The high def Bell Film clearly shows that Wiegman is Not "sprawled" across the steps. This JFK Assassination Urban Legend has been repeated ad nauseam for 62+ years. "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend". That is what continues going on regarding the JFK Assassination. This also goes for the SBT which science has proven to be "impossible".

The plaid bars and Lovelady's visible bald spot are not doctored...Neither is Shelley's Duck's Bahookie hair doo, black jacket, and white shirt collar...This is why the corruption on The Education Forum is so wickedly evil...Because it poisons and harms the phony academic standard that website pretends to uphold...Mark Knight is like a dirty small town sheriff who always does the job he's expected to do with his rulings and avoids recognizing the dishonest corruption of the people he's ruling in favor of...The membership pretends to avoid it as well...Simkin then puts on that phony Oxford/Cambridge above it all intellectual act and skates past the issue that he is fully responsible for as if he doesn't notice...The current Couch/Darnell film is good enough for any credible researcher to realize the pair fast-walking up the extension are already long proven to be Shelley and Lovelady and that anyone doubting it is basically trolling and marring good progress of research...The Education Forum refuses to answer for the correct evidence on Prayer Man that proves Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton...This one thing alone discredits all the self-platitudes they assign themselves as far as credibility...

The Education Forum gets away with the murder of switching the issue from the rotten dishonesty of Sandy Larsen and his deletion of evidence that disproved himself to a witch-hunt against the researcher who single-handedly out-argued the board on its favorite pet theory...The dishonest scoundrel who pushed that theory (Bart Kamp) is now safely a member while he still hasn't admitted the obvious evidence that refuted him...Mark Knight has been allowed to disappear the entire issue by means of bullying and vindictive moderation disguised as high-minded academic moderation and ban the person with the correct evidence for life on trumped-up BS designed to protect the wrong-doers...Knight is not made to answer for how his wrongful moderation has prevented exposure of the most important evidence discovery of our generation nor is that very important discovery ever shown on the forum...Jim DiEugenio is shilled and pampered by a membership that honors his taking a theory that he already admitted to me was false and bringing it to Congress...This dubious process endangers the credibility of JFK Assassination research - but that doesn't bother Jim D because he is an entity that always manages to get bailed out by his own wordsmithing and the corrupt sycophants who always endorse it...This is all capped-off by the ultimate insult to injury of Andrew Iler having total power and pretending he has addressed all this with a dignified set of rules, when all he is is just another Jim DiEugenio butt-******...There has to be someone on The Education Forum who remembers Larsen's photo analysis of Lovelady's plaid bars...The main thrust of that forum is not good research...It is organized dishonesty and may they be damned for it...

    You have just been confronted with being a Liar. And what do you do? YOU refuse to take the stand.  "GUILTY" as charged.

Not a single argument presented.
Not a single scrap of evidence provided on which to base any kind of counter-argument.
Just the maniacal rantings of a rabid zealot.

When you try to engage with this issue you just look buffoonish and are forced to question your precious WC narrative - "We also don't know where Oswald was during the time BRW was at the window".

Can you explain how anyone could know that or why it is even important to know that? Of course you can't. There is ample evidence  that Oswald was in the sniper's nest at 12:30 firing the shots that killed JFK. The fact you think it is important to know where Oswald was in the minutes leading up to the assassination reveals just how dumb you rare.

And when that doesn't work you resort to the sort of fabrication the WC would be proud of - " If Oswald was on the first floor at 12:00 and BRW was on the 6th floor until 12:15"

So, here's a challenge for you. Rather than spew your endless Oswald-Did-It routine (and you accuse me of starting off with an assumption! ), let's have a rational discussion about any detail of the argument I'm putting forward. Pick a specific detail, any detail, and let's debate rationally.
What do you say?

Nobody could have a rational debate with someone as stupid as you. You think the most trivial things are important while ignoring the compelling evidence that Oswald was the assassin. That is not an assumption. An assumption is a belief made in lieu of evidence, such as all theories that anyone except Oswald took part in the crime. The fact that you obsess over trivialities such as a supposed elevator race prior to the assassination reveals just how clueless you are. You focus on all the dumb stuff while ignoring what is important. Sorry, just being honest.

Book Review in History--Washington Independent Review of Books

Castro’s Secrets: The CIA And Cuba’s Intelligence Machine
Brian Latell    Palgrave Macmillan  288 pp.

May 21, 2012

A consideration of alternative theories on the assassination of John F. Kennedy, including thoughts on what Castro and Cuban intelligence knew prior to November 22, 1963.

Reviewed by Ronald Goldfarb

The assassination of John F. Kennedy by Lee Harvey Oswald in November 1963, a grim anniversary we will commemorate next year, was certainly the crime of the last century. An extensive body of literature chronicled, critiqued and analyzed that event, following the official Warren Commission Report that President Lyndon Baines Johnson ordered to document what happened. That report was flawed for reasons the Commission itself could not know. It acted quickly, as it had to, in order to assuage concerns about possible conspiracies and continuing dangers to the U.S. However flawed by the deceptions of officials in the FBI and CIA who knew facts they did not relate, and even secrets Robert F. Kennedy could not share, the Warren Commission’s basic conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald was an erratic assassin who acted alone has withstood continuous barrages of criticism. Some of that criticism is foolish and insubstantial, some impressively persuasive. Today, the Warren Commission findings remain the accepted view of the assassination.

But the case is not closed, and may never be. Two credible theories draw conclusions inconsistent with the Warren Commission’s. One is that the Mafia plotted and ordered Kennedy’s murder in retribution for Robert F. Kennedy’s aggressive prosecutions and investigations of its members. That theory is developed in my book, Perfect Villains, Imperfect Heroes: RFK’s War Against Organized Crime, a memoir of that “war” in which I was one soldier. There is convincing proof that the Mafia conspired to kill John F. Kennedy, but none to tie its conspiracy to the act of Lee Harvey Oswald, which may have fortuitously intervened. The dots of accumulating proof are not connected, though a U.S. House of Representatives Special Committee concluded that was the case, and later detailed studies added further proof of the Committee’s conclusion, based on post-Warren Commission archival disclosures.

The second theory, also backed by credible evidence, but also inconclusive, is that Fidel Castro was behind Oswald’s act of treachery in retaliation for the U.S. government’s plans to assassinate him. Again, there is evidence to support this theory, but not enough to settle the matter. Castro’s Secrets, a new book by former CIA official Brian Latell, a knowledgeable expert on Latin American intelligence, pursues this latter theory, adding credible new, if not decisive, evidence.

Latell worked for almost four decades for the CIA and National Intelligence Agency, including time as a CIA Cuba desk analyst and an intelligence officer for Latin America. He knows the literature and is a punctilious researcher, a knowledgeable historian, and a savvy insider. Latell concludes that Fidel Castro, among other notable skills, was Cuba’s “supreme spymaster,” conspiratorial in his instincts, audacious in his actions, devious in his Machiavellian brilliance, and avid in his hatred of the U.S.

I met with Latell in Key Biscayne, Florida, and over cups of Cuban coffee we discussed the revelations in his new book, a follow-up to his earlier After Fidel. Latell’s research adds uniquely credible evidence that Castro knew that the U.S. was planning to kill him, warned there might be retribution, and was aware that Kennedy was being pursued by Oswald. There is no proof Castro solicited Oswald’s criminal act or contributed to his crime. But that he knew of Oswald’s intentions, and waited knowingly for it to happen, is now demonstrated by Latell’s book.

Latell combed through vast collections of stored archival records and interviewed Cuban defectors who had fled Cuba and were protected by our intelligence service. One in particular, Florentino Aspillaga Lombard, who fled Cuba’s intelligence agency, and has been protected and hidden since then in the U.S., told Latell that his radio surveillance directed at the CIA was suddenly and inexplicably ordered to be stopped shortly before the Kennedy assassination, and was to be refocused on Texas. The implication is clear:  Castro knew of Oswald’s plan, watched and waited for it to happen. That doesn’t make Castro the active conspirator, but it proves a level of passive complicity, at the least “a conspiracy of silence,” Latell suggests.

Castro had proof that his double agent, Rolando Cubela, was meeting in Paris with Desmond Fitzgerald, Robert F. Kennedy’s CIA contact on Cuban intelligence and CIA machinations, to conjure a plan to kill Castro at the very time Oswald shot John F. Kennedy. One Cuban intelligence official told a colleague that she knew of the assassination in Dallas “almost before Kennedy did,” as a result of Cuban intelligence’s knowledge of Oswald’s plan.

Latell’s chief revelation in Castro’s Secrets is Aspillaga’s disclosure that, early in the morning of November 22, 1963, he was ordered to direct radio attention to Texas.  Aspillaga related that story to Latell in a CIA safe house decades ago. Latell confirmed it through declassified reports of two “reliable American intelligence community sources.” The revelation demonstrates Castro’s knowledge of the deadly cross-currents of intrigue between our countries that concluded in the assassination of JFK. Alone, it does not prove that Castro or Cuban intelligence agents initiated or assisted Oswald’s acts; but it does show that they knew of his plan, and at a minimum silently let it happen. Latell concedes there is “a critical distinction between Fidel Castro simply knowing in advance and somehow being involved in what transpired.”

Aspillaga is “the most valuable Cuban intelligence officer ever to have changed sides,” Latell reports. His disclosure that he was instructed “to redirect the antennas from Langley and Miami to Texas“ and to advise his superiors if anything important happened,  is chilling evidence that adds meaning to other circumstantial evidence we now know. “They knew Kennedy would be killed,” Aspillaga told Latell. Oswald had told Cuban officials in Mexico earlier that he planned to assassinate JFK. Even Lyndon Baines Johnson later stated that “Kennedy was trying to get Castro, but Castro got to him first,” adding that “I never believed Oswald acted alone, although I can accept the fact that he pulled the trigger.”

Both alternative explanations of the assassination, undercutting the Warren Commission’s single bullet, one lone assassin conclusion, remain haunting, challenging, but inconclusive. Perhaps after Fidel Castro’s death and the likely easing of relations between Cuba and the U.S., further evidence will emerge to resolve the perplexing riddle of November 23, 1963. “Until Cuban intelligence in Havana is prepared to turn over their files … it is going to be extraordinarily difficult to tidy up this case, finally and conclusively,” former CIA Director Richard Helms concluded to assassination investigators.

The Warren Commission, the House Assassination Committee, the Church Committee, and five million pages of U.S. government documents disclosed no evidence of Cuban complicity in JFK’s assassination. Latell concludes that “Castro and a small number of Cuban intelligence officers were complicit in Kennedy’s death but that their involvement fell short of an organized assassination plot.” The case rests there. For now.

Ronald Goldfarb is a Washington DC attorney and author. He has reviewed much of the John F. Kennedy assassination literature, discussed it on TV documentaries, and written about it in his Perfect Villains, Imperfect Heroes: Robert F. Kennedy’s War Against Organized Crime, published by Random House in 1995, and recently optioned for a movie

---30---

If Cuban intel had foreknowledge of the JFKA...that sure does not line up with the LHO-LNT.

An LN would not tell anyone what he was up to. How would Havana know that something would happen in Dallas on 11.22? One way would be if they had assets collaborating with or manipulating LHO.

No one was ever explained the gunsmoke in the GK area in the immediate aftermath of the JFKA.

The image isn't doctored...This will be proven by obtaining the original Darnell film and showing the exact same plaid pattern on the original film...People who claim alteration where there was no alteration (Sandy Larsen) condemn themselves to Cinque land...

Larsen's image was better than Kamp's and I assume Larsen somehow got the original or accessed technology that was better able to resolve the current copy...The image Larsen used for his analysis zoomed closer in to the plaid and managed to capture the exact alternating red, black, white, and brown plaid bars and their uniqueness and then perfectly match them to the bars seen on Lovelady's plaid in other photos...The match was perfect and was proof beyond a doubt...Proof that shows you and Royell are full of it...When I told Larsen that he had therefore indirectly proven the time that Frazier said he was standing and staring in shock at Sarah Stanton by locating Lovelady & Shelley fast-walking up the extension Larsen went back and deleted his Education Forum thread containing the photo analysis of Lovelady's plaid bars...There is nothing too low for the clique on The Education Forum and they always get to rule on themselves and their own rank dishonesty...Iler is now enforcing that corruption and has the nerve to do it under a so-called strict set of rules...Jim DiEugenio is the Trump-like leader of that clique who managed to parlay that sordid corruption all the way to the point of presenting a knowingly-false Prayer Man theory before Congress...

Just to show how dishonest The Education Forum is the clique doesn't speak up and admit Larsen's original photo analysis or his dishonest deletion of it...And those people are judging ME!...You'll never see the rank hypocrite Mark Knight comment on this business or its significance in regard to The Education Forum's so-called purpose and rules...Knight is too busy banning for life the researcher who discovered the conspiracy evidence discovery of our generation on false rules violation charges...And the clique doesn't mind...

You are the one who is full of it.
Do you really think you can claim evidence you can't provide and probably doesn't exist?
What if everything you are saying is a lie? How do we know it isn't?
You've already lost all credibility regarding this topic and this claim about Larsen seems desperate and far-fetched.

And just to clarify, the image IS doctored. That's not in dispute. You have based your identification on this single, doctored image. That's not in dispute either.
What is in dispute is your dubious claim about Larsen's work.
Please provide evidence. Your word counts for nothing.