David G. Healy

There in lies your problem my-man... you think others will be persuaded by the missives they see posted here? Where have you been? Educational discourse? Well, if your looking for rational case evidence discussion, check other *research* forums. This board has always been infested with .john wannabes.... for the uninitiated: the lone NUTS, WCR/SBT/LHO did it all by his lonesome type of wannabes. Now, I for one want to hear about Mr. Lane"s new book, if you don't mind. If I want to hear Mark Lane beat up Vinnie daBug Bugliosi, I'll move on over to Black Op Radio, find his pieces in the archives (of which there are more than a few). I even suspect Vincent knows he far outclassed with this guy Mark Lane... isn't that right David Von Pein [sic]? DHealy

Glad to hear it, Mark! When is it on bookshelves? David Healy

Mr. Viklund, My pleasure Sir. Yes I was not lost on his departing this conversation because of its absurdity to return to the Fetzer/Judyth thread. Now that is funny! At any rate as I said before I consider myself in good company! Best to you Sir, Mike Sgt Mikey, is that you? Any more ego lifting shooting escapades? LMFAO! Only YOU could draw me back here, son. Only YOU! Now this thread is a circus..... carry on! Where is Bill Miller when you need him.

I assume that Andy Walker will eventually explain why he did this. John, Spartacus is a great, GREAT research asset. Concerning JFK assassination research? The Ed Forum has ceased functioning in that realm, becoming nothing more than a glorified rah-rah JFK Lancer.... Frankly I doubt anyone really cares what motivates Andrew, I doubt he even knows himself, maybe it's all got to do with a nine iron? Seeya later, John.... Keep Spartacus up and running! I resign my membership on this forum..... and Dolva, get to a meeting, ya need it hon ya make a horrible waterboy for Len! LMFAO! David Healy 03.14.2010

frankly if your not posting concerning JFK Conspiracy matters, perhaps you'll tell us WHY we should care what you think or mention?

what ya need John is another drink.... when your honest and READY, we'll be there, help is all around the world..... http://www.aa-uk.org.uk/publications/areyou.htm

Response to the arbitrary action taken here (while JS was absent) has been articulated elsewhere on this board (IF, those responses still exist) better than I ever could, for sure -- His friends? What's do they have to do with the current issue? Why make his "friends" a focal point? I'm a bit surprised John, I expected a more leftist, enlightening response from you... so-be-it! Further, we all understand moderators come, they'll go. For a whole host of reasons. In this instance, it sounds and appears to me, a decision was made (by one EF grand elder) to rid itself of one of its more controversial, and conspiracy oriented moderators. He and a few mod's wanted to correct an earlier mod assignment mistake. An allegation was made via email, concerning same specific mod. The stage was set. when EF action was taken the inevitable backlash occurred. Almost immediately thereafter it was THEN determined, through EF back channel e-mails that that same moderators alleged major sin was now a 'misunderstanding'... oh-my! The foolish reaction(s) displayed by one biased EF director, a few mod's, and of course the resident trolls --- sigh..... bad, bad PR... worthy only of the 6th Floor Mausoleum... If the Ed Forum wishes to distance itself from JFK assassination/conspiracy subject matter, it should do well in searching out qualified WCR supporters, and for those WCR supporters that are present here, you've been upstaged. perhaps that's why they're so quiet.... bad, BAD PR, John. This issue has nothing to do with said mod's "friends", this has much to do with Ed Forum educational credibility... Peace.... David Healy

I tend to agree, Len. IF Peter asked they be taken down, however, I can understand why his request was granted. Just a thought. And WHAT request is that Mr. Speer? And, "Just a thought"? Surely you can be a little less opaque, eh? GAWD!

correct, Peter! ! ! And, there isn't a lone nut disinfo agent -or- simple minded xxxxx that isn't (or wouldn't be) terriifed at the idea of debating case facts with him. Mark Lane has no peer re this case...

Well done, Rich.... peace brother. David Healy

Is that it, David? For some reason I have the feeling you haven't read what you've referenced any more than you have read any of my post over the years which clearly show that I disagreed with the Warren Commission findings. In fact, I think from reading your responses over the years that you probably haven't read much of anything on the JFK assassination unless it was scribbled on the wall next to a urinal in a drunk tank. Bill Miller So we meet again. That was quite an intelligent and helpful reply, Bill. I suppose you're especially proud of the maturity you displayed in the part of your post where you mention a "urinal" -- a very class act. I thought you had to have a biographical page here? Ever the guard dog I see...have you forgotten your are not in OZ..er...the JFKresearch forum anymore? IN any case it appears in the rush to be the Sergeant at Arms once again your must have missed this... "I am Bill Miller, a long time researcher of the Kennedy assassination. My main interest are in the realm of the photographic record and the witnesses statements and testimonies. I have studied the case for over 25 years and I have received the Mary Ferrell Award presented for the discovery of new evidence in the JFK assassination murder case." actually Craigster, I like "Bill Miller: hunter of YETI", better (now THAT is OZ)..... bet it has a nice ring around the halls of the 6th floor mausoleum too....

word-for-word.... I'd say the article was more about Stolley than Zapruder!

seems that Pat Spear/Speer has been trying to usurp David Lifton and his authority for at least the past 7 years.... D. Horne's 5 volume set (recently released) just adds to Pat's *none evidence insider* frustration...to the best of my knowledge Spear has not made headway with his particular brand of naysay flavor, not here, not JFKReasearch, not aaj and certainly not acj, there's only one place left to go, and that's LANCER---land of the none-film/photo alteration crowd, where many lone nuts pose as CTer's....

So what? By what form of logic do you equate what you scrap off the bottom of the barrel with the hard evidence of 2+ shooters in the JFK assassination? http://occamsrazorjfk.net/ You're guilty of academic malpractice here, Prof. Tribe. Sadly for you and your silly website, it is unimpeachable that there was a fold of fabric large enough to obsure JFKJ's jacket collar in Betzner. You fail at intellectual honesty... This one is above your pay-grade, son. Take a seat and watch.

John, You're here 24/7, so I, and others I suspect, figure you have plenty of time (speed read or not).... so sort it out - or simply don't follow the Kelly threads.... if you've been following Bill Kelly's work, you'll of noticed what he's doing... perhaps you need to go back to basic JFK 101 & the WCR (and what it lacks). Ya want the mod job, just ask. Probably why Wild Bill Miller is back.... ROTFLMFAO!

David, can you offer any 'references (books, documents, etc) concerning the comments that you made' or are you going to bless everyone with yet another say nothing asinine response? Bill Miller english a second language for ya, there Wild Bill? What can you fathom out of the term "Doug Horne"s 5 volume set"? It all comes down to faith there Wild Bill, in your case faith in the WCR.... we understand why it's so difficult to defend it! FAITH is your only excuse!

Sure would Len. However, not entirely in line with a "pacifist" ideology though is it? Seeing a rifle that apparently belongs to some strange bloke your Missus has just met, and putting it in the garage where your kids are going to be running around? In his Warren Commission testimony he said he didn't know Lee owned a rifle. In a 1993 interview he said he did. I don't know about you but I don't know many "pacifists" who work for military warfare organizations and who let their kids live in a house with a rifle belonging to a former defector who stayed most weekends. This is a story you couldn't make up. It begs belief... Do you know of why a person would suggest in their Warren Commission testimony that they didn't look to see what was in the blanket because the guy who it belonged to had a right to privacy but then starts reading the same guys private letters, that Ruth is scurrying away and "copying"? You put the full picture together Len and your version of events scatter to the winds... Lee you're thinking like a Brit in 2010, in Texas in 1963 owning a rifle was totally normal, still is. They were normally used for hunting animals not people. A hand gun probably would have created more of a stir. "I don't know many "pacifists" who work for military warfare organizations" Did he ever describe himself as a "pacifist"? Bell Helicopter was not exactly a "military warfare organizations" they were a company that sold some of its production to the DoD. Should all people who consider themselves pacifists and work for GM quit their jobs because the company makes Humvees? In any case people are contradictory look at all the evangelical ministers who are guilty of the sin they rail against "Do you know of why a person would suggest in their Warren Commission testimony that they didn't look to see what was in the blanket because the guy who it belonged to had a right to privacy but then starts reading the same guys private letters, that Ruth is scurrying away and "copying"?" Did the Paines do this before or after the assassination? I'm not sure what your theory is do you think LHO really had a rifle and Paine knew it or that there never was a mysterious blanket wrapped object in the garage? Please provide the excerpt from Frontline where he said he knew LHO had one. You're rationales make little sense. IF Paine was part of some plot to frame Oswald the most logical thing for him to say to the WC and press in 1963 - 4 was that he saw rifle w/ scope that matched the one found in the TSDB amongst the "lone nut's" thing shortly before the assassination. EDIT - Formatting error fixed Len This thread is supposed to be about whether the backyard photographs are genuine, right? Thinking like a Brit in 2010 has nothing to do with it. As an aside, my wife is a Texan so I'm well clued into the culture. I spend most summers there. The fact remains, Michael Paine stated in his WC testimony that he was "opposed to violence" - I believe that pretty much defines a pacifist. WC HII p. 411. He also claimed to not want to look at what was in the blanket because he didn't want to infringe on Oswald's rights to privacy. WC HII p. 415 But earlier in his testimony he states he was infringing on LHO's rights to privacy by reading the letter, supposedly sent to the Soviet Embassy in Washington, that Ruth had shanghaied and copied. WC HII p. 406-407 The letter was taken, copied and read a week or two prior to the assassination (November 8th, 9th, 10th according to Michael Paine). The Paine's are the two people, still alive, who have definitive answers that could change the present state of play concerning our knowledge of the assassination. I don't know what Michael Paine's role in all of this was Len. I'm sure he wanted as little exposure as possible after the event due to his heritage and ancestry. Ruth too. It certainly made sense from this point of view to not invite them to the HSCA or the ARRB. These two individuals were instrumental in setting Lee Harvey Oswald up and Michael Paine’s telephone conversation with Ruth on the afternoon of the assassination “…we both know who’s responsible” is a small window into the lives of these two incredible sinister people. FACT: Paine claims to have seen the backyard photos in April 1963. http://www.jfklancer.com/pdf/Paine.pdf FACT: Paine claimed to have been shown them on the night of the assassination by the FBI - WC HIX p. 444 FACT: Fritz's typed report stated Oswald was shown one of the backyard photographs prior to them being "found" FACT: There is no chain of evidence for the backyard photos per the Dallas Inventory Sheet I doubt any pacifists’ work for GM Len. I'm sure pacifists represent a very small minority of the U.S. population. In answer to your question, I don’t believe for a second that a true pacifist would work for any company whose products resulted in the purposeful and calculated deaths, disfigurement and injury of other people. It is incongruous. You say that “…people are contradictory.” I think you mean that people are hypocrites. Ruth and Michael Paine are contradictory, hypocrites, and have information vital to cracking this case. If there ever was a rifle in the Paine garage it certainly wasn't the MC found on the 6th Floor. But deep down I don't believe there ever was a rifle Len. I do know what was in the Paine's house - a shed-full of filing cabinets with names and information of anti and pro Castro groups and individuals. I know my rationale doesn’t make sense; nothing in this case makes sense the way it should if Lee Oswald just got up one day and decided to go and shoot the president. Hoodwinking is a game that gets the best results when played by professionals. Where did that Minox camera go again? very nice, Lee Farley -- VERY NICE

Thanks Jack! LMAO -- Well, I guess I have a lot to learn by way of orientation here. But I guess I'll give everyhting the "sniff" test to be sure. GO_SECURE monk Jack as (almost) always is simply confused. Just because he thinks he is above defending the bullxxxx he posts here he thinks he and his allies aren’t expected to but John indicated otherwise: (iii) Wherever possible, members should give references (books, documents, etc) concerning the comments that they make. This will help those carrying out academic research into this area. PS - BILL KELLY What exactly was the point of your post above? Is Redd Foxx in-the-house, I say? Man, the ARRP and the HSCA document release certainly has the trolls running in all direction.... methinks the latest nutter-xxxxx whining is a run for cover from Doug Horne"s 5 volume set...

Oh ... did I wake you up, David. Any comment about Jack's claim concerning Willis 5 or was that about the time you fell asleep? How about it David, can you see the south wall of the dog-leg?? Bill Miller gee you studiously avoided my question, should I take that to mean, yeah it's going okay, but the money sucks? And to answer your question, no, I can't see the "dogleg" from my perspective I suspect YETI is standing in front of it. Go figure!

methinks you're getting all wrapped up in your own self-importance here, AGAIN.... Redd Foxx won't be happy, Len! (btw, since when is any poster here required to respond to lone nuts? Just curious.)

Those NPIC notes with Z-frame numbers (as discussed in HOAX and Doug Hornes Volume IV), some say those notes were drawn up the weekend (Nov 23rd/24th) of the assassination.... Is there a cite for Shaneyfelt assigning Zapruder film frame numbers by Jan. 30th 1964? Thanks Chris....

Jack - you cannot see the south side of the concrete wall from where Willis stood. The sunlit area with shade along its lower half is further down the fence line. http://www.jfk.org/go/collections/item-det...m:2002.040.0007 Bill Miller so, how is the 6th floor mausoleum job going?

Another very informative response, David ... I see your ability to speak and never say anything relevant has never left you. Bill Miller and you Wild Bill: "And you've been doing image composite work for HOW long? ROTFLMFAO! WOW, the longer you post on the subject the better this hassle gets...." Wouldn't want old lonesome Lamson getting lonely these days now would we?

As I understand what Tom Purvis writes, the TIME/LIFE survey came on 11/26/63; the Secret Service survey on 12/5/63; the "survey" of positons provided by the FBI on 2/7/64...and in the WCR, the cardboard "representation" of the survey was introduced as evidence, but the actual survey was not unsealed, IIRC, so the WC never got to see it...they only got to hear what FBI agent Shaneyfelt TOLD them was in the survey. And the data block in the WC Report does NOT have the same figures as the one on the original SS survey of 12/5/63...although it putports to be a "copy" of the actual survey. Hopefully, Tom will post and correct whatever misinterpretations I have made of his work. In event that anyone cares, I am neither deceased nor even ill! Merely that lightening took out our phone line and we do not have internet connection at the house. Suprisingly, I actually get a lot more work done now, without the internet ability. Currently on a library Computer. For those who may have interest in facts, the "FIRST SHOT"/aka CE399 facts, began being published in the George County Times back in November of 2009. One may be able to contact the newspaper and find old back issues, but it is unlikely. George County Times Lucedale, Mississippi ATTN: Mr. Buddy Sellers. As to the question! 1. The Time/Life survey work was done, as indicated, on 11/26/63. Due to the "no-notice" of this requested work, Mr. West did not have a survey "Party Chief" available as his crews were already designated far in advance for other tasks. He therefore contacted Breneman, who did part-time survey work for Mr. West, as well as others, and Breneman and others from Mr. West's office conducted the survey. The Breneman work is highly inaccurate due to many reasons, but was apparantly sufficient to satisfy Time/Life. As a result of inaccuracies in the actual survey, the survey plat also, by nature of the data, has inaccuracies in it as well. Other than this work, Breneman was not employed for any of the other surveys which were performed strictly by Mr. West's crews and often with Mr. West's direct supervision. 2. The Secret Service Survey Plat (& re-enactment) which is dated 12/5/63 is in fact the culmination of survey work which was done on December 2, 3, & 4th, in which extremely accurate survey data as well as vertical control was carried into and utilized in the survey work. This work produced information which was thereafter utilized in the FBI Survey Plat as well as the Warren Commission survey plat. This survey plats the impact point of each of the three shots fired, and the second shot impact location/aka Z313 impact is only a foot or so away from the WC's plotting of the impact location. And, as previoulsy indicated, the third shot impact is some 30-feet farther down Elm St., directly in front of where James Altgens was standing, approximately 5-feet prior to the second yellow curb stripe. 3. The FBI Survey Plat (& re-enactment) occurred on 2/7/64. Actually, very little survey work was done as this "scam" merely attempted to move the second/aka Z313 impact back up Elm St. a few feet to a point at which JBC is observed "reacting". And, for those who have never observed the difference, there exists a big difference between "reacting" to having been hit by a shot, as opposed to "reacting" to being shot at. Nevertheless, the FBI Survey Plat left the third/last/final impact location (down directly in front of James Altgens location) on their Survey Plat. This survey plat is the one which they have attempted to palm off as being the SS Survey Plat which erroneously platted the second shot impact location, and which plat is seen in the WC documents as well as the Dallas Archives. I have repeatedly informed that one should look down in the "legend" block and they will find in the revision block: 2/7/64. Which, anyone who also took drafting and/or mechanical drawing, would understand the significance of. 4. Then, along came the WC, who made the first shot impact location (which was the same for the SS as well as FBI survey plat) disappear. Then, due to other "magical" capabilities, they made the third/last/final shot impact location disappear. Then, they accurately surveyed in the Z313/aka Second shot impact location which was less than 1-foot from where the SS had previously surveyed it in, and then gave us all "THE SHOT THAT MISSED". 5. And, in making the first shot location completely disappear, the WC altered their own survey data, and slightly shifted camera locations, and gave us their purportedly "accurate" re-enactment for the Z210 vicinity, while claiming that they did not even get these frames of the film and also neglected to publish these frames of the film. 6. Lastly, not to leave anything open to chance, on paperwork, they "moved" James Algens location back up Elm St. to a point at which he would have been standing somewhere between where the lamp post comes into view and Mary Moormen/Jean Hill are standing. Then, Shaneyfelt informed us that there was nothing past Z334 worth seeing, which also just so happens to be just prior to James Altgens actually coming into view in the film. Now, perhaps one can understand "Tom's saying". "There is no Magic. However, Politicians, not unlike Magicians, can make things disappear" Are we having fun yet????????????? great to see you posting when possible, Tom! Hope all is well...

Well Don. considering White based his works on a number of very faulty ideas, all the work created by these faulty ideas fail. How do you deal with that simple fact? Did you even try and confirm his work yourself or is it yet another case of belief on your part? Here is one major principle where White fails. Anything based on resizing and then comparison gets tossed into the dustbin of ignorance. So whats left that has any value as a "proof'? Why resizing fails And you've been doing image composite work for HOW long? ROTFLMFAO! WOW, the longer you post on the subject the better this hassle gets....