David G. Healy

Neville, I very much doubt if the physical evidence was analysed and publicly announced before the death of LHO because of the time frame. But that doesn't alter the content of the physical evidence one iota. ... I prefer facts and the facts show that the physical evidence re the Tippit murder IE the shells found by the Davies is solid and would have been admissible in court....

Maybe they might have ... if anyone had bothered to subpoena Captain Doughty to testify that the "third" shell - that they would have had to show him - bore the marks that he presumably said that he made, and if anyone had bothered to show the "fourth" shell to Brown and Dhority so they could identify it. But they didn't, which could be because they wouldn't have so identified them. We don't know either way, and because we don't know, those shells have to be excluded.

Joe Poe thought that he'd put his initials on the first two shells, found by Benavides. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but his inability to state that the shells that he was shown were, in all fact, the shells that he'd handled on November 22, they, too, must be excluded. Their exclusion must be upheld if the fourth-person FBI report in which it is purported that Captain Doughty "positively identified" the shell that he'd handled is sufficient to establish such "positive identification," since in it, Poe also stated in no uncertain terms that he did mark the two shells.

Sergeant Jerry Hill also testified that "I told Poe to maintain the chain of evidence as small as possible, for him to retain these at that time, and to be sure and mark them for evidence, and then turn them over to the crime lab when he got there, or to homicide." While it may be possible that, on his own, Poe would have forgotten to mark the shells, but is it likely that he would have forgotten to mark them after having been reminded to?

Sergeant Pete Barnes of the Crime Lab testified that "empty .38 caliber hulls was turned over to me at the scene by patrolman -- I believe I would be safe in saying Poe, but I am not sure about that." Poe cannot find his initials which the believes that he put in the shells, and Barnes isn't sure it was Poe who gave them to him. Might have been, but couldn't say for sure.

... And no, I cant see that the death of the accused changed things considerably as far as the physical evidence IE the shells are concerned. Do you really not think if there was any planting going on the police wouldn't have planted bullets that actually matched Oswald's gun? ...

The problem with that scenario is that the bullets went to the hospital along with Tippit's body. Kind of tough to switch something you can't get your hands on.

Duke, your stubborness is just wasting everyone's time here. Below are three links to the sworn testimony of officers Brown, Dhority and Barnes. All three swore under oath that they marked the shells found at the Tippit murder scene.

Read them, dont read them, accept them, dont accept them. Frankly, I no longer care. This is like trying to reason with a Jehovah witness. My closing comments are brief, unlike yourself I dont use ten unnecessary words for every nessarcy one. If Oswald had gone to trial and those casings produced as evidence for those officers to identify, the chain of possession would have passed the criteria and they would have been accepted as admissible evidence. That's what our debate is about, remember? All your rhetoric and nitpicking wont change that. Incidentally, your last statement, "that the bullets went to the hospital with Tippit's body" do you really think they stayed there? Perhaps you belive they were locked away in the ointment drawer!

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/dhority1.htm

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/brown_c.htm

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/barnes.htm

Speaking of wasting time.... Old Duke is making you stretch a bit, huh? ROTFLMAO!

A D. VonPein clone perhaps? You clones are popping up all over the place these days. And making no headway. Keep coming back! We do enjoy the show....

"I seem to recall..."...., "I believe..." "Then, I seem to recall..." "...going on memory here..." LMFAO! C'mon, what's up?

Taking a break from getting that request finished so you can view the said in-camera original Zapruder film, David? One would think that after all that talk about you needing access to it so to put the matter to rest once and for all ... that you'd at least make out a simple written request do examine it. If its the color paper and ink that you cannot decide on, then go with white paper and black ink ... they do let you have pens at the home - don't they!

Bill Miller

when it comes to JFK assassination research, you're a joke Wild Bill -- but I do enjoy watching you dance. If you're the next generation..... LMFAO. Carry on!

I must say it makes me a bit queasy to hear of anyone not a diehard LNT posting at the McAdams site. There are so many pages of sheer disinfo that it does not make for the best company, even though it does get a high google rating.

Pam, Dankbaar didn't say Duke posted at McAdams, only that his article is posted there. The ED forum is listed there as well. Denis.

If the article is posted there, Duke must have given it to McAdams. If so, it would seem McAdams would have been showing his oh-so-helpful side to Duke to get him to do so. I think of Duke's articles in a much higher light than I do anything McAdams has at his site.

Pam, why must Duke "have given it to McAdams"? Copyright © 1992 by M. Duke Lane

[This text may be reproduced in any form provided only that it is not sold or

published in any fee- or subscription-based publication.]

I really dont think there is any reason to doubt Duke's loyalties here. Its just Dankbaar besmirching yet another good researcher who dares to disagree with him. By the way, SOME of the article's at McAdams are good stuff...dont throw the baby out with the bathwater. Denis.

I disagree. I think that anyone who is not a blind LNT who chooses to allow an article to be published at McAdams site leaves themselves open to scrutiny as to what they thought doing so would accomplish. Surely they have read McAdams pages and realize that they are disinformation at some times to the point of slander. Why would anyone who is able to think critically want to be aligned with that?

They must also realize how vicious McAdams is to CTs, and what a slanted field he has created at alt.assassination.jfk with the apologist mods, not to mention his grunions such as ex-mod Barb Junkaarinen and Dave Reitzes who attempt to block research and target posters.

You seem to know a great deal about alt.assassination.jfk dont you Pam...hmm bit suspicious that!! LOL C,mon girl relax, LN are a bit like ghosts, they can only hurt you if you belive in them.

an you know what about aaj? Not running from the Tippit thread are you, Denis? Things tighten up a bit when there's an attorney in the house, yes? We understand...

name='Wim Dankbaar' date='Nov 28 2008, 03:23 PM' post='159055'

Nothing new to add, only old stuff and a question: Where did you learn that the plaid jacket man posed as an SS agent?

Good question ... You can look this up and check it for accuracy because I am going on memory here - Lee Bowers said that he lost sight of one of the two men who said was along the fence (the heavy set man) and the other man (plaid clothing man) was still visible to him. Then I seem to recall Bowers talking about a policeman coming up to the man that Lee could still see. I believe it was Officer Smith who said that he met a man at the fence who showed him credentials as a SS man. This description and encounter does not match the alleged movements of Files post shooting.

Bill Miller

"I seem to recall..."...., "I believe..." "Then, I seem to recall..." "...going on memory here..." LMFAO! C'mon, what's up?

Perhaps I am missing something. Was all the Tippit evidence analysed and publically announced before the death of LHO? I am sure you can see that the death of the accused changed things considerably. Many of the lineups were related to the Tippit killing, do you think they would have stood up in court? Same reasoning.

Neville, I very much doubt if the physical evidence was analysed and publicly announced before the death of LHO because of the time frame. But that doesn't alter the content of the physical evidence one iota. And no, I cant see that the death of the accused changed things considerably as far as the physical evidence IE the shells are concerned. Do you really not think if there was any planting going on the police wouldn't have planted bullets that actually matched Oswald's gun?

And yes, I do think many, if not all, of the lineups would have stood up in court. But that's just IMO and as such isn't worth a light. I prefer facts and the facts show that the physical evidence re the Tippit murder IE the shells found by the Davies is solid and would have been admissible in court. This alone would have been enough to convict Oswald even without witnesses, remember Oswald was found a short distance away WITH the murder weapon. And attempted to kill yet another police officer with it!!

bold but no cigar, son.

They were? When? By what instrument? In the testimony he didn't give? In the affidavit he didn't make? Who was the police officer who got them from the Davises? Whom did he give them to, and to whom?

Testimony such as this perhaps? Its there to be found if you look Duke.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. BROWN. Yes. In regard to the Officer Tippit murder, the same date,

November 22, 1963, Lt. T. I’. Wells received a telephone call from a Mrs. Barbara

Davis of 499 East 10th stating that her sister-in-law of the same address, her

name as Mrs. Virginia Davis, had found an additional empty .38 caliber shell

cartridge in her front yard.

Lieutenant Wells ordered my partner, C. N. Dhority, and I, to go to the

Davis residence w-here Mrs. Barbara Davis handed my partner this spent hull

at, approximately 7 p.m., that evening. That was brought to the homicide and

robbery bureau by myself and Detective Dhority.

Mr. BELIN. Was it brought to that bureau at the time you brought the two

women?

Mr. BROWN. At the same time the Davis women were brought to the office

for affidavits and identification.

Mr. BELIN. Who did you turn that cartridge shell over to?

Mr. BROWN. That went to the crime lab, Dallas Crime Lab.

250

Mr. BELIN. Did you, yourself, turn it over?

Mr. BROWN. No ; Detective Dhority handled that.

Mr. BELIN. Detective Dhority handled that?

Mr. BROWN. We were keeping this evidence in a chain there. Mrs. Barbara

Jeanette Davis handed him the spent cartridge. He gave it to the crime lab

himself, which was initialled by both of us.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else, sir?

Mr. BROWN. None in regard to any evidence or identification of any further

witnesses.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else in connection with either the assassination or the

Tippit murder?

Mr. BROWN. None that I recall at this time, sir.

Mr. BELIH. Sir, you have an opportunity to either read the deposition when

it is transcribed and sign it, or else waive the reading and have our court

reporter send it directly to Washington. You can take your choice.

Mr. BROWN. Well, I have no reason to read it for any reason at all.

Mr. BELIN. Do you want to waive signing it then?

Mr. BROWN. That would be fine. Waive signing, and you can send it right

out. To the best of my knowledge, that is everything that happened.

Mr. BELIN. Well, we certainly appreciate all of your cooperation and the

cooperation of the Dallas Police Department.

TESTIMONY OF L. C. GRAVES

Testimony of L. C. Graves was taken at 3 :lO p.m., on April 6,X%4, in the office

of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Erv

feel the wheels coming off, Denis? "Solid as a sponge" sound familiar?

As for a suppressed pistol from the knoll? Regardless of caliber, frankly, I can't think of a worse *short distance type* of weapon to use..... A pistol with a 13 inch + barrel, on a moving target?

A SLOW-MOVING target, by all accounts, and moreover a target APPROACHING the shooter. Are you saying that a pistol is not a lethal weapon? can you please elaborate on the DATA and the REASONING behind your opinion?

Frankly Ray, I don't care if the moving target and vehicle were approaching a shooter. Or a non-moving target at the necessary concealed shooter distance. Bad choice of weapon for assassination unless your within 20 or so feet.

The lethality of a pistol is just that, in ones hands, of course the damn thing is LETHAL. Further, from personal experience, I qualified in the ARMY as expert with a COLT-45cal. handgun. Based on that experience alone, utilizing a handgun of any caliber, at any distance over 50 feet is damn risky business. Risky as in: MISSING the target and YOU get blown away. REASONING enough?

You know there's been much discussion and debate about recreating the 3 shot SBT theory from the TSBD. Shots made from 100 to 200+ feet, utilizing large caliber (sonic) rifles. Not many experts will agree those long-rifle, high caliber shots were possible, by Oswald, or for that matter, NRA type Expert Marksmen who attempted same. Ask those same NRA type marksmen if a pistol shot to the head, a moving target, from the DP knoll or area surrounding the knoll were possible. I doubt you'd find expert opinion re a pistol shot scenario from that area remotely possible (read: probable kill results). Having said that, a shot from a pistol from the same area for distraction purposes, now that is another story -- A suicide move on the knoll shooters part, with little hope for a kill, but......

Was Healy the shooter on the sixth floor then?

Why do you ask ... is Files now claiming to be the shooter from the 6th floor, too?

No, you said that Healy has as much to do with the JFK assassination as Files. Since Files was shooting from the knoll, I figured you meant to say that Healy was the still unknown shooter from the sixth floor.

I hate to upset Wild Bill, perhaps even you but I was in Saigon (actually US Element MAAG Headquarters, Cholon, Saigon's then sister city) on-duty, when JFK was murdered....

For those not in the know, my article concerning possible Zapruder Film alteration. Go here: http://jfkresearch.com/page3.html -- the third article from the top, ya can download it in .pdf form:

Interesting article Mr. Healy. My daughter is graduating next month with a degree in film and video production and she thinks you know a lot about your business, so I will agree that it is possible the film was clandestinely altered. The why of all escapes me, precisely because of the head snap. We agree that the head-snap cannot be explained by the jet - effect theory, and I am certain it cannot be explained as a neuromuscular reaction.

Every man in the room had combat-zone experience and their comments can be

summed up as follows: either Zapruder knew what was coming down or he was stonecold

deaf. Anyone unaware of what was about to transpire, forward of muzzle blasts,

especially within 50 feet to his rear, as Zapruder reported, would have been off that

pedestal in a flash

I am sure all forum members join me in saluting your military service, but I think you may be assuming here a fact that is not yet in evidence --that the bullet that blew out JFK's brain came from a loud weapon (we do not know the caliber of the fragments from JFK or Connally). In your opinion, is it not the case that the fatal bullet could have been fired from a pistol a/fitted with a sound suppressor or b/without a sound suppresser. If either of these is the case, would you modify the statement that "Zapruder knew what was coming down or he was stone-cold deaf"?

I welcome your daughter to the profession (more art than craft), especially if she's going to the technical/composite side of post production..... As for a suppressed pistol from the knoll? Regardless of caliber, frankly, I can't think of a worse *short distance type* of weapon to use. Unless it was a shot to distract. I can't fathom it happening. A pistol with a 13 inch + barrel, on a moving target?

As to why alter any part of the film? The only, ONLY audience of consequence to view the Zapruder film in its entirety (after Jan 1964) with direct assassination related consequences was the Warren Commission. Three shots had to be tied to the TSBD, the TSBD to Oswald -- whatever would enhance that conclusion, be it film and/or photo, so be it..... Latter day film/photo debate are sideshows. Hiding in plain sight if you will....

I recall having heard years ago, from one associated with 6th Floor Museum; "the alleged (my term) in-camera original Zapruder Film will never, EVER find it self in a court of law." Pretty telling comment.

Junkie is one of the GOOD things they call me. The fools were after my daughter too.... Some of these fools (LNers in CT clothing) are dangerous folks (they're on their best behavior here).

I hope that David has gone to the authorities and reported these dangerous folks who are after his daughter. I mean thats what a responsible person does if he is really having his family members threated ... lets not put this off for years like the requesting to examine the in-camera Zapruder film. (eyes rolling~) The authorities can find out if these dangerous folks are possibly Ct's in LNrs clothing running a counter intelligence operation. So much to think about!!!

LNrs are CTs ... Cts are LNrs .... Someone medicate me ... QUICK!

your dance card, appears full these day's, Bill. Busy guy, eh?

For those not in the know, my article concerning possible Zapruder Film alteration. Go here: http://jfkresearch.com/page3.html -- the third article from the top, ya can download it in .pdf form:

Bill :

Whatever, that is none of your business, David will do as he sees fit.....

Your diversionary tactics, of old to high-jack the thread appear to have

been working..

All, IMO, keep your eye on the topic of the thread and not on Bill Millers posts...

same old.......

B......

B,

You are about as sincere and unbiased as a photo of Rush Limbaugh making a speech at a democratic convention. Where were you many postings ago when poor David started us down a new path ...

Beckett: Hey, can you exercise a little more respect for our Beloved President than a "bla, bla, "? I cannot believe this whole cavalier attitude you possess when it comes to any form of respect.

I just got back from the Lancer Conference Sunday. When we were at the memorial, Debra Conway asked us to turn toward the street and pretend like we were there waiting for him--it was heartbreaking. Seeing the films, viewing the people at the Trade Mart, putting everything away, is just devastating. Those wounds we felt as a people on Nov. 22, 1963, are not scarred--they are opened afresh each time we contemplate our loss.

Shame on you.

Kathy

Healy:hate to break up this moment but: "turn toward the street and pretend like we were there waiting for him--it was heartbreaking." Phew, bit over the top isn't it?

So, lets get down to the serious stuff: did Wild BILL Miller sell any books for Groden?

PR biz is full of potholes, eh?

Through my good graces and Silicon Valley contacts I told Wild Bill I'd get him a job reference to ADOBE Software, Photoshop specific (I know the CEO),

Hmm, just wondering how your "Silicon Valley contacts" would react if they ever looked at that link! Better pray Bill doesn't send em one. LOL

I knew a xxxxx like you would be sniffing around this thread. And son, I retired from a wonderful career a few years back.... say, do you do film-video compositing, xxxxx? If you do we have something to talk about, otherwise go carry Miller's waterpail! Hi Kathy.....

Bill, It might very well be that Healy's remarks were repulsive. I have trouble finding them quickly there. Can you copy paste them here? I'll let you know if I agree.

Wim

Wim, I previously posted why I only put up the link and not the wording of Healy's psychotic rants. I have to now wonder even more how it is that you can sensibly and logically tell if Files story is true or not when you cannot even see why I wouldn't post Healy's vulgar remarks on this forum.

As far as you having trouble finding Healy's remarks quickly ... I don't believe you. You have time to read post and respond to everything, then you have time to read the linked page. The link works and you can presumably read.

If it helps you ... you copy and paste that smut and post it here word for word for your quick review and we'll count the minutes and hours before you are suddenly absent from the forum ... don't try playing me for a sucker.

Bill Miller

I fail to see how David Healy has anything to do with Files. You made that non existent connection, not I.

What I see on the start of that page is:

DAVID GORDON HEALY

This page is dedicated to Healy, aka the junkie. Healy is the first to preach to LNer's that they know nothing about the JFK assassination and never contribute anything to the newsgroup.

Today Christmas Day, December 25, 2007 I would like to show you one days worth of Healys contributions to the JFK newsgroup and what he knows about JFK.

And then it goes on with so much incomprehensible junk, that I don't know if I should bother at all. One of the few things I understood is this one:

"this DVP (aka Dave Reitzes) guy has absolutely no shame... "

Is that a quote of Healy?

Who is the author of that page?

Wim

Junkie is one of the GOOD things they call me. The fools were after my daughter too.... Some of these fools (LNers in CT clothing) are dangerous folks (they're on their best behavior here).

So, who knows if he (me) said that..... I will grant you, I and a few other longtime researchers (on USENET JFK assassination boards - 10+ years) have a way of batting around Lone Nutters that pose(d) as CTer's. None of them can dance around us when it comes to the WCR evidence, testimony and exhibits (includes the Zapruder Film, too.)

Wild Bill Miller has shown nothing but envy since I published an article for The Great Zapruder Film HOAX in 2003. Concerning a very serious aspect of the subject: IF, the Zapruder film is altered, was there the time, expertise, know-how, equipment and personnel available in November 1963 to accomplish the feat. There was, and that is the reason why LNer's in CT clothing moan so loud about a possible altered Z-film... Actually Miller is beside himself. He's also a legend in his own mind. He was stunned that Roland Zavada and I communicate at a professional level (once upon a time and, at Zavada request).

Miller attempts to carry Gary Mack's water wherever Gary goes..... Frankly, I think Bill wants Gary's job at the 6th floor when he, Mack, retires.... Through my good graces and Silicon Valley contacts I told Wild Bill I'd get him a job reference to ADOBE Software, Photoshop specific (I know the CEO), Bill hasn't got back to me yet. Based on Miller's Photoshop work, past .gif animation work, I suspect I erred concerning a Photoshop (expertise) referral...... tis what happens when your a nice guy... LMAO!

Before this most recent program, I would have thought such a thing was silly. But Mack made some very strange statements in Inside the Target Car, which I'm still trying to process. For example, could he really have thought Jackie was behind JFK's head in Z-312? That's JFK 101 kind of stuff. Could Gary really have blown that one?

What is being done to show Mack in error ... surely not using Zapruder's view when talking about Hat Man's.

Bill

english please..... hey, Groden books, how many did you move?

Hi Jack,

I have 2 links with 2 photos, can you tell me wheat you see?

We can almost see a figure behind zapruder on the left and I am not sure on the 2nd one.....

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=5

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...mp;relPageId=10

Hi, Wade...frankly I do not see anything, and am not quite sure from your description what it is

that you see. Can you elaborate, or make some indication on the images where to look?

Jack

one image appears to be an old color negative taken on Huston heading towards the left trun on to Elm. Tha's the TSBD on the left in the background, the other image? No clue...

...

Hey, can you exercise a little more respect for our Beloved President than a "bla, bla, "? I cannot believe this whole cavalier attitude you possess when it comes to any form of respect.

I just got back from the Lancer Conference Sunday. When we were at the memorial, Debra Conway asked us to turn toward the street and pretend like we were there waiting for him--it was heartbreaking. Seeing the films, viewing the people at the Trade Mart, putting everything away, is just devastating. Those wounds we felt as a people on Nov. 22, 1963, are not scarred--they are opened afresh each time we contemplate our loss.

Shame on you.

Kathy

hate to break up this moment but: "turn toward the street and pretend like we were there waiting for him--it was heartbreaking." Phew, bit over the top isn't it?

So, lets get down to the serious stuff: did Wild BILL Miller sell any books for Groden?

Gary is a mouthpiece. If we are interesting in defining the ongoing coverup we need to ask for whom.

Pamela, Much as it troubles me to argue with such a lovely lady, I must tell you that life would be so much easier if Gary was simply a mouthpiece for some satanic force. Unfortunately, the situation is much worse than that.

Gary is a stubborn Texan, which means he is worse than a woman when he gets an idea into his head. It drives people mad, what can I tell you.

you're right about them-thar Texans, look what's happening to the "Shrub" (Prez. Bush)

If there's one person who deserves his own thread, it's Gary Mack.

How should I start? Gary Mack is the propaganda minister for the cover-up of the JFK assassination!

Now, don't delete this, moderators. I'm very serious and I can sustain the argument. Gary Mack is a grown man, peeks at this forum every day and can defend himself. He never does, and that has a reason. I predict he will avoid the debate because he knows he will lose. Right Gary?

Wim

Wim, I can only assume that your research cannot stand on its own in your view, so you opt to post such idiotic - reckless - uneducated - pieces of diatribe that I have seen you come up with to date. I have posted to this kind of foolishness before and I know you have read it, so what's up now ... you hoping for a new breed of mindless low-brows to listen to you?

I will repeat this all to simple observation of how I see it ...

Gary Mack believes there was a conspiracy at some level. Gary feels the the acoustic evidence is good and that a shot came from the knoll. Gary Mack also believes that he and Jack's Badge Man study was good one and has yet to see any evidence that shows that it has been debunked. This is the Gary Mack 'personal view' side of things. Because Gary is a stickler for accuracy, I suspect that I will hear from him if I have misstated something, but I think I have stated it correctly from my own observations and inquiries.

The Gary Mack from the Museum's standpoint is another person altogether for that Gary Mack (the curator) must remain neutral when representing the Museum. This means that he shouldn't be posting for one side or the other concerning the JFK assassination debate. Gary will however, answer questions pertaining to the evidence of the case for he is a historian of the event that happened in Dallas. Gary Mack sits on what I feel to be probably the wealthiest archival treasure pertaining to the JFK assassination in existence and in my view he would be insane to go outside of the Museum's policy and guidelines to risk losing not only his job, but also his ability to view and review the countless records, films, and photographs found at the Museum that you obviously haven't a clue as to their existence.

So the bottom line is that if you are trying to create an illusion that because Mack will not respond on these forums because you are feared or felt to be some sort of a threat, then you are as delusional about that as you are about James Files in my opinion. I do not know any dedicated researcher of this case that would not want to trade places with Gary Mack ... including yourself. Shame on you for thinking that you'd could lower his standards by starting such a ridiculous thread as this and shame on you for thinking that reasonably intelligent people would not see through it. I have never minded your buying the Files story, but what you tried to do here is despicable in my opinion.

Bill Miller

who should we thank for writing the above response to WimD? You Miller, Gary Mack, Dave Perry, Kathy Beckett, Museum PR folks or heaven forbid, all? Many adjectives and simply no place to go,. Things must be slow this 2008 Dallas-JFK Conference cycle..... btw, reasonably, intelligent folk came to simple conclusion, long long ago, a conspiracy got JFK.

Your whinning about Gary and his excuses for not posting, is simply, foolish, if he can appear on national and local broadcast and cablecast television, radio and local media events. he can respond here. Providing a third grade cover for him simply supports the notion, you're looking for a job (or already have one). Now THAT friends and neighbors, is delusional! Truly delusional. We've been onto your game for years. Since you got dumped from JFKResearch, in fact!

Carry on troop!

why lob a turd over the transom, Mr. Fairlie? Follow the story to the end (thats the problem with GOPers, aka the Repubicans, no staying power)

I'm afraid that I wasn't able to pull any meaning out of your post.

Are you implying that I'm a "righty" simply because I used the term "lefty"?

Do you think that I haven't been to the top floor? If you intended there to be

some meaning in your post, please explain. Thanks!

of course you don't "pull any meaning" from posts that don't conform to "pre-existing" righty agendas, no surprise there... Show us your chops, Mr. Fairle, tell us what you see from that top floor. Ya got a worldwide stage here.... Thanks!

Try again. It shows on my computer.

Maybe you are not logged in.

Jack

strange.... I couldn't post if I wasn't logged in -- the image doesn't appear

Moorman comparison.

Jack

image didn't make it, Jack.

It's sad to say this, but I think the election was mostly meaningless.

America is dominated by elites who fund both major parties and have

already put their meathooks into Obama.

If you're a lefty and consider Obama's victory a watershed moment,

consider this: what did Clinton or Carter do for you as president? Sure,

you probably miss their eloquence, after 8 long years of listening to

GWB. But beyond that, what did they really do for our country?

Carter gave us billion-dollar payouts (in 2000 dollars) to the steel

industry, started the deregulation movement (which did help our GDP

at the expense of stability), and began funding the mujahideen in

Afghanistan. If it wasn't for the (overhyped) Middle East Peace Accord

and the (underused) Freedom of Information Act, I would have a hard

time saying he was useful at all.

Clinton managed to give us semi-balanced budgets (not really his work,

but I'll give him some credit), but also began the crippling handover of

our rights to FEMA and other agencies while continuing the raiding of

our economy (e.g., the Telecom Act).

In other words, what did our "Democratic" presidents really do for

the progressive movement? (No fair saying that they just "weren't

as bad as Republicans.")

I'm hopeful that Obama won't just hand away our future to the elites

overnight. Like most Democrats, he will probably take a full 8 years to

do his damage. (Republicans typically do their damage immediately.)

We should use that time to study his actions and prepare solutions.

Remember, populism is the antidote to both parties, as well as the elite.

The trouble is that it's hard to create popular movements when...

... oh, sorry, my TV show just came on. Gotta go!

why lob a turd over the transom, Mr. Fairlie? Follow the story to the end (thats the problem with GOPers, aka the Repubicans, no staying power)

ACT II: you're watching TV from the ground floor Mr. Fairlie! Get to the top of the building, the view is more, er, comprehensive ---- it's called: the spreading of Capitalism i.e., spread the wealth (convert those sworn US enemies, China & Russia) Oh-my, such sweet, SWEET success... AND then there's the world religious states? They'll always be pissing and moaning about each other, proffering who has the smoothest road to HEAVEN (with and w/o virgins). Forgetting of course that BIG-JUDGE in the SKY, oh well...

So stay tuned till next weeks addition, the on-going spreading-of-capitalism, serial saga. **Once they get a taste (pardon the pun) of capitalism that is, they don't, nor do they want to, 'go back'**

excellent work Duke Lane....

David Healy

...

No further explanation or detail was offered. I wasn't taking notes, but Gary Mack was shown in brief clip, seeming to agree with the conclusions.

now THERE'S a real shocker...

I'm a bit busy today but I'll destroy your stuff on the ghost writing tomorrow.

A bit over due aren’t we?

I would also like Craig's views on the future of the Republican Party.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=13655

I expect Craig is busy selling his Halliburton shares.

No worries about the Republicans John, things swing right and then swing left, then back again and so forth. They will return to power in due course. Its the dims turn to muck things up and I'm sure they will do just that.

as noted during earlier times, I think you're a photog with much talent. I hope that talent finds many clients in far off places such as Georgia and GAWD forbid a place called California. The "dims" and President O'bama are gonna need your taxes (and mine I might add).

Thanks. The business climate is ..well..shall we say ...challenged. I had to regroup following the near shutdown of the entire marine and rv business. I'll take it where I find it now, but projects are few and far between. My rep handles many of the top auto shooters in the world and he can't find these guys work anywhere. The situation is bleak all over.

On the other hand have you bought a RED yet?

The cream always rises to the top.... you're there, so hang in.... As for the RED, I considered it, if I was shooting for the big screen (read prime lenses), I'd have it. Out here for handhelds: 4-Panasonic HVX-200's, P2 acquisition media, 24fps 1080i/720p (some cases 30p for DVD distribution, only) these days covers just about everything I need to deliver. I can get everything else by down rez'ing through Apple-Compressor.... At my age, as far as archiving/stock footage: I see no sense "re-purposing." We struggled, let them

Take care Craig, have a nice Thanksgiving and Holiday season... and hopefully, a profitable 2009

David Healy