Keyvan, you're confusing was is factual with an interpretation of a photograph that has been altered and of using selected witness testimony to buttress a conclusion. A wrong one at that. Moorman's photograph is a fact. In it's original state there's nothing in that photo that shows two guys behind the pagoda shooting at anybody. Relying on an altered version of that photograph as proof there were two shooters behind the pagoda is a fools errand, but this has already been pointed out to you by numerous posters numerous times. Still, if you want to insist that the altered photo shows what you claim there's really nothing more to be said. You know the old saying "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink".
Oscar, I am not confusing any type of interpretation. There is a person behind Mr. Zapruder. You are obviously talking about the colored version of the Mary Moorman photo. What is different in the colored version of the Moorman photo? If there is a difference besides the fact that it is colored, please let me know, I would like to know and so would everyone on this board.
On top of the Moorman photo showing a person there, the Nix film shows a smoke trail from a gunshot from the same exact place where there is a person behind Mr. Zapruder. Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman both stated in their interview minutes after the assassination that they thought the gunshots came from the pergola. There is film evidence of what looks like smoke in the area. Police Officers and Secret Service men testified in the WC that shots came from the area.
This is not my interpretations, these are factual verifiable events that occurred 55 years ago.
So, you are discounting 1) The Moorman photo, 2) The gunshot in the Nix Film, 3) The interview and testimony of Mr. Zapruder and Mr. Newman, 4) The testimony of police officers and secret service men in the WC, and 5) Film of gunsmoke floating around. To you, even though there is evidence that shows a shot from the pergola, it is somehow not there, because all the evidence is somehow wrong.
If the evidence is wrong, show proof instead of your opinion.
You have an issue with facts, why?