Jonathan Cohen

No, the idea that they may have had a "keen interest" in no way means the Zapruder film was altered.

Nobody ever said the point couldn't be "considered." But that consideration falls apart in the absence of any ACTUAL evidence. Not speculation, not "maybe this happened" and not your personal belief that it "was crucial that Johnson and McCone find out if the Z film, now known to the world, contradicted their story, and if so, to what extent." That's not EVIDENCE.

As Tom has pointed out... Translation: The only ‘evidence’ the film was sent to Hawkeye Works is 34 year-old hearsay reported by a single witness with admitted memory problems. There is no corroboration, no actual evidence, and no reason to believe that any copy of the Z-film was ever in Rochester at any time other than McMahon’s reported hearsay from alleged SS agent “Bill Smith”.

Is there any particular reason you feel the need to demean Bill Brown by proclaiming that you "rarely" read his comments? And if you'd actually read the thread, you'd see that your rhetorical questions are all addressed, including how long Oswald stayed at his rooming house and where he went from there.

Is it not correct that "Bill Smith" has never been identified, and that there's actually no evidence he existed other than these specific accounts?

Steve, please don't tell me you actually believe this happened?

Chris - thank you again for your incredibly valuable research and contributions to the forum over the years.

Why is this thread still featured in this section of the forum? It no longer has anything to do whatsoever with the Kennedy assassination (if it ever did). Can it be moved?

This is absolute nonsense. Soooo.... what film did Muchmore personally sell to United Press International on November 25, 1963?

What specific "pictures and cameras" are you referring to, besides the alleged Babushka Lady film?

The issue was DATED Nov. 29. Surely it was physically available before that date, which means Jeremy's timeline is totally valid.

Clearly, your definition of "demonstrable falsehoods" is not shared by the majority of members here - hence your removal as a moderator.

What a disgraceful, xenophobic post, but not at all surprising, considering Gil Jesus' history of repulsive comments along these lines.

Truly, what are you talking about? Now I have to consider Lee Oswald as "something" before I can understand your reference to Marguerite Oswald's "Nazi" spokesperson? Why can't you just state simply and clearly what any of that has to do with anything?

Hardly! The only person deflecting is you, when I pressed you to explain what larger connection you are attempting to draw between the "Nazi" spokesperson (your words) and Marguerite Oswald.

Riiiiight. So is this is just another variation of your "Spaceballs" dialog-esque "I am your father's, brother's, nephew's, cousin's former roommate" - ie., a bunch of random and unrelated occurrences that you deem evidence of some massive conspiracy.

Then why bring it up in the first place? What relevance does it have in any form?

Dozens and dozens of top researchers in this case think the datebook is a fraud, and will continue to do so until they can independently investigate it and attempt to determine its authenticity.

So now are you claiming the Nazi presence in the JFK assassination went so far as to include a "spokesperson" for Marguerite Oswald?

So what?

Wait. You are suggesting that *I* should "have the datebook authenticated" ? That's one of the funniest things I've ever read on this forum, and that's saying something.

That's correct. There is no significance about that as it pertains to the JFK assassination.

Any thoughts on you continuing to shill for a "datebook" that nobody can actually see and examine to verify whether it's authentic?

Dude, enough already. STOP spamming multiple threads with the same commentary over and over!

Sadly, we seem to live in a "post-facts" society, in which the heinous acts you mentioned actually APPEAL to people rather than repel them.