Jonathan Cohen

So the entire thing is ... a fabrication? For what reason?

This is the best illustration possible of the complete and utter nonsense that is duplicate Lees and Marguerites. But I'd still love to hear Armstrong defenders explain what happened to all these extra members of the Oswald family.

Paging Paul Trejo....

This looks like something constructed for the autopsy scenes in the movie "JFK," as does the quite implausible/almost assuredly fake "new" photo in the recent Groden book.

Make it 15-6.

Great point, Larry. Just because the film was at NPIC doesn't mean it was altered in the way that so many believe.

Bumping this up since not a single person replied. Tracy, thank you for joining the forum and for your work setting the record straight on the errors and illogical conclusions inherent in the Harvey and Lee theory.

But we can know that she's lying, and she surely is. As Stephen Roy has demonstrated time and again, "she did not have a relationship - ANY relationship, ever - with Oswald, Ferrie, Sherman, Shaw, Ruby, etc. The whole story is untrue."

Bernice, Not to take this thread off-topic, but Jack White consistently refused to offer any substantive, specific evidence as to how the assassination films could have been altered in the manner he said they had. Moreover, his experiment attempting to prove that Mary Moorman was standing in the street when she took her famous Polaroid has been shown to be completely incorrect.

Could not agree more. It is baffling and incomprehensible that people actually believe this.

>New research by Pilots for 9/11 Truth and others have established that none of the four crash sites was authentic, which means some kind of video fakery was taking place in New York >that we are now able to explain. (See “Fraud and Fakery in the ‘official account’ of 9/11”.) Why anyone continues to take absolute, utter nonsense of this ilk seriously is beyond me. It is an insult to the thousands of people who died that day.

Professor Fetzer: Is it your claim that no planes hit the Trade Center towers that day? If so, how do you respond to the thousands upon thousands of people who saw the impacts with their own eyes? What did we all see, if not real planes? And do you also propose that the passengers on both planes are not actually dead?

To "attack" your studies? So anybody who disagrees with your theories is automatically attacking you? I guess I'm not surprised you view it like this, considering the Clavius Web site (http://www.xmission.com/~jwindley/) has authoritatively refuted every single point that Moon hoax theorists like yourself believe is true.

>Over at Lancer there has been discussion about Moorman being altered to hide the BOH exiting of a shot while some have even tried to show what may be 2 different >versions of the photo, pre and post alteration.... David, I don't think this photo could possibly have been altered. It ran over newswires within hours of the assassination, if I'm not mistaken, and there are also photos of the original taken that day. I'd love to hear from a pro-alterationist how it could have been tampered with in the time allotted.

From today's New York Post: Gerald Posner is joining forces with fellow JFK assassination author Mark Lane to battle further claims of plagiarism. Lane and Posner took opposing views over Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt. But now Posner has hired attorney-author Lane in a bid to sue New Times Miami owners Village Voice Media, who claimed Posner ripped off passages from Frank Owen's 2003 book "Clubland." Posner says, "Although I'm convinced Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated President Kennedy, I've always believed that had Mark Lane represented Oswald, he would have won an acquittal. That's why Mark Lane was the obvious choice as my own attorney." Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/odd_couple...J#ixzz0nozROlUH

>But as a subscriber to the COVERT ACTION INFORMATION BULLETIN before its demise, I was studying the AIDS virus more than 30 years ago, and the information presented strongly indicated that the mutated virus was created by the biowarfare goons at Fort Detrick Maryland as a part of PROJECT GLOBAL 2000, which was a eugenics campaign by the Pentagon to reduce world population. It was introduced in Africa to kill off people of color. If you are not familiar with GLOBAL 2000, you need to read up on it. It was to KILL OFF UNDESIRABLE people (non-white) through disease (AIDS), small scale limited wars in ethnic countries, famine in poor nations, and drug addiction. THE PROGRAM IS STILL IN EFFECT. Read up on EUGENICS. The Bush family and SKULL AND BONES all promote eugenics. So while Haslam offers some interesting information about AIDS...it is not ACCIDENTAL as he purports. It is an instrument of global population control at highest levels to rid the world of undesirables...blacks, homosexuals and arabs. Jack, seriously? Just when I was thinking how admirable it was for you to be standing up to Fetzer, you drop this little nugget. AIDS as a "weapon" created by the Pentagon??? Isn't that a little far-fetched considering scientists overwhelmingly agree that HIV jumped from primates to humans between 1884 and 1924?

Duke, all very astute points, but ones which Jack will no doubt not address. I have on a few occasions asked to discuss and/or speculate how any of these alterations could actually have been accomplished, but he refuses.

Jack, I know you don't make this stuff up, and I'm not trying to argue with you. I just don't happen to agree with what you think you are seeing in these images. You see a policeman wrestling another man to the ground. I do not. You see a little girl materialize out of thin air. I do not. You chalk these things up to massive fraud in the photo record of the assassination. I do not.

Jack, wrestling a man to the ground? Huh? Wouldn't this have caught they eye of the many Secret Service agents in the motorcade just feet away, much less any of the dozens of people standing nearby?

Jack, that "yellow object" sure looks to me to the building on the right side of the street that the car is passing. I'm with Robin on the "little girl" analysis too. That doesn't look like any little girl I've ever seen before. Bingo!

Jack, that "yellow object" sure looks to me to the building on the right side of the street that the car is passing. I'm with Robin on the "little girl" analysis too. That doesn't look like any little girl I've ever seen before.

>The last two to fall were Altgens and Moorman. I thought both were genuine until about the early 90s. Preparing for the Duluth conference, I did an intensive >restudy of Moorman and discovered the fakery. Again, I am wondering how the Moorman and Altgens pictures could possibly have been faked in the manner Jack suggests in light of them being transmitted over news wire services within hours of the assassination. Jack, are you claiming that the Zippo copy of Moorman represents the "fake" Moorman? And aren't you the one who frequently claims these photos are "worthless" as evidence, despite using Moorman in your studies to prove Zapruder film alteration?

>The Cancellare photo above is a blatant composite, as the shadow thrown by the figure at (viewer's) left on the south curb of Elm does not align with the direction >of the shadows thrown by the various figures on the north curb (foreground). The shadow cast by the former is from a later portion of the day, or some other day. >Unless, of course, we are to believe that there were two suns at work above Dealey Plaza that day! A composite of what and what? All of the people on the right side of the grass (ie. the Newman family) are visible in nearly these exact positions in other photos/films of the post-shooting scene.

>Jack, for what reason would the moorman photo need to be altered? the alterers painted in Zap and Sitzman because they really weren't on the pedestal filming? >Yes. Jack, don't "Zapruder" and "Sitzman" appear in the ORIGINAL Moorman polaroid? If so, I think you'll understand that some of us are incredulous that you claim they've been painted onto it.

are these white spots not part of the windows you say are missing? And why is your crop, where the windows begin, cutting off part of the person's right side? The entire right arm has been cropped off. John, I agree with you. I see white spots which certainly appear to be the windows behind Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal. Jack, every version of the Moorman picture available at Robin Unger's gallery on Duncan Macrae's forum has Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal. I'm not sure I understand what you are suggesting in terms of its alteration. Do you know of a copy of Moorman where Zapruder and Sitzman are NOT on the pedestal, or are you just pointing out that some versions of the photo were cropped in that area?