10 Webster Ave. , Apt. 1-2
                                                        Somerville, Mass.  02143
                                                                  August 9, 1992
Editor, Commentary
165 East 56th Street
New York, NY 10022

Dear Editor;

    Commentary owes its readers and the public an apology. Don't magazines have

fact checkers? You published Jacob Cohen's propaganda in your June 1992 issue

without bothering to check a single fact. So numerous are his errors that I can

not address them all in this brief letter. It would take an article twice as

long as his, which of course - in the interest of fairness - you would never

publish. It is obvious that Cohen has not studied the evidence, or he would not

keep making so many obvious and simple mistakes. Simple stupidity can not

explain such a pattern of deliberate propaganda.

    Cohen's most obvious error, which then leads to other erroneous conclusions,

is his misidentification of Zapruder's position on the grassy knoll. Zapruder

was not behind the picket fence; he was 44' feet in front of the fence. Anyone

who knows anything about the JFK assassination knows that simple fact. If I were

an uncharitable person, I would stipulate that this mistake shows that Cohen

does not research carefully and this alone should disqualify him from

participating in the debate. But I know that he knows the difference and did not

intend to deceive. He merely became a little confused and overlooked an obvious

error.

    While I agree that "Badgeman" is an optical illusion, Cohen misidentifies

the grassy knoll gunman's location to belittle the possibility of any gunman

shooting from the knoll. "Badgeman" would have been behind the fence, almost

directly behind Zapruder. The real grassy knoll gunman, as independently located

by the HSCA acoustical study, is seen in Mary Moorman's Polaroid, taken just

after - not before - the head shot, behind the fence and 10' up from the corner.

(see diagram) Notice that Cohen does not tell you about that real person. He was

well-hidden and appeared only briefly. Yet, a few people reported seeing him,

just as only a few of the 692+ people reported seeing a gunman in the TSBD.












    Why must the burden of seeing the grassy knoll gunman rest on Zapruder?

Zapruder was concentrating on filming the President's motorcade driving down Elm

Street. His eye never left the camera's viewfinder. To hunt for potential

assassins he would have needed to stop filming and turn around on that narrow

pedestal, not a pleasant task given his vertigo. Show me any evidence on the

Zapruder film or in photos which show Zapruder filming that he stopped his

filming to look around for assassins. His secretary was behind him to his left,

holding him steady by the waist. If she had glance to the right, about all she

would have seen would have been Zapruder. If she had let go of Zapruder to turn

around, Zapruder probably would have fallen off the pedestal. Then his film

would have looked more like Malcolm Couch's.

    Yet, in fact, Zapruder did identify the location of the grassy knoll gunman.

Zapruder said that the shot came from behind him and that he heard the shot

whistle past his right ear. That would place the origin somewhere near the

picket fence. Notice, again, that Cohen does not reveal that information.

    Now, just a few brief words about the "single-bullet" theory. It was the

Warren Commission, David Belin especially, which imposed that 5.6 second limit

for three shots, not the critics. They assumed that Z313 was the last shot of

only 3. They desperately wanted the other 2 shots to have been fired by Oswald

from his sniper's nest in the TSBD. Because it appeared that JFK was unhurt

before disappearing behind the sign, they assumed that the earliest possible hit

would have been at Z210. If the Zapruder camera was running at 18.3 frames per

second, those 103 frames gave them only 5.6 seconds. JFK was clearly hit by

Z225. If Z225 had been the second shot, then 2.3 seconds before that would have

been at about Z183. But Oswald's trajectory to the limousine was blocked by a

tree from Z166 to Z209, so the Warren Commission thought it was unlikely that

the first shot would have been through the tree. That is why they thought the

first shot came no earlier than Z210. That is the origin of the 5.6 second limit











for three shots. If Cohen is such a great defender of the Warren Commission, let

him defend their logic on that.

    Interestingly, Cohen seems to take heart in the fact that even the HSCA

endorsed the "single-bullet" theory. However, there is an interesting twist

here. The Warren Commission stated that the only time when both JFK and Connally

could have been in the right alinement for the "single bullet" was between

Zapruder frames 210 and 226, when they were hidden from Zapruder's view by a

sign (Then how the hell could anyone see this supposed perfect alinement?). Then

the HSCA tells us that its match-up of the acoustical data places the timing of

the "single-bullet" shot at Z190, the only time when JFK and Connally were in

perfect alinement for a "single bullet", when JFK and Connally are clearly

visible and clearly not in perfect alinement, plus the shot would have to go

through the tree. It seems that no matter which Zapruder frame you choose, JFK

and Connally are always in perfect alinement for the "single-bullet" theory,

regardless of how impossible the shot.

    I don't expect that Commentary will allow a debate on the issues and

evidence, but at least you should be made aware of the factual errors in Jacob

Cohen's article. Please spend a little money and hire a fact checker.






                                                                      Sincerely,




                                                                W. Anthony Marsh