Mike Williams Posted May 15, 2008 Share Posted May 15, 2008 Bill, Just a quick question. How could Sitzman have made the "other" film, when according to some, she was never even on the pedestal? Will the real Abe Zapruder please stand up, please stand up, please stand up! Duncan, You need to give your eyes a rest man, your seeing things! But in the interest of science....heres a photo for you! Circled in green is proof positive of the far reaches of the conspiracy, as we can clearly and plainly see E.T. standing behind the Zapruder Sitzman team! What ever you do, please do NOT give Fetzer this photo, it would be a whole new book in no time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted May 15, 2008 Share Posted May 15, 2008 Bill,Just a quick question. How could Sitzman have made the "other" film, when according to some, she was never even on the pedestal? Will the real Abe Zapruder please stand up, please stand up, please stand up! Duncan, You need to give your eyes a rest man, your seeing things! But in the interest of science....heres a photo for you! Circled in green is proof positive of the far reaches of the conspiracy, as we can clearly and plainly see E.T. standing behind the Zapruder Sitzman team! What ever you do, please do NOT give Fetzer this photo, it would be a whole new book in no time. Instead of seeing ET after your glass of wine, look at the image you posted and tell us: 1. How much shorter than Sitzman is Zapruder? 2. Show us Zapruder's camera. 3. Show us what he is aiming his camera at. 4. Show us Zapruder's hat and bow tie. Scoffing at research and researchers is not research. It is goofy. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williams Posted May 15, 2008 Share Posted May 15, 2008 Jack, Goofy Perhaps, but no less goofy than some of the ridiculous claims. Ill need about 1/2 bottle of good scotch, wine is for the non hacking faction. Abe appears to be about a half a head shorter than Sitzman. His camera is in front of his face. Cant see the bow tie. Hes aiming it at the limo. Jack, You have done some great work over the years, and I certainly dont mean to torment you, I just do not buy into the whole alteration theory. It has never been satisfactorily proven to me, and in my opinion. Most of the claims are weak at best and ludicrous at worst. However would love to buy you a drink sometime, your tenacity and dedication is impressive. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williams Posted May 15, 2008 Share Posted May 15, 2008 Duncan, You really seem to like my hat dont ya? See The marine Copr dosent give you a choice really, you wear the uniform per their regulations. But the hair man, the hair you do by choice. I can not wait to see the face paint! Do not forget the big red nose, its befitting a researcher of your stature! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williams Posted May 15, 2008 Share Posted May 15, 2008 Duncan I will be awaiting the same from you. But I must admit that Black Dog Blob was entertaining to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted May 15, 2008 Share Posted May 15, 2008 Duncan I will be awaiting the same from you. But I must admit that Black Dog Blob was entertaining to say the least. You know Mike, for someone who says they are NEW to studying the assassination, you have too much to say in my opinion, and are far too knowledgeable about many aspects related to the assassination, not just here, but on other forums too. Your disruptive tactics are nothing more than a minor irritation to me, and the good people on this forum will see through you eventually. I have nothing more to say to you, or your oversized hat ? lol!!! Duncan we have.... its the only tactic left to the Lone Nut cyber-contingent... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williams Posted May 15, 2008 Share Posted May 15, 2008 Duncan, Well thank you for the compliment. I say I am new, which I guess is true. I have only been at this a year, give or take a couple months. Might ask Don Roberdeau, he knows me well. Anyhow Ill take the comment about my knowing to much, and having to much to say as a compliment. I am lucky in one regard, I never forget anything I read, and in the last year I have read a ton of books on the subject, as well as have done a ton of reading here. David, I am hardly a lone nut. Peace to you both, Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted May 15, 2008 Share Posted May 15, 2008 Duncan,Well thank you for the compliment. I say I am new, which I guess is true. I have only been at this a year, give or take a couple months. Might ask Don Roberdeau, he knows me well. Anyhow Ill take the comment about my knowing to much, and having to much to say as a compliment. I am lucky in one regard, I never forget anything I read, and in the last year I have read a ton of books on the subject, as well as have done a ton of reading here. David, I am hardly a lone nut. Peace to you both, Mike Duncan is a hoot! He thinks you say too much to be new in his opinion. LOL!!!! I guess it would be better if you followed Duncan and Healy's example and say too much while not saying anything at all ... think about it! (smile) Then there is Healy who calls people lone nuts. He offers no insight or proof of his allegation ... he just says it. The irony of this is that Healy is on record in the same thread as saying that he believes the Zapruder film to be altered and elsewhere in that same thread that he has never seen any proof of alteration, so I guess that in David's mind must mean that he is both a LNr and a CTs. (Now how funny is that!!!) Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williams Posted May 15, 2008 Share Posted May 15, 2008 Bill, Perhaps David has an alter ego, and when we combine that with Duncan we have David, David, and Duncan. The Ed Forum equal of Daryl Daryl and Larry. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williams Posted May 16, 2008 Share Posted May 16, 2008 Duncan, Not I gotta take my big hat off to you THAT was funny!!! Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 (edited) Bill, Perhaps David has an alter ego, and when we combine that with Duncan we have David, David, and Duncan. The Ed Forum equal of Daryl Daryl and Larry. Mike my goodness your falling all over Bill "BM" Miller again, Mikey..... Ya didn't let Tom Purvis or I scare ya now did we? I'd like to know the extent of your JFK assassination research knowledge.... Haven't read much (if ANYTHING) from you concerning same... We do understand Lancer (aka Bill's place) has a cheer-leading crew here most of the time. Time is a valuable commodity.... do we waste more time with you or not? No sense "tossing pearls before swine", eh? Might want to give a few of those 45 questions that are posted here a shot (pardon the pun), .... give it that good old semper fi try, eh? See what you're made of...... Edited May 17, 2008 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 Duncan is a hoot! He thinks you say too much to be new in his opinion. LOL!!!! I guess it would be better if you followed Duncan and Healy's example and say too much while not saying anything at all ... think about it! (smile)Then there is Healy who calls people lone nuts. He offers no insight or proof of his allegation ... he just says it. The irony of this is that Healy is on record in the same thread as saying that he believes the Zapruder film to be altered and elsewhere in that same thread that he has never seen any proof of alteration, so I guess that in David's mind must mean that he is both a LNr and a CTs. (Now how funny is that!!!) Bill No Bill, what is funny is watching you two jokers completely and purposely disrupt this thread. You make a good team. When's the big day ? lol!!! Duncan they've no choice, Duncan..... they're cornered, can't bs their way out of it here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 they've no choice, Duncan..... they're cornered, can't bs their way out of it here. David, anytime you wish to be specific and debate the evidence of the case ... please feel free to do so. Idiotic schoolyard banter doesn't mean anything to anyone other than another xxxxx. It seems the one and only time that you did actually attempt to debate the evidence was when you merely admitted that you had 'seen no proof of alteration ... something you claimed to have said for years'. I mean ... What was it about Duncan's ability to add peoples faces to a meaningless cartoon that impresses you so much ... were you not able to see the alteration???? (smile~) To post the rubbish that you bring to a thread that has not a shred of JFK related data in it or the ridiculous nonsense that Duncan post with distorted alleged enhancements makes a mockery of the purpose of this forum and JFK's murder as a whole. Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 (edited) No Bill, what is funny is watching you two jokers completely and purposely disrupt this thread. You make a good team.When's the big day ? lol!!! Duncan Let us just look and see what was disrupted, Duncan. We start off with your opening post showing this ridiculous image that had no one of known that it was referenced to the JFK assassination ... no one would even know just what in the hell it was supposed to be related to. (see below) In a following response I referenced the Bronson slide for a comparison view of Sitzman's posture. (It appears that the disruption of the thread by adding common sense and responsible research practices by cross referencing the various images of Sitzman on the pedestal had now come into play) Your response was to merely say 'prove it' as to Sitzman not holding a camera and shooting this alleged 'other film'. I then responded by pointing out Sitzman in the Bronson and Nix images - both showing nothing obstructing Sitzman's face. Jack was then kind enough to post a fairly good copy of the Bronson slide which shows a white spot (Sitzman's hand) on Zapruder's back. In the meantime there is the David Healy contributions to the thread: * BM....can you positively ID Sitzman and Zapruder (in the Moorman5 [above] or any other Elm Street film-photo sequence for that matter) on that pedestal? THEN we'll talk about whose hands are on what and whom.... Little foundation, son..... (Healy forgetting that Sitzman was filmed near the pedestal by Zapruder before the parade arrived. In that sequence - Sitzman turns and looks directly at the camera. Healy has also forgotten that in the book "National Nightmare" ... Sitzman is photographed standing at the pedestal dressed just like the woman seen on the pedestal in all the assassination images of it) * denying and/or avoiding the question gets you no where... Can you ID those standing on the pedestal? Here's a hint: nor can Gary Mack make the ID * can you ID those on the pedestal here? * we have.... its the only tactic left to the Lone Nut cyber-contingent... * my goodness your falling all over Bill "BM" Miller again, Mikey..... Ya didn't let Tom Purvis or I scare ya now did we? I'd like to know the extent of your JFK assassination research knowledge.... Haven't read much (if ANYTHING) from you concerning same... We do understand Lancer (aka Bill's place) has a cheer-leading crew here most of the time. Time is a valuable commodity.... do we waste more time with you or not? No sense "tossing pearls before swine", eh? Might want to give a few of those 45 questions that are posted here a shot (pardon the pun), .... give it that good old semper fi try, eh? See what you're made of...... * they've no choice, Duncan..... they're cornered, can't bs their way out of it here. Then there is Jack's posting about Zapruder and Sitzman dancing on the pedestal ... accompanied by Bernice posting some ridiculous study Jack did by using the badly blurred Wiegman film so to imply that no one was on the pedestal. Jack does however, accidentally shows Sitzman in the Willis photo, which in turns shows no camera in front of Sitzman's face. But it appears that cross referencing assassination images disrupts the genius of your thread, so it goes unnoticed ... with the exception of two jokers like Mike and I. (sigh~) Then Jack moves even further off-topic by bringing in the pyracantha bush as if to imply that its been altered because he cannot see how a view of it from two different angles would not show the same branch formations. Then Jack is on to Moorman and Hill and how they look in the Bronson slide - then on to two women at the curb on the north side of Elm - then onto Beatrice Hester holding a newspaper. (No complaints are made about that disruption of your thread) Then to keep the thread on target ... YOU (Duncan) post about Hat Man - Gordon Arnold - and get into a tit-for-tat with Mike about him being a xxxxx ... ending with your last response showing how you took the time to xxxxx a photo of Mike and I's images on a cake. So while I do not believe you will have the character or desire to see how YOU have contributed to the disruption of this thread ... I just wanted to summarize the responses so the readers can have a idea as to just what and by whom was anything disrupted. Bill Edited May 19, 2008 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 (edited) Bill Thanks for posting my fine enhancement Bill, the best one ever produced by anyone to date. It's good to see you getting the thread back on track.! Duncan I think a more honest statement would be that your alleged enhancement is the best one that YOU have posted to date, but its still a joke even by the lowest of standards. What it has done is show others just how off-the-wall you tend to get. Congrats, your enhancement has shown Sitzman to have been running a camera - Jack's enhancement says that no one was on the pedestal ... so let us see which one of you really believes the garbage you post by going to the national news media and getting your great claims out to the world!!! I'm guessing that you'll not do a damned thing other than play to the forum and anyone silly enough to listen to you. Bill Edited June 10, 2008 by Bill Miller 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