To say Altgens6 could not be altered so quickly is a canard.There was a window of opportunity. .....
I quote from another site:
Paul Rigby, a most respected JFK researcher from the UK, has provided the OIC with a detailed time line of the Altgens6 photo and has proposed at least a two to three hour “window of opportunity” for alteration. Mr. Rigby’s work deserves discussion. He believes that there was a delay in the release of Altgens6 because it was initially wired to the AP headquarters in New York, but then appears to have been “cropped twice”.
Paul Rigby, a most respected JFK researcher from the UK, has provided the OIC with a detailed time line of the Altgens6 photo and has proposed at least a two to three hour “window of opportunity” for alteration. Mr. Rigby’s work deserves discussion. He believes that there was a delay in the release of Altgens6 because it was initially wired to the AP headquarters in New York, but then appears to have been “cropped twice”.
On the basis of the available evidence, we can — provisionally at least — draw the following inferences:
(1) Altgens did not develop his own photos;
(2) Altgens6 went by fax, not to the world at large, but to the AP New York HQ, at just after 1:00 PM/CT;
(3) The negatives were sent by commercial airline, ostensibly to the same destination but did not arrive until hours after the initial fax;
(4) The dissemination of the image from NY did not occur until at least two hours after the fax arrived but before the arrival of the negatives;
(5) Both the AP and Altgens appear to have sought to conceal this hiatus;
(6) The AP acted against its own commercial interest in delaying release of Altgens6;
(7) The version which first appeared in the final editions of newspapers in Canada and the US on the evening of 22 November 1963 was heavily, and very obviously, retouched;
(8) Point (7) may not be the explanation, either full or partial, for the concealed delay; it is quite conceivable that obvious alterations were used to draw attention away from other more subtle stuff.
(1) Altgens did not develop his own photos;
(2) Altgens6 went by fax, not to the world at large, but to the AP New York HQ, at just after 1:00 PM/CT;
(3) The negatives were sent by commercial airline, ostensibly to the same destination but did not arrive until hours after the initial fax;
(4) The dissemination of the image from NY did not occur until at least two hours after the fax arrived but before the arrival of the negatives;
(5) Both the AP and Altgens appear to have sought to conceal this hiatus;
(6) The AP acted against its own commercial interest in delaying release of Altgens6;
(7) The version which first appeared in the final editions of newspapers in Canada and the US on the evening of 22 November 1963 was heavily, and very obviously, retouched;
(8) Point (7) may not be the explanation, either full or partial, for the concealed delay; it is quite conceivable that obvious alterations were used to draw attention away from other more subtle stuff.
Since The Oakland Tribune afternoon EXTRA edition showing the cropped Altgens6 — and other visible features beyond the now obscured windshield — appears to have come out around 5:00PM/PT (or 8:00 PM/ET) and the photograph was taken at 12:30 PM/CT, the span between the photo’s being taken and its first newspaper publication would appear to be a maximum of 7 hours, if we accept The Tribune as real. Since Roy took it off the wire-photo-fax the following morning, that suggests it was actually sent out twice.
more...
The DeLoach memorandum of 25 November 1963, however, unequivocally claims that the AP did not disseminate the Altgens6 to subscribing newspapers until Saturday, November 23, 1963, which means that The Oakland Tribune got an earlier version than was nationally distributed the next day . Here is the memorandum (absent its addendum), which was added subsequently and is discussed below. Notice the language that is used to describe the photo and that he expected the FBI to further “experiment” with it. ClicK THIS LINK TO SEE THE DELOACH AND RELATED MEMOS: https://www.google.com/search…
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.