Professor finds that iconic Oswald photo was not faked (w/ Video)
November 5, 2009
The famous backyard photo of Lee Harvey Oswald.
(PhysOrg.com) -- Dartmouth Computer Scientist Hany Farid has new evidence regarding a photograph of accused John F. Kennedy assassin Lee Harvey Oswald. Farid, a pioneer in the field of digital forensics, digitally analyzed an iconic image of Oswald pictured in a backyard setting holding a rifle in one hand and Marxist newspapers in the other.
Oswald and others claimed that the incriminating photo was a fake, noting the seemingly inconsistent lighting and shadows. After analyzing the photo with modern-day forensic tools, Farid says the photo almost certainly was not altered.
"If we had found evidence of photo tampering, then it would have suggested a broader plot to kill JFK," said Farid, who is also the director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science at Dartmouth. "Those who believe that there was a broader conspiracy can no longer point to this photo as possible evidence."
Farid added that federal officials long ago said that this image had not been tampered with, but a surprising number of skeptics still assert that there was a conspiracy.
The study will appear in a forthcoming issue of the journal Perception.
Farid and his team have developed a number of digital forensic tools used to determine whether digital photos have been manipulated, and his research is often used by law enforcement officials and in legal proceedings. The tools can measure statistical inconsistencies in the underlying image pixels, improbable lighting and shadow, physically impossible perspective distortion, and other artifacts introduced by photo manipulators. The play of light and shadow was fundamental in the Oswald photo analysis.
"The human brain, while remarkable in many aspects, also has its weaknesses," says Farid. "The visual system can be quite inept at making judgments regarding 3-D geometry, lighting, and shadows."
At a casual glance, the lighting and shadows in the Oswald photo appear to many to be incongruous with the outdoor lighting. To determine if this was the case, Farid constructed a 3-D model of Oswald's head and portions of the backyard scene, from which he was able to determine that a single light source, the sun, could explain all of the shadows in the photo.
"It is highly improbable that anyone could have created such a perfect forgery with the technology available in 1963," said Farid. With no evidence of tampering, he concluded that the incriminating photo was authentic.
"As our digital forensic tools become more sophisticated, we increasingly have the ability to apply them to historic photos in an attempt to resolve some long-standing mysteries," said Farid.
Source: Dartmouth College
Oct 20, 2009 |
not rated yet |
0
Nothing is to deep for conspiracy fans.
Witness the claims of an undistorted bullet. Which is VERY distorted in fact. Lead oozed out of the bottom of it and you have show in EXACTLY the right position for it to look undistorted and you have to crop out the bottom where the lead oozes.
Ethelred
Ethelred
1:Clay Shaw's lawyer repped high level actual 'Nazi' officers and such that where brought into the US black ops system via the CIA program (previously the OSS) called 'project paperclip', approx. 3-5000 Nazi scientists came into the US via that program. All this - for Germany's black ops programs.
2:Kennedy promised to "Break the CIA into 100 pieces".
3:Kennedy had made a recent speech (just before assassination) to the Press club, warning about the infiltration of 'secret societies'. Search for it on youtube - it's there.
4:One of the ~LEADING~ members of the Warren commission was actually in Hitler's box for the 1936 Olympics!!!! Seriously-you can't make this crap up.
5: Prescott Bush (Bush senior's father), ran a banking consortium (of the FED banks) called the 'Union Banking Corp', and THEY financed the Nazis!!! He was going to be tried for treason - when the bankers stopped it. His son goes on to head the CIA and be a president.
Read more conspiracies...
http://www.scribd...isupport
For all who have never viewed the following documentary...please do...you too professor.
The Jim Garrison Story - Part 1
http://www.youtub...Q4wy_ShE
Information compiled and provided by: Christopher-Peter: Maingot; without prejudice, malice aforethought, ill will, vexation, or frivolity.
Life is not dead.
Diamonds were sold to Germany in WWII.
Orange means hot.
Orson Wells got fat.
Do any of the above have any less to do with Oswald pulling the trigger than those claims.
Oswald shot Kennedy. The evidence is strong. The evidence against it consists of distortions and ignorance.
This does not mean that Oswald acted on his own. However there is no real evidence that he didn't.
Ethelred
If you are a believer...life is, after death...it is when you truly begin to live.
Diamonds, and gold, were stolen by the Nazis.
The true meaning of hot, is: White.
It seemed to me....Orson Wells was always fat.
None of the above had anything to do with Oswald pulling a trigger.
Oswald was shot by Ruby...there is strong evidence of that...the evidence against Oswald, is distorted, and consist of ignorance.
Oswald did not act on his own...we have since discovered that there were at least two, or perhaps three, more, just like him. So, in essence...no real evidence that he was acting on his own.
PS
Don't be surprised by the inability to control or maintain loyalty, via these comments. Especially given the unorthodox style of expressing a personal perspective on wisdom.
Christopher-Peter: Maingot; without prejudice, malice aforethought, ill will, vexation, or frivolity.
The true meaning of hot is not white as it is beyond human vision.
I know. I saw it. Live on TV.Sure, just like the allegedly undistorted bullet is evidence for him. Or maybe that SURE should be some other word.No. You BELIEVE that. Much like you believe in an afterlife. This one MIGHT be true. But he still pulled the trigger.
Would like me to make equally irrelevant comments again?
Ethelred
This photo, whether it is altered or not, says absolutely nothing about who killed John Kennedy, how many people were involved, or whether it was a conspiracy or not. It is completely irrelevant.
But for the record, Mr Harid's presentation is far from conclusive.
Hany Farid: "If this was a fake, it would have been almost unimaginable how they could have done it in 1963."
Yes professor! Back in 1963, no one would have known to take the staged photo in the same location at the same time of day during the same general time of year. You see, 1963 people could barely feed themselves they were so primitive. I'm sorry, but mockery is all tghis statement deserves.
Faked photos and magic bullets; all just distractions. The proof of conspiracy in the death of Kennedy has been available from the very beginning. Witnesses.
The worst source of evidence. People's memory are friable and subject to change at the least suggestion. Especially people that think they have a good memory.
Do you have any TRAINED witnesses. Not just people that claim training but people that actually have it? Did they take notes at the time?
Yes, my memory sucks as well. So occasionally I check up on it by doing searches before I post.
Ethelred
Nice try. In fact, the odds of numerous witnesses all saying they witnessed the same thing exponentially increased the liklihood that their stated observations are accurate.
The breakdown of the witnesses is a bit complex. The ones farthest from the grass embankment were least like to stick to their guns on at least some of the shots having originated there. The ones near the knoll were adamant. Additionally, several smelled gunpowder.
To have someone 45 years later try to debunk people who were actually there is comical. This isn't subtle details we're talking about. This is the source of loud explosions, followed by the presence of smoke and the smell of gunpowder. Numerous people, all in the best position to know, observed precisely the same thing. You have no reason or right to doubt their word.
You mean I should deny all the physical evidence.
Ethelred
Please post a link to the alleged witnesses. I would like to see a count for instance. Just how many claim to have been there.
Yes witnesses do get invented. People claim to see things in places when they weren't within a hundred miles of it. Some people are that desperate to feel important.
I printed photos for Don Lasseter when he was ghosting a book by someone claiming to be involved in a conspiracy. I don't think that Don believed him much more than I did but that is guess since he didn't say.
http://www.allboo...nce.html
http://www.amazon...;sr=8-13
Bet that Amazon link get destroyed.
Ethelred
http://www.jfk-on...s02.html
-that after all the official attention and conclusions, up pops something which should have been discovered much earlier and which proves a 2nd shooter. It destroys all the Warren commission work but no one is demanding the conclusions be changed.
To my thinking John and his brother were killed because they genuinely wanted to end communism in Cuba. Communist martial law and sanction-related poverty are the only things which have kept that traditional catholic culture from collapsing due to overpop. That and the abortions which have taken place since 1968:
http://www.johnst...uba.html
-which couldn't have occured without communism.
With a 50% chance of a false positive EVEN IF the mic wasn't where they ASSUMED it was that isn't even close to evidence. They don't even know if the mic was at Deally Plaza
Ethered
Since your response to a request for evidence was to give me a one I must assume that you don't have any actual evidence that can stand scrutiny of any kind.
Thank you for your support in this matter. Your surrender was clear if not explicit.
Ethelred
You're either bored, or derive pleasure from being antagonistic.
Do you also think he was shot from the "book depository," around the tree that was in front of the window?
Coincidentally; there's always someone just like you at every blog, or forum, that I've ever come across. But your efforts are counter-productive. It only motivates others to try harder to get more information out. And, it benefits those who are more receptive. There is not much that can be done, for those who's head's are buried too deeply.
F.Y.I., and for anyone who may not have viewed these video presentations...you need to do so.
JFK
http://www.youtub...dg7xjAMk
JFK Conspiracy
http://video.goog...9429062#
The Many Faces of Lee Harvey Oswald
http://video.goog...2768943#
Christopher-Peter: Maingot; without prejudice, malice aforethought, ill will, vexation, or frivolity.
From yes but not through as the tree does not block the shots that hit Kennedy. Again the Zapruder film and the layout of the land makes that quite clear.That is because there is someone that can think at every forum. Well almost every forum. There are one topic posters like you at most forums as well. These are your first posts here.How about posting real information then. Instead of the usual obfuscations. You didn't even notice two of the links contradict each other.
Ethelred
In one stupefying remark he actually calls Oliver Stone is a researcher. A man that had to fake the gunsmoke for his film.
He makes the ridiculous claim that the car STOPPED for the shooter and the Secret Service was involved.
And you believe this rot.
The second starts with Oliver Stone. Gosh such a source. He wanted to show smoke at the Grassy Knoll and they had to use special effects because modern rifles don't produce smoke. Haven't for rather a long time.
Interesting that you posted this since it DOESN'T claim the Zapruder film was faked. Indeed it depends on it.
At least one of the two is a crock they cannot both be true. Looks like both are crap from the actual evidence.
Ethelred
There is guy claiming the there are no shadows on the newspaper in Oswald's photo. This while they show the photo. With shadows from Oswald's fingers. He makes a ridiculous claim about the proportions of the photos. They match my 5'11" pretty well. So why does he claim the guy is under 5 foot in the photo.
GIGO. If you use self contradictory crap you can only be right by accident.
And now for something completely different. Actual evidence and rational thinking.
Warning - the photos are actual autopsy photos. Black and white but still nasty.
http://www.jfklan...dex.html
The best for real evidence. As opposed to obfuscation.
http://mcadams.po...home.htm
Plus a Wiki site for a possibly neutral approach.
http://en.wikiped..._autopsy
Ethelred
http://www.youtub...=related
"Listen to this incredible audio recording of a speech made by JFK before the American Newspaper Publishers Association where he warns the press about the secret societies that are the real power in global affairs."
President John F Kennedy Secret Society Speech
http://www.youtub...=related
JFK and 9/11 - Insights Gained From Studying Both
http://video.goog...p;hl=en#
Information compiled and provided by: Christopher-Peter: Maingot; without prejudice, malice aforethought, ill will, vexation, or frivolity.
http://www.jfkmur...dams.htm
SOME COMMENTS ON JOHN MCADAMS’ KENNEDY ASSASSINATION HOME PAGE
http://hidhist.wo...me-page/
[A Wiki site for a possibly neutral approach]
Perhaps that’s the problem…can’t find the right gear…stuck in neutral???
Information compiled and provided by: Christopher-Peter: Maingot; without prejudice, malice aforethought, ill will, vexation, or frivolity.
http://video.goog...p;hl=en#
Ethelred
http://educationf...pic=1637
WHO KILLED JFK?
http://whokilledjfk.net/
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away.
Elvis Presley – 1935-1977
Information compiled and provided by: Christopher-Peter: Maingot; without prejudice, malice aforethought, ill will, vexation, or frivolity.
You are aware that Stone engaged in SERIOUS fictionalizing aren't you.
Second link
Nice but it doesn't actually pertain to his assassination. Kennedy is talking about the Soviet Union.
Third link. That is kind of long.
Well he starts right off acting as if it was odd that they figured out who did so fast. And he doesn't seem to understand that there was no normal investigation because for the simple reason that the people were DEAD. It is hard to prosecute dead people. Then again perhaps he does understand but thinks it is part of a plot.
Oh goody now he pretends they had to conspire to know that Sirhan was the assassin. I mean they only had the GUN IN HIS HAND as he tried to keep shooting. I am going to skip through this stuff after something that silly.
This is mostly about 9/11 to an audience of the converted.
Ethelred
But nothing to show that Oswald didn't pull a trigger three times from the Book Depository.Comments by a conspiracy fan about McAdam but not much about his site. Looks a bit like the result of a Usenet Flamewar to me. So he may be an unpleasant person. The site still has real evidence. Which is why I linked to it. I hadn't looked at since around 2001 till today. Still looks reliable. But I also linked to the Wiki just in case.
So here is some Bugliosi.
http://investigat...jfk.html
Interview with Bugliosi
http://hnn.us/art...490.html
About not by
http://vincent-bu...pot.com/
Ethelred
When someone makes remarks that people that think Oswald shot Kennedy are somehow mentally deficient I remind myself that they may only be idiots on this one thing. Except for Stone. Alexander SUCKED.
Now if James Cameron starts making pro conspiracy documentaries I might rethink this. Like I did in 2001 and discovered that Oswald did pull the trigger. Three times.
Ethelred
Obfuscation, obfuscation...bla, bla, bla.
Oswald "pulled the trigger three times," (expert witness) because the air in Dallas was drier than water, which made it as hot as oranges trucked up from Florida, contaminated with hydrofluorosilicic acid, for experimentation.
Oswald was quite depressed because Orson was getting fat, so he purchased a cheap 36-40 inch mail order Italian rifle, posed for pictures with it, and the communist manifesto...he wanted to get caught, so he could become famous. He left this trail that all the experts in evidence analysis could later continue to rely on.
Nothing is to deep for those who bath in the mainstream....Kennedy was talking about the "N.W.O. PATRIOTS".
What about the iconic Oswald photo (above)...being fake or real...remember the posted topic?
I hope you're having a good laugh professor.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so - Mark Twain (1835-1910)
By: Michael Parenti
To know the truth about the assassination of John Kennedy is to call into question the state security system and the entire politico-economic order it protects. This is why for over thirty years the corporate-owned press and numerous political leaders have suppressed or attacked the many revelations about the murder unearthed by independent investigators like Mark Lane, Peter Dale Scott, Carl Oglesby, Harold Weisberg, Anthony Summers, Philip Melanson, Jim Garrison, Cyril Wecht, Jim Marrs, Gaeton Fonzi, Sylvia Meagher, Michael Canfield, James DiEugenio, and many others.
http://www.michae...ion.html
Michael Parenti - The JFK Assassination and the Gangster Nature of the State Part 1
http://www.youtub...iP1UGSro
Information compiled and provided by: Christopher-Peter: Maingot; without prejudice, malice aforethought, ill will, vexation, or frivolity.
http://mcadams.po...u/odell/
Is this the study you cited to discredit my assertion of the 2 shooter acoustic evidence? No, so I discredited myself. Although I see wiggle room in this report. He claims speech patterns can resemble gunshots but so can gunshots. The recorder timelines are very complex and even if extra shots were not hits they could have been attempts From anywhere a few seconds after the fact, as the car began to speed off.
http://www.youtub...be_gdata
q]Nothing is to deep for those who bath in the mainstream....Kennedy was talking about the "N.W.O. PATRIOTS He was talking about the Soviet Union. If you insist on INVENTING a hidden meaning it is no wonder you see so many things that simply aren't there.Yes. I have mentioned it several times. Including in regards to one of the videos you posted a link to. The one that claimed that there were shadows from Oswald's fingers. While they showed his fingers and the shadows thereof.
The article is correct the photo isn't faked.Only at the contradictions in your posts. I am not claiming to be a professor.I agree. You should think on it.
Ethelred
You know anything that resembles reliable evidence.He doesn't know many movies.
He sure is into paranoid connections, innuendo, seeing things that are mere speculation, then building more speculation on top of the previous dubious speculation.
A Youtube post to support a bad film that supports his delusions. A socialist trying to support another socialist. Both with a fantasy vision of the US.
A monopoly on force and violence? In country with 10s of millions of armed citizens.
He sure does rant a lot. Can't make a reasoned argument to save his life.
What he doesn't do is give any evidence that Oswald didn't pull the trigger.
How about posting EVIDENCE.
You know. Actual facts.
Ethelred
No.
I used this.
http://www.jfk-on...s02.html
Which if it seems familiar it is because it is the link you posted to show acoustic evidence. I didn't use anything else. Just YOUR source.
From Paragraph 2
Because the recorders were sound-activated, they could have stopped frequently for varying amounts of time, except that the Channel I recorder ran continuously for 5.5 minutes when a transmitter, presumably on a police motorcycle, became stuck in the transmit mode
Also P2
Because of the severe noise and distortion on the recording, the BRSW team could neither confirm that this segment contained gunshot sounds, nor eliminate the possibility that they were present, by simple listening or by examining the waveforms of sounds on the tape.
Unknown source, unknown position of source, unknown sound that MIGHT be gunshot sounds. Missing sounds that should be there.
More
Ethelred
Just past the halfway point:
One of these four, the third, was judged to have been fired from the grassy knoll, BRSW stated the probability that this set of impulses represents a shot from the grassy knoll is 50%.
Only 50% ASSUMING that it was a gunshot in the first place. Could just as easily be car doors. Or noise as the noise was that bad.
That is a lot of spitwadding from a poor quality recording from an unknown source that could have been pretty much anywhere in the city.
And it didn't move during the recording so just which officer wasn't on his bike at that time and where would he have been. Questions no one even bothered to check from what I could see. No sounds of crowd noise, no screaming or shouting or running or jumping or pretty much anything that should be there if there was a crowd around as there was at Deally Plaza.
So while interesting it simply isn't useful.
Ethelred
The first and third shots have more smoke than the second. The second has pretty much none. Even the first shot doesn't have anything that was hanging in air after.
Yes there is a little smoke. I don't think it would be noticed unless you were looking at the gun as it went off. Nothing to see if you look because you heard a shot. And few thought they heard a shot from the Grassy Knoll. Most that thought they could place a direction heard it from behind Kennedy not in front.
If shot from the front where did the bullet go. The one in Kennedy's neck would have HAD to damage the car. The one that hit his head would have hit, oh who was next to him, his wife. Yes she would have been hit if not with the bullet itself then with her husbands brains.
Try this link for someone that had a rational change of mind.
http://mcadams.po...buff.htm
Ethelred
And no knowledge of history. At all.
John F. Kennedy made that speech April 27, 1961 - 10 days after the start of the Bay Of Pigs.
http://en.wikiped...Invasion
I gather that neither of you was alive then. That was a few days before my tenth birthday. I remember some of this stuff.
Ethelred
Working hypothesis: in office for only 3 weeks, he is naive and enthused about the Cuban invasion, only to realize afterward that it was meant to fail and to discredit him, displaying who is really in charge. Furious, he delivers a veiled threat a few weeks later to entrenched conspirator organizations in this speech.
Thomas Jefferson.
He, who joyfully marches in rank and file, has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him, the spinal cord would suffice.
Albert Einstein.
The Central Intelligence Agency, owns everyone of any significance, in the major media.
William Colby – 1920-1996 - Former CIA Director – Suspicious Death.
They gave you photos of Oswald showing he was a raving RED with a gun. For 9/11, they gave you the hijackers passport, laying in the rubble of the WTC..."maybe the smartest thing to do is...is pull it!"
http://www.youtub...dAJQV100
If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?
Albert Einstein.
Information compiled and provided by: Christopher-Peter: Maingot; without prejudice, malice aforethought, ill will, vexation, or frivolity.
I am only saying for certain that Oswald killed Kennedy.
There may have been a conspiracy but I see no compelling evidence to support that. I see people trying to manufacture one out of motive.
I really don't like the religious nutcases that are in charge of Iran. If one of them is assassinated and someone figures out a way that I might have managed to have been there with a weapon does that prove that I did it?
No.
Neither does showing that the Mafia didn't like Kennedy prove that they did it simply because they have means(guns)Motive(he was a pain)and opportunity(someone member might possibly have managed to drive by at the time) or have talked to Oswald once or maybe to someone that might have talked to Oswald.
That is the level of this crap. Or worse when they refuse to consider what their claims would HAVE to have done. Like a bullet from the front of Kennedy would have to something behind him.
Ethelred
More
Ethelred
Mine fits the time and the man. Your is a paranoid fantasy that might fit former Vice President Mad Dog but not John Kennedy.
Ethelred
He was alluding to the FACTS; the CIA, covertly, had already positioned "OPS" on Cuba’s soil, and he, JFK, was not with the plan to invade Cuba. He basically screwed up, yes, the whole idea for "them." To be able to continue with; the liquor, gambling, drugs, prostitution and, just plain old exploitation, which; “they” had going for them in Cuba.
Information compiled and provided by: Christopher-Peter: Maingot; without prejudice, malice aforethought, ill will, vexation, or frivolity.
He obviously could not show joyous reactions over its failure...he was attempting to fight another war, at home.
The “plan” for Cuba was a complex one; involving some rather sinister operatives, that one could not be associated with, especially being President, and son of Joe.
This plan was on the board before JFK’s occupation of the oval office, and involved American associations with Anti-Castro Cubans; basically Cuban mafia with ties to like business in the U.S.
JFK found himself between a rock; he would have to go along with the CIA Pigs Plan, while his brother Robert, at the same time, was putting some serious squeeze on the organized crime.
Rumour had it that JFK’s pappy was involved with black/contraband markets (mafia) and, he was aided by mafia for Jack’s election to office.
continued...
No doubt…its a can of worms…or government lies?
The perfect bureaucrat and politician, is the person who makes no decisions and escapes all responsibility - Brooks Atkinson.
When the largest industry in the world is no longer War, I will accept Darwin's theory of Evolution - Dale S. Mugford.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves - Abraham Lincoln.
Information compiled and provided by: Christopher-Peter: Maingot; without prejudice, malice aforethought, ill will, vexation, or frivolity.
He died of a brain tumor and you think what he says has more meaning than both the tumor and he were malignant?Well he took them. And what does have to with him actually pulling the trigger? Nothing again.Has nothing to do with Oswald. It sure does produce a lot of paranoia though.
Yet Another Irrelevant Quote. YAIQ in future.
Did you get away with all those irrelevancies on the other sites you went to?
Or any meaning this time around.
Actual evidence is what you need. Not vague motives at best and lots of quotes that have nothing to do with the facts.
Ethelred
Of course. That was the job of the CIA.He agreed to go on with it. It was developed under Eisenhower, an experienced general whereas Kennedy drove a boat.No. The CIA overestimated the willingness of the general Cuban population to overthrow the Communist government. Also the plan clearly leaked. Which even the most idiotic member of the CIA wouldn't have blamed on the President.I assume you are referring to the Mafia. The Mafia would have blamed the CIA for its own mistakes.
Assuming THEY never make mistakes and carry out impossibly complicated plots AND also assume that they are too bloody stupid to figure out that the CIA was responsible for the screw up is just a tad weird.
Ethelred
Sorry but no. Freemasons were involved of course but they did not found the country.
I wonder how many of the Colonial Freemasons were Loyalists?
Things often happen by chance. It was chance that got Oswald the job in the Book Depository. It was chance that a failed experiment led to Nylon. It was chance that saved Hitler when the assassin's bomb went off.
It was mostly chance the Benedict Arnold was at Saratoga to save the day for the American Revolution.
Chance happens. Sometimes it hits the fan and sometimes it hits the Shan instead.
Ethelred
You sure seem to be living up to your name. My concern is; that its not an intentional thing with you, too?
Oh; can you please provide me (us) with some factual evidence, stating William Colby died from a malignant brain tumor?
[He took the pictures] – No he did not, and his wife had problems remembering that.
[actual trigger pulling] – I must have missed that comment where you provided all the factual evidence that he did, pull it…three times.
[paranoia] – Honestly, my intentions weren’t to make you any more paranoid…I was merely providing food (with nutritional value) for thought.
Not Another Four Letter Acronym Person-NAFLAP. I was just getting a handle on the TLAs. Three Letter Acronym in future.
[General-Boat Driver] – Does it really matter who’s President?
We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex - Dwight D. Eisenhower.
1. It strengthened Castros hand.
2. It allowed cuba to ruthlessly purge dissidents and insurgents.
3. It gave castro the excuse to accept nukes
4. It disposed of troublesome exiles in the US.
5. It emboldened parties like the viet cong and the NVA who could now see the US as defeatable.
6. It defined the enemy in the public eye on both sides of the Iron Curtain. The US was capable of invading and the USSR was an immediate threat.
7. Thus it allowed us to escalate in SE Asia, an area close to collapse from overpop, the root cause of all conflict. Brilliant all around.
@muchtobedesired
-If you think BoP was about profit from pre-castro crime, SE Asia was a MUCH more lucrative market. Im sure youve heard of the US govt business with drugs etc. from the region. But IMO it was about sociopolitics- not organized crime.
JFK was following two strategies for dealing with Fidel Castro. Both were highly secret and were known to only a small number of people.
http://educationf...pic=5434
The Mafia, CIA and George Bush-By Pete Brewton
Just before Kennedy was assassinated on 22 November 1963, Dallas, Texas nightclub owner Jack Ruby made contact with Marcello, and Tampa, Florida boss Santo Trafficante
Herman Beebe had served nine months in federal prison for bank fraud and had impeccable credentials as a financier for New Orleans-based organized crime figures, including Vincent and Carlos Marcello. Herman Beebe was involved in a scheme in the early 1970s to smuggle guns and explosives to anti-Castro Cubans operating in Mexico.
http://www.youtub...3p57TqPA
The road to Dallas: the assassination of John F. Kennedy- By David E. Kaiser
Conspiracy in Camelot: the complete history of the assassination of JFK- By Jerome A. Kroth
Does it really matter if a small piece of land surrounded with water, was communist, and had a couple nukes...Russia had hundreds pointed at us...good bye!
[SE Asia was a lucrative market] - Don't you remember the C130s full of COKE flying in from Latin/South America, to Mena, Arkansas...Clinton's back yard...he couldn't seem to remember, although he threw a meager 25K to his attorney general to investigate it, even though he had asked for much more.
[But IMO it was about sociopolitics- not organized crime]
Now there's a combination worth taking a crack at: Politics and Organized Crime...hmmmm
Thought you might find this information a useful compliment to the other bits...
Bay of Pigs.
http://www.sparta...pigs.htm
Or greed and ambition were the Vehicles to get far more important Work done. 'Organized crime' is inevitable. Much better if it is created by the Powers that Be to serve their own purposes. After all, what good is money if the world is collapsing around you? Where would have inflation taken us if Iran/Iraq and the rest of the middle east had restored the caliphate after the shah was ousted and shut off the oil? But they didnt. Instead an 11 war was engineered which did nothing but kill millions and impoverish the rest. Shia against Shia. This is Sociopolitics- applied politics aimed at changing the social structure for the better. Or at least more beneficial.
And GHW Bush was doing drug deals out of the Oval Office too- :-0
-If the drug trade is Inevitable, you ought to be the one to corner the market, yes?
Farid doesn't even attempt to explain this, but it CAN be explained by reference to superimposing or pasting in a previous photo - to a *cutout* space with the contour of a man holding a rifle. This "cutout" photo actually exists as the so-called "Oswald Ghost" photo and is clearly shown on page 170 of Robert Groden's 'The Killing of a President'.
In addition, pixel density formulations aren't trustworthy since the b&w emulsions back then had different optical opacity.