Linda K. Hadley says: "The plaid pattern definitely was falsified. And they didn't do a very good job of it. They forgot to add pattern to the upper right side of the Doorman's shirt. Maybe it was too small an area to cover in the context of the original Altgens6 photo. But take a look at these three samples. Which two match? Which one is the odd man out? http://tinypic.com/r/16jguw/6
And by the way, Sirhan Sirhan did not shoot Bobby Kennedy, but we are not changing the subject."
You brought up Palestine, not me. I merely pointed out that Palestinians aren't generally considered among America's staunchest allies, so asked why you would think spreading Anti-American inflammatory propaganda there was something to celebrate. You never did answer my point. And Sirhan was captured with the smoking gun still in his hand. So your complaints about the wrong guy in that case are certainly well off the mark.
Back to your JFK argument - you again ignore all my points in rebuttal, and merely assert something else with nothing in evidence except your opinion. The portion of the shirt you reference is a mere sliver, and you claim the absence of any observable pattern is evidence they overlooked this area of alteration. I think on the contrary, that it is evidence that the area was too small to show much of a pattern, although there is one dark line running bearly vertically through the shirt on that side, enough to convince me, if not you, that the shirt is indeed plaid in all observable characteristics.
But you never even touched the central core of my rebuttal. You continuie to ignore it. Why is that, except you have no rebuttal?
1. Oswald admitted he was inside the building, so it cannot be him in the photo.
2. It's Lovelady's face as you admit.
3. It's Lovelady's plaid shirt, as you admit.
4. They could have destroyed the photo instead of altering it. Why'd they allow it to see the light of day?
5. They could have just darkened Oswald's supposed image out of the picture entirely. Why they put Lovelady's face over it, which then entailed put plaid in the shirt, adding a fake guy to the right, darkening the face of the real Lovelady?
6. The original image went out within 35 minutes of the assassination on the AP wire, which is insufficient time to do the alterations you suggest, let alone identify anything in the photo that needed alteration. In rebuttal, you quote a supposed witness who you say first said he saw two different versions of the Altgens photo on 11/22/63, then quote the same or a different witness who contradicts that, and says the first photo moved on the AP wire on the morning of the 23rd. You have offered up two different, mutually exclusive stories, and you quote both, without explanation, as if true. That alone is sufficient to render your credibility suspect. Which is it? Or don't you know? Or care?
Recent discussions in the History forum
AnnouncementAmazon Discussions Feedback Forum
|459||Mar 11, 2017|
|Looking for a really good book on turn of the century America||26||8 hours ago|
|New Vietnam War Series On PBS||0||2 days ago|
|Book (Serial Killers: Ho Chi Minh) shows what a mass-murderer the North VietNamese leader was||78||3 days ago|
|Book (The Longest Romance) shows how mass-murderous Castro's Cuba really is!||24||3 days ago|
|July 14, 1881 billy the Kid Murdered||6||3 days ago|
|Franklin expedition||0||4 days ago|
|Book Recommendations on Ancient Rome/Julius Ceasar||39||8 days ago|
|General George Custer reincarnated as General George Patton||90||8 days ago|
|British History Buffs........||1144||8 days ago|
|Hitler's luxury resort||2||12 days ago|
|Pres. Yeltsin admitted (in 1994) that communist North Korea started the whole Korean War!||40||17 days ago|