Earlier this year, 2010, 47 years after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Dartmouth Professor Hany Farid claimed in the Huffington Post that the famous (or infamous) backyard photo of Lee Harvey Oswald—the photo in which he holds a Communist newspaper in one hand and a rifle in the other—is not a fake. This implies that the photo was not patched together to set up Oswald as the Commie patsy and lone Kennedy gunman by the FBI, the same FBI which finances Farid’s laboratory and research. Smell a rat?
The UFO Digest Spotlight On…
Farid’s Fake Oswald Photo Analysis
47 Years After Lee Oswald’s Murder by mobster Jack Ruby
Disinfo On JFK’s Assassination Continues Unabated in Mass Media
By Jerry Mazza
<Edited by Robert D. Morningstar>
JFK Investigative reporter Jerry Mazza says:
“Farid’s photo is the real fake… And so is he.”
“Farid’s photo is the real fake… And so is he.”
Farid chose to represent only one photo from a series of four faked photos and to deal only with the anomalies of its shadows and lighting. Oswald had said, when shown one of these photos, that it was his head pasted on someone else’s body. And the face has a square chin, not Oswald’s pointed chin; the finger tips of the right hand are cut off; and the figure is too short to be Oswald when the newspapers are used as an internal ruler. You can even see an insert line between the chin and the lower lip! But none of this impressed Professor Farid.
Lee Harvey Oswald (Center) – A Man with 2 Chins!
<Editor’s note: On November 22nd-23rd, 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald was shown the photo and he replied: “That photo is a fake…Some one put my head on somebody else’s body…It’s very easy to do.”
Farid purposely points to the fact that the lighting of the face in the photo would seem to be coming from overhead, yet Oswald’s fairly long body shadow is cast to the right on the ground and seem to be coming from an afternoon sun. The fact that logic would indicate two sources of lighting is blown away by Farid himself, who claims we as human beings do very poorly at perceiving shadows and their sources.
He even claims he himself is not good at it, even though he is an expert working in an esteemed university, underwritten by the FBI. It’s this kind of doubletalk that makes me look through his argument like the Emperor’s Clothes and see that nothing is there.
Farid’s so called proof is explained to us in a video clip, Why JFK Assassin Photo wasn’t Faked, with Farid side by side with his computer, on which there is a “simulation” of Oswald’s head next to the supposedly “real-life” but already doctored head of Oswald with a square chin. So Farid is already in “fantasyland”…
(And trying to drag us back into it with his own fakery – But the real question is “Why now?” nearly 5 decades later.- Editor).
However, the mystification continues as Farid lauds the quality of the shadow Oswald’s nose casts under it as well as the shadows under the eyes and his lips.
(Editor’s note – Even as a 15 year-old boy, I could see through the obvious intention of Time-Life Inc. to “paint” a Hitler moustache on Oswald to associate him with Neo-Nazi right wing movements, like the John Birch Society, while at the same time portraying Oswald as a pro-Castro “Communist-Marxist-Leninist”)
Okay, so he’s already told us that it’s due to the effect of top-lighting, a light source directly overhead. But what about the shadow that slants off on the ground to the far right? That is side-lighting, presumably by the sun. Top-light would make a thin rim of shadow around Oswald’s body, either front, back, or sides, depending on how accurately the light source lined up with the body.
Try, for instance, to move your desk-light over your phone or desk object. Notice, the rim of light varies slightly as you move the top light’s overhead angle. This same desk light though does not cast a large shadow of the phone unless it is moved considerably, i.e. to the side. Farid would tell us it’s our eyes that are not working right, including his.
I would claim the body shadow comes from that sinking sun and that those light sources exist because the photo was reconstructed on a “ghost mat” that came from the Dallas Police Department. It is a blank cut-out mat of Oswald’s body, in which pieces are reinserted. Sadly for the DPD those pieces were shot with the light at various angles. That’s what causes the conflicting shadows in the backyard photos, not my or his impairment.
Even this basic concept, that angles of shadows are created by the varying positions of light sources, is violated in Farid’s “modeling by computer,” in which everything is possible. Perhaps Farid must have Photoshop 2020, which provides a look into the future of bending light to create shadows wherever you wish to them to be. We really never are told what makes Farid’s “modeling” create this unreality. But we are told his findings will be published in a journal called Perception, which will explain it all. That wouldn’t be related to Huxley’s Doorways to Perception, his journey into the use of hallucinogenic drugs, would it? That might explain why the good professor is not seeing clearly.
In the landmark book on photo fakery in the JFK assassination, The Great Zapruder Film Hoax, edited by Dr. James Fetzer, McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, with a half-dozen leading scientific and technical experts, you will find an abundance of photographic “representations” of Oswald’s face and body from before and after the Kennedy assassination for the purpose of disinformation and confusion, including a veritable Oswald stand-in, so that Lee/Harvey/Oswald could be in more than one place at the same time.
Fetzer, by the way, has published more than 100 articles and 20 books on the philosophy of science, computer science, artificial intelligence, and cognitive science. He has also edited the highly acclaimed Assassination Science and Murder in Dealey Plaza, which include extensive discussion of the fabrication of evidence about the death of JFK.
Given that wealth of information, Farid references none of it, or that of any other authority. He does tell us that he works with law enforcement, which the New York Times verified as the FBI. Farid claims he has shied away from “conspiracy theorists” over the years, who have sought information from him. But this means that he comes to the table of objectivity with a bias against independent thinkers, whether they are authors, journalists, scientists or technicians.
So how objective is Farid really? Dare I say he’s a “photo patsy”? If he had considered more than one photo in the set, it would have been obvious they are faked, because they have the same face with the same expression and the same shadows across all four, which is a photographic impossibility. So Oswald had it right!
Remember, in the making of patsies, we need some kind of verifying information from so-called experts, even if they are on the government payroll, like for instance NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, who have their very own opinion of what made the Twin Trade Towers fall, which conflicts with some 1,000 architects and engineers, who submitted a petition to Congress for a new 9/11 investigation Friday, February 19, 2010, from three different cities, including New York City, where they met with press at Ground Zero at 10 A.M., the site of the 21st Century’s major crime on American soil.
Returning to the JFK Assassination, the major crime on American soil of the 20th Century, The Great Zapruder Film Hoax scrupulously documents how photographs and the entire film has been manipulated to support the government’s lone-gunman claim, according to which Oswald alone managed to kill Kennedy and seriously wound the then Governor of Texas Connally with three shots fired in about six seconds into the limousine, which witnesses reported was actually brought to a halt. The Lincoln was sent to Ford for a complete refurbishing, including a new windshield to remove a hole near its center, where one of the first shots transited en route to JFK’s throat, which otherwise would have falsified the official account.
What’s more, despite the handicap of a bolt action, WW II Italian Army, Mannlicher-Carcano mail-order rifle, and despite the fact that another bullet hit a sidewalk and that a piece of cement rebounded, slightly wounding a bystander in the cheek, we are supposed to award our complete credence to Arlen Specter’s “Magic Bullet” theory, which has one slug passing through Kennedy’s neck from the rear to enter and exit Connelly as well. My god! How low an opinion of our intelligence do our intelligence agencies have?
This brings me back to Farid and his “modeled-shadow-theory” that the backyard photo of Oswald is not a fake, a fraud, a hybrid of intelligence hacks. In fact, Farid, as a scientist, has violated the most basic scientific requirement of all: to present all available relevant evidence. I mean, we are not talking here about some triviality not worth the effort, but the purported assassination and proof of the “lone gunman” of President John F. Kennedy.
Are we to take Farid and his computer-simulated “model” on faith or as a single source flash of government-sponsored truth? Where is the proof that he bothered to read any of the research that established the photos were faked? There is no indication that the professor even conducted a search of the literature about his latest subject, including Jim Marrs’ Crossfire: The Plot that Killed Kennedy, another standard text, which Oliver Stone used as a major source for his landmark film, JFK.
Fetzer and Marrs were so concerned they co-authored The Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasco, published it and sent it to the President of Dartmouth. But his representative has washed his hands clean of the whole matter by claiming that this “is a disagreement among scholars, and must be settled by them.” How many professors of late have been tossed off campuses for contrarian beliefs? How many should be sacked for research as sloppy as this?
The backyard photos were and continue to be the province of noted scholars and authors. And the victim was a major political figure, whose death changed the course of national policy and perhaps of world history.
How does one man, using one photo, one anomaly (shadows), one bit of computer modeling and one unsupported theory, i.e. people don’t see shadows, get away with this hoax with such faint resistance? Has Dartmouth been compromised? Is it also working for the FBI?
These questions pass through your mind when resistance folds so quickly. This is the signature of being bought and not of thought—conscious, conscionable thought. Farid found the one questionable feature of a set of faked photographs that he thought he could plausibly “explain away”, hoping that no one would catch his sleight-of-hand.
The authenticity of the photographs was also addressed by Robert Blakey, who chaired the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA). He acknowledged then that if the photos had been faked, it would not only imply that Oswald had been framed but, because of the technical sophistication involved, it would also indicate the existence of a larger conspiracy to cover up the crime, and to support the “lone gunman” scenario.
Thus, I would seriously suggest that you, dear Professor Farid, go back to your modeling board and read at least the Fetzer and Marrs books. Of course, take a look at the canon of other outstanding studies of the JFK assassination, as if you were writing a thesis for an advanced degree.
Photographic fakery undermines serious, independent scholarship. That should be one lesson you learn not to do. That’s n-o-t to do. As to the FIB—excuse me, the FBI—its business should be stopping frauds not creating them. Caveat emptor!
Jerry Mazza is a freelance writer, life-long resident of New York City. His book “State Of Shock – Poems from 9/11 on” is available at www.jerrymazza.com, Amazon.com and Barnesandnoble.com.
The UFO Digest Spotlight on…
Farid’s Fake Oswald Photo Analysis
47 Years After Lee Oswald’s Murder
by mobster Jack Ruby… Disinfo On JFK’s Assassination Continues Unabated in
Mass Media
By Jerry Mazza
<Edited by Robert D. Morningstar>
Investigator Jerry Mazza says:
“Farid’s photo is the real
fake…
And so is he.”
Early this year, 2010, 47 years after the assassination of President John F.
Kennedy in Dallas, Dartmouth Professor Hany Farid claimed in the
Huffington Post that the famous (or infamous) backyard photo of Lee Harvey
Oswald—the photo in which he holds a Communist newspaper in one hand and a
rifle in the other—is not a fake. This implies that the photo was not patched
together to set up Oswald as the Commie patsy and lone Kennedy gunman by the
FBI, the same FBI which finances Farid’s laboratory and research. Smell a rat?
Farid chose to represent only one photo from a series of four faked photos
and to deal only with the anomalies of its shadows and lighting. Oswald had
said, when shown one of these photos, that it was his head pasted on someone
else’s body. And the face has a square chin, not Oswald’s pointed chin; the finger
tips of the right hand are cut off; and the figure is too short to be Oswald
when the newspapers are used as an
internal ruler. You can even see an insert line between the chin and the
lower lip! But none of this impressed Professor Farid.
Lee Harvey Oswald – A Man with 2 Chins!
<Editor’s note: On November 22nd-23rd, 1963, Lee
Harvey Oswald was shown the photo and he replied: “That photo is a fake…Some one put my head on somebody else’s
body...It’s very easy to do.”
Farid purposely points to the fact that the lighting of the face in the
photo would seem to be coming from overhead, yet Oswald’s fairly long body
shadow is cast to the right on the ground and seem to be coming from an
afternoon sun. The fact that logic would indicate two sources of lighting is
blown away by Farid himself, who claims we as human beings do very poorly at
perceiving shadows and their sources.
He even claims he himself is not good at it, even though he is an expert
working in an esteemed university, underwritten by the FBI. It’s this kind of
doubletalk that makes me look through his argument like the Emperor’s Clothes
and see that nothing is there.
Farid’s so called proof is explained to us in a video clip, Why JFK Assassin Photo wasn’t
Faked, with Farid side by side with his computer, on which there is a
“simulation” of Oswald’s head next to the supposedly “real-life” but already
doctored head of Oswald with a square chin. So Farid is already in
“fantasyland”…
(And trying to drag us back into it with his own fakery – But the real
question is “Why now?” nearly 5 decades later.- Editor).
However, the mystification continues as Farid lauds the quality of the
shadow Oswald’s nose casts under it as well as the shadows under the eyes and
his lips.
(Editor’s note – Even as a 15 year-old boy, I could see through the obvious
intention of Time-Life Inc. to “paint” a Hitler moustache on Oswald to
associate him with Neo-Nazi right wing movements, like the John Birch Society,
while at the same time portraying Oswald as a pro-Castro
“Communist-Marxist-Leninist”)
Okay, so he’s already told us that it’s due to the effect of top-lighting, a
light source directly overhead. But
what about the shadow that slants off on the ground to the far right? That is side-lighting, presumably by the
sun. Top-light would make a thin rim of shadow around Oswald’s body, either
front, back, or sides, depending on how accurately the light source lined up
with the body.
Try, for instance, to move your desk-light over your phone or desk object.
Notice, the rim of light varies slightly as you move the top light’s overhead angle.
This same desk light though does not cast a large shadow of the phone unless it
is moved considerably, i.e. to the side. Farid would tell us it’s our eyes that
are not working right, including his.
I would claim the body shadow comes from that sinking sun and that those
light sources exist because the photo was reconstructed on a “ghost mat” that came from the
Dallas Police Department. It is a blank cut-out mat of Oswald’s body, in which
pieces are reinserted. Sadly for the DPD those pieces were shot with the light
at various angles. That’s what causes the conflicting shadows in the backyard
photos, not my or his impairment.
Even this basic concept, that angles of shadows are created by the varying positions
of light sources, is violated in Farid’s “modeling by computer,” in which
everything is possible. Perhaps Farid must have Photoshop 2020, which
provides a look into the future of bending light to create shadows wherever you
wish to them to be. We really never are told what makes Farid’s “modeling”
create this unreality. But we are told his findings will be published in a
journal called Perception, which will explain it all. That wouldn’t be
related to Huxley’s Doorways to Perception, his journey into the use of
hallucinogenic drugs, would it? That might explain why the good professor is
not seeing clearly.
In the landmark book on photo fakery in the JFK assassination, The Great
Zapruder Film Hoax, edited by Dr. James Fetzer, McKnight
Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, with a half-dozen
leading scientific and technical experts, you will find an abundance of
photographic “representations” of Oswald’s face and body from before and after
the Kennedy assassination for the purpose of disinformation and confusion,
including a veritable Oswald stand-in, so that Lee/Harvey/Oswald could be in
more than one place at the same time.
Fetzer, by the way, has published more than 100 articles and 20 books on the
philosophy of science, computer science, artificial intelligence, and cognitive
science. He has also edited the highly acclaimed Assassination
Science and Murder in
Dealey Plaza, which include extensive discussion of the
fabrication of evidence about the death of JFK.
Given that wealth of information, Farid references none of it, or that of
any other authority. He does tell us that he works with law enforcement, which
the New York Times verified as the FBI. Farid claims he has shied away from
“conspiracy theorists” over the years, who have sought information from him.
But this means that he comes to the table of objectivity with a bias against
independent thinkers, whether they are authors, journalists, scientists or
technicians.
So how objective is Farid really? Dare I say he’s a “photo patsy”? If he had
considered more than one photo in the set, it would have been obvious they are
faked, because they have the same face with the same expression and the same
shadows across all four, which is a photographic
impossibility. So Oswald had it right!
Remember, in the making of patsies, we need some kind of verifying
information from so-called experts, even if they are on the government payroll,
like for instance NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, who
have their very own opinion of what made the Twin Trade Towers fall, which
conflicts with some 1,000 architects and engineers, who submitted a petition to
Congress for a new 9/11 investigation Friday, February 19, 2010, from three
different cities, including New York City, where they met with press at Ground
Zero at 10 A.M., the site of the 21st Century’s major crime on American soil.
Returning to the JFK Assassination, the major crime on American soil of the
20th Century, The Great Zapruder Film Hoax scrupulously documents how
photographs and the entire film has been manipulated to support the
government’s lone-gunman claim, according to which Oswald alone managed to kill
Kennedy and seriously wound the then Governor of Texas Connally with three
shots fired in about six seconds into the limousine, which witnesses reported
was actually brought to a halt. The Lincoln was sent to Ford for a complete
refurbishing, including a new windshield to remove a hole near its center,
where one of the first shots transited en route to JFK’s throat, which
otherwise would have falsified the official account.
What’s more, despite the handicap of a bolt action, WW II Italian Army,
Mannlicher-Carcano mail-order rifle, and despite the fact that another bullet
hit a sidewalk and that a piece of cement rebounded, slightly wounding a
bystander in the cheek, we are supposed to award our complete credence to Arlen
Specter’s “Magic Bullet” theory, which has one slug passing through Kennedy’s
neck from the rear to enter and exit Connelly as well. My god! How low an
opinion of our intelligence do our intelligence agencies have?
This brings me back to Farid and his “modeled-shadow-theory” that the
backyard photo of Oswald is not a fake, a fraud, a hybrid of intelligence
hacks. In fact, Farid, as a scientist, has violated the most basic scientific
requirement of all: to present all available relevant evidence. I mean, we are
not talking here about some triviality not worth the effort, but the purported
assassination and proof of the “lone gunman” of President John F. Kennedy.
Are we to take Farid and his computer-simulated “model” on faith or as a
single source flash of government-sponsored truth? Where is the proof that he
bothered to read any of the research that established the photos were faked?
There is no indication that the professor even conducted a search of the
literature about his latest subject, including Jim Marrs’ Crossfire:
The Plot that Killed Kennedy, another standard text, which
Oliver Stone used as a major source for his landmark film, JFK.
Fetzer and Marrs were so concerned they co-authored The
Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasco, published it and sent it to the President of
Dartmouth. But his representative has washed his hands clean of the whole
matter by claiming that this “is a disagreement among scholars, and must be
settled by them.” How many professors of late have been tossed off campuses for
contrarian beliefs? How many should be sacked for research as sloppy as this?
The backyard photos were and continue to be the province of noted scholars
and authors. And the victim was a major political figure, whose death changed
the course of national policy and perhaps of world history.
How does one man, using one photo, one anomaly (shadows), one bit of
computer modeling and one unsupported theory, i.e. people don’t see shadows,
get away with this hoax with such faint resistance? Has Dartmouth been
compromised? Is it also working for the FBI?
These questions pass through your mind when resistance folds so quickly.
This is the signature of being bought and not of thought—conscious,
conscionable thought. Farid found the one questionable feature of a set of
faked photographs that he thought he could plausibly “explain away”, hoping
that no one would catch his sleight-of-hand.
The authenticity of the photographs was also addressed by Robert Blakey, who
chaired the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA). He acknowledged
then that if the photos had been faked, it would not only imply that Oswald had
been framed but, because of the technical sophistication involved, it would
also indicate the existence of a larger conspiracy to cover up the crime, and
to support the “lone gunman” scenario.
Thus, I would seriously suggest that you, dear Professor Farid, go back to
your modeling board and read at least the Fetzer and Marrs books. Of course,
take a look at the canon of other outstanding studies of the JFK assassination,
as if you were writing a thesis for an advanced degree.
Photographic fakery undermines serious, independent scholarship. That should
be one lesson you learn not to do. That’s n-o-t to do. As to the
FIB—excuse me, the FBI—its business should be stopping frauds not creating
them. Caveat emptor!
Jerry Mazza is a freelance writer, life-long resident of New York City.
His book “State Of Shock – Poems from 9/11 on” is available at www.jerrymazza.com, Amazon.com
and Barnesandnoble.com.
Digest Spotlight on…
Farid’s Fake Oswald Photo Analysis
47 Years After Lee Oswald’s Murder
by mobster Jack Ruby… Disinfo On JFK’s Assassination Continues Unabated in
Mass Media
By Jerry Mazza
<Edited by Robert D. Morningstar>
Investigator Jerry Mazza says:
“Farid’s photo is the real
fake…
And so is he.”
Early this year, 2010, 47 years after the assassination of President John F.
Kennedy in Dallas, Dartmouth Professor Hany Farid claimed in the
Huffington Post that the famous (or infamous) backyard photo of Lee Harvey
Oswald—the photo in which he holds a Communist newspaper in one hand and a
rifle in the other—is not a fake. This implies that the photo was not patched
together to set up Oswald as the Commie patsy and lone Kennedy gunman by the
FBI, the same FBI which finances Farid’s laboratory and research. Smell a rat?
Farid chose to represent only one photo from a series of four faked photos
and to deal only with the anomalies of its shadows and lighting. Oswald had
said, when shown one of these photos, that it was his head pasted on someone
else’s body. And the face has a square chin, not Oswald’s pointed chin; the finger
tips of the right hand are cut off; and the figure is too short to be Oswald
when the newspapers are used as an
internal ruler. You can even see an insert line between the chin and the
lower lip! But none of this impressed Professor Farid.
Lee Harvey Oswald – A Man with 2 Chins!
<Editor’s note: On November 22nd-23rd, 1963, Lee
Harvey Oswald was shown the photo and he replied: “That photo is a fake…Some one put my head on somebody else’s
body...It’s very easy to do.”
Farid purposely points to the fact that the lighting of the face in the
photo would seem to be coming from overhead, yet Oswald’s fairly long body
shadow is cast to the right on the ground and seem to be coming from an
afternoon sun. The fact that logic would indicate two sources of lighting is
blown away by Farid himself, who claims we as human beings do very poorly at
perceiving shadows and their sources.
He even claims he himself is not good at it, even though he is an expert
working in an esteemed university, underwritten by the FBI. It’s this kind of
doubletalk that makes me look through his argument like the Emperor’s Clothes
and see that nothing is there.
Farid’s so called proof is explained to us in a video clip, Why JFK Assassin Photo wasn’t
Faked, with Farid side by side with his computer, on which there is a
“simulation” of Oswald’s head next to the supposedly “real-life” but already
doctored head of Oswald with a square chin. So Farid is already in
“fantasyland”…
(And trying to drag us back into it with his own fakery – But the real
question is “Why now?” nearly 5 decades later.- Editor).
However, the mystification continues as Farid lauds the quality of the
shadow Oswald’s nose casts under it as well as the shadows under the eyes and
his lips.
(Editor’s note – Even as a 15 year-old boy, I could see through the obvious
intention of Time-Life Inc. to “paint” a Hitler moustache on Oswald to
associate him with Neo-Nazi right wing movements, like the John Birch Society,
while at the same time portraying Oswald as a pro-Castro
“Communist-Marxist-Leninist”)
Okay, so he’s already told us that it’s due to the effect of top-lighting, a
light source directly overhead. But
what about the shadow that slants off on the ground to the far right? That is side-lighting, presumably by the
sun. Top-light would make a thin rim of shadow around Oswald’s body, either
front, back, or sides, depending on how accurately the light source lined up
with the body.
Try, for instance, to move your desk-light over your phone or desk object.
Notice, the rim of light varies slightly as you move the top light’s overhead angle.
This same desk light though does not cast a large shadow of the phone unless it
is moved considerably, i.e. to the side. Farid would tell us it’s our eyes that
are not working right, including his.
I would claim the body shadow comes from that sinking sun and that those
light sources exist because the photo was reconstructed on a “ghost mat” that came from the
Dallas Police Department. It is a blank cut-out mat of Oswald’s body, in which
pieces are reinserted. Sadly for the DPD those pieces were shot with the light
at various angles. That’s what causes the conflicting shadows in the backyard
photos, not my or his impairment.
Even this basic concept, that angles of shadows are created by the varying positions
of light sources, is violated in Farid’s “modeling by computer,” in which
everything is possible. Perhaps Farid must have Photoshop 2020, which
provides a look into the future of bending light to create shadows wherever you
wish to them to be. We really never are told what makes Farid’s “modeling”
create this unreality. But we are told his findings will be published in a
journal called Perception, which will explain it all. That wouldn’t be
related to Huxley’s Doorways to Perception, his journey into the use of
hallucinogenic drugs, would it? That might explain why the good professor is
not seeing clearly.
In the landmark book on photo fakery in the JFK assassination, The Great
Zapruder Film Hoax, edited by Dr. James Fetzer, McKnight
Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, with a half-dozen
leading scientific and technical experts, you will find an abundance of
photographic “representations” of Oswald’s face and body from before and after
the Kennedy assassination for the purpose of disinformation and confusion,
including a veritable Oswald stand-in, so that Lee/Harvey/Oswald could be in
more than one place at the same time.
Fetzer, by the way, has published more than 100 articles and 20 books on the
philosophy of science, computer science, artificial intelligence, and cognitive
science. He has also edited the highly acclaimed Assassination
Science and Murder in
Dealey Plaza, which include extensive discussion of the
fabrication of evidence about the death of JFK.
Given that wealth of information, Farid references none of it, or that of
any other authority. He does tell us that he works with law enforcement, which
the New York Times verified as the FBI. Farid claims he has shied away from
“conspiracy theorists” over the years, who have sought information from him.
But this means that he comes to the table of objectivity with a bias against
independent thinkers, whether they are authors, journalists, scientists or
technicians.
So how objective is Farid really? Dare I say he’s a “photo patsy”? If he had
considered more than one photo in the set, it would have been obvious they are
faked, because they have the same face with the same expression and the same
shadows across all four, which is a photographic
impossibility. So Oswald had it right!
Remember, in the making of patsies, we need some kind of verifying
information from so-called experts, even if they are on the government payroll,
like for instance NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, who
have their very own opinion of what made the Twin Trade Towers fall, which
conflicts with some 1,000 architects and engineers, who submitted a petition to
Congress for a new 9/11 investigation Friday, February 19, 2010, from three
different cities, including New York City, where they met with press at Ground
Zero at 10 A.M., the site of the 21st Century’s major crime on American soil.
Returning to the JFK Assassination, the major crime on American soil of the
20th Century, The Great Zapruder Film Hoax scrupulously documents how
photographs and the entire film has been manipulated to support the
government’s lone-gunman claim, according to which Oswald alone managed to kill
Kennedy and seriously wound the then Governor of Texas Connally with three
shots fired in about six seconds into the limousine, which witnesses reported
was actually brought to a halt. The Lincoln was sent to Ford for a complete
refurbishing, including a new windshield to remove a hole near its center,
where one of the first shots transited en route to JFK’s throat, which
otherwise would have falsified the official account.
What’s more, despite the handicap of a bolt action, WW II Italian Army,
Mannlicher-Carcano mail-order rifle, and despite the fact that another bullet
hit a sidewalk and that a piece of cement rebounded, slightly wounding a
bystander in the cheek, we are supposed to award our complete credence to Arlen
Specter’s “Magic Bullet” theory, which has one slug passing through Kennedy’s
neck from the rear to enter and exit Connelly as well. My god! How low an
opinion of our intelligence do our intelligence agencies have?
This brings me back to Farid and his “modeled-shadow-theory” that the
backyard photo of Oswald is not a fake, a fraud, a hybrid of intelligence
hacks. In fact, Farid, as a scientist, has violated the most basic scientific
requirement of all: to present all available relevant evidence. I mean, we are
not talking here about some triviality not worth the effort, but the purported
assassination and proof of the “lone gunman” of President John F. Kennedy.
Are we to take Farid and his computer-simulated “model” on faith or as a
single source flash of government-sponsored truth? Where is the proof that he
bothered to read any of the research that established the photos were faked?
There is no indication that the professor even conducted a search of the
literature about his latest subject, including Jim Marrs’ Crossfire:
The Plot that Killed Kennedy, another standard text, which
Oliver Stone used as a major source for his landmark film, JFK.
Fetzer and Marrs were so concerned they co-authored The
Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasco, published it and sent it to the President of
Dartmouth. But his representative has washed his hands clean of the whole
matter by claiming that this “is a disagreement among scholars, and must be
settled by them.” How many professors of late have been tossed off campuses for
contrarian beliefs? How many should be sacked for research as sloppy as this?
The backyard photos were and continue to be the province of noted scholars
and authors. And the victim was a major political figure, whose death changed
the course of national policy and perhaps of world history.
How does one man, using one photo, one anomaly (shadows), one bit of
computer modeling and one unsupported theory, i.e. people don’t see shadows,
get away with this hoax with such faint resistance? Has Dartmouth been
compromised? Is it also working for the FBI?
These questions pass through your mind when resistance folds so quickly.
This is the signature of being bought and not of thought—conscious,
conscionable thought. Farid found the one questionable feature of a set of
faked photographs that he thought he could plausibly “explain away”, hoping
that no one would catch his sleight-of-hand.
The authenticity of the photographs was also addressed by Robert Blakey, who
chaired the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA). He acknowledged
then that if the photos had been faked, it would not only imply that Oswald had
been framed but, because of the technical sophistication involved, it would
also indicate the existence of a larger conspiracy to cover up the crime, and
to support the “lone gunman” scenario.
Thus, I would seriously suggest that you, dear Professor Farid, go back to
your modeling board and read at least the Fetzer and Marrs books. Of course,
take a look at the canon of other outstanding studies of the JFK assassination,
as if you were writing a thesis for an advanced degree.
Photographic fakery undermines serious, independent scholarship. That should
be one lesson you learn not to do. That’s n-o-t to do. As to the
FIB—excuse me, the FBI—its business should be stopping frauds not creating
them. Caveat emptor!
Jerry Mazza is a freelance writer, life-long resident of New York City.
His book “State Of Shock – Poems from 9/11 on” is available at www.jerrymazza.com, Amazon.com
and Barnesandnoble.com.
by mobster Jack Ruby… Disinfo On JFK’s Assassination Continues Unabated in
Mass Media
fake…
And so is he.”
Kennedy in Dallas, Dartmouth Professor Hany Farid claimed in the
Huffington Post that the famous (or infamous) backyard photo of Lee Harvey
Oswald—the photo in which he holds a Communist newspaper in one hand and a
rifle in the other—is not a fake. This implies that the photo was not patched
together to set up Oswald as the Commie patsy and lone Kennedy gunman by the
FBI, the same FBI which finances Farid’s laboratory and research. Smell a rat?
and to deal only with the anomalies of its shadows and lighting. Oswald had
said, when shown one of these photos, that it was his head pasted on someone
else’s body. And the face has a square chin, not Oswald’s pointed chin; the finger
tips of the right hand are cut off; and the figure is too short to be Oswald
when the newspapers are used as an
internal ruler. You can even see an insert line between the chin and the
lower lip! But none of this impressed Professor Farid.
Harvey Oswald was shown the photo and he replied: “That photo is a fake…Some one put my head on somebody else’s
body...It’s very easy to do.”
photo would seem to be coming from overhead, yet Oswald’s fairly long body
shadow is cast to the right on the ground and seem to be coming from an
afternoon sun. The fact that logic would indicate two sources of lighting is
blown away by Farid himself, who claims we as human beings do very poorly at
perceiving shadows and their sources.
working in an esteemed university, underwritten by the FBI. It’s this kind of
doubletalk that makes me look through his argument like the Emperor’s Clothes
and see that nothing is there.
Faked, with Farid side by side with his computer, on which there is a
“simulation” of Oswald’s head next to the supposedly “real-life” but already
doctored head of Oswald with a square chin. So Farid is already in
“fantasyland”…
question is “Why now?” nearly 5 decades later.- Editor).
shadow Oswald’s nose casts under it as well as the shadows under the eyes and
his lips.
intention of Time-Life Inc. to “paint” a Hitler moustache on Oswald to
associate him with Neo-Nazi right wing movements, like the John Birch Society,
while at the same time portraying Oswald as a pro-Castro
“Communist-Marxist-Leninist”)
light source directly overhead. But
what about the shadow that slants off on the ground to the far right? That is side-lighting, presumably by the
sun. Top-light would make a thin rim of shadow around Oswald’s body, either
front, back, or sides, depending on how accurately the light source lined up
with the body.
Notice, the rim of light varies slightly as you move the top light’s overhead angle.
This same desk light though does not cast a large shadow of the phone unless it
is moved considerably, i.e. to the side. Farid would tell us it’s our eyes that
are not working right, including his.
light sources exist because the photo was reconstructed on a “ghost mat” that came from the
Dallas Police Department. It is a blank cut-out mat of Oswald’s body, in which
pieces are reinserted. Sadly for the DPD those pieces were shot with the light
at various angles. That’s what causes the conflicting shadows in the backyard
photos, not my or his impairment.
of light sources, is violated in Farid’s “modeling by computer,” in which
everything is possible. Perhaps Farid must have Photoshop 2020, which
provides a look into the future of bending light to create shadows wherever you
wish to them to be. We really never are told what makes Farid’s “modeling”
create this unreality. But we are told his findings will be published in a
journal called Perception, which will explain it all. That wouldn’t be
related to Huxley’s Doorways to Perception, his journey into the use of
hallucinogenic drugs, would it? That might explain why the good professor is
not seeing clearly.
Zapruder Film Hoax, edited by Dr. James Fetzer, McKnight
Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, with a half-dozen
leading scientific and technical experts, you will find an abundance of
photographic “representations” of Oswald’s face and body from before and after
the Kennedy assassination for the purpose of disinformation and confusion,
including a veritable Oswald stand-in, so that Lee/Harvey/Oswald could be in
more than one place at the same time.
philosophy of science, computer science, artificial intelligence, and cognitive
science. He has also edited the highly acclaimed Assassination
Science and Murder in
Dealey Plaza, which include extensive discussion of the
fabrication of evidence about the death of JFK.
any other authority. He does tell us that he works with law enforcement, which
the New York Times verified as the FBI. Farid claims he has shied away from
“conspiracy theorists” over the years, who have sought information from him.
But this means that he comes to the table of objectivity with a bias against
independent thinkers, whether they are authors, journalists, scientists or
technicians.
considered more than one photo in the set, it would have been obvious they are
faked, because they have the same face with the same expression and the same
shadows across all four, which is a photographic
impossibility. So Oswald had it right!
information from so-called experts, even if they are on the government payroll,
like for instance NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, who
have their very own opinion of what made the Twin Trade Towers fall, which
conflicts with some 1,000 architects and engineers, who submitted a petition to
Congress for a new 9/11 investigation Friday, February 19, 2010, from three
different cities, including New York City, where they met with press at Ground
Zero at 10 A.M., the site of the 21st Century’s major crime on American soil.
20th Century, The Great Zapruder Film Hoax scrupulously documents how
photographs and the entire film has been manipulated to support the
government’s lone-gunman claim, according to which Oswald alone managed to kill
Kennedy and seriously wound the then Governor of Texas Connally with three
shots fired in about six seconds into the limousine, which witnesses reported
was actually brought to a halt. The Lincoln was sent to Ford for a complete
refurbishing, including a new windshield to remove a hole near its center,
where one of the first shots transited en route to JFK’s throat, which
otherwise would have falsified the official account.
Mannlicher-Carcano mail-order rifle, and despite the fact that another bullet
hit a sidewalk and that a piece of cement rebounded, slightly wounding a
bystander in the cheek, we are supposed to award our complete credence to Arlen
Specter’s “Magic Bullet” theory, which has one slug passing through Kennedy’s
neck from the rear to enter and exit Connelly as well. My god! How low an
opinion of our intelligence do our intelligence agencies have?
backyard photo of Oswald is not a fake, a fraud, a hybrid of intelligence
hacks. In fact, Farid, as a scientist, has violated the most basic scientific
requirement of all: to present all available relevant evidence. I mean, we are
not talking here about some triviality not worth the effort, but the purported
assassination and proof of the “lone gunman” of President John F. Kennedy.
single source flash of government-sponsored truth? Where is the proof that he
bothered to read any of the research that established the photos were faked?
There is no indication that the professor even conducted a search of the
literature about his latest subject, including Jim Marrs’ Crossfire:
The Plot that Killed Kennedy, another standard text, which
Oliver Stone used as a major source for his landmark film, JFK.
Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasco, published it and sent it to the President of
Dartmouth. But his representative has washed his hands clean of the whole
matter by claiming that this “is a disagreement among scholars, and must be
settled by them.” How many professors of late have been tossed off campuses for
contrarian beliefs? How many should be sacked for research as sloppy as this?
and authors. And the victim was a major political figure, whose death changed
the course of national policy and perhaps of world history.
computer modeling and one unsupported theory, i.e. people don’t see shadows,
get away with this hoax with such faint resistance? Has Dartmouth been
compromised? Is it also working for the FBI?
This is the signature of being bought and not of thought—conscious,
conscionable thought. Farid found the one questionable feature of a set of
faked photographs that he thought he could plausibly “explain away”, hoping
that no one would catch his sleight-of-hand.
chaired the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA). He acknowledged
then that if the photos had been faked, it would not only imply that Oswald had
been framed but, because of the technical sophistication involved, it would
also indicate the existence of a larger conspiracy to cover up the crime, and
to support the “lone gunman” scenario.
your modeling board and read at least the Fetzer and Marrs books. Of course,
take a look at the canon of other outstanding studies of the JFK assassination,
as if you were writing a thesis for an advanced degree.
be one lesson you learn not to do. That’s n-o-t to do. As to the
FIB—excuse me, the FBI—its business should be stopping frauds not creating
them. Caveat emptor!
His book “State Of Shock – Poems from 9/11 on” is available at www.jerrymazza.com, Amazon.com
and Barnesandnoble.com.
by mobster Jack Ruby… Disinfo On JFK’s Assassination Continues Unabated in
Mass Media
fake…
And so is he.”
Kennedy in Dallas, Dartmouth Professor Hany Farid claimed in the
Huffington Post that the famous (or infamous) backyard photo of Lee Harvey
Oswald—the photo in which he holds a Communist newspaper in one hand and a
rifle in the other—is not a fake. This implies that the photo was not patched
together to set up Oswald as the Commie patsy and lone Kennedy gunman by the
FBI, the same FBI which finances Farid’s laboratory and research. Smell a rat?
and to deal only with the anomalies of its shadows and lighting. Oswald had
said, when shown one of these photos, that it was his head pasted on someone
else’s body. And the face has a square chin, not Oswald’s pointed chin; the finger
tips of the right hand are cut off; and the figure is too short to be Oswald
when the newspapers are used as an
internal ruler. You can even see an insert line between the chin and the
lower lip! But none of this impressed Professor Farid.
Harvey Oswald was shown the photo and he replied: “That photo is a fake…Some one put my head on somebody else’s
body...It’s very easy to do.”
photo would seem to be coming from overhead, yet Oswald’s fairly long body
shadow is cast to the right on the ground and seem to be coming from an
afternoon sun. The fact that logic would indicate two sources of lighting is
blown away by Farid himself, who claims we as human beings do very poorly at
perceiving shadows and their sources.
working in an esteemed university, underwritten by the FBI. It’s this kind of
doubletalk that makes me look through his argument like the Emperor’s Clothes
and see that nothing is there.
Faked, with Farid side by side with his computer, on which there is a
“simulation” of Oswald’s head next to the supposedly “real-life” but already
doctored head of Oswald with a square chin. So Farid is already in
“fantasyland”…
question is “Why now?” nearly 5 decades later.- Editor).
shadow Oswald’s nose casts under it as well as the shadows under the eyes and
his lips.
intention of Time-Life Inc. to “paint” a Hitler moustache on Oswald to
associate him with Neo-Nazi right wing movements, like the John Birch Society,
while at the same time portraying Oswald as a pro-Castro
“Communist-Marxist-Leninist”)
light source directly overhead. But
what about the shadow that slants off on the ground to the far right? That is side-lighting, presumably by the
sun. Top-light would make a thin rim of shadow around Oswald’s body, either
front, back, or sides, depending on how accurately the light source lined up
with the body.
Notice, the rim of light varies slightly as you move the top light’s overhead angle.
This same desk light though does not cast a large shadow of the phone unless it
is moved considerably, i.e. to the side. Farid would tell us it’s our eyes that
are not working right, including his.
light sources exist because the photo was reconstructed on a “ghost mat” that came from the
Dallas Police Department. It is a blank cut-out mat of Oswald’s body, in which
pieces are reinserted. Sadly for the DPD those pieces were shot with the light
at various angles. That’s what causes the conflicting shadows in the backyard
photos, not my or his impairment.
of light sources, is violated in Farid’s “modeling by computer,” in which
everything is possible. Perhaps Farid must have Photoshop 2020, which
provides a look into the future of bending light to create shadows wherever you
wish to them to be. We really never are told what makes Farid’s “modeling”
create this unreality. But we are told his findings will be published in a
journal called Perception, which will explain it all. That wouldn’t be
related to Huxley’s Doorways to Perception, his journey into the use of
hallucinogenic drugs, would it? That might explain why the good professor is
not seeing clearly.
Zapruder Film Hoax, edited by Dr. James Fetzer, McKnight
Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, with a half-dozen
leading scientific and technical experts, you will find an abundance of
photographic “representations” of Oswald’s face and body from before and after
the Kennedy assassination for the purpose of disinformation and confusion,
including a veritable Oswald stand-in, so that Lee/Harvey/Oswald could be in
more than one place at the same time.
philosophy of science, computer science, artificial intelligence, and cognitive
science. He has also edited the highly acclaimed Assassination
Science and Murder in
Dealey Plaza, which include extensive discussion of the
fabrication of evidence about the death of JFK.
any other authority. He does tell us that he works with law enforcement, which
the New York Times verified as the FBI. Farid claims he has shied away from
“conspiracy theorists” over the years, who have sought information from him.
But this means that he comes to the table of objectivity with a bias against
independent thinkers, whether they are authors, journalists, scientists or
technicians.
considered more than one photo in the set, it would have been obvious they are
faked, because they have the same face with the same expression and the same
shadows across all four, which is a photographic
impossibility. So Oswald had it right!
information from so-called experts, even if they are on the government payroll,
like for instance NIST, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, who
have their very own opinion of what made the Twin Trade Towers fall, which
conflicts with some 1,000 architects and engineers, who submitted a petition to
Congress for a new 9/11 investigation Friday, February 19, 2010, from three
different cities, including New York City, where they met with press at Ground
Zero at 10 A.M., the site of the 21st Century’s major crime on American soil.
20th Century, The Great Zapruder Film Hoax scrupulously documents how
photographs and the entire film has been manipulated to support the
government’s lone-gunman claim, according to which Oswald alone managed to kill
Kennedy and seriously wound the then Governor of Texas Connally with three
shots fired in about six seconds into the limousine, which witnesses reported
was actually brought to a halt. The Lincoln was sent to Ford for a complete
refurbishing, including a new windshield to remove a hole near its center,
where one of the first shots transited en route to JFK’s throat, which
otherwise would have falsified the official account.
Mannlicher-Carcano mail-order rifle, and despite the fact that another bullet
hit a sidewalk and that a piece of cement rebounded, slightly wounding a
bystander in the cheek, we are supposed to award our complete credence to Arlen
Specter’s “Magic Bullet” theory, which has one slug passing through Kennedy’s
neck from the rear to enter and exit Connelly as well. My god! How low an
opinion of our intelligence do our intelligence agencies have?
backyard photo of Oswald is not a fake, a fraud, a hybrid of intelligence
hacks. In fact, Farid, as a scientist, has violated the most basic scientific
requirement of all: to present all available relevant evidence. I mean, we are
not talking here about some triviality not worth the effort, but the purported
assassination and proof of the “lone gunman” of President John F. Kennedy.
single source flash of government-sponsored truth? Where is the proof that he
bothered to read any of the research that established the photos were faked?
There is no indication that the professor even conducted a search of the
literature about his latest subject, including Jim Marrs’ Crossfire:
The Plot that Killed Kennedy, another standard text, which
Oliver Stone used as a major source for his landmark film, JFK.
Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasco, published it and sent it to the President of
Dartmouth. But his representative has washed his hands clean of the whole
matter by claiming that this “is a disagreement among scholars, and must be
settled by them.” How many professors of late have been tossed off campuses for
contrarian beliefs? How many should be sacked for research as sloppy as this?
and authors. And the victim was a major political figure, whose death changed
the course of national policy and perhaps of world history.
computer modeling and one unsupported theory, i.e. people don’t see shadows,
get away with this hoax with such faint resistance? Has Dartmouth been
compromised? Is it also working for the FBI?
This is the signature of being bought and not of thought—conscious,
conscionable thought. Farid found the one questionable feature of a set of
faked photographs that he thought he could plausibly “explain away”, hoping
that no one would catch his sleight-of-hand.
chaired the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA). He acknowledged
then that if the photos had been faked, it would not only imply that Oswald had
been framed but, because of the technical sophistication involved, it would
also indicate the existence of a larger conspiracy to cover up the crime, and
to support the “lone gunman” scenario.
your modeling board and read at least the Fetzer and Marrs books. Of course,
take a look at the canon of other outstanding studies of the JFK assassination,
as if you were writing a thesis for an advanced degree.
be one lesson you learn not to do. That’s n-o-t to do. As to the
FIB—excuse me, the FBI—its business should be stopping frauds not creating
them. Caveat emptor!
His book “State Of Shock – Poems from 9/11 on” is available at www.jerrymazza.com, Amazon.com
and Barnesandnoble.com.