Photographic Proof John Templin's Standing Next To "Glasses Woman" In Betzner-3

[John Iacoletti]

Iacoletti,

You don?t need to put my name in every post.

But thanks for implying that my... gasp ... horrendous mistakes are as momentous (or as "grave," if you will) as Karen Westbrook's all-time xxxx-up in her Sixth Floor Museum interview has turned out to be.

Too bad you can?t actually show that she xxxxed-up and not you. Again. That?s gotta hurt.

Speaking of mistakes, please tell us once again why you changed your mind about "Glasses Woman" in Betzner-3.

Maybe you should just start 5 new threads about it.

[Thomas Graves]

Maybe you should just start 5 new threads about it.

Iacoletti,

I won't have to start five new threads about your disingenousness regarding "Glasses Woman" in Betzner-3 if you'll confess to the following:

1)  In your desperation to not have to follow my lead by (gasp) referring to her as "black blouse - black headscarf woman" (or some-such thing), and your "fortuitously" noticing that she was possibly wearing glasses in that photo, and (hooray!) confirming for yourself by enlarging her face a bit that she really was wearing glasses ...


2) ... and rightly proceeding to refer to her as "Glasses Woman" ...

3) ...  you belatedly realized (or remembered?) that Gloria Calvery is wearing glasses like that in all of the photos we have of her ...

4) ... and so you abruptly started referring to her as "Tall Woman," instead.

5)  Then, upon being "called out" for having done so, ...

7)  ... you disingenuously over-enlarged her face to the point of extreme blurriness ...

6)  ... and posted said blurry, blown-up crop ...

7)  ... and proclaimed (like the carnival barker that you are), "Looky, looky, looky, folks!  She's not wearing glasses -- she just has a pet dragonfly and wears way too much mascara!"

LOL

-- MWT   

[John Iacoletti]

Iacoletti,

You don?t need to put my name in every post.

1)  In your desperation to not have to follow my lead by (gasp) referring to her as "black blouse - black headscarf woman" (or some-such thing),

I don?t give a damn what you call her.

and your "fortuitously" noticing that she was possibly wearing glasses in that photo, and (hooray!) confirming for yourself by enlarging her face a bit that she really was wearing glasses ...

Nope. I thought she was wearing glasses until I enlarged the photo, at which point I couldn?t tell if she was or not.

[Thomas Graves]

If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

Iacoletti,

No, but you wouldn't be here effing-up gullible newbies, those who can't see very well, and even "established researchers" who ... uhh ... can't  think very critically.

-- MWT   

[John Iacoletti]

No, but you wouldn't be here effing-up gullible newbies, those who can't see very well, and even "established researchers" who ... uhh ... can't  think very critically.

Such as yourself?

[Thomas Graves]

Because Graves says so? 

Iacoletti,

John Templin, Ernest Brandt, Jean Newman, and June Dishong are four of the very few people, along with A. J. Millican and journalists Aurelia Lorenzo, Mary Woodward, Ann Donaldson, and Maggie Brown, and, down the street, the Newmans and the Chisms, that Robin Unger and (in his early map) Don Roberdeau actually got right on the north side of Elm Street sidewalk.  So I'm not the only one who says Templin can be seen standing next to your "Glasses Woman" in Betzner-3, and who says Brandt can be seen standing on the other side of Templin in Willis-5.

-- MWT   

[John Iacoletti]

Iacoletti,

You don't need to put my name in every post.

John Templin, Ernest Brandt, Jean Newman, and June Dishong are four of the very few people, along with A. J. Millican and journalists Aurelia Lorenzo, Mary Woodward, Ann Donaldson, and Maggie Brown, and, down the street, the Newmans and the Chisms, that Robin Unger and (in his early map) Don Roberdeau actually got right on the north side of Elm Street sidewalk.

Your assessment on what they got right or wrong means absolutely nothing.