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

I never said there were two different sources; I said there were two different documents, that the FBI put it in writing- twice- that Lovelady said he wore a red and white vertical striped shirt and blue jeans. 

And whether it's a "report" or a "letter" doesn't matter a bit. You're just quibbling over words, and it changes nothing. 

The fact is that the short letter that is untitled but signed by Gemberling and Horton is a different document than the longer report which is titled and unsigned. Physically, they are different entities, and they are vastly different in content. Even if the source of the information in the long report (about what Lovelady said concerning his clothes) was Gemberling and Horton, it still constitutes a second time that the FBI put it in writing. 

Backes says the Washington Post was a morning paper. So, they didn't come out with an Extra Edition? Are you sure? Because a lot of papers did. Seems odd that the Benton Harbor News-Palladium would come out with an Extra Edition for Kennedy but the Washington Post wouldn't. 

But no matter. Here is the Washington Evening Star. They covered the assassination, and they must have been hooked into the AP because they published the Altgens7 photo on the 11/22 front page.

     
And you can be damn sure they didn't put the Altgens6 inside because if they had, we'd know about it. So, why no Altgens6? It's only the most iconic photo of the JFK assassination. 

And no, Backes: in that report, Mike Shapiro did NOT say it was wired to the world. 

It doesn't say a word about it being wired to the world. On the contrary, it says it was first kept within the AP, and apparently for quite a while. You can't make stuff up, Backass. If you're referring to something else, then say so. But, as for this report, it clearly states that there was limited distribution of the Altgens photo at first, and it was kept within the AP family. It's plain English, and you're plain stupid. And, you are wickedly dishonest. I meant what I said: you would sooner destroy evidence than admit it was Oswald in the doorway. That's how warped your values are.