David G. Healy

PS. Also note that the mods didn't ask you to stop insulting us and calling us 'blind or lying'. They cut you a lot of slack around here Jack, stop trying to play the victim.

Hello Kevin,

Question: who is, "us"?

Thanks,

David Healy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpBDuSJeH14

Please allow me to apologize in advance for the poor quality of this video. I am looking for a better quality version of this interview, but I felt that it was important to get on video what he SAID more than it was important to see how he looked.

Gil...

More and more folks are looking towards YouTUBE, so much so, many commercial TV clients are looking at it as a vehicle to exploit. We in the business had to first understand how YouTube dealt with their footage from a video compression-recompression standpoint.

Here's a link to that understanding, a bit techno-babble, hopefully it will bring a better understanding as to why, imagery-video clips look as bad as they do. Further note: if you're working with clean source footage, there's really no reason why it won;'t look GREAT on YouTube...

http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/youtu...essor_gary.html

David Healy aka AEFFECTS

Therefore I would guess if they successfully answered "Spartacus", it must have been by way of knowing of your website.

My nephew who has just graduated from university was very impressed (he was one of those who phoned me up while I was watching football). He seemed to think that if they ask a question like this on "University Challenge" it means that they expect all university students to know who I am.

we won't tell....

Nothing in the way of evidence was found so we retraced our search back down, floor by floor. Shortly after we arrived back on the 6th floor, Deputy Eugene Boone located the assassin's rifle almost completely hidden by some overhanging boxes near the stairwell. I filmed it as it was found. In my shot, the figure of Captain Fritz is standing within the enclosure next to the rifle. He knew then that the possibility of a fire fight with the sniper had greatly diminished. He dispatched one of his men to go down and call for the crime lab. About fifteen minutes later, Lt. Day and Studebaker arrived. Still pictures were taken of the positioning of the rifle, then Lt. Day slid it out from its hiding place and held it up for all of us to see. The world has seen my shot of this many times. Lt. Day immediately turned toward the window behind him and started dusting the weapon for fingerprints. Day was still within the enclosure formed by the surrounding boxes. I filmed him lifting prints from the rifle. He lifted them off with scotch tape and placed them on little white cards. When he had finished, he handed the rifle to Captain Fritz. Fritz pulled the bolt back and a live round ejected and landed on the boxes below. Fritz put the cartridge in his pocket. I did not see Fritz pick up anything other than the live round. . . .

tom alyea.

why don't you start another thread with this -- perhaps a WCR supporter can tell us where these little white cards are presently located and who the prints belonged to....

Gary Mack has emailed me several times in the past, in response to various comments I'd made on another JFK forum. Since our last email exchange, he has apparently given up trying to assuage me with his sugar-coated endorsements of the official story. Imho, Gary's present view of this case is similar to Blakey's; while accepting all the totally impossible stuff (single bullet theory, wandering back wound, head snap not reacting in equal and opposite fashion, as dicated by the laws of physics, etc.), he still clings to the "Badgeman" identification and the acoustics evidence. Again, imho, I feel that these are two of the weaker arguments for conspiracy. Gary used to write lots of interesting articles for "The Continuing Inquiry," back in the late 70s-mid 80s, the feisty little newsletter produced by Penn Jones. He clearly knows that much of what he's saying is nonsense. He's well-versed in the evidence, and how he says some of the stuff he does now with a straight face is beyond me. I've asked him more than once to explain to me how his views on the JFK assassination had changed so dramatically since those days. He always dances around this issue (as does every other ex-conspiracy believer who has been mysteriously converted to lone nutism, like Todd Vaughn, Dave Reitzes, and many more), and the only specific thing he ever cites is the Roscoe White story. While he claims to still be a CTer, everything he utters publicly (especially on television specials, where he has become a real fixture) supports the official fairy tale. I will say that he is always civil in his email exchanges, but I'd caution anyone to weigh and consider everything he says carefully.

simply, it's a job -- City of Dallas-PR

[...]

Anyhow, if this stupid idea is getting media coverage, just imagine how much press Bugliosi is gonna get. I'm getting sick already.

A ton, from ALL the wrong places...

Re-read MLane's Rush to Judgement, as good today as it was 41 years ago.... I'm sure Bugliosi sighed relief when he knew it was Jerry Spence he'd be dealing with during the Showtime "mock" trial.

http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/la/or...os/w-000009.txt

Submitted to the LAGenWeb Archives

************************************************

Copyright. All rights reserved.

http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/copyright.htm

http:/www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/la/lafiles.htm

************************************************

Waldo, James Curtis, writer and journalist, son of James Elliot and

Eveline Almira (Cobb) Waldo; born at Meredosia Ill., Dec. 10, 1835;

died at New Orleans, La., Aug. 28, 1901; his mother died in his early

infancy and he was sent to live with an uncle, Rev. Josiah Waldo, at

Troy, N. V., where he attended the Troy academy; came to New Orleans in

1848 and after courses at local schools entered his father's firm;

removed to New York in 1857, where he engaged in wholesale mercantile

business up to the opening of the Civil war, when he came South and

entered the Confederate army; served only 1 year when he was honorably

discharged on account of extreme illness; was offered lucrative

appointments by Gen. Butler and the Federal authorities during the

occupation of New Orleans and the reconstruction period, all of which

he declined; after the Civil war entered journalism as a pursuit and

was identified one time or another and in an editorial capacity with

practically every democratic and anti-carpet bag newspaper or

publication in New Orleans; his writings and the bitter denunciations

by him of carpet bag politicians brought him into frequent conflicts

with those in authority during the reconstruction period; was one of

the organizers of the White League, the organization mainly responsible

for restoring white rule in Louisiana; took a conspicuous part in the

events immediately preceding and which followed the battle of the 14th

Sept., 1874, in which conflict he was an active participant; he is best

known and remembered for his poems published under the nom de plume of

"Tim Linkenwater"; "A Christmas Carol," originally written for the

newsboys of the New Orleans Times, has been translated into eight

languages; within 3 weeks of the publication in the New Orleans

Picayune of "An Old Heirloom," it had been copied by newspapers and

periodicals from coast to coast; he was the moving spirit of several

carnival organizations and was one of the 8 founders of the Carnival

Court; married Margaret Mary Woods; children, Janey Waldo Marks (Mrs.

Sumter Davis Marks), Eveline A., Harry J., James Curtis 2nd (died in

infancy), Catherine Woods, Margaret (died in infancy), Anna (died in

infancy), James Curtis 3rd, and Benjamin Taylor.

Source: Louisiana: Comprising Sketches of Parishes, Towns, Events,

Institutions, and Persons, Arranged in Cyclopedic Form (volume 3), pp.

584-585. Edited by Alcee Fortier, Lit.D. Published in 1914, by Century Historical

Certainly no suprise here that R. H. Waldo ultimately became the Commander of the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

Not that it has a bearing on anything but: after serving only one (1) year, then (honorably as you show above, medically) discharged? He rose to THAT position in the SCV?

On 11-22-63 JFK was killed and JBC was wounded.

That's it.

All other facts are in dispute.

Every time a theory is floated, an alternate theory rises. Whether this is part of an overall plan to prevent the truth from emerging or whether it's simply human nature - it's a reality. Someone says red, someone else says blue.

Here's a short, incomplete list of theories that remain unproven or facts which are under attack:

A single bullet hit both JFK and JBC.

All shots were fired from behind.

Some shots were fired from the grassy knoll.

Zapruder filmed the assassination.

JFK's body was altered.

The autopsy photos were altered.

The X-rays were altered.

The CIA was involved.

The Mafia was involved.

Anti-Castro Cubans were involved.

LHO killed JFK.

LHO wasn't really LHO.

The backyard photos are genuine.

Ruth and Michael Paine are spies.

LHO killed Tippit.

The tramps killed JFK.

Jimmy Files killed JFK.

Nicoletti fired a gun that day.

Bill Greer killed JFK.

The Secret Service was involved.

HL Hunt was in on it.

Howard Hunt was a tramp.

Charles Harrelson was a tramp.

Frank Sturgis was a tramp.

Frenchy was a tramp.

Chauncey Holt was a tramp.

Jack Ruby knew LHO.

Jack Ruby knew Tippit.

The 112th was told to "stand down."

Conein was in Dealey Plaza.

Lansdale was in Dealey Plaza.

Rip Robertson was in Dealey Plaza.

It was a Mauser, not a Carcano.

JFK was shot from a sewer.

LBJ engineered it.

The throat had a wound of entry.

The throat had a wound of exit.

The throat had a wound from mercury.

A shot was fired from inside the limo.

Ida Dox was in on it.

Charles Crenshaw was there.

Charles Crenshaw wasn't there.

Prouty read about the killing before it happened.

Badgeman shot JFK.

There was no Badgeman.

Black Dog Man shot him.

There was no Black Dog Man.

There was blood on the sidewalk.

Milteer knew it was going to happen.

Milteer was just a right wing gasbag.

JFK's coat was bunched.

JFK's coat was not bunched.

Umbrella Man was in on it.

Epilepsy Man was in on it.

A shot came from the Dal Tex building.

A shot came from the Courts building.

The motorcycle cop's mike was stuck on.

The paper bag carried the rifle.

LHO drove a Rambler.

Ruby was in Dealey Plaza.

The limo stopped.

The TSBD lost phone and electricity.

good post Mark,

*the Zapruder film is altered-not altered

mind if I use the list elsewhere?

Cousin Jethro is an enigma. He claims to believe in the LHO LONE GUNMAN myth, yet

he believes the WC was a coverup and the Zfilm is altered. He believes he is the sole

owner of certain "evidence". He believes he is the sole authority on anything related

to guns and ballistics. He seems to spend an inordinate amout of time on the internet

but is not in the mold of the obvious provocateurs. His writings ramble and are

repititious, repeating the exact same things endlessly. I usually read none of his

messages, because I know I have heard it all before. Strange.

Jack

Let me step in here for a second .... first, one doesn't wear on their head what Tom wears on his without being put together in good ways, psyscologically and physically! FREEING the Oppressed is taken very seriously in certain circles. I've had more than a passing interest in Tom's fraternity both here and abroad. Some of those on the otherside of the Atlantic may not be as aware as those of us here in the States about that fraternity....

Presdient Kennedy for had an affinity for Tom's military fraternity, expanding their capability and usability in ways most will never know. However, one can be assured we are ALL better because of the TOM PURVIS'S of the USArmy Special Forces (Green Beret), in which Tom was a leader of the best of the BEST.

I suspect Tom Purvis as a A-Team Commander [at one time] has forgot more regarding NATO 7.62/6.5mm ball ammunition [for rifles] than many of us knew/ or CLAIM today in knowing. I also won't go into what a HALO (which Tom is) instructor does, rest assured what does happen, DOSEN'T, sitting behind a computer screen....

A few on this board can also recall the dread anticipation knowing someone was going to die in a few moments.

I'm also sure, the Craig Roberts and Carlos Hathcock's of the world, not to mention Marines-RANGERS including LRRP's were instructed in their crafts by the likes of Special Operations Command types, the Tom Purvises if you will. So lighten up.... yes?

As far as the 6th floor is concerned, someone shot from that building, Oswald (1or2) or otherwise. Did he or they use a MC, who knows. Which Oswald was used as lackey, or active participant in the assassination? that's up for grabs, someone fired from up there. Can we put Oswald in that window? NO, the DPD can't! Does that mean a Oswald didn't shot, NO! Oswald can't be "excluded"... Answers have to be found elsewhere. Most of what Tom posts are aids, assisting researchers in background information... Primarily leads focused on/in Texas and New Orleans with accompanying history....

My problem reviewing the entire DP assassination scenario focuses on Elm Street. Everything I know about the assassination on Elm Street point to a "3rd" shot that occurs further down Elm Street street. This scenario can't be rectified by DP films, yet, YET based on MWest's survey data provided by Tom Purvis, the "3rd" shot does indeed happen further WEST on Elm Street...

therefore the Zapruder FILM is altered, the question remaining is, WHY?

One might also assume; background data provided by Tom Purvis will assist those that want that question answered. At the least, provide possible motive (willing and not-so-willing possible participants) in the assassination.

Now having said all that, maybe Tom can tell me if he knew a certain S-Major. He was TDY to C' Detachment-5th SOF, Nha Trang, we got banged up in the Central Highlands, we shared a hopital room at the French Hospital in Saigon Aug-Sept '63.

David Healy

Apparently it did not work.

I don't know what I did differently, but the third time it worked.

I will now occasionally post images if I get the hang of it...but the

problem is that all of my images are on the other computer!

Jack

PS...I am trying to attach a different image to this message

as a test.

the images appear, Jack...

Message from Gary Mack:

Reuters writer Ed Stoddard wondered how and why the Jefferies film might be studied by conspiracy "buffs," so I told him that some conspiracy "researchers" would look at how Kennedy's coat was bunched and whether that helped explain one of his wounds. I used the term "bunched" because that is the term most researchers have used over the years. Stoddard's paragraph is an accurate account, in my opinion. Here it is: "The president's coat is clearly if briefly seen bunched up on his back -- a detail that will be scrutinized by conspiracy theorists who see evidence of a plot in, among other things, the fact the bullet wounds on his jacket and body did not appear to match."

The film is irrelevant re matters occuring on Elm Street in DP on Nov 22nd 1963... (we and THEY know that)

Perhaps as ole Gerald Posner makes his rounds of talk shows on FOX, MSNBC, CNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC fielding all those powder-puffs questions he's sure to be asked, he'll be kind enough to quote Gary Mack eluding to your above.

I sure Posner no doubt will comment on how GREAT Jackie looks 60 seconds before her husband is shot to death with wounds in the back and head. Immediately after he states how Jeffries film supports the contention of the WCR...

TOP POST

Good post, John. As a early-mid 20th century overview, it reflects the 2 Vietnam's near-recent history nicely.

(an aside, during 1963, Madame Nhu (President Diem's wife) insisted her husband crackdown on dancing, dancing was banned in Saigon, a public uproar ensued. Which raised the in-country, ala national level of hatred for the (US backed) President of Vietnam; Diem)

No worries, Ed.

"GoooD Morning viietnaam"

what follows is : IMO

Before morning came the dawn.

Going back in time.

Before Ho, Before the French, there was the resistance...

The Vietnamese war for independencs stretches back into the mists of pre history.

To make an argument that Kennedy was assassinated because of a SUGGESTED withdrawal of troops ignores the realities of history.

We need to look at the realisities of Indo China as a whole. Not just isolated statements in response to particular and unusual events over a short period of time in 1963.

Lyndon maintained Kennedys commitment to limited US involvement and encouragement and supporting of the South Vietnamese to themselves fight their war until after his own election in 1965.

What was the guarantee that LBJ would escalate making 'Vietnam the reason for the asassination'?

LBJ wanted GFR (west germany) to increase its involvement in Latin America.

Prince Siahanouk distanced himself from the US.

China and VietNam are traditional enemies.

France was independent yet Kennedy sought to bolster their military capabilities.

Congress dramatically reduced Kennedys requests for funds.

Ho Chi Minh declared himself intransigent.

Ho's repeated overtures to the US were rebuffed.

What I'm getting that is that business was as usual and not dependent on Kennedy.

The history above (post 1) is long and likely few will read it in detail, but a quick skim through it shows a pattern where Kennedy was just one of many players. Not as signoificant as some need him to be in order to bolster a theory that Vietnam was the reasom for the assassination/

'John Simkin' wrote:

My wife has been seriously ill for the last six months. The treatment she has received from our National Health Service has been fantastic. When you deal with NHS doctors, you never feel that your treatment is being influenced by how much it costs. Studies show that private hospitals are guilty of a great deal of over-treatment. This is very important when you are seriously ill. NHS staff have very little difficulty showing they really care about your welfare. The fact that so many of the staff are immigrants does a great deal for race-relations in the UK.

[...]

_______________________

John,

Prayers sent across the way - we're currently going through *chemo* therapy with a family member. I'm not sure what's worse, the condition,

or the CURE!

David Healy

The following have agreed to work as moderators: John Geraghty (Republic of Ireland), Stephen Turner (England), Gary Loughran (Northern Ireland), Antti Hynonen (Finland), Evan Burton (Australia), and Kathy Beckett (USA).

These moderators will have the power ro remove offensive comments in the JFK section. They will not be deleting the arguments that members are expressing. This is not an attempt to censor people's views.

Moderators will send me a copy of the passage that has been deleted? I will keep a record of these deletions that can be used later if we have to consider deleting someone’s membership. Details will also be sent to the person who has had passages removed.

It is hoped that this new moderating system will stop members from making offensive comments in the first place. If not, the moderating system might encourage member's to change their approach to debate.

It is possible that we will get a case where a member appears to be determined to cause trouble. We will have to consider removing this person from the forum. This will be decided by a majority decision of the moderating committee and the three administrators of the forum.

For further guidance of expected behaviour see:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2243

John,

Frankly when it comes to forum moderator's of ANY stripe, one is too many and 1000 aren't enough!

Having said that, will these mod's be deleting entire posts? Or, what THEY deem 'offensive passages' within the posts, and how will those deletions appear on the screen? For that matter, what does the forum define is offensive? The criteria for their decesions is what?

Who is the USofA mod Kathy Beckett? Please post her profile...

David Healy

David a simply forum search gives you this:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showuser=5680

I read that, which led to the above questions ...

[...]

(ii) All members should use a photograph of themselves as an avatar (see below for instructions how to do this). If you still find you have problems with this please email me and I will help you with this.

[...]

Please feel free to add your comments about these rules. I welcome suggestions about other rules we might need. However, do not use this thread to reopen disputes with other members. If you do, they will be deleted.

John,

re the above, should or must? please clarify.

DHealy

The following have agreed to work as moderators: John Geraghty (Republic of Ireland), Stephen Turner (England), Gary Loughran (Northern Ireland), Antti Hynonen (Finland), Evan Burton (Australia), and Kathy Beckett (USA).

These moderators will have the power ro remove offensive comments in the JFK section. They will not be deleting the arguments that members are expressing. This is not an attempt to censor people's views.

Moderators will send me a copy of the passage that has been deleted? I will keep a record of these deletions that can be used later if we have to consider deleting someone’s membership. Details will also be sent to the person who has had passages removed.

It is hoped that this new moderating system will stop members from making offensive comments in the first place. If not, the moderating system might encourage member's to change their approach to debate.

It is possible that we will get a case where a member appears to be determined to cause trouble. We will have to consider removing this person from the forum. This will be decided by a majority decision of the moderating committee and the three administrators of the forum.

For further guidance of expected behaviour see:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2243

John,

Frankly when it comes to forum moderator's of ANY stripe, one is too many and 1000 aren't enough!

Having said that, will these mod's be deleting entire posts? Or, what THEY deem 'offensive passages' within the posts, and how will those deletions appear on the screen? For that matter, what does the forum define is offensive? The criteria for their decesions is what?

Who is the USofA mod Kathy Beckett? Please post her profile...

David Healy

(Q6) I am a Freshman at Chandler High in Chandler, Arizona, I am doing an Nation History Day project (http://nhd.org) on Agent Orange's effect in the Vietnam war. I would like to know: did Veterans know about the effects of the rainbow herbacides? if so were they told not to tell about it? Did the chemical manufacturers know about the effects? Personal accounts and inside on if the Veterans were effected. Should we have used the herbicides in Vietnam? Could Veterans tell a difference from the herbicides?

Ian

Herbacides were NOT used in Vietnam, circa. 1963-65. They were used soon after. Might want to post your question to alt.war.vietnam (google groups) many, many Vietnam era vets post to that board. I'm sure a few will respond to thoughtful questions covering the topic. [don't let rancor on that board hold you back from asking your questions].

I suggest in the title block of your post there, start the title with: "Doug Reese, please....". I'm sure he'll see it, you should receive a prompt reply to your question.

David Healy

I have said dozens of times that the GAP the gang is so proud of is IMMATERIAL.

I have said dozens of times that there is a gap because of the one-inch setback.

One track minds.

Jack

That is not what you said, Jack! You claimed to have replicated where Mary Moorman was standing and your first example photograph had these thick lines over the edge of the pedestal hiding the fact that the gap was missing in your so-called recreation photo. Ron Hepler, Josiah Thompson, myself and some others got after you for hiding that flaw in your example picture. Eventually you had no choice but to show it. Then Thompson offered up the drum scan and your position then was that Josiah had invented the gap with his drum scan. You went as far as to say that the drum scan was the only Moorman print that showed the gap. You were then challeneged you to take any of the known Moorman copies made before the drum scan and show us that there was no gap in any of them. You then went silent and never produced any such thing. You must have finally realized that the jig was up. Now once your 'no gap' claim was exposed as yet another erroneous claim of yours - you have suddenly come up with a new spin about the gap being immaterial. What ever you do Jack - don't admit you were wrong all along.

Bill Miller

perhaps you should re-read what Craig said above -- the way I interrupt his comment is: a copy of the Thompson copy of the Moorman5 Poaroid was digitally "enhanced" in Photoshop type of program for WHATEVER reason. Based on that alteration the Gang proved Jack White's (I might add Fetzer, Mantik and others) study wrong, that about it?

Now how can you prove one persons analysis/content interpretation of a specific photo wrong based another's copy of the SAME photo that's been proveably altered? Who is spinning whom here, Bill Miller? Your in a tough spot, Guy! The term JOKE comes to mind... What if anything E-L-S-E was altered?

Photo alteration is just that, PHOTO ALTERATION

*An aside, how do you, or this forum moderators determine truth, character and knowledge by reading and interpreting this (or any) forum postings? Seems a bit naive.

Nothing against John.G of course....

Of course....

There are ways to determine those attributes. One can begin by noting those who do not possess them.

Nothing against David H. of course....

How do those JFK assassination related facts (you've been interested in for many years) color your postings here, Mr. Hogan? Further praytell, how do they lead you in determining a researchers "attributes"? How do you Mr. Hogan know who does or does NOT possess certain attributes? Please show us your crystal ball!

Have you Mr. Hogan posted/performed ANY JFK assassination related research one can review, if so, WHERE?

Do you have the credentials to peer comment on specific areas of JFK assassination research, (in particular 11/22/63 films/photos of Dealey Plaza) and if so, please tell me and the lurkers those areas of expertise?

And for the record, it's perfectly fine to post armchair opinions re ANY phase of JFK assassination related research, here AND other places! Just tell us its opinion!

Yes that is a great Moorman image Jack, its the Thompson drum scan you usually call trash. Did you get some new glasses?

Jack has a tendency to change is mind depending on his needs at the moment. The drum scan is sharp in Jack's eyes until he has to defend why his recreation Moorman LOS didn't show the gap between the pedestal and the colonnade window ... then all of a sudden it is an altered image. Jack cannot produce any of the other Moorman photos that he claims do not show a gap, but nevertheless ... that's just a small detail in the effort to make everything appear altered. His use of the Altgens 6 photo on the book "Hoax" wehereas he called in genuine and can be used to validate other assassination images is another example. Seeing that now he is aware that Moorman and Hill's shadows are coming from the grass, which shows his having them in the street is nonsense, then I am sure that he will now claim that Altgens 6 is altered. Isn't it ironic how in the end it has been these guys own words that has hurt the credibility of their claims.

Bill

look like this is appropriate response here, too!

dgh: sit-down! the above from someone who thought increasing screen resolution increased detail in the image..... LMAO! But we won't talk about that, will we?

Actually David, the appropriate response would be for you to show us a Moorman print that doesn't show the gap that I speak of ... so at this time I ask that you provide such a print to show us that Jack is right. You can bet your sweet behind that if what Jack said was true, then he would have posted it long ago when asked to do so. So now that you have trolled your way into the discussion, I ask that you show us such a print.

Bill Miller

your steel trap memory has somehow failed you... I've been on record (4+years) the street/grass Moorman 5 debate was a non-starter, a waste of time, you know that.... wake-up and keep your seat. Now about your photo resolution issues...

dgh: perhaps the reason Robert Groden won't defend his JFK work [these days] is the drubbing he took during his appearence at the OJ trial, not to mention other on-camera appearences, eh? So, in order to keep a presence in the internet jfk assassination research arena he jerks ole Bill's chain on occasion.

Robert Groden doesn't jerk any chains - if contacted, he will take the time to address questions based on his knowledge and expertise. I have never seen or heard of Robert merly trolling a forum and giving the type of say nothing responses that I have seen you do, David. And so you know this from yet another time that I have had to respeat this to you ... Robert testified that the one photo offered into evidence had signs of tampering done to it. It was the other photographer who had published photos of OJ at a football game that convinced the jury that O.J. had once wore the Bruno Magli shoes.

To the POINT: These folks (here and elsewhere) think no further research is need in the JFK assassination...it's: LHO ALONE, pure and simple!

When is the using of the poorest quality images possible so to draw characters out of pixel distortion, film transfer artifacts, and light spots seen through trees and on shelter walls considered further research?

One needs to have compassion for Lone Nutter's in CT clothing these day's, with up to 90% of folks polled [over the years]believing something was amiss (how do you spell; C-O-N-S-P-I-R-A-C-Y) with WCR/Evidence, the Nutter's have a daunting task. A huge uphill PR campaign to wage, and they're losing ground daily...

One would think that your definition of a "nutter" might be someone who takes ridiculously degraded images and draws distorted people onto them so to make CT's look like idiots. I would think that you'd be more concerned about the ground they are losing for CT's looking credible. Some of us who believe there was a conspiracy want to have it proven by way of hard credible evidence and not just by doing something short of pouring gasoline out on the sidewalk and trying to make assassins out of the swirls of light. So not only shame on those individuals who implement such practices, but also shame on the trolls who try and defend it.

dgh: yeah right, doesn't jerk any chains.... it's ALWAYS the other guy...LMAO...

plain English Bill: your qualification interrupting JFK assassination related film or photo is? Such an easy question to clear up, especially if one wants a measure of credibility!

We know through testimony (Mo Weitzman), and other first hand experience - Groden's film background, yours is suspect! Help clear this up!

I may not be your first choice, but if I can help out in any way I would be most obliged. I am a student and have a good deal of free time on my hands. I realise that my youth may be an issue. If you are stuck for someone to help out, even in a minor role, I am certainly available.

In fact, you would be one of my first choices. I will contact you about this by email.

Do we have any other volunteers? It might be a good idea to have a panel of 3 moderators. If we only use one they might be accused of having a "secret agenda". It is important the other two volunteers have not been involved in any previous disputes.

I think John Geraghty is an excellent choice and I thank him for offering. John's passion for truth and his ability to seek and find knowledge has always been evident from his posts, in my opinion.

John Geraghty's youth is a non-issue, except that it is heartening to see that there are a few good young people out there willing to take the torch when it is passed.

John Geraghty has an extremely bright future in whatever endeavors he chooses to pursue. As I have told John before, I look forward to reading his first book.

*An aside, how do you, or this forum moderators determine truth, character and knowledge by reading and interpreting this (or any) forum postings? Seems a bit naive.

Nothing against John.G of course....

How do you provide unbiased E-D-U-C-A-T-I-O-N, when you have "mod's" interrupting "possible" PROPOGANDA and lies?

I suspect JFK is still the biggest attraction on this site (based on posting totals, I have no idea broad lurker visits). If, say the JFK portion of this site goes to a moderated forum, most CTer's will cease posting here. I certainly will, which I'm sure will delight many. Will JFK related traffic decrease? Over the short-term, I doubt it -- Long term, of course it will! Why would this forum be different? Wanna close off spirited JFK assassination related debate, go private -- impose a fee, then you can hear what you and other Lone Nutter's want to HEAR/DISCUSS.

Wanna do something constructive with the Dealey Plaza photo and film aspects of the JFK assassination? Find a source for verifiable original source imagery, which will get all these johnny-come-lately film photo experts on the same page, provide bandwidth for downloading same and space for interpretation-debate concerning same... bet 90% of the nonesense disappears.... as well as the johhny-come-lately's... (especially when they have to confirm their film/photo expertise)

Based on what I see, the ONLYbehaviour problem on this forum surfaces with; JFK-Dealey Plaza related film/photos... way to many theories and careers ride on the subject status quo...

as author David Mantik M.D., Ph.D. is known to of said [when it comes to the JFK debate]: "the hisorians have FAILED us, miserably....".

I'll add; so has the media, public and privately held -- and that now appears to include internet-USNET based outlets.... free speech is ILLUSION, nothing is FREE!

BIGGEST BOOK YET ON JFK'S KILLING

By CINDY ADAMS

New York Post

February 2, 2007 -- PROSECUTOR on the Charles Man son murder trial, Vincent Bugliosi, a name from headlines past, was DA in L.A. eight years. He also wrote award-winning crime books like "Helter Skelter," "Till Death Do Us Part" and "Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O.J. Simpson Got Away With Murder." He's at it again.

Not prosecuting. Writing.

Bugliosi's just written a 1,600-page, 1,500,000-word book. The thing's larger than most coffee tables. Start it in junior high, you'll finish as a senior citizen. The title: "Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy."

So, why? He's setting the record straight forever and always. The man takes apart every single theory ever perpetrated. He follows the Oswald line, Ruby line, conspiracy line, every line ever even sniffed at. Following each to its nth degree with every twist around every corner behind every tree down every alley inside every crevice, he's five years late delivering the manuscript.

This book's like a train hurtling through a tunnel because his ultimate conclusion? The final revelation? There ain't no revelation. It was what it was. It wasn't more than it was. A nut killed the president of the United States, and that's it, period.

Bugliosi originally wanted this in separate volumes but that was - pardon the expression - shot down because readers usually buy only one. While no human alive will stick through to the end, it'll sell to every library, archive, historical society, etc. Publisher Random House, price $50, pub. date May 19.

Think Bugliosi is hoping, Mark Lane is asleep?

Some of the names are in this thread - now contact MSNBC with your ground breaking finds!

Cut the crap!

Either put up or shut up!

Post your lists!

EBC

EBC,

Go read Jack's definition of the word "Provocateur" so to find out why I am not going to post such a list. I will address your use of the word "crap" though ... I will show you how Groden used it when speaking about the kind of nonsense you are trying to defend ...

Robert Groden: I have been a close friend of Jack's for thirty years ...................... In the matter of the Zapruder films authenticity and many of the other issues such as foreshortening, and other technical issues, you have been 100% right and Jack has been 100% wrong ........ The record must remain straight ......... This Zapruder film alteration foolishness has done so much harm, that it can not be measured. It is now spilling over into other areas of the photographic evidence in the Kennedy case. I am extremely frustrated by it all ............ Jack knows how disappointed I am about the damage that has been done by the irresponsible crap that has misled so many people in this case.

************

dgh: perhaps the reason Robert Groden won't defend his JFK work [these days] is the drubbing he took during his appearence at the OJ trial, not to mention other on-camera appearences, eh? So, in order to keep a presence in the internet jfk assassination research arena he jerks ole Bill's chain on occasion.

To the POINT: These folks (here and elsewhere) think no further research is need in the JFK assassination...it's: LHO ALONE, pure and simple!

One needs to have compassion for Lone Nutter's in CT clothing these day's, with up to 90% of folks polled [over the years] believing something was amiss (how do you spell; C-O-N-S-P-I-R-A-C-Y) with WCR/Evidence, the Nutter's have a daunting task. A huge uphill PR campaign to wage, and they're losing ground daily...

Yes that is a great Moorman image Jack, its the Thompson drum scan you usually call trash. Did you get some new glasses?

Jack has a tendency to change is mind depending on his needs at the moment. The drum scan is sharp in Jack's eyes until he has to defend why his recreation Moorman LOS didn't show the gap between the pedestal and the colonnade window ... then all of a sudden it is an altered image. Jack cannot produce any of the other Moorman photos that he claims do not show a gap, but nevertheless ... that's just a small detail in the effort to make everything appear altered. His use of the Altgens 6 photo on the book "Hoax" wehereas he called in genuine and can be used to validate other assassination images is another example. Seeing that now he is aware that Moorman and Hill's shadows are coming from the grass, which shows his having them in the street is nonsense, then I am sure that he will now claim that Altgens 6 is altered. Isn't it ironic how in the end it has been these guys own words that has hurt the credibility of their claims.

Bill

look like this is appropriate response here, too!

dgh: sit-down! the above from someone who thought increasing screen resolution increased detail in the image..... LMAO! But we won't talk about that, will we?