Bill Miller Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 So by using Miller as his mouthpiece, Mack can "remain neutral" while still having his say? Bill, Gary Mack has in the past tried to use me to put forth his messages, as he is using you. But since Mack made the claim that he'd seen something in a newspaper, it should be incumbent upon MACK to either produce the information--or a link thereto--or retract his [heretofore] unproven [unprovable?] assertion. That's the way the world works, Miller: if you make a claim, it's up to you to either back it up or back off. You don't seem to have a problem with this approach when dealing with Healy and others on the film alteration topic; so why are the rules different where Mack is involved? [/quote Where do you come up with this stuff. I don't post for Mack. Mack is a historian who is sitting atop the largest collection of historical images and data on the assassination that is only a phone call away. I seek information from him and pass it on. And Mack not only saw the article, but cited details from memory to me. I asked if he could find the article and he said the museum has lots of materials to be archived. My understanding is that there are lots of boxes of materials to go through. He said as he has time to archive them ... he will keep and eye out for it. Would anyone of you doubters like to make a wager that Mack told me the truth??? Then once the article is made known - what then - apologies from anyone or will it just go quiet until the next accusation arises??? Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Rigby Posted June 20, 2008 Author Share Posted June 20, 2008 Where do you come up with this stuff. I don't post for Mack. Mack is a historian who is sitting atop the largest collection of historical images and data on the assassination that is only a phone call away. I seek information from him and pass it on. And Mack not only saw the article, but cited details from memory to me. I asked if he could find the article and he said the museum has lots of materials to be archived. My understanding is that there are lots of boxes of materials to go through. He said as he has time to archive them ... he will keep and eye out for it. Would anyone of you doubters like to make a wager that Mack told me the truth??? Then once the article is made known - what then - apologies from anyone or will it just go quiet until the next accusation arises??? Bill Miller Can’t wait, Bill. In the meantime, let’s enjoy this extract from the expanded – eight-page pamphlet version – of Mark Lane’s original article on the case, “Lane’s Defense Brief for Oswald,” published by the National Guardian, 19 December 1963: ”A motion picture taken of the President just before, during, and after the shooting, and demonstrated on television showed that the President was looking directly ahead when the first shot, which entered his throat, was fired. A series of still pictures taken from the motion picture and published in Life magazine on Nov. 29 show show exactly the same situation.” http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/The_critics/L...l_Guardian.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 (edited) 'Bill Miller' wrote: Where do you come up with this stuff. I don't post for Mack. Mack is a historian who is sitting atop the largest collection of historical images and data on the assassination that is only a phone call away. I seek information from him and pass it on. And Mack not only saw the article, but cited details from memory to me. I asked if he could find the article and he said the museum has lots of materials to be archived. My understanding is that there are lots of boxes of materials to go through. He said as he has time to archive them ... he will keep and eye out for it. Would anyone of you doubters like to make a wager that Mack told me the truth??? Then once the article is made known - what then - apologies from anyone or will it just go quiet until the next accusation arises??? Bill Miller dance sweet Gloria, dance..... I'm embarrassed for you man, Paul Rigby has you tied up in so many knots even Denise Pointing is running the other direction. Happens every time amateurish Lone Nuts are confronted by researchers that know their way around subject matter. Edited June 20, 2008 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 dance sweet Gloria, dance..... I'm embarrassed for you man, Paul Rigby has you tied up in so many knots even Denise Pointing is running the other direction. Happens every time amateurish Lone Nuts are confronted by researchers that know their way around subject matter. Thanks for another say nothing lunatic type response ... You could be the poster boy for this symptom ... delusions of grandeur - a delusion (common in paranoia) that you are much greater and more powerful and influential than you really are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 (edited) dance sweet Gloria, dance..... I'm embarrassed for you man, Paul Rigby has you tied up in so many knots even Denise Pointing is running the other direction. Happens every time amateurish Lone Nuts are confronted by researchers that know their way around subject matter. Thanks for another say nothing lunatic type response ... You could be the poster boy for this symptom ... ]delusions of grandeur - a delusion (common in paranoia) that you are much greater and more powerful and influential than you really are lest you forget son, I'm the one that can't prove Z-film film alteration, YET. Lunatics need not apply at the door.... as far as Denise Pointing is concerned, what can I say other than; you Lone Nuts have been dancing for a long, long time.... You're not attempting to be the next Gary Mack are ya son? Edited June 20, 2008 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 lest you forget son, I'm the one that can't prove Z-film film alteration, YET. Of course you cannot prove Zfilm alteration yet ... you spent all your time trolling the forums and bitching about not seeing the originals instead of detailing a request and submitting it to the proper people so to get the job done. Lunatics need not apply at the door Yes David ... no one can take that job away from you! .... as far as Denise Pointing is concerned, what can I say other than; you Lone Nuts have been dancing for a long, long time.... You're not attempting to be the next Gary Mack are ya son? Didn't Vincent Van Gogh say something like that just before he finished going crazy and cut his ear off .... don't end up like Van Gogh, David - GET HELP!!! PS: Thanks again for another say-nothing response. Your name has been submitted to the Guinness people for the most non-related responses to the JFK assassination. Congrats!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Pointing Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 (edited) dance sweet Gloria, dance..... I'm embarrassed for you man, Paul Rigby has you tied up in so many knots even Denise Pointing is running the other direction. Happens every time amateurish Lone Nuts are confronted by researchers that . "Denise" Pointing ? I realize you have failing eyesight "gramps", that's obvious by the way you see things in the Z film which no one else does. But are they really THAT bad? You really are a poor old fellow aren't you. And this great researcher who has everybody "tied up in so many knots" and who really "know their way around subject matter" This would be your "chum" Rigby, right? The "researcher" who also believes SS agent Greer shot Kennedy, in the middle of a motorcade, with Jacky and the Connally's in the same car...AND NO ONE NOTICED!!! I guess their eyes must have been as bad as yours "gramps" LOL Look, I realise Rigby is probably the closest thing to a friend you ever had but your infatuation with everything he says is getting a little embarrassing. Why dont you just go back to Lancer or alt.conspiracy.jfk whatever and pester them for awhile. It must their turn for a few laughs now, and let the good folk at the ED forum get on with some real research...just go anywhere and take Rigby with you, PLEASE!! Edited June 20, 2008 by Denis Pointing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Pointing Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 (quote].... as far as Denise Pointing is concerned, what can I say other than; you Lone Nuts have been dancing for a long, long time.... You're not attempting to be the next Gary Mack are ya son? Didn't Vincent Van Gogh say something like that just before he finished going crazy and cut his ear off .... don't end up like Van Gogh, David - GET HELP!!! (/quote] I really think its too late for David "Gramps" Healy to get help now Bill, the kindest thing would be if someone had him committed. Oh, and if Healy = Van Gogh, does that make Rigby his little sunflower. LOL. Denis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Rigby Posted June 21, 2008 Author Share Posted June 21, 2008 (quote].... as far as Denise Pointing is concerned, what can I say other than; you Lone Nuts have been dancing for a long, long time.... You're not attempting to be the next Gary Mack are ya son? Didn't Vincent Van Gogh say something like that just before he finished going crazy and cut his ear off .... don't end up like Van Gogh, David - GET HELP!!! (/quote] I really think its too late for David "Gramps" Healy to get help now Bill, the kindest thing would be if someone had him committed. Oh, and if Healy = Van Gogh, does that make Rigby his little sunflower. LOL. Denis. Syke-warfare for the under-tens, courtesy of Ponticus, the man who doesn't know his middle from his end! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Rigby Posted June 21, 2008 Author Share Posted June 21, 2008 Why would anyone want to withdraw the first version of the Zapruder film and edit it? Herbers is again of use here. In the same piece he tells us what troubled the holders of the film:“…The known facts about the bullets, and the position of the assassin, suggested that he started shooting as the President’s car was coming toward him, swung his rifle in an arc of almost 180 degrees and fired at least twice more." Paul Mandel had at least one precursor. A little elaboration is in order. Why was it necessary to suppress the first version of the Zapruder film on November 25/26, and revise it? One key element of any answer lies with the Parkland press conference. The insistence of Perry and Clark that Kennedy was shot from the front threw a significant spanner in the works, not least because their expert, disinterested, first-hand, matter-of-fact descriptions were broadcast live. How to preserve the credibility of both the patsy-from-the-rear scenario, and the similarly pre-planned supporting film? The solution was to suppress the film-as-film, hastily edit it, and meanwhile bring the public round by degree through the medium of the written word. Here’s the latter process in action. Note how in example 1, the first shot, which does not impact, is fired while the presidential limousine is on Houston: John Herbers, “Kennedy Struck by Two Bullets, Doctor Who Attended Him Says,” New York Times, November 27, 1963, p.20:“…The known facts about the bullets, and the position of the assassin, suggested that he started shooting as the President’s car was coming toward him, swung his rifle in an arc of almost 180 degrees and fired at least twice more. A rifle like the one that killed President Kennedy might be able to fire three shots in two seconds, a gun expert indicated after tests. A strip of color movie film taken by a Dallas clothing manufacturer with an 8-mm camera tends to support this sequence of events. The film covers about a 15-second period. As the President’s car come abreast of the photographer, the President was struck in the front of the neck.” In this second example, the first shot, which now does impact, occurs as the turn is made from Houston onto Elm: Arthur J. Snider (Chicago Daily News Service), “Movies Reconstruct Tragedy,” Fort Worth Star-Telegram, (Evening edition), November 27, 1963, section 2, p.1:“Chicago, Nov. 27 – With the aid of movies taken by an amateur, it is possible to reconstruct to some extent the horrifying moments in the assassination of President Kennedy. As the fateful car rounded the turn and moved into the curving parkway, the President rolled his head to the right, smiling and waving. At that instant, about 12:30 p.m., the sniper, peering through a four-power telescope sight, fired his cheap rifle.” The 6.5 mm bullet – about .25 caliber – pierced the President’s neck just below the Adam’s apple. It took a downward course.” And here’s the process completed in example 3, with the presidential limousine now “50 yards past Oswald” on Elm: Paul Mandel, “End to Nagging Rumors: The Six Critical Seconds,” Life, 6 December 1963:“The doctor said one bullet passed from back to front on the right side of the President’s head. But the other, the doctor reported, entered the President’s throat from the front and then lodged in his body. Since by this time the limousine was 50 yards past Oswald and the President’s back was turned almost directly to the sniper, it has been hard to understand how the bullet could enter the front of his throat. Hence the recurring guess that there was a second sniper somewhere else. But the 8mm film shows the President turning his body far around to the right as he waves to someone in the crowd. His throat is exposed–toward the sniper’s nest–just before he clutches it,” http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/mandel.htm The film-as-film could not be shown while the above process of fraudulent harmonisation - of medical testimony and the lone-assassin-from-the-rear – was undertaken. More, it was predicated on the removal of the left turn from Houston onto Elm. Showing of that turn would have furnished visual-pictorial refutation of the entire elaborate deceit. Here's the CIA again engaged in the progressive unfolding of an entirely fictitious narrative, albeit two years earlier: ”The lack of accurate information did not deter some reporters at news desks in the United States, particularly in Miami. In its first edition, The Miami News carried a banner story by its Cuban expert, Hal Hendrix, who reported the rumors that the Isle of Pines had been shelled by sea and bombed, and that Raul Castro, Fidel’s brother, had been captured. Before long Miami’s Cuban exiles were reading in the second edition ‘unconfirmed reports’ that the Isle of Pines had fallen ‘and the thousands of political prisoners freed,’ and the flat assertion that ‘the invaders seemed to using their aircraft to increasing advantage. After covering the landings, the planes swept inland, shooting up and bombing Castro’s defenders who were gathered in large numbers.’ Also duly reported was the rumor that Fidel himself had a four-engine jet prop plane ready at the San Julian Air Base to flee the country,”Haynes Johnson. The Bay of Pigs: The Invasion of Cuba by Brigade 2506 (London: Hutchinson & Co. Ltd., 1965), p.120. Hendrix was notoriously active on 22 November, briefing extensively, on a non-attributable basis, to fellow pressmen on the Russo-Communist background of the alleged assassin. It's hard to resist the notion that the same figures who handled Hendrix on both occasions were not a million miles away from the creation and management of the spin campaign waged 27 Nov - 6 December in respect of the Zapruder film. Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 (edited) dance sweet Gloria, dance..... I'm embarrassed for you man, Paul Rigby has you tied up in so many knots even Denise Pointing is running the other direction. Happens every time amateurish Lone Nuts are confronted by researchers that . "Denise" Pointing ? I realize you have failing eyesight "gramps", that's obvious by the way you see things in the Z film which no one else does. But are they really THAT bad? You really are a poor old fellow aren't you. And this great researcher who has everybody "tied up in so many knots" and who really "know their way around subject matter" This would be your "chum" Rigby, right? The "researcher" who also believes SS agent Greer shot Kennedy, in the middle of a motorcade, with Jacky and the Connally's in the same car...AND NO ONE NOTICED!!! I guess their eyes must have been as bad as yours "gramps" LOL Look, I realise Rigby is probably the closest thing to a friend you ever had but your infatuation with everything he says is getting a little embarrassing. Why dont you just go back to Lancer or alt.conspiracy.jfk whatever and pester them for awhile. It must their turn for a few laughs now, and let the good folk at the ED forum get on with some real research...just go anywhere and take Rigby with you, PLEASE!! D-E-N-I-S-E, ya see son, Dennis is spelled Dennis in all english speaking countries.... trouble with the English language too, son? We're here to serve you Denise. Now don't go hiding behind Paul Rigby big guy... we gotta see what your film/photo credential look like.... We've no need for more disinfo agents... WHAT? No bio? You're on this forum with no BIO? Who are you Denise Pointing, we ALL have them, except YOU sonny! What say you John Simkin Denis Pointing has no bio! What is the lad scared of? Edited June 21, 2008 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gary Loughran Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 La tristesse durera toujours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Pointing Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 (edited) dance sweet Gloria, dance..... I'm embarrassed for you man, Paul Rigby has you tied up in so many knots even Denise Pointing is running the other direction. Happens every time amateurish Lone Nuts are confronted by researchers that . "Denise" Pointing ? I realize you have failing eyesight "gramps", that's obvious by the way you see things in the Z film which no one else does. But are they really THAT bad? You really are a poor old fellow aren't you. And this great researcher who has everybody "tied up in so many knots" and who really "know their way around subject matter" This would be your "chum" Rigby, right? The "researcher" who also believes SS agent Greer shot Kennedy, in the middle of a motorcade, with Jacky and the Connally's in the same car...AND NO ONE NOTICED!!! I guess their eyes must have been as bad as yours "gramps" LOL Look, I realise Rigby is probably the closest thing to a friend you ever had but your infatuation with everything he says is getting a little embarrassing. Why dont you just go back to Lancer or alt.conspiracy.jfk whatever and pester them for awhile. It must their turn for a few laughs now, and let the good folk at the ED forum get on with some real research...just go anywhere and take Rigby with you, PLEASE!! D-E-N-I-S-E, ya see son, Dennis is spelled Dennis in all english speaking countries.... trouble with the English language too, son? We're here to serve you Denise. Now don't go hiding behind Paul Rigby big guy... we gotta see what your film/photo credential look like.... We've no need for more disinfo agents... WHAT? No bio? You're on this forum with no BIO? Who are you Denise Pointing, we ALL have them, except YOU sonny! What say you John Simkin Denis Pointing has no bio! What is the lad scared of? I realise a persons mental age regresses as they get older "gramps" but going by this last post "gramps" if you regress any more you'll be seen crawling round the old folks home on all fours, wearing a nappy. And Ive never claimed to have any "film/photo credential" they are not needed to combat your nonsense Healy, all you require is a brain and common sense, the two commodities you very definitely lack. Now, instead of all this pathetically childish name calling and "Denise" gibberish, try posting something to convince me, some facts, figures, anything to back up your argument on Z film alteration. I know you cant post anything from your "famous" chapter in Fretzers, LOL, "book" as that's all been shown to be pure rubbish long ago, but surely you have something new by now, after all its not much to show for a life times work, is it Healy? Oh, by the way, I received an unwelcome email yesterday from one of your "fans" over at alt.conspiracy.jfk. I sincerly hope the accusations concerning you, circulating over there aren't true, although that would of course explain why your post's are so weired. I was also supplied with a link to a web page dedicated to famous Healy post's and statments, which, I am told, proves the allegations to be true. I'm sure you'll be relived to hear I've resisted the temptation to visit there, as I dont wish to be associated with the foul mouthed bunch from alt.conspiracy.jfk, nor sink to their level, which I suppose, also means I dont wish to associate with you either as you seem to be one of them. Why dont you just stay there Healy and leave this board to the more decent, serious researcher. You really dont belong here, you know. The ED forum standed requires a lot more than having the ability to think up ingenious ways of insulting people and adding a letter or two to their name for amusement. PS Who's Holmes by the way? Edited June 21, 2008 by Denis Pointing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Pointing Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 La tristesse durera toujours Or as long as Healy keeps posting here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Rigby Posted June 21, 2008 Author Share Posted June 21, 2008 I realise a persons mental age regresses as they get older "gramps" but going by this last post "gramps" if you regress any more you'll be seen crawling round the old folks home on all fours, wearing a nappy. And Ive never claimed to have any "film/photo credential" they are not needed to combat your nonsense Healy, all you require is a brain and common sense, the two commodities you very definitely lack. Now, instead of all this pathetically childish name calling and "Denise" gibberish, try posting something to convince me, some facts, figures, anything to back up your argument on Z film alteration. I know you cant post anything from your "famous" chapter in Fretzers, LOL, "book" as that's all been shown to be pure rubbish long ago, but surely you have something new by now, after all its not much to show for a life times work, is it Healy? Oh, by the way, I received an unwelcome email yesterday from one of your "fans" over at alt.conspiracy.jfk. I sincerly hope the accusations concerning you, circulating over there aren't true, although that would of course explain why your post's are so weired. I was also supplied with a link to a web page dedicated to famous Healy post's and statments, which, I am told, proves the allegations to be true. I'm sure you'll be relived to hear I've resisted the temptation to visit there, as I dont wish to be associated with the foul mouthed bunch from alt.conspiracy.jfk, nor sink to their level, which I suppose, also means I dont wish to associate with you either as you seem to be one of them. Why dont you just stay there Healy and leave this board to the more decent, serious researcher. You really dont belong here, you know. The ED forum standed requires a lot more than having the ability to think up ingenious ways of insulting people and adding a letter or two to their name for amusement. PS Who's Holmes by the way? Sir Joseph Bazalgette plainly laboured in vain - the sewers of London run as rank as ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now