Is Robert Groden legit, or is he working for the other side?

[Ralph Cinque]

The Robert Groden scan of Doorman is considered the best and the most
detailed. But, are all the details real?

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/3929/86470341.jpg

To test that, I created a scan of my own. We'll call it the Cinque scan.
What I did was take a sharp, clear version of the Altgens photo-from Life
magazine-and I cut Doorman out of it. Period. That's it. No editing. No
filtering. No nothing.

http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/9104/collage573.jpg

So, what you have above is the Cinque scan on the left, and the Groden
scan on the right.

I had to keep it small because otherwise the enlargement would look
pixellated, and the Idiot Backes would accuse me of doing it on purpose.

What I want you to notice is that, on my side which is left, the pattern
of Doorman's shirt is quite smooth and consistent. It looks a little
mottled, but it still looks consistent with no sharp contrast. However,
the Groden scan on the right shows quite a lot of contrast with white
lines and splotches against the dark background.

On my Doorman, and I'm sure Richard Hooke will agree with this, we're just
seeing the light reflecting off his shirt. That's what the slight mottling
is. Oswald's shirt glistened in the sunlight. It had a fine, grainy
pattern- so fine that away from the direct light, it just looked brown.
But, in the direct light, as Doorman was, it sparkled, it glistened, and
that's what we are seeing.

But on Groden's side, we are seeing much more contrast than that, and some
have equated it with the "plaid" pattern of Lovelady's shirt.

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/7620/collage574.jpg

They are obviously not the same. The only thing those patterns have in
common is that they are both varied, but they are not varied in the same
way. There is nothing plaid or checkered or geometric about Doorman's
pattern, and there is no reason to think we are seeing Lovelady's pattern
on him.

But, what are we seeing? I maintain that the contrasting pattern that we
see is distortion introduced by Robert Groden. Go back to the comparison
with my Doorman. The distinct white lines on Groden's cuff are an
exaggeration of the light glistening off the shirt- which Groden somehow
converted into distinct white lines.

http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/9104/collage573.jpg

Here is what Groden reportedly said about it as published in the HSCA
Final Report:

He said that he detected a "pattern of lines" that correspond more "in
pattern and color" to Lovelady's plaid shirt than to Oswald's tweed
shirt.

Bull crap! There are no lines on Doorman's shirt. It has a consistent
grainy pattern with some faint light reflections- that's all. But somehow,
Groden exaggerated that effect into distinct white lines.

I am saying that Groden infused artificial content into that scan of his,
and here's my proof: look at the collar of Black Tie Man on his scan.

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/3929/86470341.jpg

How on Earth could the detail of that collar- which is evident- show up in
the Altgens photo? It's impossible. Look what it started with:


http://img803.imageshack.us/img803/2674/lifealtgens.jpg

Do you really think that honing in close on that doorway, that you would
be able to distinguish the fine line of Black Tie Man's shirt collar?

This was Tri-X film, which was lousy film, with poor resolution, and poor
detail. The idea that that collar would be distinguishable from Altgens'
distance is preposterous.

I don't know what was done, but that carved out collar isn't real. And it
makes me wonder: has Robert Groden been working for the other side all
along? Is he a plant? Is he a phony CT like Joseph Backes and Albert
Doyle?

Or, is Robert Groden more like the Inspector Clouseau of JFK assassination
research, where he was tricked by others to do the things he did? I think
it's more likely the latter.

[Ralph Cinque]

Compare the detail of LBJ's Secret Service agent to that of Black Tie Man.

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/3835/collage576.jpg

The form of Black Tie Man is so crude and so gross that it doesn't even
look like a photograph at all, especially in comparison to the agent. In
fact, Black Tie Man looks crude even for a drawing. On every comparable
element, Black Tie Man looks crude and primitive compared to the agent.
That is, until you get to that shirt collar where a fine line came through
on him, where it is the one thing alone that came out better on Black Tie
Man and on Secret Agent man. I don't buy it.

[fatol...@gmail.com]

That's Clint Hill, not LBJ's Secret Service agent. I think you just lost
some credibility there, dude.

[Jason Burke]

You have GOT to be kidding, Ralph.

[Ralph Cinque]

He's the SS agent standing on LBJ's vehicle, the Lincoln convertible. Quit
wasting my time, would you?

[claviger]

Ralph,

> I don't know what was done, but that carved out collar isn't real. And it
> makes me wonder: has Robert Groden been working for the other side all
> along? Is he a plant? Is he a phony CT like Joseph Backes and Albert
> Doyle?

No. He is every bit the goofball you think he is.

> Or, is Robert Groden more like the Inspector Clouseau of JFK assassination
> research, where he was tricked by others to do the things he did? I think
> it's more likely the latter.

Yes. For once you are right. You nailed it. Groden is the Inspector
Clouseau of this case. I cannot tell if he lost his load of turnips
somewhere along the way or if he never had full control of the turnips to
begin with. Whatever the case may be, he now has "Bats in the belfry" and
"His elevator no longer goes to the top floor" to use some apropos
vernacular expressions. And I've figured you out too. You are a smart
guy playing dumb because you're obviously posting here to cure boredom, so
you're gaming the system for your own amusement which is why I rarely
respond to your exaggerated nonsense. What you are all about is making
fun of anyone who responds to you, thinking you are serious. It's obvious
as hell to me because nobody could be as dumb as you pretend to be. Why
don't you stop playing games and become a serious part of this ongoing
discussion.

[Jason Burke]

You nailed it. My theory is that ol' Ralph is working on a book for the
50th. Problem is, he's antagonized pretty much everyone on both sides of
the argument. That is, sales will be close to zero.

[fatol...@gmail.com]

That's the Queen Mary Secret Service followup car, not LBJ's car. Clint Hill was a major character in the action that day. You really should know who he is, if you want to play the expert and stuff. He was Jackie's Secret Service man. Though, it is interesting that he was assigned to LBJ a few years later when Jackie didn't need him anymore.

[Ralph Cinque]

I am not alone. I have Dr. David Wrone, Attorney Vincent Salandria, authors Peter Janney and Phillip Nelson and other accomplished individuals on my side. And the other thing I have on my side is the fact that it is Oswald in the doorway, and it can't not be him. It's his clothes- his shirt and his t-shirt. How could Oswald's clothes get on anyone else? It's his slender, willowy frame and not Lovelady's husky one of the time. It's his stance, clasping his hands left over right, of which we have many pictures of Oswald doing it, including the moment he was shot by Jack Ruby. The fact is that nobody could be as dumb as YOU are pretending to be in denying the patently obvious, that it was Lee Harvey Oswald in the doorway.

[John Fiorentino]

Obviously Cinque knows nothing about the JFK assassination.


John F.




<fatol...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6939a996-779d-4421...@googlegroups.com...

[John Fiorentino]

Oswald in the doorway????

What a joke, Cinque.


John F.





"Ralph Cinque" <buda...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7929f084-85d1-47bc...@googlegroups.com...

[Walt]

On May 2, 9:33 pm, Ralph Cinque <budab...@gmail.com> wrote:
> He's the SS agent standing on LBJ's vehicle, the Lincoln convertible. Quit
> wasting my time, would you?

Clint Hill was riding on the running board of the Secret Service 53
Cadillac when this Altgen's photo was snapped. He was never in LBJ's
Lincoln. That's SS agent William T McInyre behind him ....

[John Fiorentino]

Now Cinque believes the nutball Groden...."is working for the other side!"

You MUST be joking!!

John F.


"Ralph Cinque" <buda...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:1b55686d-0538-4f8f...@googlegroups.com...

[Jason Burke]

On 5/3/2013 4:16 AM, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> I am not alone. I have Dr. David Wrone, Attorney Vincent Salandria, authors Peter Janney and Phillip Nelson and other accomplished individuals on my side.

All of whom are experts in photography and photographic manipulation, I
see.

> And the other thing I have on my side is the fact that it is Oswald in the doorway,

No matter how many times and how loud you yell, it's still Billy Nolan
Lovelady in the doorway.

> and it can't not be him. It's his clothes- his shirt and his t-shirt. How could Oswald's clothes get on anyone else?

But they didn't.

> It's his slender, willowy frame and not Lovelady's husky one of the time.

I *love* your 'attempt' to prove that there's what now, FOUR different
Lovelady's in all these 'faked' films.

> It's his stance, clasping his hands left over right, of which we have many pictures of Oswald doing it, including the moment he was shot by Jack Ruby. The fact is that nobody could be as dumb as YOU are

So let me get this straight. Everyone except the half dozen folks you've
perhaps convinced that you're not totally wacky is wrong, Wrong, WRONG,
and you're right.

Is that what we're looking at here, Ralph?

[fatol...@gmail.com]

Oswald was in the doorway; you're right about that. But, it doesn't help
your case when you're wrong about everything else, is all I'm saying.

[Ralph Cinque]

They give me a hard time on McAdams' forum because it's Op Central, but an

interesting response came in today. A guy named Fatol wrote:

"Oswald was in the doorway; you're right about that. But, it doesn't help
your case when you're wrong about everything else, is all I'm saying."

And that got me thinking that once you concede that it's Oswald in the
doorway, then the others things follow like clockwork. Here is how I
responded to him:

Cinque: So, Fatol, you admit that it's Oswald in the doorway. That's
great! But everything else we say follows from that, and you just haven't
thought it through. For instance, we say that Billy Lovelady was Black
Hole Man. And that makes sense because if Oswald was Doorman, then
Lovelady had to be somebody else because he was definitely out there. He
said he was there; others said he was there; there is no doubt about it.
It is not in dispute.

BH Man matches his body type at the time. He matches the position he
claimed to be, which was;: "the far left of the doorway". And, we even
found a bit of the arrow he drew to himself on CE 369, and it's pointing
to BH Man.

It's also true that BH Man wore a short-sleeved shirt, just as Lovelady
first said he wore. And that means that all those figures of Lovelady
wearing a long-sleeved plaid shirt can't be him. So, he wasn't the figure
milling around outside the TSBD after the assassination seen in the Martin
and Hughes films. And he wasn't any of the figures in any of the versions
of the Dallas PD footage in which Lovelady was allegedly passed by Oswald.
But, note that he never alleged it. Lovelady denied ever seeing Oswald
again that day after they broke for lunch.

To give another example, we also claim that Black Tie Man who appears to
be crammed up next to Doorman in an impossible union wasn't really there.
Now remember that you granted that Altgens Doorman was Oswald. Therefore,
I presume you agree that Wiegman Doorman was also Oswald. The Altgens
photo and the first frame of Wiegman were taken within a second of each
other. They were every close to simultaneous.

http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/9311/collage582.jpg

In Wiegman on the left, there is no one that close to Doorman.

You can also see in the first few seconds of the Wiegman film that Doorman
doesn't have anyone that close to him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3xR0WBPo8I

Some have tried to claim that in Altgens it only looks like they are
crammed together because of Altgens angle, but that is bull. And I know
because I went to Dealey Plaza and tested it. The only way to approximate
what we see in altgens is to jam them together.

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/3169/sdbtmancollage2.jpg

That image on the right was taken with Tri-X film from Altgens position. I
think it's a pretty good reproduction of the spatial relationships, and
that guy and I were touching, and I mean flush. We had to be in order to
make it work. But notice that I have a "point" to my shoulder, while
Doorman does not. The point of his shoulder would extend over into the
white shirt of Black Tie Man. Of that I am absolutely certain from 37
years experience as a chiropractor. The white line I drew is pointing to
the "point" of my shoulder but there is no corresponding point on Doorman.

Notice also that I was wearing a plaid shirt which did register as have a
boxed or geometric pattern, unlike the amorphous "pattern" of Doorman's
shirt. What you are seeing on him is mostly just distortion.

So, Fatol, we are right about Oswald being in the doorway, and we are
right about everything else too because they follow from Oswald being in
the doorway. That is all I'm saying.

[Canuck]

On Friday, May 3, 2013 4:16:17 AM UTC-7, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> I am not alone. I have Dr. David Wrone, Attorney Vincent Salandria, authors Peter Janney and Phillip Nelson and other accomplished individuals on my side. And the other thing I have on my side is the fact that it is Oswald in the doorway, and it can't not be him. It's his clothes- his shirt and his t-shirt. How could Oswald's clothes get on anyone else? It's his slender, willowy frame and not Lovelady's husky one of the time. It's his stance, clasping his hands left over right, of which we have many pictures of Oswald doing it, including the moment he was shot by Jack Ruby. The fact is that nobody could be as dumb as YOU are pretending to be in denying the patently obvious, that it was Lee Harvey Oswald in the doorway.

Apparently, you and your group need to believe that Oswald is standing at
the top of the steps watching the motorcade, but it's obviously Lovelady.

- prw

[timstter]

On May 3, 12:33 pm, Ralph Cinque <budab...@gmail.com> wrote:
> He's the SS agent standing on LBJ's vehicle, the Lincoln convertible. Quit
> wasting my time, would you?

Lord help us! Cinque thinks that LBJ was in the Queen Mary!

Hey Cinque, point out LBJ in *the Lincoln convertible* willya?

Egg on face time for Cinque, it seems.

Concerned Regards,

Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*

*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.

And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0144a.htm

X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!

[timstter]

Er, Ralph, *Fatol* is ACTUALLY fatoldcreep, to give him his full, self-
allocated title. He posts from a gmail address.

He also posts over @ The Nuthouse under the name Willy Gingersnaps.

His CURRENT theory is that Jackie Kennedy is signalling to CIA man Rip
Robertson in one of the Altgens photos and that BOTH of them are in on
the plot to murder JFK.

THIS is the kind support you garner for your Oswald-In-The-Doorway
nonsense and you count it as some sort of TRIUMPH?!!

Just how deluded ARE you, Ralph?

Very Concerned Regards,

[Jason Burke]

On 5/4/2013 1:09 PM, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> They give me a hard time on McAdams' forum because it's Op Central,

Dang CIA's about 40 years behind on my checks.

> but an
> interesting response came in today. A guy named Fatol wrote:
>
> "Oswald was in the doorway; you're right about that. But, it doesn't help
> your case when you're wrong about everything else, is all I'm saying."
>
> And that got me thinking that once you concede that it's Oswald in the

Ah, so now because this Fatol fellow thinks that it's Ozzie in the
doorway, this proves your case?!?

Let's just not respond to the rest of this drivel; I'm laughing too hard.

[fatol...@gmail.com]

I won't go skipping down your nutty little path. You, more likely than
Groden, are working for the dark side. Oswald was in the doorway.
Lovelady's face was pasted over his. And you, somehow, make this fact
unbelievable. Touche.

[Anthony Marsh]

FYI, he is noT A real person. He is a WC defender pretending to be a
conspiracy kook to make up strawman conspiracies that are supposed to
discredit ALL conspiracy theories.

[Ralph Cinque]

Fatol, if you're agreed that it was Oswald in the doorway, that's good
enough for me because let's face it: that's 99% of it. With Oswald in the
doorway, the whole official story collapses to nothingness. And he most
certainly was in the doorway wearing his distinctive shirt, his
distinctive t-shirt, with hie slender build, his chin, his ear, etc.

These other people here are just whistling Dixie in the dark. They are
denying the undeniable. They just don't want to admit that it's over for
the official story- but it is.

[Ralph Cinque]

Unbelievable? You're mad. We brought Doorman back to life. People are
talking about him today because of us. What good were you doing? We're the
ones who put it back on the map. Oswald is back in the doorway because of
us. Vincent Salandria joined us, not you. Don't begin to compare yourself
to us. You're nothing; we are the real deal.

[Jason Burke]

You're hallucinating now, Ralph. I think it's time you get some help.

[Walt]

THAT is the problem I have always had with the photo...... Doorman's
left shoulder is missing, making it appear as if Doorman is a mountain
climber with a coil of rope on his left shoulder.....and black tie man
apparently has a weird cut jacket that doesn't button across his
belly. It looks like black tie man has been added to the
photo....and when his image was inserted they allowed his white shirt
to overlap and cut off doormans shoulder.

Makes me wonder if this is the original unaltered Altgens photo???

I don't for an instant believe the original Altgen's photo that was
published in many newspapers and magazines was
altered...... BUT..... Is the photo you're working with, that same
exact photo?

[Walt]

Peter..... The man is obviously leaning on the partially open front door
of the TSBD, and leaning forward, just as someone who has just arrived at
that place would be doing. He's not "standing at the top of the steps
watching the motorcade"

We know that Lee oswald said that he ate his lunch in the 1st floor
lunchroom and then went to the second floor lunchroom to get a Coke.....
What route did he take to get to the second floor lunchroom.....Perhaps he
went to the front door glanced out for a few seconds and then took he
stairs just inside the front door to the second floor.......

[Ace Kefford]

One of the biggest weaknesses of a shockingly large percentage of those
who believe in a conspiracy is the failure to get rid of "evidence" and
theories that have been proven incorrect or inaccurate.

It would be like if Oswald lone assassin people were insisting that the
police did in fact find at Oswald's apartment a map showing the motorcade
location and the projected shots, as was reported/speculated on early.

Why do so many persist in arguing "issues" that only weaken their overall
position (because they are easily refutable and distract from better
arguments) and make one question the person's whole mindset and general
approach. (It's not quite the same thing as sticking to an ancient circa
mid-1960s argument, but Jack White lost all credibility with me when I saw
his "Zapruder dance" mistaken photo analysis in one of Fetzer's books.
Anybody who could misread photos that poorly and present such a ridiculous
explanation to explain his misreading loses any status as someone you
could trust.)

[Ralph Cinque]

Walt, you and I have never seen the original Altgens photo. All the US
papers published the altered one. I think it's possible that the original
was published in some foreign papers, perhaps in Europe or Asia. You
better start believing that the altered one is all our eyes have seen. And
if you dispute that, then please, by all means, post the unaltered one
here.

[Anthony Marsh]

Do you understand how the wire services work? Of course not. Everyone in
the world get exactly the same version of the photo.
Why don't you go the library and look at all the foreign newspapers to
see if you can spot any differences?

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/5/2013 10:38 PM, Ace Kefford wrote:
> On Saturday, May 4, 2013 4:10:10 PM UTC-4, Canuck wrote:
>> On Friday, May 3, 2013 4:16:17 AM UTC-7, Ralph Cinque wrote:
>>
>>> I am not alone. I have Dr. David Wrone, Attorney Vincent Salandria, authors Peter Janney and Phillip Nelson and other accomplished individuals on my side. And the other thing I have on my side is the fact that it is Oswald in the doorway, and it can't not be him. It's his clothes- his shirt and his t-shirt. How could Oswald's clothes get on anyone else? It's his slender, willowy frame and not Lovelady's husky one of the time. It's his stance, clasping his hands left over right, of which we have many pictures of Oswald doing it, including the moment he was shot by Jack Ruby. The fact is that nobody could be as dumb as YOU are pretending to be in denying the patently obvious, that it was Lee Harvey Oswald in the doorway.
>>
>>
>>
>> Apparently, you and your group need to believe that Oswald is standing at
>>
>> the top of the steps watching the motorcade, but it's obviously Lovelady.
>>
>>
>>
>> - prw
>
> One of the biggest weaknesses of a shockingly large percentage of those
> who believe in a conspiracy is the failure to get rid of "evidence" and
> theories that have been proven incorrect or inaccurate.
>
> It would be like if Oswald lone assassin people were insisting that the
> police did in fact find at Oswald's apartment a map showing the motorcade
> location and the projected shots, as was reported/speculated on early.
>

It would be like kooks arguing that one bullet went through both men and
caused 7 wounds.

> Why do so many persist in arguing "issues" that only weaken their overall
> position (because they are easily refutable and distract from better
> arguments) and make one question the person's whole mindset and general
> approach. (It's not quite the same thing as sticking to an ancient circa
> mid-1960s argument, but Jack White lost all credibility with me when I saw
> his "Zapruder dance" mistaken photo analysis in one of Fetzer's books.
> Anybody who could misread photos that poorly and present such a ridiculous
> explanation to explain his misreading loses any status as someone you
> could trust.)
>

And so when I disprove their kook ideas you think it is fun to attack me?

Who else has devoted an entire Web page to attacking Assassination
Science?

[timstter]

> >http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol...

>
> > X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!

OIC. And you can prove this HOW, Marsh?

Don't forget, over @ The Nuthouse, Yellow Pants and the gang try to
pass YOU off as an LNer, LOL!

[Ralph Cinque]

Walt, he was just standing there at the top of the steps. And we can see him standing there as well in the Wiegman film.

http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/1277/wiegmandoormancropped.jpg

If you do the Math, you realize that the opening of the Wiegman film and taking of the Altgens photo were very close in time- definitely within one second. Here they are side by side.

http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/9311/collage582.jpg

Notice that at that time, there was no one standing that close to Doorman in the Wiegman film. Black Tie Man, whom we see crowded next to Doorman, wasn't really there. He was implanted there.

I have been a chiropractor for 37 years, and I can tell you with certainty that Doorman would have to have been a freak for what we are seeing of him in the Altgens photo to be real, to be his real anatomy. He could do that with his shoulder. His shoulder got cut off, and I am sure of it. Here is how it looked, before and after, with a little artistic help from me.

Before, his natural state, is on the right, and after, what they did to him, is on the left.

http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/8109/collage88.jpg

[Walt]

Ralph...... I don't understand how the authorities would have known
instantly that they would have to alter James Altgen's photo. While
I agree that it certainly appears to be altered as it appeared in Life
magazine I don't see how it could have been altered in the first few
hours after the murder. Unless Lee told them that he had just poked
his head out of the front door for a few seconds as he was on his way
to the second floor lunchroom, there's no way they could have been
alerted so soon after the murder.

[Ace Kefford]

Why do you think Groden would have to be INTENTIONALLY a disinfo
operative? The mind masters can easily plant information and leads that,
based on their psychological profiles, will lead to arguments that
distract from the main cause.

For example, many think the Iraq war had to do with oil, and so Cheney was
manipulated to pursue that military excursion. In fact, I would encourage
close study of the countryside of Iraq, some experiments and explorations
during WWII, and certain biblical passages (canonical and apocryphal).
You may learn the real story of how and why Cheney was manipulated without
engaging his conscious mind or intellect.

[Ralph Cinque]

Walt, hey knew full-well ahead of time that people would be shooting
cameras and films during the motorcade and that there would likely be a
photographic record of the assassination which had to be managed.

And as far as the Altgens photo appearing in "the first few hours" the
vast majority of newspapers did NOT publish the Altgens photo at all on
11/22. The few that did were evening papers for which there would have
been several hours to alter the photo, but the paucity of them makes them
very suspicious.

I often say that Rule#1 is that there was no limit too how far they were
willing to go to support the big lie. Fake a few newspapers? It's nothing.

But, the main thing is that we can see with our own eyes that the Altgens
photo was altered, with the black obfuscation of Black Hole Man's face,
the white obfuscation of Obfuscated Man's face, the cutting off of
Doorman's shoulder, and so much more. They messed with it- we can see that
they did- and that is proof that they had the time to do it.

[Jason Burke]

On 5/6/2013 12:13 PM, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> Walt, hey knew full-well ahead of time that people would be shooting
> cameras and films during the motorcade and that there would likely be a
> photographic record of the assassination which had to be managed.
>
> And as far as the Altgens photo appearing in "the first few hours" the
> vast majority of newspapers did NOT publish the Altgens photo at all on
> 11/22. The few that did were evening papers for which there would have
> been several hours to alter the photo, but the paucity of them makes them
> very suspicious.

Not this again...

The Cinque Scientific Method:
1) Toss out everything that's unhelpful to your hypothesis, no matter
how reasonable it is or how often it's been verified.
2) Imagine something that's barely within the realm of possibility
(or has been blasted out of the water numerous times,) state it as fact,
and yell REAL LOUD when it's challenged.
3) Go to step 1.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/6/2013 3:13 PM, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> Walt, hey knew full-well ahead of time that people would be shooting
> cameras and films during the motorcade and that there would likely be a
> photographic record of the assassination which had to be managed.
>
> And as far as the Altgens photo appearing in "the first few hours" the
> vast majority of newspapers did NOT publish the Altgens photo at all on
> 11/22. The few that did were evening papers for which there would have
> been several hours to alter the photo, but the paucity of them makes them
> very suspicious.
>

How about the shooting of the Pope. Did the Bulgrarians think that none
of those tourist would have cameras? How come no spectator filmed them
shooting the Pope? Or President Chen? Why do you think Philippine
security police wouldn't let the press get off the plane while they took
away Aquino?

> I often say that Rule#1 is that there was no limit too how far they were
> willing to go to support the big lie. Fake a few newspapers? It's nothing.
>

How about fake ALL the evidence?

> But, the main thing is that we can see with our own eyes that the Altgens
> photo was altered, with the black obfuscation of Black Hole Man's face,
> the white obfuscation of Obfuscated Man's face, the cutting off of
> Doorman's shoulder, and so much more. They messed with it- we can see that
> they did- and that is proof that they had the time to do it.
>

No, WE can't. YOU can see things that don't exist.

[Anthony Marsh]

What's your conspiracy theory? Just spit it out.

[Anthony Marsh]

The reporters were talking about it right away that it looked like
Oswald in the doorway. This was not invented years later.

[Ace Kefford]

Jason,

You have distilled the essence of this method of which Cinque might be the foremost practitioner but which has been followed to lesser degrees by many other of his cherry-picking conspiracy-oriented "thinkers".

[Walt]

On May 6, 6:38 pm, Jason Burke <Burke_Ja...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 5/6/2013 12:13 PM, Ralph Cinque wrote:
>
> > Walt, hey knew full-well ahead of time that people would be shooting
> > cameras and films during the motorcade and that there would likely be a
> > photographic record of the assassination which had to be managed.

Good point....no argument..... BUT.... Why bother to make Oswald look like
Lovelady?? Why not just black out that portion of Altgens photo? Are there
unaltered photos out there that required that the figure be altered
because the simple elimination of that figure by black out would expose
the lie.


The fact that they knew that there would be cameras recording every moment
in Dealy is the reason that Lee stayed out of sight during what he thought
was a hoax ( like the Walker hoax) Lee knew that if he made it to Cuba as
a fugitive for having shot at JFK, he would die in front of Castro's
firing squad if a photo turned up which showed him saluting JFK at a time
when he was supposed to be shooting at JFK.