Those Front Steps

[Sandy Larsen]

15 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

It's not a superior copy, Mr. Larson. 'Superior' is just Mr. Stancak's word for images that upset him less.

The print I used from the Weisberg archive (which I found on the prayerman site btw-----one of only two sites Mr. Stancak has said contains images worthy of his expert attention!) is far crisper:

 

Incidentally, I took the frame that Mr. Stancak posted and simply zoomed in. The result is on the left, Mr. Stancak's heavily processed crop, by contrast, on the right---------------

Perhaps Mr. Stancak might share with us what he did to the image?

Unfortunately for him, though, no amount of fiddling with the image can get rid of the thing he knows and we know is such a calamity for his 'right shoulder hidden behind his head' nonsense: the white tshirt.

For Mr. Stancak's posture explanation to have a chance, that white shirt shouldn't be where we see it.

It's the reason I have asked Mr. Stancak to do up a digital model and show us. I'm guessing he won't dare!

 

Thanks for the clarification, Alan.

 

[Alan Ford]

Mr. Cohen is trying to divert the discussion, Mr. Larsen. It's what he does.

[Sandy Larsen]

2 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

Mr. Cohen is trying to divert the discussion, Mr. Larsen. It's what he does.

 

Yes, and I fell for it.

But that's okay... I like to repeat things I strongly believe. Doing so might get others to consider it.

 

[Alan Ford]

1 minute ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Yes, and I fell for it.

But that's okay... I like to repeat things I strongly believe. Doing so might get others to consider it.

 

👍

[Jonathan Cohen]

45 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

There is no evidence that Billy Lovelady wore a red plaid shirt on 11/22.

Oh, except for the NUMEROUS FILMS AND PHOTOS OF HIM WEARING IT ...

45 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Billy Lovelady himself said he did not wear a red plaid shirt on 11/22.

He was mistaken.

45 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

The red plaid shirt sported by Billy Lovelady in 1967 is not the same shirt as the one worn by the other guy on 11/22. The former has no pocket whereas the latter does. We have photographic proof of this.

Your interpretation of these photos is 100% incorrect.

45 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

We have photographic proof that the guy who did wear a red plaid shirt on 11/22 isn't Billy Lovelady. They are clearly different people.

There is more.

You have ZERO proof of this. Literally zero.

[Alan Ford]

See? He's at it again.

This is what Mr. Cohen does. His agenda here is entirely a negative one.

[Andrej Stancak]

47 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

It's not a superior copy, Mr. Larsen. 'Superior' is just Mr. Stancak's word for images that upset him less.

The print I used from the Weisberg archive (which I found on the prayerman site btw-----one of only two sites Mr. Stancak has said contains images worthy of his expert attention!) is far crisper:

But it's no great odds. Both versions are a disaster for Mr. Stancak's claim.

Incidentally, I took the more blurry frame that Mr. Stancak posted and simply zoomed in. The result is on the left, Mr. Stancak's heavily processed crop, by contrast, on the right---------------

Perhaps Mr. Stancak might share with us what he did to the image?

Unfortunately for him, though, no amount of fiddling with the image can get rid of the thing he knows and we know is such a calamity for his 'right shoulder hidden behind his head' nonsense: the white tshirt.

For Mr. Stancak's posture explanation to have a chance, that white shirt shouldn't be where we see it.

It's the reason I have asked Mr. Stancak to do up a digital model and show us. I'm guessing he won't dare!

Alan:

I reduced the dark tones a bit, basically, increased the contrast, and I sharpened the cropped image very slightly, all using SmartPhotoFix procedure in CorelPainshopPro v. 7. The reason was to show the contour of the right side of Lovelady better. I see no problem with this procedure.

The dark (black) version of Wiegman is of course of much worse quality than the one I downloaded from jfkassassinationgallery.com. In the one I brought, it is possible to see the details in the depth of the doorway which is a prerequisite for figuring out the orientation of Lovelady's body. This version even shows the faint figure of Prayer Man while the "black" copy, which obviously has been arranged by scanning some old print, does not show Prayer Man.

It is a pitty that you cannot understand Lovelady's posture in the cropped views of his body I prepared. It is not that difficult, just try again. But if you think I will spend weeks modelling this Wiegman frame to satisfy you, you are very wrong.

No doubt you really wish to have your blackened-out Oswald next to Lovelady in this frame and there is no reasonable argument that would change your view. So, the thread once again is all yours and I would really appreciate if you and Sandy stopped calling my name or quote me in this thread. If not, I will delete all my posts in this thread.

Consider this: even if the area of this Wiegman frame would somehow be intentionally darkened (which it was not), how can one know who or what was in that area if there is nothing to be seen in there? And, why only this frame was blackened out and not the rest of Wiegman film frames? Maybe it now dawns on you what nonsense are you pursuing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

5 minutes ago, Andrej Stancak said:

And, why only this frame was blackened out and not the rest of Wiegman film frames?

 

Aren't most, if not all, blacked out?

 

[Alan Ford]

1 minute ago, Andrej Stancak said:

No doubt you really wish to have your blackened-out Oswald next to Lovelady in this frame and there is no reasonable argument that would change your view. So, the thread once again is all yours and I would really appreciate if you and Sandy stopped calling my name or quote me in this thread. If not, I will delete all my posts in this thread.

Consider this: even if the area of this Wiegman frame would somehow be intentionally darkened (which it was not), how can one know who or what was in that area if there is nothing to be seen in there? And, why only this frame was blackened out and not the rest of Wiegman film frames? Maybe it now dawns on you what nonsense are you pursuing.

Tell us about Mr. Lovelady's white tshirt, Mr. Stancak. For some reason, you never ever seem to want to talk about it.

How does the white tshirt fit into your "right shoulder hidden behind his head" theory? Do tell us!

-----------------

The first question in your final paragraph above is too transcendently inane to merit a response.

-----------------

The second question in that paragraph indicates that your reading skills need as much work as your photo-interpretive ones. I have been making it 100% clear that I believe a fake shadow has been placed down Mr. Lovelady's right side in all the Wiegman frames.

-----------------

And let me remind our readers that you are yourself a photo-alterationist. Here was your reaction when the Kamp Darnell frame was brought to folks' attention here by Mr. Davidson:

"if the picture brought here by Chris was photographed from the video system at SFM, then I am sure that the picture made available to researchers by the NBC/SFM is a fake."

Of course, you understood immediately that exposure of the fact that Prayer Man is in fact a woman would also constitute exposure of the subjective impressionism run amok that had led you to your many preposterously overconfident 'analytic' pronouncements on 'Prayer Man's' attire, physique and posture.

Down you get off your high horse, Mr. Stancak.

👍

 

[Roger Odisio]

8 hours ago, Alan Ford said:

THE BASICS:

1. Mr. Oswald signed up for participation in a White House-approved off-books false flag incident to involve deliberate misses from the TSBD.
2. This shockingly provocative action would be blamed on pro-Castro elements.
3. The point of the staged missed-shots incident: to serve as pretext for C-Day (12/1/63)
4. Mr. Oswald--------a 'known' 'pro-Castro' troublemaker with perfect backstory---------would become the public face/name of the outrage, the inside man at the TSBD who helped make it all happen. There would be evidence pointing to his involvement (though NOT as gunman), which fact would allow the incident to be sold to the public as a pro-Castro provocation.
5. Mr. Oswald signed up to play this role. He expected to be whisked away from Dallas (perhaps flown out of Redbird?), in all probability never to see his wife & children again. The world would be told that he had fled to Cuba.
6. Mr. Oswald, like a number of others at the TSBD, played his part----------in his case, right up to and including being about to carry out his political stunt just in front of the Depository immediately after the shots had been fired...................

7. However, as soon as he learned to his horror that Pres. Kennedy was actually hit, he knew he was in deepest trouble. The false-flag operation had turned into an actual assassination of the very man who had ultimately greenlit the false-flag operation. And Mr. Oswald would be exposed by name, because that had been baked into the false-flag plan.
8. He ended up making his way to the Texas Theatre to meet a contact he was told would be there. But his goose was already cooked. To his great credit, he never broke cover even under the unimaginable stress of arrest & interrogation. Right up to the end, he hoped for rescue by those he had served. But instead he got a bullet from Mr. Jack Ruby.
9. The assassination came as a complete shock to all those who had (like Mr. Oswald) taken part in good faith in 'Conspiracy A' (the false-flag operation). They found themselves horribly exposed.
10. Those 'guiltocents' in the TSBD (Messrs. Truly, Shelley, Lovelady [et al.?]), who had been on the same team as Mr. Oswald, had no choice but to hang him out to dry.
11. The Kennedy loyalists (up to and incl. Mr. Robert Kennedy) were in an impossible situation. The last thing they could afford-----------for their own sakes as well as for the sake of Pres. Kennedy's memory----------would be for the true facts behind the assassination to come out. And so, in order to cover up the ethically and politically highly dubious (and utterly reckless) false-flag operation, they gave full backing to the truly absurd LN theory. Mr. Robert Kennedy even meddled in the autopsy ('on behalf of the family'.) A real investigation would be apocalyptic for all concerned. Under no circumstances could the world know that Pres. Kennedy had gone into Dealey Plaza expecting to hear gunfire.
12. Of course, the complete post-assassination paralysis of ALL those behind the false-flag operation had been factored in by those behind 'Conspiracy B' (the actual assassination plot, which piggybacked on 'Conspiracy A').

“It would not be a very difficult job to shoot the president of the United States. All you’d have to do is get up in a high building with a high-powered rifle with a telescopic sight, and there’s nothing anybody could do.”
(Pres. John F. Kennedy, morning of 11/22/63

1. Mr. Oswald signed up for participation in a White House-approved off-books false flag incident to involve deliberate misses from the TSBD.
2. This shockingly provocative action would be blamed on pro-Castro elements.
3. The point of the staged missed-shots incident: to serve as pretext for C-Day (12/1/63)

 

What does "White House approved off-books false flag incident" mean, Alan?  Are you saying JFK approved it?  Didn't you at one point in this thread say you thought Kennedy had gestured toward the steps on his way by?

[Jonathan Cohen]

2 hours ago, Alan Ford said:

See? He's at it again.

This is what Mr. Cohen does. His agenda here is entirely a negative one.

I have no agenda whatsoever than to dispel the nonsense you are peddling in this thread.

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

I have no agenda whatsoever than to dispel the nonsense you are peddling in this thread.

 

How does your saying that something is nonsense dispel anything? It's just your opinion.

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

34 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

It's just your opinion.

Not only is it my opinion, it's also the opinion of 99 out of every 100 credible JFK assassination researchers. The fact that nobody supports your alteration nonsense should tell you something about the quality of your work, but clearly it doesn't ...

[Alan Ford]

4 hours ago, Roger Odisio said:

1. Mr. Oswald signed up for participation in a White House-approved off-books false flag incident to involve deliberate misses from the TSBD.
2. This shockingly provocative action would be blamed on pro-Castro elements.
3. The point of the staged missed-shots incident: to serve as pretext for C-Day (12/1/63)

 

What does "White House approved off-books false flag incident" mean, Alan?  Are you saying JFK approved it?  Didn't you at one point in this thread say you thought Kennedy had gestured toward the steps on his way by?

Yes x2

[Alan Ford]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

How does your saying that something is nonsense dispel anything? It's just your opinion.

 

He's just an NPC. Doesn't do critical thinking.

Edited November 8, 2023 by Alan Ford