Epilogue
(Backstabbed:
The History of a Photograph)
My article "Backstabbed:
The History of a Photograph" has raised sufficient alarm within the
DIA's COINTELPRO
operation that they felt compelled to release yet another doctored version of
the original photo. Their hope is to claim that the new doctored version
is the original version. While I can prove, using both evidence in the
doctored photo and historical evidence, that the new image is also doctored,
there are important questions, from a logical point of view, about the new
document. In the first doctored image (click thumbnail to the right), one
can clearly see the arms of my chair at Cycorp. I am also wearing glasses
I only wore at Cycorp. I only wear glasses when using the computer.
The glasses remain in the second doctored image, though the imposed background
is out of doors and no computer is before me. My left hand, in the second
doctored image, remains in the position to rest upon the arm chair and, without
the arm chair, no reasonable explanation can be given for the position of my
left hand.
The image shows my face as it was three years ago, when the original photo
was taken. I've changed quite a bit since then due to the stress of being
harassed by COINTELPRO. The image to the right is a photo of me 1 1/2
years ago. I have aged even more since then. The next photo is a
photo taken of me in Harvard Square a little more than one year ago. As
you can see in the doctored image, I am much younger looking and heavier in the
doctored image.
There is endless evidence of COINTELPRO faking and altering photos of
me. Some of those will be displayed at the end of the epilogue.
What I'd like to do first, however, is point out some technical problems with
the most recent doctored images and then ask some historical questions that
would be necessary to back up COINTELPRO's claims that the most recent doctored
image is an original image.
In the newest version of the doctored image, look at my
chest. You will see the computer generated shadowing of the hat that
has been added to the original image. It casts upon the chest
flickers of light ostensibly passing through the hat. Given the
angle of the shadow, one must conclude that the sun is shining upon me
from the right hand side. If the sun were shining on me from the
right hand side, from a low angle as indicated by the shadow, then the
right side of the hat (the left side from the viewer's perspective, would
be shadowed by the hat itself. It is not shadowed thusly. In
fact, the righting on the had, as indicated by the shadowing behind my
head, shows darkening only on the left side of the interior of the had (as
seen from the viewer's perspective), consistent with the lighting on the
shirt, but inconsistent with the lighting of the exterior of the hat which
is illuminated on the left side (from the viewer's perspective) as if the
sun were strait above.
What you are seeing is the product of a computer program. An
object (the hat) colored as is, has been introduced to the image and a
position for the sun has been selected. The computer program, then,
generates a shadow of the hat, in relation to the hypothetical position of
the sun, upon my body and upon the interior of the hat. The hat and
my body are then conjoined, by the computer program, to form one object
which is then superimposed upon another image taken outside.
Another aspect of the photo which is obviously fake is the shadow
beneath my right arm. She sharp gradient was painted onto the
image. It was not generated by a computer. The shadow is too
dark, too abrupt and implies that the sun is directly overhead. This
proposes a third sun, a thin atmosphere (or no atmosphere). Since
neither I nor anyone else in the image is wearing a space suit, this needs
explanation.
How can I prove this last assertion? Very easily! If you
view the tree in the background, you will see that it is lighted from
behind and to the right. This places the actual position of the sun
in the background image in a different location from "my
image." The image on "me" is coming from the right
front and the image on the tree is coming from the right back. Since
there are not two suns, the image is proved to be doctored. |
|
There are historical impossibilities as well. I do not recognize the
background in the photo. Therefore, I call upon COINTELPRO to tell us
where the background is located. I also call upon COINTELPRO to tell us
when the photo was taken. As I said, it must have been taken three years
ago. Therefore, COINTELPRO must prove that I was at that location three
years ago.
Three years ago, I was in Austin, Texas. I can document the three
protests I attended during that time frame. I can also demonstrate that
none of them were in the location of the background of the photo.
Additionally, I own no such hat and I do not own an Arab hat scarf shown around
my waste. I also ask, for what logical reason would one wear that hat with
that scarf?
On another historical dimension, since the photo was taken three years ago,
it was taken during the winter of 2001/2002. This is before Bush was being
equated with Hitler. I doubt that a T-Shirt with that design existed
then. I certain do not own such a T-Shirt and I do not wear swastikas.
Why am I wasting my time explaining all of this? Well, I think this is
important for all activists. It shows the lengths that the U.S. Government
is willing to go in smearing activists and dissidents. Supposedly, we are in a
war against terrorism that is stressing our economy. If we are in a real
war against terrorism, why is the U.S. Government spending energies, moneys and
resources taking down activists rather than preventing terrorism? Either
they are wasteful and malicious, there is no war on terrorism (only a war on
dissent) or both.
Gallery of a Small Sample of Various Other Doctored
Photos by the DIA (KOBE)
|
To
the left you have original photo. To the right you have a doctored
image produced from using my face from the original photo.
The
DIA (KOBE) has removed the copyright from this photo. The copyright
was placed on the photo to provide evidence that the DIA was violating the
law by modifying and republishing the photo. Look at the area where
the copyright was and see how they modified it. |
The above picture is a doctored image from a picture
taken in Austin, Texas during an anti-War protest during 2001. The
sign has been changed by the DIA (KOBE). It originally read:
"Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft: Axis of Arrogance."
In the above picture, the hot Texas sun is straight
above, thereby shadowing my eyes and producing a very unfavorable
image. The image was enlarged beyond its resolution, eyes were added
(see below), and various defamatory versions of the image were placed
online to harass me.
|