David G. Healy

The person selling the bike came to me ... I believe through another researcher. That information was posted in detail on more than one occasion and on more than one forum. If I am not mistaken ... that bike was also used in the movie "JFK". I believe the man's name who was considered the guru of Harley Davidson Motorcycles was named Lonnie Isam. Do a forum search and refresh your memory. In fact, JFK Research probably had the most details that were posted - good luck in finding the information there. I am surprised at you, David. I would have thought that you checked on all this stuff when it was posted in the past and that was what led you to say on this forum that YOU had never seen anything that proved alteration. But seeing how you like proof ... here is the proof that I cited what you said correctly ............. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...c=5959&st=0 Post #8 David Healy: Of course there's NO proof of film alteration, something I've stated for years Bill If you can't post Lamson's measurements-evidence w/affidavit there's nothing to talk to you about. I could care less if Harley of Harley-Davidson told you anything... somebody told me so-so, I posted on so many forums.... yadada, yadada -- nonsense, doesn't prove a damn thing.... Just post your proof with affidavit, that the left rear motorcyle cop closet to the north curb of Elm Street as depicted in the Moorman 5 photo, that to the top of THAT windscreen is 58" from the street surface. Stay on point, Bill, you can't deal with two lines of thought at the same time...

It is refreshing to have a new member of the forum with intelligence. As for Lamson and "Miller"...ignore them. Their words tell us everything we need to know about them. Jack Churchin has shown some flash of intelligence? Oh yea, he posted blind support of the misinformation-ist in chief! So Jack you gonna deal with your error about the height of the MC windshields and Marys lens height or are you gonna run away as usual? post the proof -- Miller's phone call doesn't cut it, nor is it proof here or anywhere else, champ! Just another Lone Nut opinion.... So, how do YOU know the top of the MC windshield is 58" off the ground in the Moorman 5? I MEASURED IT! I suggest YOU do the same. Plenty of clues there davie, if you know were to look. Why not try your hand at some actual photographic research for a change...you know put your name on something other that a cut and paste. You have the guts davie? Measure what, champ? The actual windscreen as it was on the actual limo escort motorcyle on 11/23/63...? Where, when, who was there (when you measured the attached windshield), and a verifiable affidavit with your measurements/ findings, complete with DPD motorcycle ID & Registration number. AND a DPD statement stating that yes indeed, the motorcyle windscreen you measured was from that very motorcycle displayed in Moorman 5 photo, left rear limo position adjacent to Elm Street north curbing (and in DP that day). Just post the evidence, big guy! No time for nonsense and/or opinions.

We've the BEST (Costella's) of the worst Z-film/frames, you're correct! When one realizes there are (6th Floor Museum?) 35mm slides or 4x5 trannies taken of Z-film frames, access to those either sets, with in-camera Zapruder film ccomparison and confirmation would get us well on down the road...

It is refreshing to have a new member of the forum with intelligence. As for Lamson and "Miller"...ignore them. Their words tell us everything we need to know about them. Jack Churchin has shown some flash of intelligence? Oh yea, he posted blind support of the misinformation-ist in chief! So Jack you gonna deal with your error about the height of the MC windshields and Marys lens height or are you gonna run away as usual? post the proof -- Miller's phone call doesn't cut it, nor is it proof here or anywhere else, champ! Just another Lone Nut opinion.... So, how do YOU know the top of the MC windshield is 58" off the ground in the Moorman 5?

Been going on for years... neither can help his-self. Some think they've never been asked to write a article, perhaps its simple jealousy? Some think its more serious, unrelated to JFK assassination research, a defect of character, if you will. Does Jack have a right to be cautious and/or return slights. Of course he does, I suspect he's the only JFK researcher posting to this board that has been physically attacked (while he slept), stabbed multiple times and nearly died from same assault (related to his research, eh? Who knows!)....

LMAO!

'Bill Miller' wrote David, Thanks for asking a question that has been answered for you several times in the past. If needed ... I can probably do a forum search and find where that information has been posted more than once. However, I will briefly tell the story once again. Some years back when Jack first posted his claim about where he thinks Moorman stood on the JFK Research Forum - there was a guy who had a DPD motorcycle that was said to have been in the JFK Dallas motorcade. I believe the bike was on Ebay or going on Ebay at the time. Anyway, I called him and asked about some of the specs of the bike concerning its measurements. One of the first things that I wanted to know was the ground measurement to the top of the windshield. As I posted then and several times since then - the standing height was 58". I assume that you remembered this piece of information in the past and had used it to formulate that you had never seen any signs of alteration - especially concerning Moorman being in the street. Bill

'Bill Miller' wrote: [...] Next question. Jack, I am so glad that you mentioned how close the Martin cycle came to Mary Moorman ... this brings me to a question that has been asked, but never answered by you. It is a known fact that a DPD motorcycle windshield stood 58" off the ground which is higher than you say Moorman's camera lens was. Please tell us how it is that Moorman's photo shows her camera lens to be above the top of Martin's windshield? Bill dgh: For openers, perhaps you can start with how you know that the top of that *SPECIFIC* windshield is exactly 58" off the ground?

Adele and Bill are both members of this forum...

grow up, smell the roses!

I'm not blinded by the possibility that LHO was a willing (or non-willing) shooter in Dealey Plaza, that day. Someone pulled the trigger, and probably someone. Tom Purvis's argument says Oswald could of and probably did the deed, by him self -- I disagree for multiple reasons, non-evidence related. Back to Tom: the question becomes (if one follows TomP logic), why was the the Elm Street Zapruder film sequence altered/changed? Clearly, Surveyor West data shows a shot further west on Elm St. yet the film does not portray that, WHY? It's also been alleged (for many years) shots came from another (other than the TSBD) building to JFK's rear, if that is the case, that clears LHO. Afterall, he can't be on a TSBD inside-stairway or in the TSBD lunchroom the same time he's shooting from another building or from the grassy knoll now can he! BUT, he could of been ONE of multiple shooters, eh? Back to TomP, whether southern factions wanted JFK dead is one theory, wanting JFK simply out of office (not elected much let alone RElelected) is another... it appears TomP has laid groundwork for both

'Bill Miller' wrote: Yes, that is the fedora outline that has been labeled Hat Man. Jack has called the Dallas sky seen over the fence - "smoke". As was posted in the past on this forum ... Josiah Thompson went to the plaza many years ago and went to Moorman's location to see if anything in the trees or RR yard could account for that hat shape and Josiah found it to not be there. Josiah's conclusion was that it could have been someone seen in Moorman's photo who left the area after the shooting. [...] The sky as smoke has what do to with Hatman, again? Never learn do ya? WHEN (date and time please) did Thompson go to Dealey Plaza-Mary Moorman's position and determine the above? Did Thompson inform Gary Mack of his findings, if so, has Gary Mack acknowledge same?

seeing that Kathy (or else someone) dragged Debra into this: opinions are fine, Debra -- evidence, facts and truth are however, another matter. Does "strong heart" = arrogance, Debra? And if that's all it takes to trust and publish...well so be it. The unvarnished truth is JFK was murdered through conspiracy, everything else in this case *pales* in comparison. Further, I'll keep my longtime tenure as the MODERATOR of the JFK Assassination Research Film/Picture forum in check for the moment. It's enough to know I was there when Bill Miller (under that name) made his JFKResearch forum, internet debut. Film/Photo technical abilities, NOT his strong suit, rhetoric certainly was... it appears not much has changed over the years. When Bill Miller left the JFKResearch forum he found a immediate home at Debra's *Lancer*, discussion forum. That 1st *Lancer* discussion forum was on its last legs, hardly any participation much less appreciable membership (I was also a member of that old *Lancer* forum, as well as the early days of the new and improved *Lancer*, though seldom posted in the early day's, though that increased during 2002-2003. Miller showed up at Lancer during the last days of the OLD Lancer forum, the Lancer forum had a face-lift, was rejuvenated, membership drives, etc and went on to interesting things... Away from *Lancer* rumors flew as to the forums newfound successes and just who was responsible in those early days of the new forum. From then on Bill rubbed shoulders with Gary Mack, Groden and the Dallas tribe of: Dealey Plaza Film/Photo History staus quo, at all costs. Anayway, a lot of that early Lancer success spawned jealousy in quite a few circles. I recall we at JFKResearch wished Debra and her forum well and best of luck and meant it! She even poked her head in a time or two... all that changed in 2003 when Fetzer's The Great Zapruder Film HOAX was published ....btw, for those that care...GIF animation is not rocket science and was not invented by Bill Miller David, This has nothing to do with creating problems!!!! I'm sorry if it came across that way!!!! I believe Debra was correcting something that another poster had written.. I wasn't trying to create a conflict, just agreed to post it. Kathy well thank you Kathy, I hadn't realized this thread had drifted away from its original topic, silly me....This thread, that I started, started out as a *apology to a fellow researcher* and some how it got to Bill Miller, it was off to the races after that -- now we have Debra correcting something about Bill Miller? Protecting him sounds a wee bit more realistic... Can any of these folks read a thread title? Here's a simple suggestion, I've done this myself as a forum moderator.....have Debra start (or you as a moderator) a thread concerning Bill Miller, move the posts from this thread that deal with Miller to the new thread, in their proper date/time order. That'll allow my *original* thread to proceed to digital oblivion... Mike Hogan and I have completed our business, it's time to MOVE ON Thank you, David Healy

seeing that Kathy (or else someone) dragged Debra into this: opinions are fine, Debra -- evidence, facts and truth are however, another matter. Does "strong heart" = arrogance, Debra? And if that's all it takes to trust and publish...well so be it. The unvarnished truth is JFK was murdered through conspiracy, everything else in this case *pales* in comparison. Further, I'll keep my longtime tenure as the MODERATOR of the JFK Assassination Research Film/Picture forum in check for the moment. It's enough to know I was there when Bill Miller (under that name) made his JFKResearch forum, internet debut. Film/Photo technical abilities, NOT his strong suit, rhetoric certainly was... it appears not much has changed over the years. When Bill Miller left the JFKResearch forum he found a immediate home at Debra's *Lancer*, discussion forum. That 1st *Lancer* discussion forum was on its last legs, hardly any participation much less appreciable membership (I was also a member of that old *Lancer* forum, as well as the early days of the new and improved *Lancer*, though seldom posted in the early day's, though that increased during 2002-2003. Miller showed up at Lancer during the last days of the OLD Lancer forum, the Lancer forum had a face-lift, was rejuvenated, membership drives, etc and went on to interesting things... Away from *Lancer* rumors flew as to the forums newfound successes and just who was responsible in those early days of the new forum. From then on Bill rubbed shoulders with Gary Mack, Groden and the Dallas tribe of: Dealey Plaza Film/Photo History staus quo, at all costs. Anayway, a lot of that early Lancer success spawned jealousy in quite a few circles. I recall we at JFKResearch wished Debra and her forum well and best of luck and meant it! She even poked her head in a time or two... all that changed in 2003 when Fetzer's The Great Zapruder Film HOAX was published ....btw, for those that care...GIF animation is not rocket science and was not invented by Bill Miller

Threads like this only damage the reputation of the forum. I am tempted to delete the whole thread as I do not have the time to decide which individual insults should be removed. I am also considering putting the worst offenders on permanent moderation. I think this is going to be the only way to control this kind of behaviour. Mike Hogan accepted my apology, which I'm pleased --- this thread has grown into something utterly amazing, do with it as you wish -- thank you, Mike and JohnS..

Wow, I apologize to Mike Hogan in a thread titled same, in the same thread I see a quote (and accurate at that) from me concerning the Miller/Peters alias fiasco from 3 years ago.... anyway, I feel confident Mike has seen my apology. David

I'd like to extend an apology to Michael Hogan, a member of this forum. On more than one occasion I said unkind things to him and about him. I was wrong! David G. Healy

This is interesting. And I'm glad you and James responded to this. I was thinking of Camarillo Ranch and I just thought of MK/ULTRA and the Manson family at Spahn Ranch. Probably no connection. Have you heard of one? And who is Osbourne? Kathy ***********************************************************8 Spahn Ranch is nestled between the western side of Box Canyon and the Santa Susanna Pass Road, which is at the Ventura/Los Angeles County line, bordered by Simi Valley on the west and the city of Chatsworth to the east. Box canyon was a favorite film location for the old Hopalong Cassidy movies and serials. The rock formations are spectacular. Rocket Dyne and Hughes had, and probably still have, a lot of acreage out in that area, cordoned off by high chain linked fences, topped with barbed wire on some of the more remote sections of the property, surveillance cameras, and many DANGER NO TRESPASSING signs strategically placed throughout, from what I can remember. I also lived in Box Canyon in the late 1970's, before moving to T.O. in the early 1980's. What must they be doing out there? Another "Area 51"? MK/ULTRA stuff? FWIW. Although Area 51 is not located where we've been talking about, the reason you can see it from Google Earth is because nobody is there anymore. They moved to another section of the desert. I know a woman and her husband who drove around out there lost and they could see air vents in the mountains. But no one came after them. If you look it up on Google Earth, you'll see there are a lot of Air Force Bases around there. Also, from what I've read, the old Area 51 is radioactive. So much for spooks. Kathy ************************************************************** "What must they be doing out there? Another "Area 51"? MK/ULTRA stuff?" Seriously, I think they're noted for aircraft parts, assemblage, rocket science, the usual milspecs required in the manufacture and production of government/corporate issued contracts for materials and acquisition. What and where was "Area 51" supposed to be? Area 51 was nothing more, nor less, than a super-secret/secure test area with runways for super-secret aviation test vehicles from disk-shaped [uFO-type in the '50s and '60s] to stealth bombers and more...and not the only one...just the one most known. Then there's Tonopah, Nv (also in the Area 51/Nellis AFB test range area). The little Nevada town that kept a 7 year secret; the STEALTH F-117... I came through Tonopah earlier this week...

John, I made a "fuss" about Healy's lack of a bio for the following reasons. 1- He made a big "fuss" himself about my and other member's lack of photos. 2- When I pointed out to him that he needed to post his bio. He hypocritically and arrogantly refused. He gave the impression that he thought he was some how exempt. 3- He makes snide remarks about other people's bios. By doing so and not posting his own he was like a little kid throwing a snowball at someone then running to hide. 4- He takes the position that people without post production experience are not qualified to question his conclusion in TGZFH that the types of alterations to the Z-film alleged in that book were possible in 1963, yet he refuses to answer questions about his own experience producing composite images on film as opposed to video. 5- Bill Miller and Tim Carroll also made it clear they thought Healy should comply with rule # 1 of this forum. 6- While it's true that Healy has been a member since before the rules went into effect it is my impression that the rules apply new and old members equally. Unlike him virtually all members new and old have been in compliance since I joined. IIRC you and Andy insisted that even old members like Terry and Mike post their photos. 7- I didn't hear back from you. If you had told me on the forum or via e-mail or PM that you had asked Healy to comply I would have made less of a "fuss". 8- I agree that it's important that this forum, like all forums have rules of behavior. If some members are allowed to flaunt them what is to stop other members from doing so too – what's the point of having rules if they are not enforced? While it's true that there still are a few members are not in compliance reasons 1 – 5 do not apply to them. Len 3- He makes snide remarks about other people's bios. This guy's arrogance is unbelievable. I joined some time ago when biographies were not required and recently followed protocol and added my own and this Healy asshole immediatly insulted several points in my bio. Is this accepted behavior on this forum? Does this Healy asshole think he is king of the class or something? I've read a couple of his posts and he has said nothing that has impressed me at all. But I was glad to see that others were victims of this anti-social remarks as well. Of course I'm sure he has his nose right up the ass of any conspiracy nuts that join up--but being an Oswald-guilty devotee I was immediately in his sights I guess. LMAO... evidently I was correct, you haven't published.... LHO devotee? Your a tad off little guy, I believe two shooters from the rear, if LHO was one of them so be it... Now, about your publishing career.....

by all means take ALL the time you need to respond, *eternity* sounds about right, eh? Frankly, no one cares a wit, if you have patience, or about your "irons in the fire"... All this graduate and post graduate work, yet nothing published? Strange! psst, there's plenty new under the sun, you just gott'a know what rock to lift up! Such is the fate of the lone neuters

T. Folsom' droned: [...] Whew....and there you have my views. Of course I don't know ANYTHING about you personally. You may be a wonderful father, grandfather, husband, soccer coach, or gardener. I don't mean to cast aspersions on your personal attributes, but once you step into the arean of public debate and present yourself as a photograph expert then you are fair game for criticism. I do not claim to be a photographic expert therefore I am NOT fair game in such a debate. I am an American History scholar who has spent thirty years studying ALL areas of American History, focusing as a hobby on the Kennedy assassination. ************** Well there you have it folks, another Lone Nut quasi scholar-historian ~cough-cough~, not fair game for anything.... well thank GAWD... at least we don't have to clean up your messes... Murder as a hobby, how quaint! You can move on with your life now, Nutter we've relieved your burden....

well, you given this old man not only good reliable JFK assassination data but, a few laughs along the way... I like that! Sure there isn't a touch of the wee IRISH in ya, Thomas? DHealy

I am one of those converted LHO guilty advocates. I was a die-hard conspiracy believer until about 1980. I began studying the Kennedy assassintion in earnest following the publication of "November 22, 1963: You are the Jury" however at that time I was more convinced in Josiah Thompson, Mark Lane, and Edward Epstein's views than I was of David Belin's. But the more I read of the assassination and especially the more I read conspiracy-oriented books, "Rush to Judgement," "Six Seconds in Dallas," "Who Killed Kennedy," "They've Killed the President", "The Assassination Tapes," "The Second Oswald" etc... I soon found that these authors didn't really solve the case. In fact they never provided ANY answers. I saw very quickly that conspiracy believers were much better at standing on the sidelilnes and asking question sthan they were in stepping onto the field and providing answers that agreed with logic, common sense, and the known evidence. Then with the findings of the HSCA and the public discredting and embarassment of Jack White for his supposed photographic "expertise" I started to smell a rat. By 1980 I began examining the evidence with an "Oswald Guilty" frame of mind and EVERYTHING suddenly made perfect sense. Questions I had always struggled with now made perfect sense. Questions like the backyard photographs (of which there was no credible evidence of forgery), Oswald's autograph on the back of one of those photographs, Oswald taking the package of "curtain rods" to work, Oswald's unexpected trip to Ruth Paine's house on November 21st, Oswald fleeing the scene after the assassination, Oswald walking/jogging/running seven blocks to catch the very bus that would have stopped across the street from the TSBD, Oswald leaving the bus in a panic when it stalled in traffic, Oswald having the cab driver drop him off four blocks past his North Beckley boarding house, Oswald taking a gun with him after leaving the boarding house, Oswald's shooting of Tippit (which was iron-clad based on the evidence, in my mind), Oswald's attempted murder of Officer McDonald, Oswald's numerous lies while being interrogated, Oswald's failure to implicate any co-conspirators, and Oswald's lies concerning his rifle ownership. When I assumed (hoped) Oswald was innocent, NONE of these facts made any sense. Once I assumed Oswald was guilty, then EVERY single fact in the case made perfect sense. It rang true. Since my conversion EVERY SINGLE conspiracy book has rehashed old material without solving ANYTHING. Points that have been disproven for years are still brought up as if they were brand new. I cannot believe that in over forty years no one in this so-called conspiracy has ever talked. That thought alone boggles rational thought. The later exposure of the chicanery of individuals like the photo-expert fake, Robert Groden, in the Simpson civil trial, only added to Jack White's previous exposure. Revelations of Mark Lane's dishonest handling of Helen Markham's statements, the irrational and ridiculous claims of Zapruder film alteration, all simply were too silly for me to give serious thought. In fact the number of former conspiracy believers who have converted is constantly growing--however I don't seem to know of ANY "LHO-Guilty" devotees who have been converted to the "Conspiracy Nut" camp. There may be some--but I've never heard of even one in my thirty years of Kennedy assassination research. That, at least is my story. You left out the part about JACK WHITE BEING YOUR NEMESIS. Please explain. Jack White "your nemesis" quite a few of the oldtime Nutter's are back, Jack.... As this one is: " I'ah seen the light...." LMAO! Even Dave Reitzes emerges from retirement (the original: "I'ah seen the LIGHT")... Bugliosi's recent tank job brought many of them back into the fray... This Folsom dude is a .john (mcadams) grad and a Mel Ayton apologist/propogandist, he's been around for awhile, not near the 30 years he claims (10 years tops). He's a Von Pein supporter on alt.conspiracy.jfk...

sitdown Lower_y (another a Mel Ayton acolyte, [Mel Ayton - Europe's best known Lone Nutter]) ..... you xxxxx all JFK forums, including the USNET boards -- we've been hip to your baiting game for years now..... Since Bugliosi's book tanked the Nutter's are attempting a full frontal assault on JFK researchers of the CT persuasion .... It appears the preservers of Nov 22nd 1963 Dealey Plaza History are claiming it as their own... Also, when the Lone Nutter's drag Dave Reitzes (another of the CTer's who turned Lone Nut, AFTER he saw the light) out of retirement, you know they're getting desperate.... There was a whole lot riding on the success of Bugliosi's book... Even David Von Pein is flapping around like a fish out of water... And Folsom, get a bio and photo up --- who do you think you are, Dick Cheney?

Apparently you attribute the same level of reliability to an interview that you do to sworn testimony. I do NOT. I will use Skinny Holland's testimony before the WC LONG before I will use a private interview with a researcher. If YOU accept them on equal ground than clearly you and I will not agree on much. lately, sworn testimony is a noose around the Lone Nut collective neck... couple that with altered film/photos/x-rays, botched autopsy -- we got us a mess, Sherlock!