Newseum displays "Oswald's shirt": Proof that he was Doorman!

[Robin Unger]

Re: Black mans hand

It has been confirmed by Gary Mack that the wiegman frames and altgens6 have almost identical Timelines ( only 1- 2 seconds apart )

At no stage in any of the Wiegman frames do we ever see the black man with his hand up ?

.

Edited March 5, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

This is how i see the Large man in the suit and tie.

CLick on the image to view FULL SIZE

Edited March 5, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Randy Gunter]

What if it is LHO in the doorway and Loveladys face has been superimposed over Oswalds? I have never heard this option proposed previously.

If the bad guys can alter other films and photos, why not this one?

Randy

[Thomas Graves]

Thomas Graves is at least as bad as Lee Farley at serious research. He belittles the point I have made about using yet a "third Lovelady", but that is meant to distract any serious student from the evidence. We know that there were at least TWO "Lovelady"s, since the Billy who posed for the FBI and the Checkered Shirt Man look nothing alike. Look at the "Lovelady" in the upper-right hand image from footage that purportedly was taken at the Dallas Police Department:

It's an interesting case, because he looks like a composite of the real Billy and Checkered Shirt Man. When you realize that this issue of the splayed shirt has been on their minds for a long time and they have been doing what they can to create fabricated images to make the real Billy look more like Doorman (as we see above, where they even faked his left-arm and altered the sleeve), it should come as no surprise. But Lamson, Unger and Graves would never admit it.

"They had to bring in a THIRD LOVELADY for the sake of faking an open shirt in new footage from the DPD"

thanks I really needed that.

John,

This really is funny!

Dr. Fetzer accused me of "grasping at straws" when I showed that Lovelady was wearing his unbuttoned shirt in front of the TSBD. But It's a case of the pot calling the kettle black. "Three Loveladys." LOL!!! Hilarious!!!

--Tommy

It took 3 weeks to convince your chiropractor that the footage you are discussing (above) was shot outside of the TSBD. He thought it was outside the Dallas Police Department HQ. Once he could no longer deny its location - he dropped to the Fetzarian position that the footage was faked.

It took a week to convince your chiropractor that the footage inside the Robbery and Homicide Office depicted Billy Lovelady sat down in a chair. He was convinced the footage contained a midget. He even lied about what he said and went back and edited his posts. He then dropped to the Fetzarian position that the footage was faked. (emphasis added by T. Graves)

Now we have fake arms added into photographs. If we don't have fake people then we've got fake limbs. We have mobile CIA photographic processing labs faking footage that was still warm and we have an army of imposters posing as Billy Lovelady. We have fake Altgens pictures. Fake Zapruder film. Fake Moorman. Fake Hughes. Fake Bronson.

Do we now have a fake Bonnie Ray Williams and a fake James Jarman? If so, how many will we wind up with? Two, three, twenty seven?

If by a million to one chance you are not creating this crazy nonsense up to deliberately create division, then my judgement is that there are saner people locked up.

Lee,

So, Cinque said that Lovelady was impersonated at one point by a midget?

That's hilarious!

The guy who thought that up must be a mental midget.

--Tommy

PS: Please note that Lovelady is smoking in the Martin clip, and that he exhaled the smoke through his mouth (and/or coughed), distorting his face somewhat.

Also, I guess Dr. Fetzer is going to start claiming now that this Lovelady had his shirt buttoned at the neck but unbuttoned in the chest and upper belly area. LOL

Edited March 5, 2013 by Thomas Graves

[Greg Burnham]

What if it is LHO in the doorway and Loveladys face has been superimposed over Oswalds? I have never heard this option proposed previously.

If the bad guys can alter other films and photos, why not this one?

Randy

To find the answer, research: "Mr. Potato Head in Dealey Plaza" (available under a different name) at Veterans Today.

In my view, this is the danger with The School of Random Claims of Alteration: It breeds red herrings and dopplegangers.

It also tends to damage honest research into the film alteration that DID occur, encouraging the general public and the main

stream media to confuse it with irresponsible supposition.

[Randy Gunter]

Burnham,

Your swarmy comments with directions to dead end references are not helpful in the least.

Didn't you recently release a JFK impersonation video? Nice.

Randy

[Thomas Graves]

What if it is LHO in the doorway and Loveladys face has been superimposed over Oswalds? I have never heard this option proposed previously.

If the bad guys can alter other films and photos, why not this one?

Randy

[...]

In my view, this is the danger with The School of Random Claims of Alteration: It breeds red herrings and dopplegangers.

It also tends to damage honest research into the film alteration that DID occur, encouraging the general public and the main

stream media to confuse it with irresponsible supposition.

I agree, Greg.

--Tommy

[Greg Burnham]

Burnham,

Your swarmy comments with directions to dead end references are not helpful in the least.

Didn't you recently release a JFK impersonation video? Nice.

Randy

Gunter,

My satirical video was made for a purpose and contained a meaning that was apparently either lost on you or was over your head.

However, that you come here, at this late date, supposedly ignorant of the existence of the exact claim being peddled--coincidentally

in this specific thread--is hard to sell.

[Randy Gunter]

It appears that the ignorance falls on you for not realizing that the doorman subject is still being argued, and you're most blatantly oblivious to the fact that the case has not been solved.

Thank you for confirming the conversations being said about you. It's always good to separate fact from fiction.

[Greg Burnham]

It appears that the ignorance falls on you for not realizing that the doorman subject is still being argued, and you're most blatantly oblivious to the fact that the case has not been solved.

Thank you for confirming the conversations being said about you. It's always good to separate fact from fiction.

I certainly know the subject is still being argued and that it has not been settled. I've been in this debate since it began. I do not claim to know who is standing in the doorway, Oswald or

Lovelady or other. However, I object to the pseudo science that is being employed to conclude Doorman is Oswald. Is Oswald doorman? I don't know. What I do know is that the arguments

being put forth to advance that notion do not persuade.

[Lindsay Anderson]

Lindsay has asked me to post the following image to illustrate his conjecture about the black man's arm:

I have two immediate observations, the first of which concerns the blue line. He has included the white

shirt that Black Tie Man was wearing as though it were part of Doorman's shirt. That is of course wrong,

where it would have to have been a peculiar shirt, indeed, to shift from richly textured to stark white. And

it would have been at least equally remarkable if the upwardly extended hand of Black Profile Man (as we

might call him) were to have exactly the same texture and quality as the shirt that Doorman was wearing.

Thanks for posting the image James,

For the record, I was not suggesting that doorman has a peculiar shirt. I was suggesting that the shift to stark white could be due to bright sunlight falling on that part of doorman's shirt, that the black tie is comparative shadow (where doorman ends and the other guy begins) and that some of the shirt of tie-man similarly appears white due again to sunlight and over exposure.

Re: Black mans hand

It has been confirmed by Gary Mack that the wiegman frames and altgens6 have almost identical Timelines ( only 1- 2 seconds apart )

At no stage in any of the Wiegman frames do we ever see the black man with his hand up ?

.

Thanks for clearing that up for me - once I saw the raised arm it was very difficult to see it as anything else.

I really didn't expect to have discovered anything new (though it would have been nice). I still hold to my wider premise; that some of the anomalies with the image may result from bright sunlight and over-exposure rather than alteration and that the image is of sufficiently poor quality that it lends itself to many questions but few conclusions.

Edited March 6, 2013 by Lindsay Anderson

[Greg Burnham]

[...]

I still hold to my wider premise; that some of the anomalies with the image may result from bright sunlight and over-exposure rather than alteration and that the image is of sufficiently poor quality that it lends itself to many questions but few conclusions.

That has been my position from the start of this debate.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Greg Burnham could not distinguish between science and pseudo-science

if his life depended upon. It is embarrassing that he is posting such rubbish.

The arguments are very simple, but they do not make a dent on those who

are cognitively impaired. The first argument, e.g., is based on observation:

(1) Doorman's was wearing a long sleeved shirt with distinctive features.

Oswald was wearing a long sleeved shirt with distinctive features.

Therefore, Oswald's shirt makes him a strong candidate for Doorman.

The second is based upon observation, the FBI photographs and report,

and the principle of identity (the same person cannot be wearing a short-

sleeved shirt and a long-sleeved shirt at one and the same time), namely:

(2) Doorman was not wearing a short-sleeved shirt.

Lovelady was wearing a short-sleeved shirt.

Therefore, Lovelady was not Doorman.

The third argument is based upon observation and the same principle of

identity, where the differences between them are rather easy to observe:

(3) Doorman had a shirt that was splayed open.

Checkered Shirt Man was not splayed open.

Therefore, Checkered Shirt Man is not Doorman.

The fourth argument is a simple deductive argument by elimination as follows:

(4) Doorman was Oswald or Lovelady or Checkered Shirt Man.

But Doorman was not Lovelady or Checkered Shirt Man.

Therefore, Doorman was Oswald.

Scientific reasoning is based upon hypothesis formation, observation, and both

deductive and inductive reasoning. There is nothing here that could possibly

qualify as "pseudo-scientific". Moreover, we have further proof that Lovelady

and Checkered Shirt Man were not at the same places at the same times, i.e.,

Further comparisons reveal our critics would have Checkered Man's shirt open and closed at the same time:

[Robin Unger]

Quote:

I still hold to my wider premise; that some of the anomalies with the image may result from bright sunlight and over-exposure rather than alteration and that the image is of sufficiently poor quality that it lends itself to many questions but few conclusions.

That is precisely what we see

bright sunlight , over-exposure, poor resolution, deep shadows

Also not forgetting the fact that the area we are looking at, is only a very tiny piece of the overall photo, and needs to be BLOWN UP just to be studied

[Robin Unger]

Quote

Greg Burnham could not distinguish between science and pseudo-science

if his life depended upon

That the old Fetzer we have all come to know.

When you are incapable of presenting a good enough case to convince others that you are correct !

GO ON THE ATTACK, START NAME CALLING,

Typical Fetzer tactics

But we see right through you, your bully boy tactics won't work anymore.Jim

Now people see you for what you really are,

a snake oil salesman, with a HUGE EGO that he is incapable of keeping under control