diego which sent kids off to fight and die in Vietnam. So he wasn't a "volunteer." Nor was he a "Vietnam era Marine officer" because he ducked it.
Fetzer's claim that his time in the Marine Corps makes him an experienced warrior is about as bogus as his claim that touching the control stick for a few seconds makes him a "jet pilot."
Now I can understand that SOME (USofA citizens) participating in this thread had absolutely nothing to do with military service, does not surprise me in the least. Draft OR enlistment. In particular participation in any US military forces branch during the 'Vietnam ERA'. For whatever reason they saw fit. Judged against that backdrop it, what I've seen displayed here by a few of those, I'm would not surprised if they, in fact, "elected" to pass ANY type of military service.
You Dr. Tink are another story. I suspect full well, you know, and fully understand the term Vietnam Era service, and the dates associated with such term. If you served during that *declared* period, you were a Vietnam ERA Veteran! In-country or OUT, PERIOD!
Tink said: "Nor was he a "Vietnam era Marine officer" because he ducked it."
That Dr. Tink, is unabashed BullS**t ---
Is THIS how you treat those that served, those whom may have served with distinction? It's telling around here! Considering YOUR own military service, pretty low way to act.
Starting to stink, real bad!
oh, Okinawa? -- that the same place all those Marines gave their lives during WW2? The same Okinawa that houses Ft. Buckner [to this day] and all those TDY Special Forces A teams, B & C Detachments 1960-64? Unless you've access to someones DD214, how in the hell do you know what someone, anyone did in the military during the; quote "Vietnam ERA" unquote?
David Healy
-
Hey Ed,
Nice to see you're still around...
David Healy
-
Jim I'm as mystified as Craig. What are you trying to prove with your latest posts? No one denies that Bush wanted Wellstone out of the Senate. Long irrelevant posts like that just clog up the thread. Is that you ploy to divert people's attention from the facts of the case?
Len
Facts - whose fact's? Better get Evan back here, your sinking!
-
Hi folks, I thought I would provide a brief update by posting a sampling of speaker's presentations. This is only partial of course and does not include several of our speakers; I thought it would give some flavor to the scope and nature of topics being addressed. In addition I'm happy to announce that Jim Teague, Aubrey Rike and Beverly Oliver Massagee will be joining us for the conference and it still looks like Billy Sol Estes will be there as well.
Sampling of speakers and topics JFK Lancer November in Dallas 2005 :
Jim Marrs, “Means, Motives and Opportunities”?
Joan Mellen, "A Farewell To Justice: Demythologizing Jim Garrison"?
Larry Hancock, “Covert Operations – from Cuba to Dallas?”
Jim Olivier and Stuart Wesler, “News on Oswald in New Orleans”
David Kaiser, "Making Everyone Unhappy: The Kennedy Administration, Castro, and Cuban Exiles, 1963"
John Williams, "A Conspicuously Disowned Presence: General Curtis E. LeMay
at The Bethesda Autopsy of Friday, November 22"
Ian Griggs, “Search For A Stripper” - deals with the life and times of the
Carousel Club dancer Kathy Kay
Stuart Wexler and Tom Pinkston , “Bullet Fragment Fallacies”
Phil Hopley “Deep History of the Fair Play For Cuba Committee”
John Simkin, “Grant Stockdale, Mary Pinchot Meyer and the Assassination
of John F. Kennedy”
Ben Rogers, "Research in the Papers of Penn Jones, Jr"
Pat Speer, “Lawyers, Doctors, and Head Shrinkers: Lies and Deceptions in the JFK Medical Evidence”
Whats Miller's topic, Larry?
-
Len, this thread is supposed to be about Josiah Thompson's book and work. Please restrict your flame war with Fetzer and Healy to the thread on Fetzer's book.
I'm not the one who brought up 'Hoax' in this thread and I don't think Tink would object to my using the example of Posner's book sales to counter Healy's spurious point
your choice of Posner's book is needlessly antagonistic
Fetzer compared me to Hitler* on the thread about his book, wasn't that "needlessly antagonistic"? Especially since he should know I'm Jewish from our participation in another forum. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FETZERclaims...NK/message/1885
*http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=4542&view=findpost&p=39724
no recent book on the assassination as reviled, and as undeserving of respect, as Posner's.
That's why I chose it what better book to counter his point with?
I assume your mentioning of this book was done to annoy Fetzer
No, I did it to counter Healy
if you choose to defend Posner's book
I'm not defending it, my whole point is that sales are no indication of quality
"... I'm not the one who brought up 'Hoax' in this thread and I don't think Tink would object to my using the example of Posner's book sales to counter Healy's spurious point..."
Tink would object? Why praytell would he object? His and Fetzer's disagreements are well known, some refer to them as the battle of EGO'S... both parties, well known. You on the other hand...
To close -- I for one could care less about your, or most, for that matter - "debates". Debates concerning the assassinatioon of JFK are the kiss-of-death in moving this investigation forward. Let debate happen in a courtroom...
There are too many coincidences regarding political deaths in America -- write a book, find a publisher, get your opinions, supported by known facts of the time, on bookstore shelves. Noel Tyman, Josiah Thompson, David Lifton, Jim Fetzer and many, many more paid the price for publishing the fruits of 'their' toils/investgiations. YOU, prepared to do the same, or will you continue to be part of the ever expanding [JFK in particular, amongst others] political assassination white noise, internet 'opinion' gallery?
-
That Colby is a slick one. He will deny the obvious and twist the truth, ignore evidence and assail character until no one will have the courage to speak up or search for the truth! It is a method tried and true. It is a method that worked for Hitler and it works for Bush just as well.
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...indpost&p=39724
Jim - My response to this should be to tell you to perform a biologically impossible act. You complain that I "assail character" and in the next sentence you compare me to Hitler*! This is especially unconscionable considering you should know that I'm Jewish from our participation in the Yahoo Forum and that you repeatedly cite Bollyn a Holocaust 'revisionist' who has close ties to various neo-Nazi's as a reliable source.
It's ironic that the person who complains the most about others 'assailing character' and nasty posts is the worst offender. Cite ONE example of where I have intimidated others "until no one will have the courage to speak up or search for the truth!". Wasn't it you who attacked Pat and Steve? Isn't it you who keeps on implying that anyone who agrees with me is being "taken in" "gullible", "a sap" or "a dupe"**?
To quote Joseph Welsh from the Army-McCarthy hearings "Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"
*Comparing me to Bush as bad enough
** He used those words just in the post I'm quoting, anyone who has been following this thread will have seen various examples of this
CUTE, but no banana!
--PLONK--
-
Mr. Colby ranted on:
Evan beware Dr. Fetzer has nasty streak and is a bit paranoid.
Get ready to be attacked.
He accused me of being "cognitively impaired", then decided I was disreputable and probably an agent of the US gov't and now he thinks I'm crazy!!
If you go back over the older posts you see that he lashed out at Steve and Pat for very mildly and politely disagreeing with him. He accused one of being "massively ignorant" among other things and then denied having called him an idiot.
I saw in your bio that you are a military officer. I wouldn't be surprised if Fetzer will start insinuating that you must be an intelligence asset working on a joint US/Australian project to discredit him.
[...]
____________
Considering your entire career here on this forum (evidently other forums, too) has been spent attacking Jim Fetzer, one MIGHT come to the conclusion, it is YOU Mr. Colby, that miay be a 'bit' "paranoid", not to mention uncomfortable with published authors findings and conclusions regarding specific subjects. Of course if you're a published author and qualified to correct and/or add to the evidentiary mix regarding certain subjects -- that'd be nice to know... If all you have is "opinion", well you know what we say in the states; opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one.
Dr. Tink tried to ease your entry to this forum - now, he's a known quantity, when it comes to JFK [not the Z-film much anymore, I'm sorry to opine] probably careless about Paul Wellstone's death, other than the cursory, "Too Bad, he seemed a nice guy and took his job seriously". You, on the other hand aren't a known commodity! Have you published (other than the internet forum posts) anything related to Fetzer's current subject matter? Title, and reviews of the titles? If the best you have is 'bashing' those that present material that may be uncomforable for you and/or, yes, a employer, perhaps - here's a suggestion: USNET alt.conspiracy.jfk ! Well, better yet: alt.assassination.jfk would perhaps suit you bette., The "conspiracy" site has a habit of calling those that can't deliver and/or skew related evidence in the death of JFK, LIARS... those usually high tail it to the .john board, where anything/anyone that supports WCR findings is protected....
Even Dr. Tink's upcoming presention partner Dr. GaryA. posts to the 'conspiracy' board, has for years ---
Hey, how about starting a pro USGovenment Paul Wellstone conspiracy USNET board? That good taste? Well, hell, no need for thanks - just trying to help your cause...
David Healy
-
God Jim it's almost like we are two broken records arguing. You keep on raising the same incorrect and irrelevant points and I keep on replying to them.
Reread your sources you misunderstood
1] Bollyn's article,
2]NTSB accident site regulations, and
3] Mrs. Conry's interview!!! I have pointed all this out to you back on Yahoo and again here go back through my old posts.
Christopher Bollyn (on the early arrival of the FBI),In the article from your Nazi buddy Bollyn that you cite all that he says is that the FBI in Duluth said that the 'recovery team' came from Minneapolis. This not in dispute. McCabe [the FBI spokesman] said that agents from Duluth got to site between noon and 2. The recovery team arrived later.
The NTSB is only allowed to investige {sic} a crash as the scene of a crime if the Attorney General declares it to be a "crime scene". John Ashcroft, Attorney General, did not declare it to be a crime scene and the NTSB gave no attention to the possibility it was deliberate.Wrong again !!!
Jim you misread the NTSB regulations I think this the 3rd or 4th time I have brought this to your attention!!! I pointed this out to you a few times on Yahoo and once before here see the excerpt from post 45 below
1] This is irrelevant except for the fact that once again it shows your reading comprehension problems because that is not what it says at YOUR source. [see below]2] a) Investigating a crash as a crime is up to the FBI and other law enforcement agencies which the Board can 'call in' at will.
The Board does not carry out criminal investigations under ANY circumstances. c) The AG's role is to determine who leads the investigation not what can be investigated by who. I already pointed this out to you in the other forum!"the NTSB has complete discretion over which organisations it designates as parties to the investigation...In cases of suspected criminal activity, other agencies may participate in the investigation. The Safety Board does not investigate criminal activity".
"As the result of recent legislation, the NTSB will surrender lead status on a transportation accident only if the Attorney General, in consultation with the Chairman of the Safety Board, notifies the Board that circumstances reasonably indicate that the accident may have been caused by an intentional criminal act. "
When did the "recent legislation" go into effect? The page was posted Sept. 2004, 2 years after the Wellstone crash.
<http://www.ntsb.gov/Abt_NTSB/invest.htm> this is the same page you cited in the From The Wilderness article.
The scenario it provided is ludicrous on its face. Two pilots flying a very high-quality aircraft in non-threatening weather are supposed to simply have neglected their air speed and altitude and let the plane crash.Not ludicrous because similar crashes have happened before. Just one example.
How about this scenario - THREE airline pilots [much more qualified than Conry who was a part time charter pilot] flying a jetliner simply neglected their altitude and let the plane crash even after a warning horn sounded. Explain this one away Fetzer!!!
Eastern Flight 401
"In this example, we have three highly qualified flight crewmembers (captain, first officer, and flight engineer), each with a substantial amount of flight time and experience. This flight, from New York to Miami, was routine and uneventful until arriving in the Miami vicinity. At that point, when the landing gear was extended, the nose gear light failed to illuminate. The main gears were confirmed down. All three crew members became so fixated on the landing gear light, no one noticed that the autopilot had disengaged at 2000 feet and the L1011 was slowly descending towards the Everglades. At the time the air traffic controller asked "how are things coming along out there" (in reference to working on the nose gear problem), the aircraft was at 900 feet. By the time the crew had recognized how dangerously low they were, it was too late. The aircraft had impacted the ground."
"So again, we have an accident where a perfectly airworthy aircraft, under complete control of the pilot (s), was inadvertently flown into the ground, with little or no awareness by the pilot (s) until it was too late."
http://www.airlinesafety.com/editorials/Hu...rrorVsTerrorism
1] The pilot had 30,000 flight hours 8 - 9 x more than Conry
2]the plane was descending at about 200 feet/min.
3]even after the altitude alert horn sounded the crew remained oblivious.
the cockpit voice recorder transcript can be found at
http://www.airdisaster.com/cvr/cvr_ea401.shtml
Excepts from the transcript - All times below are min:sec until impact all dialogue is from the flight crew except APP which is the control tower. My comments are in blue.
- 9:48 transcript starts
-8:50 the flight crew notice the problem with the light and try to fix it
- 7:52 Uh, Bob, it might be the light. Could you jiggle tha, the light?
All three continue trying to fix the light
- 6:08 Put the ... on autopilot here
All three continue trying to fix the light - at some point the pilot accidentally disengages the autopilot but due to a miscalibrated switch the autopilot light remains lit
- 4:40 This won't come out, Bob. If I had a pair of pliers, I could cushion it with that Kleenex
All three continue trying to fix the light
- 2:02 Naw that's right, we're about to cross Krome Avenue right now
All three continue trying to fix the light
- 1:34 [sound of altitude alert horn]
No reaction to altitude alert horn the next thing said is
- 1:31 We can tell if that # # # # is down by looking down at our indices
All three continue trying to fix the light
-0:32 APP Eastern, ah 401 how are things comin' along out there? The plane is at 900 feet but the oblivious crew thinks they are at 2000
- 0:30 pilot talks to tower changes heading doesn't notice that he is a less than half the altitude he should be
- 0:23 Huh?
- 0:21 One eighty
- 0:07 We did something to the altitude
-0:06 What?
- 0:05 We're still at two thousand right?
-0:03 Hey, what's happening here?
[sound of click]
- 0:02 [sound of six beeps similar to radio altimeter increasing in rate]
0:00 [sound of impact]
This in spite of the fact that they were well-qualified (regardless of his drivel about the extra flight-log, which his wife had never seen,Jim you misread the interview, the log book you are talking about WAS NOT THE DUPLICATE reread the interview or see my post on that point in this thread. Even his wife said he had only 3000 - 4000 hours. He forged his logbooks and had about 3400 hours
the primary pilot, Richard Conry, was an Air Transport Pilot, which is the highest civilian standingAirline [not Air] Transport Pilot is the highest of only TWO professional ratings. according to the BLS 80% of professional pilots are ATPs http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos107.htm
had passed his FAA "flight check" just two days before this flightThis is getting tiring Jim. You keep on bringing up incorrect or irrelevant points and I keep on replying
The check is irrelevant pilots are tested every 6 months - and he had a problem during the test after a simulated stall the head pilot had to cue him to fly faster look back through my old posts for details or reread the NTSB reports.
was praised as an extremely careful pilot by those who knew him bestThere is no way to know if he or Guess were flying. Conry normally had the co-pilot fly.
He was praised by a friend who had not flown with him in 12 years!! His colleagues were mixed at best some said he was careful, most said he did not like to fly or was a bad pilot, four said he almost crashed one of them urged him to retire! He complained to a childhood friend he had difficulty flying and landing A 100s.
Jim except for Flight 401 and the statistic about ATPs I have brought all of this to your attention many times!!! Why don't even try to reply to my points?
I think I know whats wrong "Facts got your tongue"
I will reply to the rest of this crap tomorrow
Len
Please do! I suspect many are awaiting your "crap" with baited breath ... roflmfao!
It appears Mr. Colby ENJOYS discussing airline tragedies [or he has a fixation with a certain University Professor, some here haven't been able to discern WHICH], the cause from offical NTSB documents only [aparently very, very sensative about any other insight - opinion or possible evidence - contrary] and aftermath - hey, whatever toots your horn.
A hint of flight experience on his part might be helpful. But no, all we get are questions regarding what kind of camera do you have, do you carry your camera on your person or in do you stow it in luggage... come on...
Pan Am still fly to So. America? Maybe Mr. Colby will enlighten us...
-
http://thinkprogress.org/2005/09/13/katrina-myths-debunked/
following should provide a little insight regarding USA right-wing politics, not to mention Murdoch's 'fair and balanced', FOX News Network [amongst others]
___________________
Right-Wing Myths About Katrina, Debunked
There are a lot of right-wing myths about Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath. ThinkProgress has created this guide to help you set the record straight.
CLAIM — STATE AND LOCAL OFFICIALS WERE MOSTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR FAILURES: “White House Shifts Blame to State and Local Officials” [Washington Post, 9/4/05]
FACT – BUSH PUT FEMA IN CHARGE OF EFFORT BEFORE KATRINA STRUCK: “Specifically, FEMA is authorized to identify, mobilize, and provide at its discretion, equipment and resources necessary to alleviate the impacts of the emergency.” [White House, 8/27/05]
FACT — FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ABLE TO ACT WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM STATES: The Wall Street Journal: “Mr. Chertoff activated the National Response Plan last Tuesday by declaring the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina an ‘Incident of National Significance.’ The plan, which was rolled out to much fanfare in January, essentially enables Washington to move federal assets to the disaster without waiting for requests from state officials.” [Wall Street Journal, 9/13/05]
CLAIM — NO ONE COULD HAVE PREDICTED BREACHED LEVEES: On ABC’s Good Morning America, Bush said, “I don’t think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees.” [Good Morning America, 9/1/05]
FACT — LEVEE BREACH PREDICTED REPEATEDLY: Responding to Bush’s comments on Meet the Press, Dr. Ivor Van Heerden of the LSU Hurricane Center “I didn’t buy that because, you know, we had discussed on numerous occasions that a worst-case scenario would be if we had one of these major hurricanes and then we lost the levee systems.” A White House advisor sat in on the “Hurricane Pam Exercise,” a computer simulation of the possible effects of a Category 3 hurricane on New Orleans. The exercise found that “…a storm like Hurricane Pam would: cause flooding that would leave 300,000 people trapped in New Orleans, many of whom would not have private transportation for evacuation.” [Meet the Press, 9/11/05]
CLAIM — GOV. BLANCO DELAYED STATE OF EMERGENCY DECLARATION: In a Sept. 4 Washington Post article, which was corrected hours later, an anonymous Bush administration source claimed Governor Blanco had not yet declared a state of emergency in Louisiana. The Post reported, “As of Saturday, Blanco still had not declared a state of emergency, the senior Bush official said.” [Washington Post, 9/4/05]
FACT — GOV. KATHLEEN BLANCO DECLARED A STATE OF EMERGENCY IN LOUISIANA ON AUGUST 26: Three days prior to when Katrina made landfall. [Office of the Governor, 8/26/05]
CLAIM — GOVERNORS WANTED FEMA TO BE WEAK: Brit Hume: “FEMA, first of all, is not a first responder. FEMA is basically a tiny little agency that has been kept weak. And you know why it’s been kept weak? The governors want it that way.” [Fox News Sunday, 9/11/05]
FACT — STATE OFFICIAL COMPLAINED ABOUT WEAKENING OF FEMA UNDER BUSH: “State and local disaster-relief officials have been complaining about the lack of federal involvement in emergency response for some time. Trina Sheets, the executive director of the National Emergency Management Association, which represents local emergency personnel, told Salon that “since the Department of Homeland Security was established there has been a steady degradation of the capabilities.” [salon, 9/7/05]
CLAIM — RESIDENTS WHO REMAINED IN NEW ORLEANS ARE TO BLAME FOR NOT EVACUATING: Sen. Rick Santorum said, “I mean, you have people who don’t heed those warnings and then put people at risk as a result of not heeding those warnings. There may be a need to look at tougher penalties on those who decide to ride it out and understand that there are consequences to not leaving.” [Associated Press, 9/6/05]
FACT — MOST RESIDENTS WHO REMAINED COULDN’T AFFORD TO LEAVE: New York Times: “The victims, they note, were largely black and poor, those who toiled in the background of the tourist havens, living in tumbledown neighborhoods that were long known to be vulnerable to disaster if the levees failed. Without so much as a car or bus fare to escape ahead of time, they found themselves left behind by a failure to plan for their rescue should the dreaded day ever arrive.” [New York Times, 9/2/05]
CLAIM — BUSH “STRUCK THE RIGHT BALANCE” BETWEEN HIRING POLITICAL CRONIES AND EXPERIENCED PROFESSIONALS: Vice President Cheney said Bush had “struck the right balance between political appointees and career professionals to oversee the relief efforts.” [AP, 9/8/05]
FACT — MOST TOP FEMA OFFICIALS WERE POLITICAL HACKS: “Five of eight top Federal Emergency Management Agency officials came to their posts with virtually no experience in handling disasters.” [Washington Post, 9/9/05]
CLAIM — MAYOR NAGIN LEFT 2,000 SCHOOL BUSES BEHIND IN THE FLOOD: Sean Hannity said, “You would have thought that the 2,000 buses, school buses, that sat in the yards would have been used to help those people that were incapable of getting out on their own, but none of that had happened locally.” [Hannity and Colmes, 9/6/05]
FACT — NEW ORLEANS HAD LESS THAN 300 WORKING SCHOOL BUSES: “The [Orleans Parish school] district owns 324 buses but 70 are broken down.” [New Orleans Times-Picayune, 9/5/05]
CLAIM: LOCAL OFFICIALS DESERVE BLAME FOR LACK OF EVACUATION BUSES : Rick Santorum claimed, “Many didn’t have cars … And that really was a failure on the part of local officials in not making transportation available to get people out.” [Times Leader, 9/6/05]
FACT: LOUISIANA NATIONAL GUARD REQUESTED 700 BUSES FROM FEMA FOR EVACUATIONS, FEMA ONLY SENT 100: The Boston Globe reported, “On Sunday, the day before the storm, the Louisiana National Guard asked FEMA for 700 buses to evacuate people. It received only 100.” [boston Globe, 9/11/05]
CLAIM — MILITARY NOT STRETCHED THIN BY IRAQ: President Bush said, “We’ve got plenty of troops to do both. Let me just — let me just talk about that again. I’ve answered this question before, and you can speak to General Honore if you care to. He’s the military man on the ground. It is preposterous to claim that the engagement in Iraq meant there wasn’t enough troops here, just pure and simple.” [White House, 9/12/05]
FACT — MILITARY LEADERS SAY IRAQ HAMPERED THEIR EFFORTS AFTER KATRINA: National Guard Chief Lt. Gen. Steven Blum said, “Had that (Mississippi and Louisiana) brigade been at home and not in Iraq, their expertise and capabilities could have been brought to bear.” The Washington Post reported “In Louisiana and Mississippi, civilian and military leaders said the response to the hurricane was delayed by the absence of the Mississippi National Guard’s 155th Infantry Brigade and Louisiana’s 256th Infantry Brigade, each with thousands of troops in Iraq.” [AP, 9/10/05, Washington Post, 9/10/05]
CLAIM: NEWSPAPERS REPORTED NEW ORLEANS HAD BEEN SPARED SIGNIFICANT HURRICANE DAMAGE: Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff said, “I remember on Tuesday morning picking up newspapers and I saw headlines, ‘New Orleans Dodged The Bullet.’” [Meet the Press, 9/4/05]
FACT: HEADLINES ACROSS THE COUNTRY ANNOUNCED “CATASTROPHIC” DAMAGE TO NEW ORLEANS: The Tuesday, August 30th edition of the Times-Picayune led with a banner headline reading, “CATASTROPHIC: Storm Surge Swamps 9th Ward, St. Bernard; Lakeview Levee Breach Threatens to Inundate City.” Dozens of other major newspapers led with headlines describing Katrina’s horrifying aftermath. [Times-Picayune, 8/30/05; Newseum via Wonkette]
-
Josiah Thompson wrote:
Dear Mr. Speer,
Thank you for your questions and also for your reply to Professor Fetzer. I’ve been hiking in Wyoming for the last ten days and I just saw your post with its questions.
I don’t know exactly what happened in Dealey Plaza but I do know one thing: The claim that any single person (whether LHO or someone else) fired all the shots that day in Dealey Plaza is nonsense. That clearly did not happen. What exactly did happen is something we can approximate but not clearly know at this point. I guess both you and I are in the process of trying to narrow down that approximation.
Are there things in “Six Seconds” that I no longer back or believe in? Of course. Let me offer you an important example.
In “Six Seconds,” I claimed that JFK was hit in the head first from the rear and then from the front within two Zapruder frames (Z312-Z314) or one ninth of the a second. This claim was based on the autopsy data and the fact that JFK’s head moved about two inches forward between Z312 and Z313. Several years ago, Art Snyder of the Stanford Linear Accelerator demonstrated to me that my measurement was of the smear in Z313 and not of any movement of the head between these two frames. Within the last two years, David Wimp has demonstrated that JFK’s head begins moving forward about Z308 in concert with the forward movement of everyone else in the limousine. At Z314, JFK’s head and body begin moving backward at a high rate of speed while everyone else continues moving forward. Winp suggests that Greer’s foot may have touched the brake pedal when he turned around at Z302ff and that shifted everyone forward. In summary, I am now convinced that there is no evidence of a double impact on JFK’s head at Z312-314 of the Zapruder film. What we see there is a shot impacting from the right front and only a shot impacting from the right front. If he was shot in the head from the rear, that probably came later at Z327/328.
The kind of meticulous examination of the Zapruder film carried out by Snyder, Wimp and others shows what additional information responsible science (not assassinated science) can provide in figuring out what happened.
hate to take you to task here, but a few of us aren't as impressed with DaveW. as you are, especially when it comes to science... readers can follow the 1st link below and see what John Costella has to say regarding his old "internet assistant" DaveW
That brings me to your suggestion that I should not have reviewed Professor Fetzer’s books as I did and thus discouraged others from reading them. You wrote in another thread, “As far as his going on to Amazon and trashing all of Dr. Fetzer's books, in an attempt to discourage people from even reading them, I do think that's a bit low... Mr. Thompson should apologize for publicly trashing Dr. Fetzer's books, while Dr. Fetzer should apologize for suggesting that Mr. Thompson, who put in a lot of work on the case in the 60's and was considered by many THE most convincing voice in argument for a conspiracy, was a disinformation agent on behalf of the CIA.... “
By his actions over the last decade, Professor Fetzer has shown himself to be a self-aggrandizing blowhard. You will be giving a talk at Lancer this November. I imagine that you will be talking about your reconstruction of what happened in Dealey Plaza. Am I right? For my part, on the same weekend I’ll be giving a talk at the ARRC conference in Washington. I’ll be pointing where we can find bedrock evidence in the Kennedy case. You and I have been invited to talk because, presumably, the sponsors of these conferences are convinced we may have something useful to say. Fetzer, because of his bilious style of attacking the character of those with whom he disagrees, will be appearing nowhere. Why? Because the critical community has gotten his number. As far as I can discern, he has made himself persona non grata.
I first tangled with him in 1998 when I expressed disagreement with his alteration claims and was told that I “was not qualified to have an opinion in these matters.”
everybody has opinion, does that mean your willing to discuss optical film printing - matting techniques circa. 1963? After all, IF the Z-film is altered, it happened with mattes!
Later, we tangled at a Lancer Conference in that year which ended with the sponsor turning off the juice to Fetzer’s microphone. Since that time, he has proved incapable of answering any of the objections to his increasingly obsessive claims about the inauthenticity of the Zapruder film and has stooped to calling those like me who disagree with him “disinformation agents.” His so called “assassination science” has turned out to be quackery.
just in case you forgot, comments re the above "incapable" is bunk, as were arguments your team put forth... see the 1st url below:
http://www.assassinationscience.com/johnco...hoax/index.html
http://www.assassinationscience.com/johncostella/jfk/intro/
His use of private remarks from Vincent Salandria fall in the same category. Vincent Salandria is one of the true heroes of the critical community concerned with the Kennedy assassination. His early articles in “The Minority of One” and “Liberation” still deserve respect as the first attempts to show that the evidence in the case failed to support the conclusions of the Warren Reportt. However, as you point out, his claim that the powers that be left a confused skein of evidence to bother us is just nonsense. It shows, again as you point out, that Salandria (like the rest of us) hasn’t been able to figure it out.
Fetzer’s various books have been refuted again and again. His style is that of the tabloid press and his conclusions no more probative than conclusions you or I would find in the “National Enquirer.” Claiming that untutored people are experts and that photos show what they clearly do not show is part and parcel of the Fetzer shtick. My reviews of his books are pungent but true. When I last checked Amazon re the Zapruder “Hoax” book, some nine or ten of the latest reviews from his readers were negative and much more scathing than mine.
One of his readers said, “Buy the book only for its entertainment value...” Another wrote, “On some pages it is like reading a weekend car ad... don’t waste money on it.” Another called it “pure nonsense.” Another said, “Fetzer’s theories are nutty and not worthwhile. It [the book] goes in the fiction section of the library together with the WARREN REPORT, CASE CLOSED and CONSPIRACY OF ONE.” Finally, one guy went so far as to say, “The fact that anyone, anyone at all (besides Jim Fetzer’s mother, found this book credible is evidence of the fact there are people out there who will believe ANYTHING. Fetzer in all his books, has yet to add anything of real historical value. Within the conspiracy world Fetzer is a god. [Nope! I don’t think so.] Within the legitimate academic circles of real historians, he is a carnival con man. This will eat at him forever.”
Why shouldn’t I warn others of the unreliable nature of these books? Isn’t that exactly what reviews are supposed to do? I pointed out what was wrong with his arguments. If they’re wrong this should be pointed out. If you want to save the Professor from criticism, you should persuade him not to publish such nonsense and then try to defend it so evasively with noxious bile.
I think you've sold more 'HOAX' books for him than any other source, third printing now...
However, it matters not to him. He has moved on to publishing even sillier claims about the plane crash which killed Senator Wellstone. If that doesn’t keep him in enough of a spotlight, I imagine he will turn his attention to claiming that Bush and his flunky Brown actually dynamited the levees in New Orleans!!! That’s all fine as long as he leaves those of us concerned with the Kennedy assassination immune to his tirades. All Fetzer’s tirades do is make it more difficult for the rest of us to get out the real truth concerning this incompetent national administration.
if it's not yet apparent, many have come to the conclusion, re the old JFK assassination research guard, the job isn't getting done... WHY? What's taking so long?
Please let me know if you have additional questions. I have not yet been able to figure out how to read your reconstruction of the event, something I would be very keen to do.
Josiah Thompson
-
John Gillespie wrote:
I call into question your credibility because Mr. Myers performed a thoroughly superb investigation and it is clear to me you are like so many others here, Dixie included of course, who wouldn't know where to begin, especially if it led in the 'wrong' direction.
dgh01: As soon as you, John Gillespie display your 3d Graphics credentials we'll have something to talk about - regarding Dale Myers Emmy winning animation work.
And why would you, especially when you can get on here and chat it up with the ignorami?
dgh01: it's called the internet Mr. Gillespie, the subject matter, I'm quite familar with. If you're into learning about this case, GREAT! If your one of those that divert those that are looking for conclusions, conclusions that don't necessarily lead to WCR conclusions -- we'll go right past you.
You're into the usual wishful thinking of the Progressives. It's called agendae and it reflects poorly on the credibility of the honest researchers, authors and members of the cognoscenti who know a fact when they see one and can recognize those who are just spreading warts, like yourself.
dgh01: I do declah, ya-honah -- I've been castigated, castigated by a dried-up lawyah
You make it easy for the McAdams of the world to brand others as loony conspiracists.
dgh01: he's been at it for years now, to no avail - are you his heir apparent, Mr. Gillespie?
I see you as just another Progressive being allowed to dispense profanity and personal attacks on the Re-Education Forum.
dgh01: well here's one you can share with your reich-wing partners, I haven't a clue as to who killed President Kennedy, do you?
Ah, but you can't top Jack - who observed that people wrote things they wouldn't say to someone's face and then, practically in the same breath, he wrote the same type of things and used the very same profanity.
dgh01: I suspect JWhite has his reasons for saying what he feels he must, just like crusty old word merchants like you. As they say: If you haven't walked a mile in a mans shoes, how the hell do you know what your talking about?
But you're good, though; just vile enough and clearly out of control - a true Progressive.
dgh01: was that one of those ofhand compliments? Vile enough? You are new to internet boards, aren't you?
Now, go away. I'm off to correspond with your betters and to receive updates on how Mr. Roberts is toying with the fools on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
dgh01: take my word for it -- he's [Roberts] a shoo-in. Do we Liberals have to inform you rabid right-wingers about everything?
I leave you to yourselves, again.
dgh01: I never LEFT myself, again!
-
We are all tired of the ravings of Mr.Peters/Miller/whoever.
He continues to ignore the obvious RETOUCHING of the so-called
DRUM SCAN, which was revealed at least 2 years ago or more.
He continues to beat this dead horse by calling me and others
liars and worse.
The drum scan RETOUCHING is very clear in the area of the
pedestal:
1. the pedestal top was cleaned up with a sharp straight line
2. the "gap" was significantly increased
3. the corner of the pedestal was "squared up", although it is not
4. and most obvious, the slant of the pedestal top was changed
from slanting down to right to SLANTING DOWN TO LEFT, to
further exaggerate the "gap".
This was posted on the JFKresearch forum years ago, AND NEVER
REFUTED NOR DENIED by Thompson/Mack/Lamson/Miller et al.
Here it is again, gang.
Now SHUT UP!
Jack White
Additionally, as I have always pointed out, the corner of the
pedestal is not square, but is offset by about an inch. The
"gap" advocates refuse to recognize this. When retouching
the "drum scan", they also were ignorant of the CAMBER
of the top of the pedestal (for shedding rainwater). It is
NOT A FLAT SURFACE, but is raised more than an inch in
the center. When they retouched the top of the pedestal,
they made it a STRAIGHT LINE, not a curve.
Give up, Peters/Miller. The hoaxers have been exposed.
Jack White
I love this one...White as Fetzer before him argues against the principal of the lever....amazing.
can always tell when the non-photo alteration camp get's nervous. They ring any bell they can find, especially when they've run out of arguments, so here we go AGAIN - regurgitating a argument from 10/03.
They could find no one ( I wonder why?) to duplicate the transit experiment in Dealey Plaza, as performed by Dr's. Fetzer and Mantik amongst their able bodied assistants. I suspect no one will take up the chore now... As a result we're back to the BM movement [bill Miller - pardon the pun] along with Gentleman Larry Peters, or whomever he is.
Get your gear down there and show us your findings? Next to the seamless films of DP [four years now] might this experiment be second?
-
nice photo.... I suspect you'll be gone in a day or so... ta-ta
-
Craig Lamson,Sep 14 2005
David G. Healy,Aug 1 2004
Mr. Peter's just post the before and after [regarding Dr. Thompson's 'drum scan' image] imagery, with a statement from Craig what he did to the image -- I would like to know what Craig Lamson did to ***enhane*** the image, if anything other than creating the CD --
Now thats plain English Mr. Peter's, James Gordon, Bill Miller or whatever name/skirt your currently hiding behind -- you've expressed ZERO knowledge regarding imagery posted on the net - guess we're back to provocateur nonsense aren't we....?
For your info Mr. Peter's, I think it's a safe bet; JWhite wiped his hands of you long ago; your an amusing distraction; certainly nothing more than a distraction! Based on your photo resolution comments, I'm fairly certain your Bill Miller, all you needed to add is: if you save a 72dpi image at a higher resolution [300dpi], only you can see things in a picture others can't. roflmao
So for lurkers hereabouts, that TYPE OF REASONING, not to mention the disruptions, is why the likes of these guys we're dumped from JFKRESEARCH and the forum going private - researcher funded...
I'd say we're onto something - sure gave cause to those of us that need much convincing regarding the subject matter.
Whinning about what researchers did with photos Mr. Peter's just doesn't cut it!
ta-ta guy!
----------------
Larry Peters,Jul 31 2004
dgh01: operative word here is "knowingly", if you can prove that, please post your proof. As far as posting on the internet, Mr. Peter's let me remind you, what you and lurkers see on this forum and in the websites in general is posted imagery that has NO higher resolution than 72 dpi (at no fault of the forum moderators, a internet **given** -- if you're unaware of what that means, you might want to get clarification - I'm sure the moderators can clarify this).
Mr. Healy - I see you're still trying to move on and keep Mr. White out of the spot light by continuing to beat a dead horse. Very well, here it is from someone who worked with Mr. White on the Badge Man project. Gary Mack has said,
"Jack White not only has had access to all known Moorman photos - including
an 8x10 print of the drum scan - he has copied all of them. Every single
one! I was there. I gave some of them to him. He has them all, yet
insists on using the WORST one to try to make his point."
The "drum scan" image was forwarded AFTER Dr. Thompson's work in San Francisco to Craig Lamson for further/other processing[?], later copied to CD's and distributed, I being one of the recipients of a CD with the image.A CD that I was eventually given, as well.
Understanding the seriousness of the debate and the implications of the street/grass Moorman position, it is prudent that researchers see [Craig's before and after imagry] the components that drew your side of the **gap** debate to it's current conclusion, YES?No - that is smoke and mirrors on your part and here is why. You can overlay every known copy of Moorman's photo over the top of one another and there will NEVER be one that shows the gap closed as Mr. White's so-called recreation photo does. Below is an example of two Moorman photos - One is Thompson's with the fingerprint on it and the other is Groden's without the fingerprint. Like with the pedestal, there is a gap between Jackie and JFK's head. When overlaid on top of one another - the gap never changes. The only way to get the gap to change is by lightening the photo until you start washing out the images and expanding the light colored areas. There is no Moorman print in TGZFH that shows the gap closed, nor will Mr. White ever be able to produce one on this forum. (see attachment number one)
Doing research on imagery of no greater resolution than 72 dpi, is dangerous at best -- if that's all you've got, then the honest thing you can say is: "no conclusions - just opinions". For what it's worth, Jack White always requests comments regarding his work [new and old]. If YOU are not in the vicinity when his requests for comments are made, well what can you say? Maybe, you've been 86'ed from the very place where Jack posts regularly, Rich's JFKResearch forum?[/quoteMr. Healy - again you are trying to mislead someone. When enlarging an image after it has been reduced to 72 DPI it will cause it to pixel and become distorted with magnification. However, magnification can be achieved before posting an image to a forum such as this one. I can zoom in on the Moorman photo - capture it to where we can count the emulsion specs if you like. No matter how you slice it - the gap will not close. The transfermation to the Internet will not selectively alter any parts of the image being posted. In other words - it will not leave the some gaps like that between Jackie and JFK's head open while closing others like that between the pedestal and the pergola window. (see attachment number two)
dgh01: Mr. Peter's if you can't post right here, the exact resolution of imagery your working with, what your comparing, where that referenced imagery is located, make it available to other's. NOISE Mr. Peter's - just another opinion -- far cry from research, Mr. Peter's. A very far cry!You mean the same resolution imagery that Mr. White didn't post? By the way - I did source my Moorman images, but you have to take the time to actually read the post thoroughly.
dgh01: I post my opinions regarding photo alteration research. elsewhere -- LOL!That is the most honest statement you have made thus far. I believe you are talking about JFKResearch where no one can challenge alteration claims without being banned from the site. That brings us to the next question - If you are not here to share your opinions about photo and film alteration, then why are you posting in this thread at all? Interesting!
-------------------
today 9/13/05 2330
As I was reading this old thread I found this question by you David and its time to correct the record.
dgh01:Correct what record?
When Tink had the Moorman 5 copy neg drum scanned in San Fran he had the the scanner tech make two copies of the cd containing the file. All the details of the scan are available at our web page on the Moorman 5.
dgh01: drum scanning infers the *original* document/photo was NOT drum scanned. The trannie of the document/photo, who shot it, when, the size? Where does it currently live?
Tink had the scanner tech sign each original cd and he sent one to me and one to G. Mack for the 6 floor. Gary still has this original disk.
dgh01: What original GM disk, and what's on 'THAT' disc? So GaryM has a copy of the near recent CD with the Tink drum scanned trannie AND his original disc? Again, disc of what?
When I recieved the disk I did noting to the file....nothing..repete...nothing.
dgh01: I haven't said you did, there are others that might not give you the benefit of the doubt
No changes what so ever. I simply made dupilcates of the master disk supplied by Tink and sent them out in the mail. The file you recieved is exactly as it came off the scanner.
dgh01: fine -- as to the file I recieved; I don't know that its exactly as it came off the scanner
I can't even tell you the file type it was saved as. I have your word, your word ONLY. Do you know if the file was saved at the scanner facility in a .jpeg format in-between its original file format saved to HD's from the scanner application?
The master disk (with the scanners techs signature) was returned to Tink.
dgh01: why wasn't a third CD for duping created? What would that cost Tink or the house for that matter, $0.25 cents? The scanner operator sign that one too. THAT one is issued to you for distribution duplication - then your rearend is covered
Any claims by White that the image was retouched is pure crap.
dgh01: say's you -- how do you know the .jpeg/.gif files that were posted to internet boards, in particular JFK Research, weren't retouched? Compression artifacts can certainly create the appearence of alteration - that ALSO works in the other direction...
The file is as it came from the scanner...and I might add it matches the print that was made from the same neg perfectly,
dgh01: so we're at least down, two generations from the "original" camera Polaroid, correct? Whether they match or not, is purely subjective on your part, no one from the other side of the equation has seen what you speak of
as well as every other file I have seem from the Moorman except for that crappy scan White likes to promote. And even that one when subjected to careful study also shows the same gap as all the other Moormans floating around.
dgh01: In case you haven't noticed the camera original Moorman5 photo is horrible quality, worthless -- till the different generations floating around are laid on a table, side-by-side comparisons made with the original for ALL to see, and evaluate. What we have here is your's, Dr. Tink and GaryM's word the above is true -- not good enough for others -- As you may be aware, I've stated before, I have no axe to grind concerning this particular photo -- In my estimation, the Moorman 5 photo controversy is a "canard", pure and simple! The Moorman 5 photo is diversion
-
Well, your overall postings and your last answer should probably convince me that the information worth to be achieved must be delivered from other sources than those I choose ....…… What a beautiful thought.
In other words you suggest to me that I should visit www.moveon.org or similar places more often to get the RIGHT AND ONLY TRUTH about everything that is going around us ….
Well …. Welcome the New World of George Orwell.
By the way ……. this thread was debating at the start other things than we are debating right now….
Let’s go back to the debate where Simkin haunted Busch for poorly handling the Katrin disaster.
As to your beautiful thoughts -- personally, I could care less the websites you visit re USofA politically related info, Dalibor. Your opinion of our current President and the political climate in the states although interesting, do little in advancing the registered 'US' voters understanding . Have a nice day!
I agree, back to the thread topic
-
Dalibor Svoboda wrote:
Well if Charles Krauthammer is a FOX News personality ....... what a beautiful label you put on him ....... meaning that you will ever never bother to consider his argument ....... what about the another arcticle I´m reprinting bellow.
Is it a more balanced article in your view??? An article which tries to explain and understand instead of blaming and misunderstanding …… which I feel is today a common way of arguing inside democrats in America and also on this Forum.
[...]
**article**
___________________
Dalibor,
There is no IF about it! Krauthammer can be seen daily on FOX News. As does many other "print" reporters and columnists within the competing media. The uphill climb ALL USofA Cable News Networks face is credibility and impartiality.
As to what I'll "bother" to consider, well, I'll bother to consider that, sometime!
further, Fox News 'fair and balanced' declarations nonsense was scaled back months ago --- A few of us are familiar with the television career of Roger Ailes...
-
It was a pleasure to read this article which is in its balanced views and conclusions far more explanative that postings which absolutely and definitely know how the effect of Katrina should be interpreted ……. And not to forgot whom to blame!
I hope that at least some members of Education Forum will find more knowledge and intellectual stimulation by reading “Where to Point Fingers”.
washingtonpost.com
Where to Point the Fingers
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, September 9, 2005; A25
In less enlightened times there was no catastrophe independent of human agency. When the plague or some other natural disaster struck, witches were burned, Jews were massacred and all felt better (except the witches and Jews).
A few centuries later, our progressive thinkers have progressed not an inch. No fall of a sparrow on this planet is not attributed to sin and human perfidy. The three current favorites are: (1) global warming, (2) the war in Iraq and (3) tax cuts. Katrina hits and the unholy trinity is immediately invoked to damn sinner-in-chief George W. Bush.
This kind of stupidity merits no attention whatsoever, but I'll give it a paragraph. There is no relationship between global warming and the frequency and intensity of Atlantic hurricanes. Period. The problem with the evacuation of New Orleans is not that National Guardsmen in Iraq could not get to New Orleans but that National Guardsmen in Louisiana did not get to New Orleans. As for the Bush tax cuts, administration budget requests for New Orleans flood control during the five Bush years exceed those of the five preceding Clinton years. The notion that the allegedly missing revenue would have been spent wisely by Congress, targeted precisely to the levees of New Orleans, and that the reconstruction would have been completed in time, is a threefold fallacy. The argument ends when you realize that, as The Post noted, "the levees that failed were already completed projects."
Let's be clear. The author of this calamity was, first and foremost, Nature (or if you prefer, Nature's God). The suffering was augmented, aided and abetted in descending order of culpability by the following:
1. The mayor of New Orleans. He knows the city. He knows the danger. He knows that during Hurricane Georges in 1998, the use of the Superdome was a disaster and fully two-thirds of residents never got out of the city. Nothing was done. He declared a mandatory evacuation only 24 hours before Hurricane Katrina hit. He did not even declare a voluntary evacuation until the day before that, at 5 p.m. At that time, he explained that he needed to study his legal authority to call a mandatory evacuation and was hesitating to do so lest the city be sued by hotels and other businesses.
2. The governor. It's her job to call up the National Guard and get it to where it has to go. Where the Guard was in the first few days is a mystery. Indeed, she issued an authorization for the National Guard to commandeer school buses to evacuate people on Wednesday afternoon -- more than two days after the hurricane hit and after much of the fleet had already drowned in its parking lots.
3. The head of FEMA. Late, slow and in way over his head. On Thursday, Sept. 2, he said on national television that he didn't even know there were people in the convention center, when anybody watching television could see them there, destitute and desperate. Maybe in his vast bureaucracy he can assign three 20-year-olds to watch cable news and give him updates every hour on what in hell is going on.
4. The president. Late, slow, and simply out of tune with the urgency and magnitude of the disaster. The second he heard that the levees had been breached in New Orleans, he should have canceled his schedule and addressed the country on national television to mobilize it both emotionally and physically to assist in the disaster. His flyover on the way to Washington was the worst possible symbolism. And his Friday visit was so tone-deaf and politically disastrous that he had to fly back three days later.
5. Congress. Now as always playing holier-than-thou. Perhaps it might ask itself who created the Department of Homeland Security in the first place. The congressional response to all crises is the same -- rearrange the bureaucratic boxes, but be sure to add one extra layer. The past four years of DHS have been spent principally on bureaucratic reorganization (and real estate) instead of, say, a workable plan for as predictable a disaster as a Gulf Coast hurricane.
6. The American people. They have made it impossible for any politician to make any responsible energy policy over the past 30 years -- but that is a column for another day. Now is not the time for constructive suggestions. Now is the time for blame, recrimination and sheer astonishment. Mayor Ray Nagin has announced that, as bodies are still being found and as a public health catastrophe descends upon the city, he is sending 60 percent of his cops on city funds for a little R&R, mostly to Vegas hotels. Asked if it was appropriate to party in these circumstances, he responded: "New Orleans is a party town. Get over it."
Most of us in the states understand Krauthammer is a FOX News personality. He has been for quite some time now. Thanks for the posting though!
-
Len Colby dronned on and on and ON
He likes to make sarcastic remarks about what people do for a living. He did it to you and to me and to some other guy. [see previous post on the thread I cited] that must be because he not very happy about his current state of employment
_____________
I do believe sir-- twas YOU who called me a moron? Are you surprised at my reaction? Just post your picture and all will be well. You and Craig can tippty-toe off through the contrails of everlasting heaven --
The Board does not carry out criminal investigations under ANY circumstances. c) The AG's role is to determine who leads the investigation not what can be investigated by who. I already pointed this out to you in the other forum!
Disinfortmation Agents
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted · Edited by David G. Healy
Don't worry, Tim
I'm sure Josiah will send you a autograph -- btw, just curious; what would you know about the 60-70's peace movement -- other than what you've read in a book someplace?
Wasn't Salandria Mr. Thompson's attorney of record for a time? I also suspect he, Salandria finished out his long and distinguished career with his license in tact!