He refers to them as "wildly different versions." He says that Lovelady looks like a "werewolf" on the left and "clean-shaven" on the right. He asks if they "could look any more different?" Yes, they could look tremendously more different. It's mainly a difference in coloring. It has to do with the way the photos were processed and the materials they were produced on. The one on the left is from the inside back cover of a book: Forgive My Grief IV, by Penn Jones. It wasn't even done on photographic paper. The one on the right was done on standard photographic paper.
So, the punk is making much ado about nothing. The difference is easily and sufficiently explained. Plus, it really doesn't make a whit of difference because regardless of whether Lovelady was scruffy or clean-shaved at the time, we know he had facial hair. There are no concerns about whether or not he went bald on his face. So, that's irrelevant. But, there is concern about whether or not he went bald on top of his head.
So, what are you implying, Upperpunk? That different photographic and lighting conditions could produce that much difference in the amount of hair and the hairline? Let's look at it again using another FBI image:
You can't say those are both legit. You can't say that different photographic media and lighting conditions resulted in his hair appearing that much different.
And I'll tell you what, let's do this: Since the FBI photo was undoubtedly produced on standard photographic paper, let's use the version of Mark Lane Lovelady that was also produced on standard photographic paper.
Now, you listen up, Upperpunk: That can't be dismissed, and it can't be explained away. You're just making excuses. You've already admitted that Mark Lane wasn't lying, and that means that the FBI was. It was a deliberate and unconscionable deception by the FBI.
And realize that they were NEVER straight-forward about any of this. They waited 3 months before taking those pictures, and when they did, they only sent them to the Warren Commission. There was no announcement in the papers. There was no release to the press. And what did the Warren Commission do? They didn't even use them. They didn't publish them in the Warren Report. They just left them among the documents, without comment, acknowledgment, analysis, or review, and the vast majority of Americans never had access to them. It's only because of Harold Weisberg that the existence of these FBI photos of Lovelady became well known. It was in spite of the intentions of the FBI and the Warren Commission.
Just think: the Warren Commission had to determine who a man was in a photograph, knowing beforehand that it was definitely one of two men. AND THEY HAD PHOTOS OF BOTH OF THEM. But, they didn't use them. They never did any photographic analysis. They never did any photographic comparisons. Instead, their ENTIRE methodology was to ask several carefully-selected individuals to identify the person. That's it! And the one that mattered most, Billy Lovelady himself, identified SOMEONE ELSE as himself:
So, the Warren Commission essentially shoved the FBI photos of Lovelady under the rug. And then they had Joseph Ball do a song and dance, and I mean that literally because he "danced" around the whole thing with Lovelady- never asking him directly who Doorman was- whereas he "sang" like a soprano with Danny Arce:
Mr. BALL. Just 1 minute, I want to show you a picture. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 369. I show you this picture. See this man in this picture?
Mr. ARCE. Yeah.
Mr. BALL. Recognize him?
Mr. ARCE. Yes, that's Billy Lovelady.
Mr. BALL. Just to identify it clearly, the man on the steps---well, you see the man on the steps, do you not?
Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. He is a white man, isn't he?
Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And you see his picture just above the picture of two colored people, is that correct; would you describe it like that?
Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. I am not going to mark this purposely because other witnesses have to see it.
Mr. ARCE. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Did you say that is Billy Lovelady?
Mr. ARCE. Yes, that is Billy Lovelady.
Mr. BALL. Now, there is only one face that is clearly shown within the entrance-way of the Texas School Book Depository Building, isn't there?
Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And only one face of a person who is standing on the steps of the Depository Building entrance?
Mr. ARCE. Yeah.
Mr. BALL. And that one man you see there---
Mr. ARCE. Yes, that's Billy Lovelady.
This is the same Danny Arce who loved the balmy weather of the Florida Keys.
And the deception with the FBI photos didn't end in 1964. The existence of the Hard and Soft versions of FBI Lovelady is no innocent thing.
There is a qualitative difference there. The physiognomy of those two are vastly different and opposite to each other. On the right, he looks "soft," and on the left, he looks "hard." They were going for those effects.
And they do shit like this every chance they get. Recall that somebody tried to draw in a face on Black Hole Man:
That is blatant fraud! It is utter fakery!
Then, there is bpete who went with this deformed figure in order to slenderize a big muscular guy into skinny Buell Frazier:
Here's how the image actually was; you had there a he-man:
Bend, twist, stretch, distort, whatever it takes, eh? Oh, and by the way, you are probably bpete, so nice work. But, it's all dungeon work.
Yes, there are "dark forces" at work alright, and you are among them.
But, we'll finish with these two: each an image of Billy Lovelady, one showing him with good coverage on top and the other showing him to be mostly bald.
And you think you can account for it by different photographic processing? God-damn punk that you are.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.