Jump to content
The Education Forum

Willis 5 alterations are OBVIOUS!


Jack White
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

There is no doubt that Willis 5 is heavily retouched.

Some here, however, will dispute this obvious evidence

with vicious personal attacks.

Jack

Jack, there have been many good researchers who have pored over the assassination photos .... have you ever wondered why you are the only one who keeps making all theses alleged finds ???

Bill Miller

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no doubt that Willis 5 is heavily retouched.

Some here, however, will dispute this obvious evidence

with vicious personal attacks.

Jack

Jack,

What you see as the pant legs of the man in the red shirt...could it be part of the base of the streetlight?

The problem with that is obvious....the lamppost is several feet away.

Could these photos have been designed to divert attention away from some other, more important, details?

Chuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no doubt that Willis 5 is heavily retouched.

Some here, however, will dispute this obvious evidence

with vicious personal attacks.

Jack

Jack,

What you see as the pant legs of the man in the red shirt...could it be part of the base of the streetlight?

The problem with that is obvious....the lamppost is several feet away.

Could these photos have been designed to divert attention away from some other, more important, details?

Chuck

Thanks, Chuck. At first I thought that it was a post, it was so sharp. Then

I saw it was an extension of his legs. Definitely not "photographic".

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Chuck. At first I thought that it was a post, it was so sharp. Then

I saw it was an extension of his legs. Definitely not "photographic".

Jack

Well, Jack ... you're the man! After all, wasn't it you that found the Elm Street midget.

Bill Miller

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good points Jack --

except I wouldnt' use the worthless Moorman polaroids to prove ANYTHING.....

best wishes and hang in there.........because of your work on the Kennedy assassination,

the Lunar Photos and the 9/11 photos you have earned the distinct honor of having

disinformation agents dogging you...............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The blue box on the right supposedly shows the same section of fence in Willis 5 as in Moorman. But the box actually shows where the fence meets the overpass and that area is NOT visible in Moorman.

Willis 5 shows shadow on the side of the fence just like Moorman.

The same is true for the shadows on the concrete wall. Both the UPI Moorman photo and Willis 5 show the same shadows.

Jack chose to use the AP version of Moorman and the tonal quality of that version is terrible. It is NOT an accurate copy of the original Polaroid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Jack -

Thank God we have had your questioning viewpoints to consider over these decades as opposed to the pablum offered up by your detractors. They serve up their gruel and claim that it is both delicious and nutritious. It is neither - as any nutrition-starved patriot knows. I have also been comparing Willis #5 to Zapruder frames and am wondering about the following... thanks for blazing the trails...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Jack -

Thank God we have had your questioning viewpoints to consider over these decades as opposed to the pablum offered up by your detractors. They serve up their gruel and claim that it is both delicious and nutritious. It is neither - as any nutrition-starved patriot knows. I have also been comparing Willis #5 to Zapruder frames and am wondering about the following... thanks for blazing the trails...

Excellent observations, JL. I will look into them!

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Jack -

Thank God we have had your questioning viewpoints to consider over these decades as opposed to the pablum offered up by your detractors. They serve up their gruel and claim that it is both delicious and nutritious. It is neither - as any nutrition-starved patriot knows. I have also been comparing Willis #5 to Zapruder frames and am wondering about the following... thanks for blazing the trails...

Excellent observations, JL. I will look into them!

Jack

Speaking of Willis... Jack, have you or any of the other photo gurus done a detailed study of Black Dog Man with today's technology? Given what came out of the tiny Moorman photo (Badgeman) I would guess more detail is resident in Willis...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Jack -

Thank God we have had your questioning viewpoints to consider over these decades as opposed to the pablum offered up by your detractors. They serve up their gruel and claim that it is both delicious and nutritious. It is neither - as any nutrition-starved patriot knows. I have also been comparing Willis #5 to Zapruder frames and am wondering about the following... thanks for blazing the trails...

Excellent observations, JL. I will look into them!

Jack

Speaking of Willis... Jack, have you or any of the other photo gurus done a detailed study of Black Dog Man with today's technology? Given what came out of the tiny Moorman photo (Badgeman) I would guess more detail is resident in Willis...

Hi, John White. My late father John White would have been 112 years old

next week were he still here.

I have studied the blackdogman for more than 30 years. No good image

exists of "him". "He" appears only in Willis5 and Betzner.

I have concluded that he probably did not exist at all, but was added

by retouching. I base that mostly on the Moorman image.

Thanks.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Jack -

Thank God we have had your questioning viewpoints to consider over these decades as opposed to the pablum offered up by your detractors. They serve up their gruel and claim that it is both delicious and nutritious. It is neither - as any nutrition-starved patriot knows. I have also been comparing Willis #5 to Zapruder frames and am wondering about the following... thanks for blazing the trails...

Excellent observations, JL. I will look into them!

Jack

Speaking of Willis... Jack, have you or any of the other photo gurus done a detailed study of Black Dog Man with today's technology? Given what came out of the tiny Moorman photo (Badgeman) I would guess more detail is resident in Willis...

Hi, John White. My late father John White would have been 112 years old

next week were he still here.

I have studied the blackdogman for more than 30 years. No good image

exists of "him". "He" appears only in Willis5 and Betzner.

I have concluded that he probably did not exist at all, but was added

by retouching. I base that mostly on the Moorman image.

Thanks.

Jack

Fair enough... Is it possible that the Dog Man does not appear in Moorman because of the angle and the dark background? Or, that "he" was a "round 1" shooter only and began his exit after the throat shot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack

What exactly would be the point of altering details of blurry photos like these? What do you think was “covered up” by these alterations? What would the point be of deleting “the third man” from this photo? Don’t you think that all these supposed alteration you see are really just the result of the poor resolution of these images.

Len

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...