David G. Healy

\Yeah right, the source for the frame is, what? Can you assure us pulldown was removed from the Nix film BEFORE the frame was studied... You know what pulldown is, yes? Perhaps you should consult with Sherry

As usual ... you throw out the remark about having your 'shot' at someone and when asked for details so to see if you are stating the record correctly - you evade the issue altogether. I guess that little dance that led to you saying, "I have seen no proof of alteration" taught you a lesson after all. I don't have to ask Zavada a question that is irrelevant to this discussion. Any moron can look up on the Internet as to what Kodachrome II and/or Kodacolor film is. Film Compositing is a side step from reality for you use it as if to insinuate that it can alter Kodachrome film where it cannot be detected by experts and that is where you are misleading the reader. There is nothing in your article that deals with the heart of the matter. Zavada is the head scientist that invented that film, and unlike you, he not only knows all there is about the characteristics of this type of film, but also has used that knowledge when examining the alleged Zapruder original. Zavada stated that he has found the Zapruder film to be the in camera original. I then went to Robert Groden to get his findings. In case you have forgotten - Robert is one of the main conspiracy believers in the JFK assassination. If anyone has a motive for wanting the Zapruder film to be altered so to show conspiracy - it is Groden. But Robert had examined the alleged Zapruder original film and checked it for clarity, sharpness, and color shifting. Robert said that his examination found the characteristics of the said Zapruder original to hold up to every thing that he looked for. So this isn't about some paranoid individual trying to look important by talking about what might have been done, but rather two individuals who are far more qualified to examine Kodachrome II film and tell if it is the original or not. Even yourself, as well as Jack White, has said openly that copies of the original film lose detail with each copy generation. This is a must that cannot be prevented. The alleged Zapruder original stood up to all of this, thus your article is irrelevant. The fact that your article doesn't mention where you examined the alleged camera original or that you even knew how to go about detecting it being a copy film only supports what I have said. Just once it would be grand if you just admitted that you were wrong. So far the best you have done is to say two things which cancel the other. You said, 'I believe the Zfilm is altered' and 'I have seen no proof of alteration'. If people wonder why the alleged earth-shattering information said to be found in the hoax book Fetzer published hasn't gotten any attention ... its because its only full of innuendos without facts to back them up. Bill Miller I see, so what Roland Zavada (as a KODAK project manager) helped create and knows inside and out Kodak 8mm film, that's irrelevant, eh? That sum up your position? Funny, you use to spout all that film gamma info, post foolish dot graphs and the like, now its irrelevant, who is paranoid here? I'm detecting fear... Lazy is as Lazy does..... Ya need to get off your duff and do real JFK assassination DP film-photo research work.... By the way, don't let me interrupt the thrashing you seem to be getting from Tom Purvis... (re this thread, in which you'd desperately like to change the title or avoid)

Yes David ... you did an article that had lots to say about film, but not Kodachrome film, and how someone could alter it. As you have said before ... you didn't say the film is altered, but rather suggested how it could be altered. Your article fails to say how Kodachrome II film can be altered in a way that could not be detected. In fact, you have since posted that you have 'seen no signs of alteration'. Now it was YOU who posted that you had this 'shot' at Sherry and so far you have not offered any details about this alleged 'shot'. Your merely saying something without any details is just another example as to why you cannot sell this garbage to even the sorriest tabloid. Thanks again for making my point. son, you know where to find Sherry, right on that thar Lancer board you, shall we say, help rejuvenate, if not fund... Now if you choose not get in touch with her, that is your problem son....who am I to urge you on.... Lazy is as lazy does, eh? For the record much better than you, Bill Miller (in fact all of them were better than you) tried to tear that article apart, they ALL failed miserably.... Amazing they all knew a bit about film compositing, a term I suspect you just learned about.... I suggest you get in touch with Roland Zavada, ask him if I'm aware of dual 8mm KodachromeII and/or Kodacolor. Anything short of you talking to Zavada is a non-starter with me. You're not competent enough holding ANY type of *Z-film authenticity*conversation ....

What concerns have you got concerning the 2D imagery of any film, David? If you have had any concerns about the 2D imagery of the assassination films ... you had forgot to mention them when Jack posted all those alteration claims based on them. You also failed to let Lifton know of the problem with him using them to make his assertions. The same can be said for Costella. Of course we know why that was - they'd simply tell you that the image being 2D had nothing to do with their claims being accurate or not. Sure Sherry is smart and thats exactly why I wanted to hear what you had to say about your so-called 'shot' at the smart lady. As usual, you had nothing to support what you said or implied as to have a 'shot' at a blood spatter expert. And I love you in bold, too! In fact, I believe I posted in bold where you said that you've 'seen no signs of alteration'. I'm impressed your so frightened about what I or any other person concerned with Dealey Plaza film authenticity issues.... so listen up guy, when you deal the humiliation your suffering at the hand of Tom Purvis don't bother to hide in my little corner of the world... Take it like a man.... you can can't you? No fair hiding behind Sherry's skirt! My concerns are below? read it and weep, son! http://jfkresearch.com/page3.html (third article from the top been there since in that form since 2003 - since 1999 in the original form, YOU Lone Nutters haven't touched it yet -- Love it in bold, eh?)

From observing the quality of your responses and desire to seriously participate in any of the discussions on this forum ... I bet that your flicking a light switch and seeing the light actually coming on amazes you. Still waiting to hear what you remember about this so-called alleged 'shot' that you had at Sherry. Let me know if you remember anything. ahh, she's not responding to you... smart lady! Say, how is Al doing these day's? And, I love me in bold how about you? LMAO

Just as I suspected ... you have nothing to support your claim once again. You come onto an Education Forum and then make a general statement that may or not be true and refuse to offer any details when asked to do so. I guess that in a way you possibly did get a shot at Sherry, but most likely found yourself way over your head as usual and this could explain your reluctance to tell the interested parties on this forum as to what was discussed. Thanks again for supporting my position by being your typical David (say nothing) Healy. Bill Miller What you suspect is irrelevant to me and/or this forum.... Do you need, or require Sherry's email address? Go to JFKLancer forum (here's the URL in case you lose your way: http://www.jfklancer.com/ ). I suspect you can find her address there. From what I understand Sherry happens to be part of management there. I'm amazed you aren't aware of that. I'm sure she kept copies of our 2D imagery (Zapruder extant film -- something I do have some concern about) of a 3D world 'blood spatter' discussion... She should contact me re permission releasing an of my off-board emails concerning the subject matter, if in fact there are any... What was posted on the Lancer forum is in the public arena (unless you purged everything I posted there, of course).... p.s. I'm sure Al Carrier appreciates you dragging him into this... dum-da-dum-dumb... Do have a nice day!

There is nothing to deflect, David, but seeing how you are in a posting mode .... how about some of those details concerning the 'shots' you had at Sherry .... I am still most interested in hearing about them. Thanks in advance! ask her.... it appears you're totally oblivious to the subject matter...

I seem to recall you posting back at that time, thus you know the message and how there was more to the incidents that Al described, but just like with the JFK case, you tell only a part of the story so to mislead the reader. I must tell you that while this hurts your position when constantly using such a modus-operandi ... I certainly appreciate it! It's not my intention to argue with you, but rather to expose what you're attempting to do. It is comments like that you made about Carrier that helps me do this. Thanks again! LMAO c'mon trying to deflect attention away from yourself onto Carrier is farcical ... Your in a tough spot right now, you've ventured onto unfamilair grounds and its showing, BIG time

Maybe he wants to remain alive, unlike Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin. Kathy I talked to Hayden last year after attending a small anti-war play in West L.A. directed by a friend, at which he spoke. I asked him if he followed developments in the Kennedy assassination. He said he did, but just barely. I gave him a card with my webpage address on it. He said he'd look at it, but much as Oliver Stone and Emilio Estevez before him, never wrote me to tell me his reaction to my "stuff." I doubt he even looked. I've found that most veterans from the 60's feel there was a conspiracy, but won't lift a finger to read anything written about the case from the last 30 years. They were pleased that the HSCA said there'd been a conspiracy, and that Oliver Stone's film was a hit. But that's as far as it goes. Veterans as in military veterans? Specifically Vietnam War veterans? If that's the case let me give you the simple answer in three short sentences..... "It don't mean noth'in." "The f**ks who did it, will rot in hell, and they KNOW it." "And besides, what can we do about it? We've already paid and paid and paid some more, it's your turn."

you really are having trouble reading aren't you? Apparently, TPurvis quoted a rather popular practitioner of the art....eh? The BLOODSTAIN per Sherry, for the 3rd time what bloodstain....? Insofar as the Zapruder Film and Nix film are concerned, you have a bit of a problem, the Zapruder film has "serious" credibility problems, and the alleged NIX film was questioned when returned to the family. I believe that went something like this: "this is not the film my father (NIX) shot..."

David, you should install a 10 second delay in your responses so to at least give you a chance to listen to how stupid they sound before posting them. In the past I have cited Zavada and Groden both because they know more about Kodachrome II film that you and I do put together. So didn't that ring true to you??? And didn't it ring true when I quoted you as saying in the same thread that you 'believe the Zapruder film to be altered' and where you said that you 'have seen no proof of alteration' .... yes, I believe I did and it was also true. So saying that Sherry is the blood spatter expert over any of us is no different IMO. Now when are you going to post something true like you knowing little about the evidence of the JFK assassination??? LOL!!!! Follow the bouncing ball Bill Miller..... I had my shot at Sherry (while you held her coat) 2 years ago, I see nothing different, nonsense in fact -- let's no forget that "bloodstain" quote -- What bloodstain might that be in the Zapruder film? And I believe Tom Purvis has a few comments for you! Why don't you just get Sherry over here, she's helping in Lancer management isn't she? She's the pro, eh? As you said, "your not qualified...". I doubt she needs your suffocating support...

finally, something that rings true

Zapruder film bloodstain? What bloodstain?

Please tell this forum what difference does it matter if the movie 'JFK' was being filmed as to how gunshots were heard by the hundreds of people who were there in different areas of the plaza as the firings took place? The fact is that it doesn't mean anything, but I look forward to you trying to make it appear otherwise. Whether Oliver Stone had a camera rolling or not didn't effect the sounds of gunfire that were heard by those in attendance to hear them. I gave you no information from the movie, but rather from the witnesses who were there and heard the shots during all 32/33 test firings. I am starting to see the same ol' - same ol' and that is when someone tells us that they have figured out the assassination and when confronted with evidence to the contrary - they get defensive and try to stray away from the points being made that debunks their previous conclusion. who you talking too Miller, some mythical monster or ogre? If your gonna quote, tell us who your quoting. Certainly don't want lurkers thinking your not accurate, now do we?

I think the same can be said that if you have no signs of alteration, then your paranoia over the films being altered is unwarranted. The last I recall is that you said, 'I have seen no proof of alteration'. Can't prove it..... Nor can you confirm the extant Zapruder film is legit, just a lot of Lone Nut Warren Commission support'in, hop'in and a pray'in.... Healthy paranoia is not only wonderful for the soul but.... In short son, the entire film and photo record concerning Dealey Plaza events on Nov 22nd 1963 is questioned... You need the varsity to dig out of this hole, and that's what we're waiting for... in the meantime, carry on.

Tom, How can you support a third (successful) shot that occurs in less than 2 seconds from the previous one? The entire single shooter theory lies on the weapon having been a Carcano, which is as we all know a bolt action rifle. With this in mind, that is, the time needed to "recycle" the weapon + the time needed to obtain an accurate aim again, a theorized time of less than 2 seconds, is very very short. On top of this, the third shot must have been by far the hardest shot as at this time the target was the farthest away and the target was partially slumped in the back seat. (Minimal area of head visible to the shooter at this point). Considering these, I'd say a successful third headshot with these "facts" in mind is virtually impossible. http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z350.jpg "facts"? If the extant Zapruder film is altered, you have NO FACTSl, save one..... JFK died by gunshot wounds on the streets of Dallas Texas, Nov 22nd 1963 The question is not whether or not the Z-film has been altered. The questions are: 1. To what extent it has been altered. 2. To what purpose was this done. http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z208.jpg http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z209.jpg http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z210.jpg http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z211.jpg http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z212.jpg ------------------------------ http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z350.jpg well Tom, I am under-a-bit of scrutiny here these day's, I'm attempting to clean up my act.... LMFAO!

Tom, How can you support a third (successful) shot that occurs in less than 2 seconds from the previous one? The entire single shooter theory lies on the weapon having been a Carcano, which is as we all know a bolt action rifle. With this in mind, that is, the time needed to "recycle" the weapon + the time needed to obtain an accurate aim again, a theorized time of less than 2 seconds, is very very short. On top of this, the third shot must have been by far the hardest shot as at this time the target was the farthest away and the target was partially slumped in the back seat. (Minimal area of head visible to the shooter at this point). Considering these, I'd say a successful third headshot with these "facts" in mind is virtually impossible. "facts"? If the extant Zapruder film is altered, you have NO FACTSl, save one..... JFK died by gunshot wounds on the streets of Dallas Texas, Nov 22nd 1963

Tom, your bias is not allowing you to see the obvious. The debris being expelled from a bullet impacting the brain is what caused the mist cloud caught in Z313. Sherry has stated that a second bullet to the head would have produced an equal, if not more of an spatter pattern than the first one did. No such explosion of matter is seen and if the Zapruder film was clear enough to see the first explosion of brain matter, then it is clear enough to see an alleged second one IMO. No assassination film shows a second explosion of debris from the head. If you feel more qualified to tells us what the impact of a second bullet smashing into the head would look like compared to the first and its different than Sherry's, then I'll be happy to hear it. But I must say that you don't make a very convincing argument over how silly 'blood spatter science' is in this case if you have no real background experience or knowledge of the subject. opinion - pure and simple.... won't hold up in a court of law... as for you hearing it? What? Who cares what you hear....?

Since when is anyone required to answer a question on this forum? Especially from a moderator that apparently has nothing better to do than follow certain someones around this forum... You want Appolo? Go here http://www.spacecamp.com/museum/ Everything space artifacts, even have the last Saturn Five rocket (disassembled of course, nuclear treaty requirement) MACA/NASA's roots are there, including Von Braun's actual office an exhibit in the in the museum.... More commonly called US Space and Rocket Center.... Werner Von Braun's home (Huntsville Alabama) till he died.... If your nice to the folks there they may even let you sit in one of the Apollo capsule simulators (the REAL deal). Pensecola....? LMAO! Go to the source.... http://www.redstone.army.mil/history/ right around the corner from the museum Alabama just up the road from Pensacola.... btw, what the hell Space stuff is in Pensecola? aside: there's a SR-22 parked roght outside the frontdoor of the museum, at least there was 2 years ago...

Seems like you would want to know her profession - her qualifications - and her conclusions before accusing someone of XXXX for her. Why? Sherry has never stated what Z-film version she reviewed, nor the source for same, nor where she viewed same. Was the film verified as authentic, if so what were qualifications for same and WHO provided a certificate of authenticity (all things needed in a court of law). Then you can tell us, how one can view a 2D simulation of a real world 3D event and come to concrete conclusion about ANYTHING.... You're not XXXX Sherry's opinion here, are ya? Edited by moderator.

Von Pinhead was hawking Bugliosi's book a year before it was published on various forums on the web. He is a subscriber of the official version and like Bugliosi, refers to and considers anyone who disagrees with him a "kook", often referring to them as "Mr. Kook". Not only is Von Pein in complete denial even when presented with evidence of a conspiracy, he has suffered the misfortune of being thrown off reputable forums like JFK Lancer. In newsgroup alt.conspiracy.jfk, one can see that a typical Von Pein post may include links to previous Von Pein posts. In other words, he posts opinion, then uses it as a factual reference in a later post. I've never seen anything so ridiculous: using oneself as a source. Of course, when you have nothing else, I suppose, you dock at any port in a storm. In Von Pein's world, there is no such thing as tampering with evidence. There is no such thing as altering affidavits. There is no such thing as evidence substitution. There is no such thing as staged police lineups. There is no such thing as coerced witnesses. In Von Pein's world, 80 % or more of the public, who believe that John Kennedy was killed as a result of a conspiracy, are simply "kooks". For Von Pein's sake, I hope Bugliosi doesn't stop short one day. I've been following the antics of the lone nut shills over at the alt.conspiracy.jfk site for several months now. Do Von Pein and those other people really think they are fooling anybody? Anyone who has to hurl insults, in lieu of actual fact based arguments, has already lost the debate. I haven't read Bugliosi's book, and don't intend to (no need to waste my time on a book arguing the thesis that the world is flat) but from what I have heard, he stoops to the same level of name calling that the lone nut internet forum brigade engages in as a regular routine. At this late date, with all the new revelations from the ARRB added on to what was previously known, anyone seriously arguing the Warren Commission line is either in a severe state of denial, or is a paid shill of the establishment. Pathetic. Brian: I, like you, have not bought nor read Bugliosi's "cinder block" book. And I also have no intention of doing so. I have the WC 26 volumes on CD-ROM and I've read Case Closed (then threw it in the trash), so for me, the-same-old-same-old is just a waste of time and money. The purpose of the childishness of the McAdams-sent trolls at a.c.j. is to distract the discussion away from evidence and testimony and away from exposure of the truth by using off-topic postings that have nothing to do with the JFK assassination but instead serve to sidetrack everyone. As you know, more often than not, the ones who hurl the first insults are those on the LN side. Many times, Cters (myself included) fall for their tactics and retaliate. But I'm learning not to fall into their trap. Trolls don't care about the case. They just care about being a-holes to whomever. Many don't like the Kennedys. Many more don't like people who believe in conspiracies. So this case draws quite a few "nut jobs" from all over the map. Some of whom wish to please their master, who has vowed to destroy a.c.j. http://www.prouty.org/mcadams I find it funny that those who ridicule conspiracies are, in fact, part of a conspiracy to destroy a newsgroup. Yes, they are bad characters. I've seen them on every single internet forum where the JFK conspiracy is being discussed. Von Pein got kicked off the JFK Lancer forum with some other lone nut stooge allegedly named "Nick Kendrick" a couple of years ago for engaging in xxxxx tactics. They now hang out on the Internet Movie Data Base forum for the JFK movie. It's amusing to watch them post with all these different sock puppet accounts. Apparently they can't get enough real converts to their side, so they have to create phony supporters on other accounts. I don't even bother posting on there anymore, but pop n every now and again to see what they're up to. They just keep repeating the same bull over and over again. It's almost as if someone (McAdams?) is training them in sophisticated disinfo tactics. Anyway, I am delighted that Bugliosi's book tanked. The American public as a whole is not dumb enough to be fooled by such a ploy, or maybe I should say that anyone dumb enough to be taken in by the Warren Commission official story isn't likely to be an inveterate reader anyway. Anyone naive enough to believe it isn't even likely to read an entire one of their ridiculous posts either. They are clearly wasting their time, just like Bugliosi did, even though he got his paycheck for his efforts. BINGO....

No Tom ... you just used words like XXXX for 'her' ... I know what you meant and so did you. gotta stop leading with your chin, Miller! Edited by moderator.

The expert I spoke with is not a XXXX and if you know who she is, then you would not have said such a stupid thing about her .... your choice of words show just how narrow minded you are. I am rather surprised that the usually over-sensitive moderators allow you to post such a comment. Maybe you can post on your blood spatter expertise or post any information you have sought from another blood spatter expert that contradicts Sherry's observations. And as I recall, Al Carrier, who is a ballistics expert and experienced in CSI, also supported the work of the blood expert that you refer to as a 'whore'. And by the way - you misspelled "ASININE". I bet that Dr. Henry Lee can spell the word correctly. You should advertise that the next time a blood spatter exert is used in a court of law to prove a case ... the defense can call you to testify that blood spatter science is asinine ... that should go over pretty big. I'm always amazed at the level of police work accomplished by walking the streets of Dallas, and Dealey Plaza a few times... watch a few films, put pen to paper -- then declare to those us whom have been on BOTH business ends of weapons fire, how it all happened, amazing... Now, Lancer is a business, Bill. Pure and simple (I believe Sherry [the blood spatter analyst] is part of that business, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). What ever the position that overall board takes; CT, Lone Nut KOOK or combination of both -- it's simply PR, pushing a position, hype and professional/amateur XXXX a position... Edited by moderator due to inappropriate language.

Everyone here seems to want Wecht to be innocent because his "one of us". Fact is from what Ive seen of the evidence the guys as guilty as hell. A Deo et Rege Thank you Healy, but I am neither God nor King....just plain Denis, or Pointing to you. finally... something correct!

Everyone here seems to want Wecht to be innocent because his "one of us". Fact is from what Ive seen of the evidence the guys as guilty as hell. A Deo et Rege