Jump to content
The Education Forum

Oswald Leaving TSBD?


Recommended Posts

Those that remember the old Lancer forum and the fighting that took place over whether Altgens6 was altered or not will recognize that question as 'xxxxx bait'.

When visitors that don't comment (lurkers) observe someone bullying posters & no moderator/administration action taken to insure a fair exchange of communication for all contributors taken, visitors will assume that the bully is acting on behalf of the folks running the website.

What I see is important only to me, convincing others what they should see is what YOU do, Mr. Graves. Others with a similar purpose in life don't always agree with your spin on things. For example, the identification of Billy Lovelady in the doorway of the TSBD is analyzed entirely different here:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/02/17/jfk-who-was-in-the-book-depository-doorway/

One thing we all share together is none of us were present when JFK was murdered and never will be. Snake oil salesmen don't need LSD or other drugs, what they peddle online & how they conduct themselves is poison enough.

BM

Dear Brad,

If, as you say, what you "see" is important only to you, why then are you trying to share it with us here?

Would you have us believe that Oswald was standing in front of Lovelady?

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi James,

You have a tough job that I don't envy. It's no secret that most, if not all JFK forums constantly battle with the freedom of speech the webmaster grants to visitors or members with those who use the opportunity to hijack the discussion for their own purposes. The most common description of such pirates is 'trolls'; other descriptions are also used. Jack White's frequent battles with such are infamous on the internet.

I find anyone asking me to recommend an illegal drug to use (insinuating I am a drug user) following a statement I made unacceptable also.

For your visitors that would like to learn about the Altgens photos timeline, I recommend briefly visiting this site & then returning to discuss it here at EF:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/04/03/jfk-the-james-ike-altgens-photo-timeline/

Best,

BM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi James,

You have a tough job that I don't envy. It's no secret that most, if not all JFK forums constantly battle with the freedom of speech the webmaster grants to visitors or members with those who use the opportunity to hijack the discussion for their own purposes. The most common description of such pirates is 'trolls'; other descriptions are also used. Jack White's frequent battles with such are infamous on the internet.

I find anyone asking me to recommend an illegal drug to use (insinuating I am a drug user) following a statement I made unacceptable also.

For your visitors that would like to learn about the Altgens photos timeline, I recommend briefly visiting this site & then returning to discuss it here at EF:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/04/03/jfk-the-james-ike-altgens-photo-timeline/

Best,

BM

Yes, Professor James Fetzer (who has been banned here) will explain it all to you.

He and his buddy Ralph Cinque.

LOL

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi James,

You have a tough job that I don't envy. It's no secret that most, if not all JFK forums constantly battle with the freedom of speech the webmaster grants to visitors or members with those who use the opportunity to hijack the discussion for their own purposes. The most common description of such pirates is 'trolls'; other descriptions are also used. Jack White's frequent battles with such are infamous on the internet.

I find anyone asking me to recommend an illegal drug to use (insinuating I am a drug user) following a statement I made unacceptable also.

For your visitors that would like to learn about the Altgens photos timeline, I recommend briefly visiting this site & then returning to discuss it here at EF:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/04/03/jfk-the-james-ike-altgens-photo-timeline/

Best,

BM

Hey there Brad...

I'd like very much to discuss this with you yet I have to head out.

this is a composite of the key Altgens photos... please notice how different #7, the one with the lost negative, looks compared to the others..

And maybe ask why the top right of the image is cut off - the men on the bridge are much higher than the missing right side of the image... what's that about? I added that area back using Cabluck just to see what might be missing...

Any ideas?

altgenscontactsheetone_lowscan_zpsfaphhq

Altgens%207%20plus%20Cabluck_zpsqagntwds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there, David. I admire your photo work & analysis & wanted to answer you before I get involved in a project later tonight. According to the two researchers in the link I posted in post #2015 (the visitor count is near 20,000 for 2 weeks on the Internet), when James 'Ike' Altgens returned to the Dallas Morning News a few blocks South on Houston Street from Dealey Plaza & after calling in & notifying the newspaper he had witnessed & photographed the ambush, Ike's photos were handled by 'someone who grabbed my camera' & Altgens was sent to Parkland. Normally, Altgens would have developed his own photos & sent them out on the news wire. While Altgens had a solid jump on the competition with exclusive photos, his exclusive photos were held back & broadcast on TV much later in the day. Walter Cronkite showed Altgens6 (cropped) in the late aftertoon/early evening 22 Nov '63. Other than James Altgens, Dave Wiegman was the only other professional photographer to catch a portion of the ambush in Dealey Plaza on film, making Altgens photos exclusive property; yet they were held back for a period of 4-5 hours (according to the researchers in the link). Abe Zapruder & Marilyn Sitzman are conspiuously missing from Dave Wiegman's film, even though he captured JFK's limo departing Elm Street while running over to the area the Zapruder/Sitzman team were filming. Some analysts believe the couple were darkend out of the dark appearing film & others believe the film was edited & the portion of the film depicting Zapruder & Sitzman leaving the film pedestal was edited out of the final product broadcast several times on TV the assassination weekend.

Being alive during the assassination weekend as a pre-teen, I remember seeing Altgens 6 & 7 in the Saturday, 23 Nov 1963 newspaper. When I returned to school after JFK's funeral, my teacher (this was back in the day when there was only one teacher for all subjects, all school day long) showed her class more newspapers with additional Altgens photos that had been published from Saturday onward. No Altgens photos from Parkland were published that I can remember nor have I ever seen any Altgens photos from Parkland published, have you?

It may be of interest to you & younger EF visitors, that initially the Altgens6 photo was described as depicting JFK slumped across the back seat of his limo, his head in Jackie's lap & Jackie holding up JFK's limp right arm. As the post-assassination week progressed, this description was changed to JFK 'clutching his throat'.

This entire Altgens saga is currently generating red flags for a number of reasons besides Altgens losing possession of his film & camera after the ambush & someone 'else' developing & releasing Altgens photos on the newswire in a suspicious state of appearance:

1. Altgens told the FBI that armed SS men & policemen ran up the knoll after the shooting & he followed them in the hopes of getting a photo of the assassin. The area these officials ran to is cropped out of Altgens 7. Other eyewitnesses also reported armed SS men converging on the knoll.

2. A photo Altgens took is missing.

3. With all the chaos around him, in Altgens8, what caught his eye was Zapruder leaving the pergola via the alcove, not the Newmans or the Hestors lying on the grass by Ike Altgens. This suggests to some analysts a hasty 'false photo scene' to account for another missing photo.

4. Altgens originally wanted to get a motorcade photo with the Dallas skyline in the background. That's why he tried to gain access to the TOP. He had his camera set to catch as much of the TSBD & Dal-Tex surface as he could get, yet his photo only reaches the lower floors of both buildings.

5. When one adds the mysterious, unidentified railroad 'detective' on the TOP, the phantom train passing at the time of the ambush blocking one of the two DPD officer's stationed as guards view of the shooting, Dan Rather on the other side of the TOP oblivious to the ambush & the convergence of law enforcement officials on the railyards, many questions arise as to what transpired there.

Altgens photos have joined the long list of JFK ambush visuals that have been accused of being victims of photo manipulation. JFK's limo might have caught a reflection of the missing corner of the TUP bridge. I saw an analysis of the z-film posted on Y/T in which the visual analyst believes the entire right side of JFK's limo (the side facing Zapruder) was blacked out as it emerged from the shrub in front of Zapruder, thus eliminating reflections from the stockade fence & TUP bridge corner.

With Altgens camera, it would have been a simple matter of re-shooting the scenes he had filmed earlier & incorporating the new backdrops, eliminating what was contained in the original exposures.

With backdrops photographed after the ambush, JFK's limo could have been moved closer to or further away from where Ike Altgens photographed it. Spectators on the sidewalk, meridian grass, TSBD doorway & Dal-Tex bldg could have been monkeyed around with also.

You've got a good topic for discussion, David. I'll check out your progress, but probably won't join in the conversation. It's no hassle lurking & less pressure on the good folks running the website to accomodate those with an apparent intent to pirate, divert or destroy the good that serious, well intentioned researchers like David Josephs strives for. To better accomodate complainers, I'll take a vacation from posting further. I will silently follow your progress, David, while not responding to agitator's 'bait' that is used against the responder & gives agitators a purpose to disrupt even further.

You do great work, David. I collect each & every visual you publish online.

There is a video interview with one of the researchers involved in the Altgens photos timeline posted on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlYl1g6gSjQ

In the video, one can hear the researcher explain the visual display at the website I posted a link to. EF would be a great place for visitors to that website to discuss the research published there.

Best always,

BM

edited to update info contained

Edited by Brad Milch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David and Brad

I appreciate your wish to discuss Altgens 6 et al but there is another thread for that topic and it's not this one.

David, perhaps you've been busy and have missed the fact that there is now a specific topic for Altgens. But, if not, then I would wonder why you are persisting on raising the issue of Altgens on a thread that is for the discussion of Prayer Man.

Please show some respect for the work Chris, Randy, Stan and others are doing on PM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there, David. I admire your photo work & analysis & wanted to answer you before I do a re-format later tonight. According to the two researchers in the link I posted in post #2015, James 'Ike' Altgens photos were handled by 'someone who grabbed my camera' & Altgens was sent to Parkland. Normally, Altgens would have developed his own photos & sent them out on the news wire. While Altgens had a jump on the competition, his photos were held back & broadcast on TV much later.

As a pre-teen, I remember seeing Altgens 6 & 7 in the Saturday, 23 Nov 1963 newspaper. When I returned to school after JFK's funeral, my teacher (this was back in the day when there was only one teacher for all subjects, all school day long) showed her class more newspapers with additional Altgens photos.

Altgens photos have now joined the long list of JFK ambush visuals that have been accused of being victims of photo manipulation. JFK's limo might have caught a reflection of the missing corner of the TUP bridge. I saw an analysis of the z-film posted on Y/T in which the visual analysts believes the entire right side of JFK's limo (the side facing Zapruder) was blacked out as it emerged from the shrub in front of Zapruder, thus eliminating reflections from the stockade fence & TUP bridge corner.

You've got a good topic for discussion. I'll check out your progress but probably won't join in the conversation.

You do great work, David

Best,

BM

Brad, what happened to accommodating Vanessa?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there, David. I admire your photo work & analysis & wanted to answer you before I do a re-format later tonight. According to the two researchers in the link I posted in post #2015, James 'Ike' Altgens photos were handled by 'someone who grabbed my camera' & Altgens was sent to Parkland. Normally, Altgens would have developed his own photos & sent them out on the news wire. While Altgens had a jump on the competition, his photos were held back & broadcast on TV much later.

As a pre-teen, I remember seeing Altgens 6 & 7 in the Saturday, 23 Nov 1963 newspaper. When I returned to school after JFK's funeral, my teacher (this was back in the day when there was only one teacher for all subjects, all school day long) showed her class more newspapers with additional Altgens photos.

Altgens photos have now joined the long list of JFK ambush visuals that have been accused of being victims of photo manipulation. JFK's limo might have caught a reflection of the missing corner of the TUP bridge. I saw an analysis of the z-film posted on Y/T in which the visual analysts believes the entire right side of JFK's limo (the side facing Zapruder) was blacked out as it emerged from the shrub in front of Zapruder, thus eliminating reflections from the stockade fence & TUP bridge corner.

You've got a good topic for discussion. I'll check out your progress but probably won't join in the conversation.

You do great work, David

Best,

BM

Brad, what happened to accommodating Vanessa?

Vanessa,

In an attempt to get this thread back on track, I would like to ask you a question.

What do you think Prayer Man is holding, if anything, in Weigman?

A white or silver camera?

Your guess is as good as mine.

Thanks,

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Tommy. :)

Probably your guess is better than mine. :) But it strikes me as odd that in the colour film of Altgens that Randy (?) posted his camera is white-ish looking. We can see from other pictures of Altgens camera that it is in fact black with a bit of silver and glass. So why is it showing up as white-ish looking in a colour film?

Similarly with PM if he's holding a normal black camera why is it showing up as white-ish? Shouldn't it be black in a black and white film?

I'm stumped Tommy, help me out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Tommy. :)

Probably your guess is better than mine. :) But it strikes me as odd that in the colour film of Altgens that Randy (?) posted his camera is white-ish looking. We can see from other pictures of Altgens camera that it is in fact black with a bit of silver and glass. So why is it showing up as white-ish looking in a colour film?

Similarly with PM if he's holding a normal black camera why is it showing up as white-ish? Shouldn't it be black in a black and white film?

I'm stumped Tommy, help me out.

I wish I could, Vanessa.

Thinking outside of the box:

Did Velveeta Cheese glow in the dark?

Did Oswald forget to wash the DDT off his apple?

LOL

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Tommy. :)

Probably your guess is better than mine. :) But it strikes me as odd that in the colour film of Altgens that Randy (?) posted his camera is white-ish looking. We can see from other pictures of Altgens camera that it is in fact black with a bit of silver and glass. So why is it showing up as white-ish looking in a colour film?

Similarly with PM if he's holding a normal black camera why is it showing up as white-ish? Shouldn't it be black in a black and white film?

I'm stumped Tommy, help me out.

I wish I could, Vanessa.

Thinking outside of the box:

Did Velveeta Cheese glow in the dark?

Did Oswald forget to wash the DDT off his apple?

LOL

--Tommy :sun

Hi Tommy :)

All that extra bleach in his white bread?

Tommy, is it possible I've scared everyone off? Seriously fellas I'm not that bad. I promise to be gentle with you from now on. :)

Mr Sorensen, you are usually most obliging in pointing out my errors. Can you explain why Altgens' black camera shows up as white in a colour film?

If we can work that out it might help work out why PM's camera is white in a black and white film

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vanessa:

I would say Altgens' black camera looks "white" in this image because the camera has many reflective, silvery parts to it that reflect bright light quite well. I'm no expert in photography but I think the resolving power of some cameras (such as Zapruder's movie camera) is limited when dealing with reflected light such that they look like blobs in some cases. That's what I think is happening here. It's hard to determine what color things are when they reflect light (glare) and the resolution of the camera/film is rather poor.

image103.jpg

Thank you Mr Sorensen. So good to know I can always rely on you to set me straight.

Your point about glare is supported by the fact that the photographer standing next to Altgens is holding his camera in front of his body and presumably protecting it from the sun. That guy's camera looks black.

And if we look really hard at Altgens perhaps we can see a bit of black below the white.

Ray, thanks for posting that picture of Altgens' camera - it does look more silver than black especially from Zapruder's elevated position.

Which brings us back to PM. Given Weigman is facing him pretty much at an equal height, maybe PM's camera is all silver. Because I don't see any black there at all. And we can deduce that because Weigman's TV camera ought to be able to film things at a much higher resolution than Zapruder's. Plus Weigman is possibly closer to PM than Zapruder is to Altgens.

Thoughts, gents?

Edited by Vanessa Loney
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been a lurker here ever since this thread started on 14 August 2013. I think the identity of Prayer Man is the single most captivating question involving the JFK assassination. Conclusively answer this question and the official account of one of the worst crimes of the twentieth century could be utterly destroyed. No other single issue has such enormous implications.

Sean Murphy is my favorite researcher and I have been on the lookout for his return. I also noted who Sean Murphy's favorite researcher is:

Greg Parker is aces with me--always has been, always will be. My single favourite JFK researcher.

With that kind of endorsement, I have also waited for the return of Greg Parker, a longtime Education Forum member. When Greg returned several weeks ago, I felt the time was right for me to become a member and support this thread and contribute anywhere else I could. I felt a research renaissance was beginning here and I wanted to be a part of it in some small way.

Now, I am distressed over the events and issues that have caused Greg to leave. There are many things I find troubling about his departure, but I consider it inappropriate to question or criticize the administration here so I won't do that. I will just say that my short stint as an active member here has ended. I'll go back to being a lurker, something that's probably the best fit for me anyhow.

I sincerely hope that good, constructive research once again becomes the hallmark at The Education Forum.

Good luck and thanks.

Dear Mr Sorensen

I'm very sorry to hear that you feel compelled to stop commenting on here. You have made a great contribution to this thread and your input has been greatly appreciated by me, at least.

Totally endorse your comments though. If Sean Murphy and Greg Parker would both come back on here wouldn't that be great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...