Harris "looking the fool"
Robert Harris
>> >> > > On Mar 2, 2:27 pm, Bob Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> > > > You stated in your article, that 10-40 contiguous frames
were
>> >> > > > removed,
>> >> > > > to hide the limo stopping.
>> >> >
>> >> > > between 212 and 360 (possibly more than 40 frames) -- Did I
say in the
>> >> > > article the "limo stopping", Bob?
>> >> >
>> >> > Yes, you said exactly that.
>> >> >
>> >> > "So what was removed from the film?
>> >> > A. The limo left turn problems: probably 100-140 frames.
>> >> > B. The limo stop (momentarily or extended): 10-40 frames."
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Bob where did I state "contiguous frames"? For the record, example,
>> >> every other frame is NOT contiguous.
>> >
>> >Yep, you got me there. Maybe the limo stopped and started 10 times,
eh.
>> >
>> >How in holy hell, would they hide the limo stopping unless they cut
out
>> >all frames that showed it stopped?
>>
>> By pulling the limo out of the picture, then reinserting it as a
moving
>> vehicle. Of course, I'll defer to David's expertise here.
>
>Well, that's not what he said in the article.
>
>And that just doesn't work.
How silly!! Hollywood's been doing such things for decades...
>The Moorman photo proves that.
No Bob, the Moorman film does no such thing.
>If just half
>a second of footage of the limo stopped had been replaced by footage of
>the limo moving, then the Zapruder film would show the limo, well past
>her position, when the head explosion took place.
You apparently believe that altering one film is impossible, because
another
film "matches" it and could not have been altered.
Rather silly...
>Instead, everything matches perfectly, with a point in time just after
>the explosion, and an eighteenth of a second before Kellerman began to
>duck.
Actually, your claim of the Moorman film matching the Z-film is disputed.
Despite your one hour of study...
>Now, if you posit the film being altered AFTER the first headshot, to
>hide stoppage then, then somebody needs to explain why they went to all
>that trouble.
It's so obvious that you *MUST* be trying to look the fool.
Robert Harris
<reharris1-5C521...@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
Robert Harris <reha...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Umm.. for those of you who don't get it, I went to considerable trouble
to explain on a VERY simple level, how Ben could check the alignment
between Zapruder and Mary Moorman to confirm that her photo matched
perfectly with the Zfilm.
Ben's reply told us more about him and his integrity, than anything I
could ever say. He declared that there has been a "dispute" that the
"Moorman film" matches the Zapruder film.
Ben, to save you further embarrassment please allow me to alert you to
the fact that there is not and never has been, a Moorman film.
Therefore, you have never been told there was a "dispute" about it:-)
Unless of course, he learned about the "Moorman film" in that great
reference, "Murder from Within", where he found witnesses who were
conned or misrepresented, making statements that directly contradicted
their original, sworn testimonies.
Robert Harris
Ben Holmes
Robert Harris says...
Yep... the moment I hit the send key I noticed that I had meant the *NIX* film.
For it's the Nix vs the Z-film where Hill's movements are not in sync.
But I left it to see what you'd do with it... and reposted the more interesting
question about your inability to figure out *why* someone would want to change
the film.
See how easy it is to admit error, Bob?
Now, would you care to examine the eyewitnesses, and retract your incorrect
assertion?
>Ben, to save you further embarrassment please allow me to alert you to
>the fact that there is not and never has been, a Moorman film.
Yep... tis true. A very famous Moorman *PHOTO*, but not film.
>Therefore, you have never been told there was a "dispute" about it:-)
There is indeed, however, a dispute about the *NIX* film... which was what was
on my mind. In fact, just for the fun of it, I was reviewing it again last
night, and had it well on my mind.
>Unless of course, he learned about the "Moorman film" in that great
>reference, "Murder from Within", where he found witnesses who were
>conned or misrepresented, making statements that directly contradicted
>their original, sworn testimonies.
Can you quote *ANY* eyewitness statement that "directly contradicted"?
I'd like to see what *YOU* believe "direct contradiction" actually consists of.
But, of course, since you've finally admitted that Chaney did indeed speak of a
limo stop - you must now try to convince everyone that he was not "roughly
adjacent", despite the Altgen's photo.
But you're a liar, Bob... so I don't really expect you to say anything at all.
>Robert Harris
Robert Harris
Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
Bullshit!!
This is the passage you were responding to:
"Rather than do a cdddraftsman impression, why not talk about the
Moorman photo and the Zapruder film, honestly and analytically?
This is pretty easy to do. Just imagine a line from Moorman to Zapruder
and the same line, from Zapruder to Moorman. Now, look at the
motorcycles and the folks in the limo. Do you agree that they match
perfectly?
Now, consider what would happen if the Zapruder film, was running just
half a second ahead of the real world. That's nine frames Ben.
Do you see a 9 frame discrepancy between Moorman and Zapruder??"
You could not possibly have read that and mistook my reference to the
Moorman photo to be the Nix film.
Infinitely worse, you obviously refused to look at the zfilm and the
photo, to honestly determine whether they matched or not. Or did you
actually make that comparison and find out for yourself, Ben?
BTW, where did you see any controversy about the Nix film matching
Zapruder?
Robert Harris
David Von Pein
real time.
(Probably just a ruse to keep his inane postings at the top of the
page for hours longer than they deserve to be there.)
Ben Holmes
That's okay, Bob... believe anything you want.
>This is the passage you were responding to:
>
>"Rather than do a cdddraftsman impression, why not talk about the
>Moorman photo and the Zapruder film, honestly and analytically?
>
>This is pretty easy to do. Just imagine a line from Moorman to Zapruder
>and the same line, from Zapruder to Moorman. Now, look at the
>motorcycles and the folks in the limo. Do you agree that they match
>perfectly?
>
>Now, consider what would happen if the Zapruder film, was running just
>half a second ahead of the real world. That's nine frames Ben.
>
>Do you see a 9 frame discrepancy between Moorman and Zapruder??"
>
>You could not possibly have read that and mistook my reference to the
>Moorman photo to be the Nix film.
>
>Infinitely worse, you obviously refused to look at the zfilm and the
>photo, to honestly determine whether they matched or not. Or did you
>actually make that comparison and find out for yourself, Ben?
>
>BTW, where did you see any controversy about the Nix film matching
>Zapruder?
Haven't done any reading, I see. You can try "MIDP", or any of several books
about the Z-film alteration.
Just for the fun of it, how many people do you see standing in the grass in
Z-369?
>Robert Harris
>
>
>
>> For it's the Nix vs the Z-film where Hill's movements are not in sync.
>>
>> But I left it to see what you'd do with it... and reposted the more
>> interesting question about your inability to figure out *why* someone
>> would want to change the film.
>>
>> See how easy it is to admit error, Bob?
>>
>>
>> Now, would you care to examine the eyewitnesses, and retract your incorrect
>> assertion?
>>
>>
>>
>> >Ben, to save you further embarrassment please allow me to alert you to
>> >the fact that there is not and never has been, a Moorman film.
>>
>> Yep... tis true. A very famous Moorman *PHOTO*, but not film.
>>
>>
>> >Therefore, you have never been told there was a "dispute" about it:-)
>>
>> There is indeed, however, a dispute about the *NIX* film... which was what
>> was on my mind. In fact, just for the fun of it, I was reviewing it again
>> last night, and had it well on my mind.
>>
>>
>> >Unless of course, he learned about the "Moorman film" in that great
>> >reference, "Murder from Within", where he found witnesses who were
>> >conned or misrepresented, making statements that directly contradicted
>> >their original, sworn testimonies.
>>
>> Can you quote *ANY* eyewitness statement that "directly contradicted"?
>>
>> I'd like to see what *YOU* believe "direct contradiction" actually consists
>> of.
Dead silence...
>>But, of course, since you've finally admitted that Chaney did indeed speak of
>> a limo stop - you must now try to convince everyone that he was not "roughly
>> adjacent", despite the Altgen's photo.
>>
>> But you're a liar, Bob... so I don't really expect you to say anything at
>> all.
And indeed, my prediction has been born out...
>> >Robert Harris
Chuck Schuyler
>
> >>But, of course, since you've finally admitted that Chaney did indeed speak of
> >> a limo stop - you must now try to convince everyone that he was not "roughly
> >> adjacent", despite the Altgen's photo.
Ben, in light of the evidence Todd Vaughan posted, would you like to
modify your Chaney statement?
>Reporter: Did the President's car stop?
>Chaney: I didn't see a stop.
>KRLD Tape 9 - KRLD/KDFW-TV Collection/The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey
>Plaza
(Dead silence from Holmes.)
tims...@gmail.com
Hi Holmes,
Say, you seem to have kicked off your dispute with Harris, though of
course you've *never* debated Z film alteration, with a blind belief
in Jack White's ridiculous chapter in the book Murder In Dealey Plaza.
LOL! That was a stupid idea, Ben...
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Mar 4, 1:55 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
> In article <reharris1-FB3CB6.03045704032...@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
> Robert Harris says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <fqhra401...@drn.newsguy.com>,
> > Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
>
> >> In article
> >> <reharris1-6F7F3B.20492103032...@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
> >> Robert Harris says...
>
> >> >In article
> >> ><reharris1-5C5218.18233903032...@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
> >> >Robert Harris- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Burly...@gmail.com
What happened to Mr. Holmes? Where is he, and why did he never
respond to this question by Chuck, regarding what Mr Vaughan posted
regarding James Chaney?
Isn't it Mr. Holmes who is always accusing everyone of "ducking"
running", "lying" and "cowardice"? He should address this, as he is
eating his own words.
Gil Jesus
> What happened to Mr. Holmes? �Where is he, and why did he never
> respond to this question by Chuck, regarding what Mr Vaughan posted
> regarding James Chaney?
>
> �Isn't it Mr. Holmes who is always accusing everyone of "ducking"
> running", "lying" and "cowardice"? �He should address this, as he is
> eating his own words.-
What has this got to do with the JFK assassination ?
justm...@gmail.com
Gilda is taking over as forum retard in Healys absence. Gilda? STFU!
Ben Holmes
Gil Jesus says...
>
>On Apr 27, 9:33=EF=BF=BDam, BurlyGu...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> What happened to Mr. Holmes? =EF=BF=BDWhere is he, and why did he never
>> respond to this question by Chuck, regarding what Mr Vaughan posted
>> regarding James Chaney?
Surely this dishonest troll is well aware that everyone 'poster' he named was on
my list of trolls.
If Chuckie, Toddy, or the kook who posted this ever make an intelligent
response, surely there are others who would both see, and comment on it.
It seems that the more I ignore the trolls, the more frantic they become to be
noticed.
>> =EF=BF=BDIsn't it Mr. Holmes who is always accusing everyone of "ducking"
>> running", "lying" and "cowardice"? =EF=BF=BDHe should address this, as he is
>> eating his own words.
>
>What has this got to do with the JFK assassination ?
Nothing. This is why it was posted. Trolls have very little to say on the
assassination, and virtually *nothing* to say on the evidence.
But concerning those who merely *post* the evidence, they have a great deal
indeed to say...
justm...@gmail.com
> In article <d3dcc3e9-e285-4086-b67b-f7469addc...@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
Such a shame that Holmes and Gilda both need to flatter themselves
because no one else will...well except the other 2 lap dogs. More bs
from his highness of the dojo pink belts.
Gil Jesus
wrote:
>
> Such a shame that Holmes and Gilda both need to flatter themselves
> because no one else will...well except the other 2 lap dogs. �More bs
> from his highness of the dojo pink belts.-
Burly...@gmail.com
It has everything to do with the JFK assasination, unlike your
threads regarding "Justme".
Mr.Holmes did not address the question put to him by Chuck, regarding
James Chaney. Mr. Holmes constantly accuses people of being a
"coward" "ducking" and "running" from questions regarding the
assassination. That you even have to ask such a question is ludicrous.
Burly...@gmail.com
The same thing your threads regarding "JOEY" have.
curtjester1
>
> - Show quoted text -
I just want to say, it would enhance the thread for lurkers if the
frames of film or the films themselves could be posted for a quick
back and forth to see the images and people under scutiny.
CJ
curtjester1
>
> - Show quoted text -
Here's the Costella frames from a Zapruder Film
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/
CJ
tims...@gmail.com
Bump
aeffects
someone send old Timmy a dime.... seems he's been dumped at .john's --
something about "not performing"
where of where do they find these lone nut losers <sigh>
Todd W. Vaughan
Word is that you know all about that.
>
> where of where do they find these lone nut losers <sigh>- Hide quoted text -
tims...@gmail.com
Hi Toots,
David *aeffects* Healy, come on down! Great to hear from you! Happy
you want to discuss Z film alteration, Z-369, Yellow Pants/Legs and
all that!
Now, Toots-E-Roll fella, published author on Z film alteration, no
doubt you were pleased to see this useful link posted by DVP the other
day, you being an expert on Z film alteration and all that:
=======================================
An excellent aerial photo of Dealey Plaza. Very good detail and image
clarity can be achieved by clicking once on this 1967 photograph to
enlarge it:
http://216.122.129.112/dc/user_files/10720.jpg
=======================================
That's a FANTASTIC view of Dealey Plaza, isn't it Toots? Very easy to
see the four lightposts that run down Main at Dealey, closest to the
Knoll, eh Toots, starting from # 1 up at Houston and # 4 down near the
Triple Underpass. You following me, Toots?
Now here comes the rub, Toots-E-Roll fella. Your friend Benny Holmes's
*Lady In Yellow Pants* theory must OBVIOUSLY be wrong, since, from
where Nix was filming, lightpost # 2 must be the one appearing in his
film, whereas the lightpost in Z-369 must be # 3, agreed, Toots-E-Roll
fella?
That's a HUGE expanse of grass between lightpost # 2 and lightpost #
3, eh David? No wonder ol' *Yellow Legs/Pants* isn't visible in
Zapruder but we can see her in Nix, eh? LOL, Toots!
It looks like Ben has made a TERRIBLE mistake with this whole theory
of his. I don't think it is fair that he leaves you being his
mouthpiece, carrying the can for this whole mess, Toots-E-Roll fella.
I mean, this might affect your <snicker> *standing* as a published
author on Z film alteration, David.
I am standing by to reveal more flaws in HIS theory, and clear YOUR
name, David. Simply say the word and more help will be provided. :-)
Fraternal Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> where of where do they find these lone nut losers <sigh>- Hide quoted text -
aeffects
LMFAO!
Ben Holmes
aeffects says...
>
>sum-bitch..... the Lone Neuter Timmy down-undah Brennan LOVES us.....
>
>LMFAO!
I take it my fan club is being heard from?
aeffects
> In article <612510c5-52fe-4eca-8fc9-4e4e35a0f...@x19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> aeffects says...
>
>
>
> >sum-bitch..... the Lone Neuter Timmy down-undah Brennan LOVES us.....
>
> >LMFAO!
>
> I take it my fan club is being heard from?
you know Ben, you got this following here that can't hit their ass
with both hands.... a bunch of "white belts" I'ma thinking!
LMAO!
Ben Holmes
aeffects says...
Oh, there's nothing wrong with white belts... but if you're still wearing one
40+ years later, it's a sad thing.
The white belts might even have fun with me for the next few weeks... broke a
toe, so I'll be alot slower on my feet.
tims...@gmail.com
I guess you wouldn't know, would you Ben, on account of you got your
killfilter on.
Don't you want to defend your Z film alteration theory Ben?
Probably best not to, I guess, LOL!
It really is a dud, isn't it Ben?
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On May 13, 5:39 am, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
> In article <612510c5-52fe-4eca-8fc9-4e4e35a0f...@x19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
tims...@gmail.com
Hi Toots,
Say, doncha think it's kind of instructional, though, that neither you
nor Ben actually want to discuss any specifics of his flawed Z film
alteration theory?
I mean you, after all, are a published author on Z film alteration, Mr
David *aeffects* Healy, sir.
Surely you can bounce in and shoot down the assertions of some
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator* from Australia, of all places, with a few
specifics, no?
How come you haven't done so, so far, Toots? It's not that you
actually know nothing of any value about Z film alteration, is it?
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
aeffects
now if you idiots had any knowledge of JFK's assassination you might
prove your worth burning up bandwidth around here -- but don't hurt
yourself..... LMFAO
justm...@gmail.com
Another evasion by the king of junkies David Healy. Notice how he
completely avoided what you said in your post Tim? He's screwed and he
knows it. Now hes like a worm in a bait shop trying to squirm his was
out of being put in the little carton and thrown to the fish.
Dishonorable dishcharge huh? ROFLMAO you loser!
tims...@gmail.com
Hi Just,
Yeah, gotta say this guy Healy, and his friend Ben Holmes, have done
everything possible to evade any direct discussion of their stupid Z
film alteration theory for several months now.
So much for all the nonsense THEY posted about others before that. It
was all true of THEM, LOL!
Shocking when you realise Healy is actually a published <snicker>
*expert* on Z film alteration. JFK-CT in action...
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On May 13, 9:19 am, "justme1...@gmail.com" <justme1...@gmail.com>
wrote:
justm...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Tim,
Wonder who his ghost writer was. Can you imagine the poor sucker
trying to decipher Healys illiterate, incoherent babble? LMAO....Healy
certainly doesn't have the brains to write an article by himself.
Wonder how much he paid to have it published? No wonder he's so
jealous of Dale Myers...smart, handsome, successful, intelligent man.
The complete opposite of Healy!
tims...@gmail.com
Hi Just,
Healy's editor is Jim Fetzer, the 9/11 conspiracy theorist. Of course,
he is the only guy who would give Healy a gig, LOL! The idea of
comparing Healy's published nonsense with that of the Emmy award
winning Dale Myers is completely absurd, as we both know, LOL!
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On May 14, 8:14 am, "justme1...@gmail.com" <justme1...@gmail.com>
> The complete opposite of Healy!- Hide quoted text -
aeffects
> he is the only guy who would give Healy a gig, LOL! The idea of
> comparing Healy's published nonsense with that of the Emmy award
> winning Dale Myers is completely absurd, as we both know, LOL!
there you are, SKANK.... they let you out for weekends, eh? LMFAO.
Listen, we know your envious, can't get a damn thing published.....
Mark your time son, above all else, ENVY will drive you insane....
Whose Dale Myers?
tims...@gmail.com
Hi Toots,
Say, how come you ran from that photo of Dealey Plaza DVP posted? I
reposted it the other day to help you out, Toots, by showing that your
and Benny's *Yellow Pants* theory was garbage but no actual comment
from you on the matter, Toots-E-Roll fella.
Now why was that, Toots? Surely you can debate and win over some SKANK
from Australia on the matter of Z film alteration, eh Toots? I keep a
pitchin' 'em and you keep a duckin' 'em, ol' Toots-E-Roll fella, er, I
mean David *aeffects* Healy, published author on Z film alteration,
LOL! :-)
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -