The Danger Of The Fetzer Assassination School

[Charles Drago]

I will be more careful about how I collectively describe people, but I think this is largely semantics.

Much as Josef Goebbels' use of the word "vermin" to describe Jews was largely a matter of semantics?

[Albert Doyle]

Fetzer is in denial that Lovelady was filmed by numerous sources on the front steps in the minutes after the assassination. He needs to force the literal translation of the visit of Lovelady and Shelley to the railroad tracks to make his grandiose forgery claim work.

[LR Trotter]

A couple of days ago on CableTV, possibly the Military Channel, there was a broadcast about the JFK Assassination. Of course it "proposed the single/magic bullet" process, and it had the dummy torsos being shot, "lined up according to the snipers nest and autopsy information", not as the victims actually were IMO. But, what I did notice was a color film that appears to have been shot shortly after the shooting showing the TSBD building doorway area, with what strongly appears to me to be Doorway Man standing near the steps/stairway approach. And, if LHO and not BNL, he sure seems to be in the area later than LHO reportedly was in/near the building.
pinwheels:

[Albert Doyle]

Don Jefferies continues to float sophist suggestions of Lovelady being Oswald despite the fact most of what he says has already been disproven by the real facts. Don's points are based more on speculative ignorance of the evidence more than anything else. Accordingly, Fetzer thanks him.


If the EF members would simply show Fetzer that Lovelady's ear on the front steps and in the FBI photo both have the same identical indentation half way down the rim they would destroy Fetzer's illusion in one example. Fetzer refuses to recognize the neanderthalization of Lovelady is solely due to different lenses causing different aspect ratio's from shot to shot. If he refuses to recognize sound scientific fact he should simply be put on moderation until he learns to respect reality.

[Albert Doyle]

If you have a sharp eye you can see Lovelady's left ear in the "caveman" shot and his left ear in the 1970's shot are identical.



It's Lovelady.

[Gary Craig]

JMHO

The real harm Cinque and Fetzer's incessant and repetitive regurgitation of the: "is it Lovelady or is it Oswald?" proposition is how
it effects the casual or new JFK Assassination observor/student.

It's been accepted for decades, by students of the assassination and the a majority of the public, that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK.
When JFK Assassination websites are opened by new and casual students of JFK's murder they are now sadly subjected to something altogether different.

Instead of a discussion of who the conspirators were, and the why and how, they are subjected to the postings of Cinque and Fetzter claiming Oswald is the person in Altgens #6 not Lovelady.

An issue that changes nothing.

If it's Oswald it validates what is already accepted.
If it's not Oswald, it again changes nothing.

The perception projected, however, is of a JFK Assassination Community debating if there was a conspiracy.

And that perception is being defined by Cinque and Fetzer.

[Don Jeffries]

Don Jefferies continues to float sophist suggestions of Lovelady being Oswald despite the fact most of what he says has already been disproven by the real facts. Don's points are based more on speculative ignorance of the evidence more than anything else. Accordingly, Fetzer thanks him.

Albert, you are free to consider my views "sophist." I will continue to maintain that there are huge questions about the figure in the doorway. You've "disproven" things to your satisfaction, not mine. My arguments are completely seperate from Ralph Cinque's or Jim Fetzer's. I have been just as unpersuaded as the others on EF by their photo interpretations.

Just because they're wrong doesn't make you right.

[Magda Hassan]

Don, what are your huge questions about the figure in the door. Why do you have doubts it is Lovelady?

[Don Jeffries]

Magda,

I don't believe that someone could look at a photo-as Lovelady is alleged to have looked at the Altgens-and identified himself as the figure in question, and yet still persisted in not remembering the shirt he was wearing. Even after Lovelady had identified himself, he continued to say he wore an entirely different shirt. There is a big difference between a short sleeved striped shirt and long sleeve plaid shirt.

Why wasn't Lovelady simply required to wear the exact same clothing, and then photographed in the exact same position as the figure in the doorway? Instead, we are supposed to believe the FBI "didn't care" about the shirt he was wearing! That's absurd- the shirt was crucial to identifying the figure.

Lovelady and Oswald allegedly looked enough alike to fool members of both their families. Considering how many Oswald imposters we know there were, I find it extremely curious that someone who looked this much like him just happened to work at the TSBD. Then there is the question of how badly the authorities wanted the figure not to be Oswald. How convenient that such a dead ringer for the alleged assassin happened to be handy.

If Lovelady somehow forgot that quickly what shirt he was wearing, his memory would have been jogged by seeing the Altgens photo. Human nature dictates that he was probably looking at every other photo of him that day as well. There is no reason to claim the mystery has been solved. This question has not been settled.

[Albert Doyle]

The weight of what you say only originates from present day hindsight. As Dunne showed, once Lovelady was shown himself in the plaid shirt he corrected his mistake and admitted he was wearing it.

The reason I reject your reasons for allowing the possibility it was Oswald is because they are completely speculative and based on suspicions after the fact. You are inferring that because Lovelady could be mistaken for Oswald at a distance that therefore there's something sinister in that that suggests deliberateness.

But none of this cancels or changes the fact all other evidence points towards it being Lovelady and none points towards it being Oswald. If you are going to suggest it is Oswald you have to walk your suggestion through all the other evidence. For it to be Oswald would mean that CIA forgers had to painstakingly locate and control all other photographic evidence and insert plaid shirts on Lovelady in each and every photo. At that point you are in the same looney wagon as Cinque and Fetzer.

I think what dismisses it being Oswald the most is Oswald's lack of breath when Baker confronted him. If Oswald was out on the front steps being caught by Altgens then he would have had to move quickly back upstairs to get back to the lunchroom. He would have had to climb the steps and therefore would have been visibly active. The actions of somebody as deep as Oswald was in the conspiracy is not to calmly buy a Coke and hang-out in the lunchroom after seeing the president shot in person. This is something that the same character who reacted to police confrontation by drawing a gun would not have reacted to by having a calm expression and no reaction.

Common sense tells you that the reason it looks like Lovelady is because it is. And it isn't because Fetzerian mobile forgery lab CIA spooks intercepted Altgens and quickly figured-out all the necessary changes before sending it on to the AP wire. The problem with what you write, Don, is that it tolerates and accepts the insanity I just listed without accounting or taking logical responsibility for it.