Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque



The Desperate Backass is now claiming that I messed with the aspect ratio of Gorilla Man to make him look wider. It is nonsense.

This collage was taken directly from the OIC website. 

 

Here's the link: http://www.oswald-innocent.com/oswald.html

It's the killers who mess with the aspect ratios to falsify the images and fix their errors, as they did here:

Now, here's the funny part: the Idiot Backes defends what you see above. He sees no foul play in it. How does he explain such a disparity? I don't know exactly except that he claims that it's innocent, that there was no subterfuge involved. Yet, he accuses me of adjusting the aspect ratio of Gorilla Man to cheat.

Backes, you are lowest, dimmest dullard there ever was. I have no need to alter Gorilla Man's aspect ratio. His deviations from Doorman are so great, there is no need to do anything to increase them. Here is what we say about it on the OIC site:

First, Doorman's shirt is sprawled open, and Gorilla Lovelady's shirt is not. This was supposed to be just a scant few minutes after the assassination and essentially in the same place- outside the TSBD. Are we to assume that Lovelady had the frame of mind to re-configure himself in the immediate aftermath of the assassination? And if so, don't you think that somebody should have asked him about it? Nobody did.

Second, doesn't the man on the right look quite a bit stockier? Don't you have the sense that he is quite a lot heavier? We never had that sense when comparing Doorman to Oswald, where they always seemed to be the same size and the same build.

Third, when you compare the shirt patterns, both look "varied" and "complex" but they are certainly not identical. This isn't horseshoes or hand grenades, so close doesn't count. Furthermore, we now know that the splotchyness of Doorman's shirt is due to haze and distortion. That's all it is. Without that, his shirt just looks grainy. And notice that Gorilla Lovelady has pattern all the way up to and including his collar. Now look at Doorman's upper right side (on our left). Doesn't it just look bland and grainy, like Oswald's? In no version of the Altgens photo does Doorman's shirt look checkered. Checkered means horizontal and vertical lines crossing and forming boxes. Gorilla Lovelady's shirt is strewn with boxes; there is not a single box on Doorman's shirt.

Fourth, look at the left side of Doorman's shirt on our right, the margin of it. Doesn't it look thicker and more substantial than the flimsy margin on the other side? Doesn't it look about twice as thick? It was twice as thick, as it was folded over into a long lapel on that side. But now look at Gorilla Lovelady. Do you see a lapel on him? No, it just a regular shirt with a regular collar and the standard lay. But, Doorman's shirt looks more like what we saw on Oswald with the long jacket-like fold down the left side.

Fifth, doesn't Doorman's face have a rather soft look, whereas Gorilla Lovelady's has a very hard look? Granted, those are subjective qualities, but still, they are discernible. The guy on the right looks like a caveman; the guy on the left does not. Both visually in terms of specifics, and intuitively in terms of the general impression, these two look like different men.

Now, with all that working for us, what need would we have to mess with Lovelady's aspect ratio? That would be overkill. It's already as clear as a bell that they are different men. Very different men. And I don't have to cheat to prove it. It's way past the threshold of certainty. Different men. Different men. Different men.