David G. Healy

the wonderful world of Nutter evasion, now I KNOW Miller works for the 6th Floor Mausoleum..... pound away Duncan!

This has been posted many times on the JFK forums - At the time of the fatal shot - Roy Kellerman who was riding in the passenger seat of the President's limo had said that he heard what sounded like a sonic boom ... bang .. bang almost over the top of one another. Mrs. Hartman said that she saw a furrow in the grass on the south pasture leading back to the large tree above the knoll. As you know .. the large tree is near the Badge Man figure. It was a nearby police officer that told Mrs. Hartman that the furrow looked to have been made by a bullet hitting the ground. This is where the story ends. So yes, Moorman's photo was taken after the sound of the kill shot that hit the President, thus Badge Man missed and possibly caused the furrow seen on the south pasture. Bill Miller dgh: Gary Mack, if BMiller can work there, I want a job too! I bet my resume blows Miller's right out of the water... give me a call or drop me a note, you know where to find me -- thanks for the consideration

HBO a link to this forum -- Hanks told Bugliosi recently the Reclaiming History project won't hit production till 2010... Plenty of time for Hanks and the producing unit to hear the OTHER side of the story... John Simkin?

Yes David ... anyone that Mack hasn't given them his personal photos to so they can be posted on the forum - does indeed work for the Museum. You are so clever - you really are!!! I am starting to wonder by the off-the-wall nonsense that you post that maybe you have worked for the 6th Floor Museum and gotten canned, thus making you a disgruntled ex-employee. At least through your past remarks ... a case can be made for saying it. dgh: oh Bill.... when you couldn't get work at the 6th Floor Museum I tried to find you employment with ADOBE, as it stands today you're certainly not qualified for the Photoshop unit, but, I suspect you could learn something sitting at the feet of the masters.... so, you're admitting your working for the 6th Floor Museum, yes? So much for gratitude. I guess that Gary and I discussing an event that he has first hand knowledge about (even the parts were edited out of the show) could be seen by someone like yourself as overstating something, but I will take that title any day over being known for saying opposite positions in the same thread. What was that again ... Oh yes, 'I have never seen proof of alteration' and 'I believe the film to be altered'.

well now THAT is interesting.... perhaps Bill will now admit he's working for the 6th floor museum... Hiya Gary Bill has been known to OVER state much

back to Florida and all those 85 year old drivers, eh?

Evan, Do I at least get points for efficiency? After all, with one simple caveat I'm attacking an entire government agency ! What personal attack? A commentary on writing skills is not a personal attack, but a critique. Jack seems he has to make sure we (and the lurkers) notice he's around, sooner or later he'll post something worthwhile... got something to do with the uniform

anything to bolster the Lone Nut image... such a waste! I'm reminded of #18 in the disinfo list of tricks: 18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how "sensitive they are to criticism". to the best of my knowledge Bugliosi has not confronted one of Reclaiming History's critics, yet.....

he needs ALL the help he can get..... a huge literary failure...

Ed wrote: Back brace or no back brace, it would have been neurologically/physiologically impossible for JFK - or anyone else for that matter - to have remained seated in an almost upright position after having been shot through the back and throat. dgh: Agreed! The blue dots represent the approximate position of JFK's eyes. When her husband slumped sideways into her lap gasping, having been just shot in the back and the throat, do you really believe Jackie just sat there and did nothing? Look again , and you may conclude otherwise. .... dgh: so your suggesting Ed, JFK's head and body twisted to the right while he was falling-leaning towards Jackie?

finding it is NOT the question.... ~~quote on update 01-12-2008: the SMPTE link http://www.mte.com/nysmpte/meetings/sum0004.htm Film Forensics and the Zapruder Film, presented by Roland Zavada is no longer good (wonder why?) ~~quote off little refresher

update 01-12-2008: the SMPTE link http://www.mte.com/nysmpte/meetings/sum0004.htm Film Forensics and the Zapruder Film, presented by Roland Zavada is no longer good (wonder why?) Perhaps Miller can now cite some actual data pertaining to the subject, eh? Yea... wonder why? http://www.mte.com/nysmpte/ yep, they all say that, AFTER the fact.... hell, I found the source for all those Z-film floating around (some which have passed through the pope of Dealy Plaza's hands, and that isn't news? LMAO -- Even Miller is trying to figure this one out, a loss for words

Bill Miller' wrote: update 01-12-2008: the SMPTE link http://www.mte.com/nysmpte/meetings/sum0004.htm Film Forensics and the Zapruder Film, presented by Roland Zavada is no longer good (wonder why?) Perhaps Miller can now cite some actual data pertaining to the subject, eh?

Yet again you misstate the facts. I have never said that Groden has any great interest in your work. The garbage that you come up with has been and still is the butt-end of jokes that many of us laugh about when we get together. Groden has ridiculed me by asking 'Why do you waste your time posting to those idiots!'. So now you know what he thinks and why he won't waste his time answering your emails. And your so-called challenge has been like taking a feather to a knife fight, thus there is no challenge. Groden will ask 'What does he know about the optics pertaining to Moorman's camera lens?' ... or 'What does he know about the foreshortening effect and how did he apply it to the image?' Then I tell Groden, 'He didn't address any of this.' And that's when Robert will ask why am I wasting my time when this person doesn't even know the first thing about the subject he is wanting to argue about. And this is just why I cannot just ask Robert to do something because 'Duncan' wants it done, so I have to approach it as if its something that I'm working on, then he'll get around to doing it. What I have done is go to Dealey Plaza and used stand-ins while viewing them from Moorman's location. You don't know the facts as usual, thus you are once again wrong. I will get around to presenting some images to show how once again you are in error and it will prove nothing except how poorly some people look into their claims before making them. Like is the past - it will not stop you from carrying on with the same pitiful research practices, thus nothing will be gained other than once again showing how you were wrong, which is nothing new. John Simkin manages to go to Dallas every year ... So buy yourself an airline ticket well in advance for a cheap rate and make the trip. Plan out your research for when you get there - go to the Museum and anywhere else you can think of so then and only then you will at least appear to be serious about the things you say. Bill Miller speaking of garbage -- why not [just for a change] try posting WHO you're quoting and responding too.... ?

quick question: any idea the whereabouts of Bob Vernon? I lost contact with him 45 days after Hurricane Katrina.... haven't heard anything (anywhere) about him since....Appreciate it! David Healy

links not working Wed 01-09-2008 0022hrs Pacific Standard Time Frank wrote: In my opinion the best available version of Zapruder is from the film "JFK". For my eye it is the clearest and steadiest. Also the most easily viewed frame by frame because it's in a commercial DVD format. I never seen any other versions (MPI etc.) that offer anything better. It seems that we're not supposed to prefer this version; and we all have other copies; but consider this: Oliver Stone and his Hollywood crew spent more money and time in stabilizing and reprinting this film than anybody else. Page 1 : http://copweb.be/Frank%20Caramelli%20Jr/Fl...%20Fragment.htm Page 2 : http://www.copweb.be/Frank%20Caramelli%20J...%20Animated.htm

this very topic was discussed by David Mantik MD, Ph.D at the 2003 Univ Minn. Zapruder Film Symposium. Optical film compositing and printing can account for many discrepencies.... Clear and concise graphics Miles, thank you! David Healy

Well I'm not an educator or in the system.... Interesting comment though -- your training that enables you to make those types of decisions is? Or, did you throw your own kids out when you thought the time was correct?

I notice for the first time Jackie brings her right arm up to and around JFK's shoulder AFTER the headshot....

the choice: into the teeth of eternity one trembling or, into eternity clutched to the warm bosum of ones higher power.....

No need. Sit down. Pour a drink. Enjoy some more lone nuttery: http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic...p;&start=40 Posted: 28 Dec 2007 08:13 pm If all the conjectures point that if the job was not completed from outside then the only way it was done was from inside the car when it sped away. Some one inside the car did the rest. http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic...;&start=120 Posted: 29 Dec 2007 04:18 am Bullets in abdomen will confirm that it is either armour piercing bullets, confirming army's involvement or someone shooting from inside the SUV, which means someone close to BB is involved in the assassination. As if citing the undocumented claims of a blogger weren’t bad enough you’ve gotten so desperate that you are quoting forum posts? What’s next, are you going to cite a conversation you overheard on the bus? Information barked to you by Sam your neighbor’s dog? Even if we forget that they are posts, they don’t support you theory note the use of the condition in the first, Tevye sang “If I were a rich man, Ya ha deedle deedle, bubba bubba deedle deedle dum.…I'd build a big tall house with rooms by the dozen, Right in the middle of the town.” It wouldn’t be accurate to say “the milkman said he was going to build a large house downtown”. The first merely stated the obvious IF she weren’t killed outside the car she had to be killed in it. The second also has already been discussed the poster’s assumption that she was shot in the abdomen was based on Naik’s faulty 2nd (or 3rd) hand account. No other information in support of this was posted on the thread. The author seems not to be a very careful researcher because he (?) asked who was in the SUV when that was answered in the same quote he referred to. As the longtime ago Lone Nutter Steve Keating use to tell me, "you're a hoot!"

Anyone that has ever held Armstrong's book in their hand and spent five or ten minutes examining it can easily come to the conclusion that the research contained within is far from snake oil. It matters little whether or not one agrees with Armstrong's conclusion that there were two Oswalds, the quality of his overall research is evident. The personal and financial sacrifices Armstrong made in researching and self-publishing Harvey & Lee have been well documented on this Forum. That such a work could contain minor inaccuracies stands to reason and in no way diminishes the overall value of Armstrong's research. Jack White's defense of Armstrong's research as a whole is not only honest and well-intentioned, it is 100% correct. Of course Jack has the distinct advantage of being familiar with Armstrong's book. right on, Michael!

LMAO!

amongst other pieces of evidence, authenticity of the Zapruder film is paramount.... the entire case against LHO is built around the Zapruder film....Roland Zavada's investigation didn't cut it, and he knows it... WHO he (Zavada) needed to interview was a few optical 1960-1964 film lab techs and studio matte artists familiar with the optical film printing craft, NOT the cursory heads of companies that employ same....

Miller dronned: Whose Groden?