Jump to content
The Education Forum

Jonathan Cohen

Members
  • Content Count

    76
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jonathan Cohen

  • Rank
    Experienced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

5,909 profile views
  1. A false photo that combines Lee and Harvey? Huh? Falsified by who? Why? And then forcibly included in Robert Oswald's 1967 book? Why is it that H&L believers fail to accept that human beings sometimes get dates and times wrong, years after the fact? Is it so impossible to believe that Robert was simply incorrect about the date he put in the caption?
  2. So, according to you, the conspirators massively altered Altgens 6 during the precious few minutes before it went out over the AP wire but managed to leave in evidence of a sniper in a window of the Dal-Tex building?
  3. That's what YOU say. That isn't what Voebel says. Please show me specific evidence from Voebel's testimony where he clearly articulates that he was friends with TWO different and distinct boys both with the last name of Oswald during this time period.
  4. So are you telling us that Ed Voebel had no idea he had befriended two different people?
  5. This would mean that between 12:30 and 5:35, of course the plotters also altered other films and photographs of the TSBD doorway -- which they didn't even yet have in their possession or know existed -- so that they could bring them into alignment with the newly faked Altgens 6. You've got to be kidding, right?
  6. Yes, I can offer a simple explanation that does not require her to be an impostor and/or part of some doppelganger plot. She had a poor memory, made honest/simple mistakes, was nervous and under stress, some of her responses were recorded incorrectly, etc. etc. Haven't you ever made a mistake when recalling details about your own life? Can you remember the exact address of every place you've ever lived? As with every single piece of evidence that you claim supports the doppelganger theory, there are perfectly logical alternatives to the contrary.
  7. Jeremy, don't forget that the overseers of the top-secret long-term doppelganger scheme also allowed the "fake" Marguerite Oswald to give an interview to a local journalist!
  8. There is nothing mysterious or conspiratorial about this document whatsoever. As usual, simple mistakes take on needly sinister meanings in the H&L world.
  9. Riiiiiight. The "Marguerite Oswald impostor" gives interviews to local journalists. Great thinking by the plotters, huh?
  10. And here, finally, is an important distinction. Was Oswald impersonated in some form at some point during his lifetime? There is credible evidence to suggest he was, although there is just as much credible evidence indicating some of these witnesses were mistaken. It is absolutely possible to believe Oswald was impersonated on a handful of occasions WITHOUT having to believe in the preposterous and nonsensical notion that there were TWO different versions of him (and TWO of his mothers, let's not forget..) galavanting around the world for a decade.
  11. Not to derail this thread, but the above is one of John Butler's favorite talking points. I challenged him to explain how this evidence could have been faked in an earlier thread where he claimed Altgens 6 has been heavily altered, but neither he nor anyone else can do it. Why? Because the film and photo record in this case is self-authenticating.
  12. Kudos to Robert. This is one of many perfectly logical ways to explain the Stripling confusion.
  13. Why on earth would whoever was running this imaginary double Oswald project allow the "Marguerite Oswald" imposter to give interviews to local journalists??
  14. False. None of the Parkland doctors determined the extent of this flap because Mrs. Kennedy had essentially pushed it back together while holding JFK's head during the ride to the hospital. Upon arrival at the ER, the doctors were completely focused on the wound in the back of the head but even then did not know its true shape and extent.
  15. You're kidding, right? Jeremy has absolutely destroyed the key point of this entire ridiculous theory. but HE is the one with an illogical line of reasoning? As always, if you need me, I'll be having cocktails with the "short, dumpy" Marguerite Oswald. Or, wait. Maybe it's the "tall, attractive, well-dressed" Marguerite. I'll let you know.
×
×
  • Create New...