Compare it to other pictures of Lee Oswald   Fabricating pictures was quite primitive in  Look at another Oswald picture on the page   Which viewpoint does the reader believe  Is the Big Chin a sign of a fake or not   Gamaliel will now try to change the subject and wont directly discuss the Big Chin      Weve already discussed the Big Chin to death  It was one of many allegations of photo manipulation dismissed by the HSCA You want to mention it as if  it was never debunked  its the most important thing ever  it is proof of conspiracy      Gamaliel none of the three things you just wrote make any logical sense Some believe the chin is not a fabrication So what This doesnt mean these true believers have debunked something Its their opinion The policy of this web site is to provide all opinions and certainly not to hide the evidence When are you going to understand this rule  How important is it It is relevant to Oswalds contention that some one was framing him Whether that is the most important thing ever is up to the reader  Whether it is proof of a conspiracy is also up to the reader   Gamaliel your frantic attempts to delete and hide any information that you disagree with is directly contrary to the web site rules Why do you continue to do it    Dont forget there were two Oswalds Lee Oswald and Harvey Oswald One worked for the CIA and was the real triggerman I forget which But wait a minute the fatal shot really came from the grassy knoll from an antiCastro Cuban who wanted payback for no airsupport for Brigade  during the Bay of Pigs disaster No wait a minute Oswald was a paid hitman for the mafia oh well Its  in the AM all this conspiracy stuff is making me loopy Goodnight    Gamaliel is this person above who calls himself Mytwocents your alter ego and put in for comic relief     Web site rules of inclusion of all significant viewpoints  The evidence of the fabricated photograph is a significant viewpoint that was discussed in the HSCA report Some experts believe it shows fabricationsome dont Under the rules of this web site all significant viewpoints should be presented   Claiming that someone else disagrees with a significant viewpoint on a subject is not a ground for excluding it from the article   Arguing it is not the most important thing ever is not a ground for excluding the view point that the photographs are fabrications   Arguing that evidence that the photographs were fabricated is evidence of a conspiracy  is not a ground for excluding the evidence  Gentlemen These are basic web site rules     Leave this article in a readable state Dont leave  after every goddamn sentence in a paragraph  Use one tag   Free free to argue about content but make sure the current content is at least readable  I have just fixed a couple of paragraphs Im about to go after any others    You should control your anger Content that is both controversial and unreferernced should be taken out Do that instead   Control my anger  What are you talking about  Im not in a position to verify either way  I just want to make sure that the article is readable for the users  This article is not neutral  Surely its not the job of Wikipedia contributors to decide whether or not Oswald worked alone was part of a conspiracy or had anything to do with the assassination at all  It seems to me that the only way of rendering a neutral article is to state that Oswald was arrested and held on suspicion of Kennedys murder but was killed before he could be tried  It can then be provably stated that the Warren Commission in its Report concluded that Oswald was guilty and had worked alone but that there have since been many efforts and arguments that attempt to disprove this conclusion    Its not our business to decide what really happened which is what some people here are trying to do  We are here to report on and check verifiable facts not persuade peop