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

This is the collage of Oswald in the doorway displayed on the home page of the OIC website. bpete claims that both images are "heavily altered." The image on the right isn't altered at all, that I know of. I certainly didn't alter it. And the image on the left was simply colorized in brown. And, I am not even the one who colorized it. It was bpete's friend Robin Unger who did it. bpete refers it to as being "heavily altered." Do you think colorizing amounts to heavy altering? I don't think so. And furthermore, it's a very conspicuous change. Everyone knows that the Altgens photo was black and white. So, nobody is trying to get away with anything by colorizing it. No one is pulling a fast one. No one is slipping something in without telling. And, the fact is, that the world is in color, and his shirt was brown. So, in this case, the "heavily altered" image is more true to life than the black and white one.

But again, I don't consider colorizing a black and white photo to be heavily altering it. 

But, I want you to see just how stupid some people can be. 

No where in the two photos above, are you seeing Oswald in the doorway of the TSBD. The photo on your left is a crop of an enlarged section of the Altgens photo, showing Billy Lovelady, the profile of a man that appears to be Carl Jones, standing in front of Lovelady and possibly Bill Shelley, standing behind Lovelady.
The photo has had color tints added.

What is stupid about this (besides making "nowhere" two words) is the presumption that I expect people to accept that it's Oswald on the left just because I'm telling them so- the way he's telling them that he's Lovelady. It's obvious to any intelligent observer that those are the same clothes on both sides of the collage. It's the same outer shirt, that is largely unbuttoned on the left and completely unbuttoned on the right, over an exposed white t-shirt with a sunken collar. So, if he's claiming that that's Lovelady on the left, then surmised in that claim is the claim that Oswald and Lovelady dressed exactly the same that day. There are simply no dealbreakers there between Oswald and Doorman in regard to clothing. Is it really true that Oswald and Lovelady dressed exactly alike that day? No. Of course not. It's not like they were wearing uniforms. 

Furthermore, there are no dealbreakers of any kind between Oswald and Doorman in regard to ANYTHING. Their size and builds look exactly the same. The shape of theirs faces look the same. Their eyes look the same, including their stares. The length of their necks is the same. There is simply nothing that conflicts between them. There isn't one thing that you can point to on Doorman and say that the corresponding feature on Oswald is different. Nothing.

To put it in plain parlance: they look an awful lot alike, and in no way, do they look unlike. So, did Oswald and Lovelady look that much alike? No, they did not, and there is no reason to think they would take identical pictures.

How could those two guys be imaged on the same day and come out looking exactly the same, as much so as in the collage? Isn't it obvious that Lovelady was a lot heavier, stockier? Isn't it obvious that he didn't have the deep-set eyes and intense stare that Oswald had? Isn't it obvious that their t-shirts were very different? And note that Lovelady always wore a t-shirt like the one he's wearing there. Whose t-shirt are we seeing in the Altgens photo?

The very idea that that much likeness- in the man and the clothing-existed between Oswald and Lovelady is PREPOSTEROUS. It is insane. And to just glibly say that that's Lovelady on the left just because the moron wants to say it? That's just plain stupid. 

You know, if he were a smarter man, bpete would know that if a smart person looks at what he wrote, his words, that the smart person will know that I am right. 

So, go ahead and leave up what you wrote, bpete. You can't hurt me with it. Who is it going to impress? Backes? O'Blazney? You're dimwits, the three of you. Here's who you remind me of: