Jonathan Cohen

For the exact reason he said : to get visas to travel first to Cuba and then to Russia. To frame him.

Tremble to your heart's content. I have no interest in debating with you based on your faulty photo interpretations. Perhaps the fine folks at ROKC are in a more sporting mood, so why not engage them directly?

Wasn't all this already a part of the 2018 film "The Parkland Doctors?" Dubious of this upcoming version of it, to say the least. For one thing, Dr. Goldstrich now claims both the head and throat shots were fired from behind.

The counter analysis is that you appear to have no idea what you're talking about, and people far more patient than I have been illustrating this for several days here.

A "black blob" ? Come on. Are you serious? And you realize of course that for you to claim this person is Oswald would mean he was NOT in the doorway when the shots were fired?

My analysis is that your interpretation of the films is wrong. Neither Billy Lovelady nor Lee Oswald were waving a flag on the front steps of the building, and they certainly were not in any kind of cahoots as assassination conspirators.

Out of curiosity, why didn't Oswald tell anybody who would listen that he was waving a flag around on the TSBD front steps during the assassination? Why didn't any of his numerous coworkers standing right next to him mention such a thing either?

This has been discussed ad nauseum. Lovelady was wrong in his 1964 affidavit about the shirt he was wearing on Nov. 22, 1963. He was photographed several years later by Robert Groden wearing the correct shirt.

Agreed. Many people here seem to be incapable of accepting that Oswald could have been in Mexico City of his own volition while also being impersonated/toyed with by other entities.

Questionable photo/film interpretations notwithstanding, Oswald was not "waving a flag" as a "political stunt" on the front steps of the Texas School Book Depository.

This is yet further confirmation that Oswald was in fact in Mexico City, no matter how loudly the "all the evidence is fake" camp screams otherwise.

Not sure why you created a new thread when I already updated the original discussion last night with the new information about Barry Levinson joining the film …

Barry Levinson now stepping in to direct: https://deadline.com/2023/10/barry-levinson-assassination-al-pacino-1235576261/

You could start by, you know, getting the man's name right ?

Great. So Sandy Larsen is, in fact, totally wrong.

Clearly yours as well!

Sean, do you also believe that the man wearing the red/plaid shirt in the Martin film frame is NOT Billy Lovelady?

Uh uh .. so he just happened to have in his possession the IDENTICAL shirt he was wearing on Nov. 22, 1963 and identified himself as wearing it on multiple occasions, but according to you, it was all a part of a big old years-long lie that he repeated to journalists and investigators until his death? Where do you come up with this complete nonsense? It's embarrassing.

And you claim this in spite of the fact that Loveladly himself identified himself as the man in the red/plaid shirt during his HSCA testimony? https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=99803#relPageId=2&tab=page

So, let me get this straight. It is your claim that the man in the red/plaid shirt at bottom right above is NOT Billy Lovelady?

Just to be clear: in the 1970s, Robert Groden photographed Lovelady wearing the same plaid shirt he wore to work on 11/22/1963.

I explain it by the fact that you are imagining things.

Why not - I'll play along. Besides your own personal interpretations of the Dealey Plaza films and photos, on what are you basing your definitive statement that the person in the photo who you claim isn't Lovelady has "a spinal condition" ?

OK, so is everybody on this forum in agreement that it is completely absurd to believe the assassination was predicated on President Kennedy getting ready to tell the world that aliens were real?

There's no "plaid pattern" drawn in. My goodness. A "spinal condition" ? What in the world are you talking about? Complete, utter nonsense.