Hacked again?

[Bill Miller]

Why no Z-film frame of Mary Moorman *on the grass* in the Nov 29th 1963 issue of LIFE, or the Memorial issue? Same for the October 2nd 1964 issue, NO Z-film frame published of Mary Moorman *on the grass*.

What kind of an idiot would think that Life Magazine should have been more concerned about showing Moorman on the grass rather than to concentrate on showing the reactions of the victims inside the car. Such a remark is asinine and IMO it shows just how weak minded some people can be.

Bill Miller

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Len:

Thanx for the 6 reasons. Compelling. Bill and David, thanx also but you both go into tangents where I am unfamiliar. Someone whose name begins with Z (Not Zapruter)...who is to come out with something???

Dawn

Thats Roland Zavada Dawn, the guy who invented Kodakchrome 2, He has some delayed (though ill health) work being published on why the N/A copy of Zapruder is the in camera original, and not a copy.

[Len Colby]

Len:

Thanx for the 6 reasons. Compelling. Bill and David, thanx also but you both go into tangents where I am unfamiliar. Someone whose name begins with Z (Not Zapruter)...who is to come out with something???

Dawn

Thats Roland Zavada Dawn, the guy who invented Kodakchrome 2, He has some delayed (though ill health) work being published on why the N/A copy of Zapruder is the in camera original, and not a copy.

Thanx Dawn. It should also be noted that will be his 3rd report on why the film isn't a copy. The 1st was very technical and couched becaused of restrictions put on him by Kodak, the 2nd is more accessable to lay people and more direct because he had since retired. There are excerpts from and a link to it in my last post.

David shows his intellectual dishonesty by constantly referring to Zavada's 1st report as if he had never released the 2nd. He has yet to explain his false claim that Zavada promised his 3rd report soon. 1st he cited an e-mail Zavada (also known as Rollie) sent him, perhaps he forgot that I got a copy of the same message. In that message Rollie said the opposite, that it would take him "some time". Now Healy claims that Zavada promised the report "soon" publicly but refuses to say when or where or provide a citation.

Me:So you think the film that was seen in Zapruder's office the next morning wasn't Kodakchrome? Obviously the finished product including the copies were on Kodakcrome. IIRC Stoley took possession of the films then an there and stills were printed in Life 2 or 3 days later.

dgh01: how you arrive at that, did I say that? your snipping speaks volumes -- old time, LONGTIME Lone Nutter tactic, when you don't know or try to steer the thread to something you can't or won'd discuss -- snip, re-phrase the point, then RUN....

Bill: Stoley took possession of the film and stills were printed before 24 hrs had elapsed because by Sunday morning the stills had been made and carefully gone over so to send them to publication. I believe that shipments of them magazines were completed by Sunday night because they were being mailed to customers by the next morning.

dgh01: ah so WHAT! Tell me WHY thats relevant to a Z-film alteration scenario?

IIRC the alterationists always claimed that the copy of the film screened in Zapruder's office the next morning was altered. IIRC Costella said that. Do you not back that theory? If not when do you think "the switch" was made? Costella also claimed that some of the stills from Life were from the altered film

[Bill Miller]

IIRC the alterationists always claimed that the copy of the film screened in Zapruder's office the next morning was altered. IIRC Costella said that. Do you not back that theory? If not when do you think "the switch" was made? Costella also claimed that some of the stills from Life were from the altered film

[b]Dawn, also keep in mind that these alteration claims are so bogus that the people making them are contradicting themselves at times. Jack has people believing that Moorman was standing in the street, while at the same time Jack is saying that Altgens 6 is genuine. Altgens 6 shows Brehm, Moorman and Hill's shadows coming from the south pasture and over the curb. If this argument was presented to you in a court of law - YOU'D HAVE A FIELD DAY!

Red arrow points to Hill and Moorman's shadows coming from the grass. Jack White says the Altgens photo is unaltered/genuine and yet Jack claims Moorman and Hill are in the street. I am not aware of a single person who supports alteration ever pointing this grave error out to Jack or Fetzer. If the error was pointed out, then it went into print anyway. Since that time, the error has been presented to these JFK forums and you still will see Jack trying to sell that bogus claim, as well as Healy. How much credibility would you give them in one of your court trials if they double talked like this in front of your jury???

These alterationist know so little about the subject they are pretending to understand that they say things that are really absurd. Healy tells people to read Costella's web page. On that very web page, Costella finds it suspicious that the Life Magazine's prints are clearer than the MPI version of the Zapruder film. Costella fails to see that Life Magazine made prints from the camera original and MPI took photographs of the camera original's frames - ran them through a series of processes (some of which lose clarity/sharpness) - and then transferred the images onto film made for research purposes. Now in a court of Law, which picture would you find more reliable - a 1st generation photo or a third generation photo that has been filtered down? Groden becomes so disgusted at these guys because they have not bothered to learn the subject well enough to discuss it intelligently. Look at the colors seen on the Life print and compare them to the same colors on the MPI version ... this is just one aspect of determining whether one is looking at copies that are generations away from the original. The differences are so noticeable that one doesn't need to be an expert to see them with your own eyes even if you didn't know the causes for them - that's where people like Groden or Zavada come into play ... they know the "why's". You should do a search and go back and read the responses Healy gave and when you do - you will trust Groden's opinions even more.

Bill Miller[/b]

Edited September 1, 2006 by Bill Miller

[David G. Healy]

'Bill Miller' dronned on:

[...]

These alterationist know so little about the subject they are pretending to understand that they say things that are really absurd. Healy tells people to read Costella's web page. On that very web page, Costella finds it suspicious that the Life Magazine's prints are clearer than the MPI version of the Zapruder film.

dgh" why don't you post the exact quote that offends your sensabilities. Cease alluding to, show the lurkers what your talking about. Grandstanding is so unbecoming, you have that little faith in Lurkers?... a cite will work wonders? While your at it, take the Costella's website points apart -- step by step, I've been waiting for one of you drone artists attempt at that (get your Physicist's line up, you'll NEED 'em)

Costella fails to see that Life Magazine made prints from the camera original and MPI took photographs of the camera original's frames - ran them through a series of processes (some of which lose clarity/sharpness) - and then transferred the images onto film made for research purposes. Now in a court of Law, which picture would you find more reliable - a 1st generation photo or a third generation photo that has been filtered down? Groden becomes so disgusted at these guys because they have not bothered to learn the subject well enough to discuss it intelligently. Look at the colors seen on the Life print and compare them to the same colors on the MPI version ... this is just one aspect of determining whether one is looking at copies that are generations away from the original. The differences are so noticeable that one doesn't need to be an expert to see them with your own eyes even if you didn't know the causes for them - that's where people like Groden or Zavada come into play ... they know the "why's". You should do a search and go back and read the responses Healy gave and when you do - you will trust Groden's opinions even more.

dgh:Groden's opinion, ROFLMAO? His credibility and motives are tainted/suspect at BEST.... rofl, you need a new hero, Bill

Bill Miller

Edited September 1, 2006 by David G. Healy

[Jack White]

I trust Bob Groden completely. (FWIW)

Good, Dawn ... then I will make it easy for you. Groden says that the alteration believers do not know what they are talking about. Robert says that while Jack White is a nice man - he says that Jack is not a photo expert and is one of the worst people he has seen at photo interpretation. Robert's opinion of Healy is not any better ... FWIW.

Bill Miller

"Miller" has gone too far now. I am certain that Robert never said such!

He has been a very close friend since 1978. I have helped him a lot and he

has helped me a lot. The "quote" has been fabricated by "Miller".

Robert has given me several of his books, suitably autographed (see

attachment) which state his true opinion. Let "Miller" post "Robert's

written opinion of me" and see if they match my attachment.

"Miller" is a despicable xxxx and hypocrite. See what Groden really

says. Which do you believe?

Jack

[Bill Miller]

dgh" why don't you post the exact quote that offends your sensabilities. Cease alluding to, show the lurkers what your talking about. Grandstanding is so unbecoming, you have that little faith in Lurkers?... a cite will work wonders? While your at it, take the Costella's website points apart -- step by step, I've been waiting for one of you drone artists attempt at that (get your Physicist's line up, you'll NEED 'em)

It wasn't just a few weeks or so ago that we went over this stuff. Besides, it is good practice for those to learn how to use the forum search engine so they can go read the things you can't seem to recall saying. (God, I love those archives!)

dgh:Groden's opinion, ROFLMAO? His credibility and motives are tainted/suspect at BEST.... rofl, you need a new hero, Bill

David, Dawn said she trust Groden's opinions, thus I shared them with her. xxxxx elsewhere!

Bill Miller

[Jack White]

I trust Bob Groden completely. (FWIW)

Good, Dawn ... then I will make it easy for you. Groden says that the alteration believers do not know what they are talking about. Robert says that while Jack White is a nice man - he says that Jack is not a photo expert and is one of the worst people he has seen at photo interpretation. Robert's opinion of Healy is not any better ... FWIW.

Bill Miller

"Miller" has gone too far now. I am certain that Robert never said such!

He has been a very close friend since 1978. I have helped him a lot and he

has helped me a lot. The "quote" has been fabricated by "Miller".

Robert has given me several of his books, suitably autographed (see

attachment) which state his true opinion. Let "Miller" post "Robert's

written opinion of me" and see if they match my attachment.

"Miller" is a despicable xxxx and hypocrite. See what Groden really

says. Which do you believe?

Jack

Come on, "Miller". Get Robert to WRITE the statement "he told you".

I want to compare the writing. Be sure to have him disavow the

second attached statement he wrote to me... "YOU'RE THE BEST."

The attached autograph is from his THE SEARCH FOR LEE HARVEY OSWALD,

for which I gave Robert approximately 100 slides, many of which he used

in the book. He and I have often swapped photos and photo studies.

He has visited in my home frequently and is a great favorite of my

wife Sue. How often does he visit you?

Come on, "Miller"...put up or shut up. You are lying and you know it,

but you are too gutless to admit your fabrication. If you are such a

good friend of Robert's, I am sure he will be glad to write you a

statement defaming me and disavowing his previous statements.

Robert and I agree on nearly everything...EXCEPT his insistence

that the Z film is NOT altered. I completely understand why he cannot

change his stance, since all of his previous work depends on his

being "the expert" on the film. He is entitled to believe what he

wants, despite newer studies. That does not keep me from counting

him as one of my best friends. He has done more to advance

JFK research than almost anyone else, by far, and I appreciate

being his friend.

Jack

PS...I challenge "Miller" to show us the autographed book copies

given to him praising HIS research and help. I will be waiting.

After reading Groden's own words, I call on everyone to denounce

"Miller" as the fraud he is. Come on, people...quit letting him

spreading lies. Speak up!

Edited September 1, 2006 by Jack White

[Bill Miller]

"Miller" has gone too far now. I am certain that Robert never said such!

He has been a very close friend since 1978. I have helped him a lot and he

has helped me a lot. The "quote" has been fabricated by "Miller".

Robert has given me several of his books, suitably autographed (see

attachment) which state his true opinion. Let "Miller" post "Robert's

written opinion of me" and see if they match my attachment.

"Miller" is a despicable xxxx and hypocrite. See what Groden really

says. Which do you believe?

Jack

Jack - Show us something good Groden has said about your alteration garbage??? I too, am Groden's friend ... spent the last 3 out of 4 B-days dining with him. He believes that your alteration claims are absurd. I speak to Robert on a regular basis and you are welcome to call him for an update any time you wish. I, and others, have said that your past work prior to your alteration claims was good, however, your poorly researched alteration claims have hurt your credibility. FWIW, Robert just got off the phone with me as I read him some of what was posted and he agrees that your alteration claims has hurt your credibility. This does not mean Robert doesn't view you as a friend, but instead he isn't going to pretend that you are correct when he knows you are wrong. You seem to think that those who agree with you must be friends and those who do not agree with you are the enemy. A friend is not a "YES MAN", but rather someone who will be honest with you if they believe you to be wrong.

Bill Miller

Edited September 1, 2006 by Bill Miller

[David G. Healy]

dgh" why don't you post the exact quote that offends your sensabilities. Cease alluding to, show the lurkers what your talking about. Grandstanding is so unbecoming, you have that little faith in Lurkers?... a cite will work wonders? While your at it, take the Costella's website points apart -- step by step, I've been waiting for one of you drone artists attempt at that (get your Physicist's line up, you'll NEED 'em)

It wasn't just a few weeks or so ago that we went over this stuff. Besides, it is good practice for those to learn how to use the forum search engine so they can go read the things you can't seem to recall saying. (God, I love those archives!)

dgh:Groden's opinion, ROFLMAO? His credibility and motives are tainted/suspect at BEST.... rofl, you need a new hero, Bill

David, Dawn said she trust Groden's opinions, thus I shared them with her. xxxxx elsewhere!

Bill Miller

looks like you really stepped in it this time..... Now you're being called a xxxx as well as a fraud.....

p.s. to show I'm not prejudice, I don't care whose opinion Dawn trusts -- coming from you, I suspect Dawn's the best confirmation we're going to see re YOUR photo interpretation shills, whoops skills... what did you say your experience was again.... we can't hear you!

[Bill Miller]

looks like you really stepped in it this time..... Now you're being called a xxxx as well as a fraud.....

You're right, David ... I am being called those things by an individual who double talks about the evidence ... how will I ever live this down.

(see post 64)

Bill Miller

Edited September 1, 2006 by Bill Miller

[Brendan Slattery]

[Mark Stapleton]

Nice to see that even rabid neocons can maintain a sense of humor. They're gonna need it.

Edited September 2, 2006 by Mark Stapleton

[Jack White]

Come on,"Miller", get it in writing. Alleged phone calls

are only hearsay.

Whose birthday were your celebrating? When? Where?

Why would Robert bother with you since you took over

as a shill for Deb? He hates her and anyone who fronts

for her. Once when I had two invitations to be on the

JFK programs, I chose Lancer instead of COPA, and

a friend of Robert's said I was a traitor for not supporting

COPA, where he was the main attraction. I picked COPA

merely because it would have about 300 in attendance

and COPA only about 50.

You are incapable of truth.

Jack

[Craig Lamson]

Come on,"Miller", get it in writing. Alleged phone calls

are only hearsay.

Whose birthday were your celebrating? When? Where?

Why would Robert bother with you since you took over

as a shill for Deb? He hates her and anyone who fronts

for her. Once when I had two invitations to be on the

JFK programs, I chose Lancer instead of COPA, and

a friend of Robert's said I was a traitor for not supporting

COPA, where he was the main attraction. I picked COPA

merely because it would have about 300 in attendance

and COPA only about 50.

You are incapable of truth.

Jack

No Jack it is YOu who is incapable of truth...you prove it to the world every day. That Groden would disown your z film alteration work and your feeble attempts at "photo interpretation" is simply the wise thing to do.

After all anyone who finds your works compelling is nothing more than a loon.