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

If you believe that Oswald was framed and innocent, if you believe that the official story is a complete lie, then you have to recognize that they had a job to do, which was to sell the lie. And they surely would have used not only words but images to do that. 

Are we to believe that they were telling this awful, despicable lie but that all the movies and images supported the official story? That no image got captured that conflicted with the official story or failed to support its claims? That nothing had to be altered, that everything photographed and filmed did not conflict with the story they were telling? 

That would have been an incredible amount of good  luck for the conspirators, and it goes way beyond credulity. Isn't it far more likely that they altered film and photo images and that they anticipated the need to do so? 

I am drawing a distinction here between LNs and Oswald-innocent CTs. I say Oswald-innocent CTs because I don't include those who say there was a conspiracy that included Oswald as shooter. That I consider to be totally untenable because Oswald was not an accomplished marksman and he was no kind of assassin. The only shooting he admitted to doing post-Marines was some hunting with a shotgun in Russia- which has nothing in common with the assassination attempt from the 6th floor. The idea that conspirators would have chosen Oswald to be shooting in the direction of Jackie and Nellie and the others in the limo whom they wanted unharmed is untenable. There was a great big world of professional killers they had to choose from, and they never would have settled on Oswald as shooter. It's insane to think so. He had never done anything like this before in his life. He had never shot at a moving target before that we know of- in his life. Who assigns such a person to be a Presidential assassin? It's crazy to even suggest it. 

Therefore, Oswald-guilty CTs can go straight to Hell for being utterly stupid and nonsensical as far as I'm concerned. It is simply preposterous to think that the Mafia or the CIA would have assigned Oswald to be a shooter. 

But, for the Oswald-innocent CTs, there is not only no grounds to reject the idea of movie alterations, but there is every reason to consider them. It was, after all, a selling operation. They were selling a story. And they were using movies to sell it. Just listen to the verbage that went along with the movie as Oswald was being led to the homicide division.  Consider this:

"In Dallas Police headquarters, Lee Oswald is booked for the slaying of Officer Tippit. Tight-lipped, bruised from his battle with his captors, he is led through a gauntlet of newsmen. And the world gets its first look at Lee Harvey Oswald, suspected cop killer.  But now, from articles in his pocket, police make the startling discovery that this is the missing Book Depository employee and immediately send investigators to question his wife. As examination proves that his pistol fired the shots killing Tippit, evidence swiftly mounts that he has committed this day, not one murder, but two."

First, note that the above sounds like a script. It sounds like a carefully worded and very theatrical script and not the spontaneous utterance of a reporter. And what articles in his pocket were they referring to? The bus transfer ticket? 

The above was recited during the procession through City Hall culminating with the Lovelady walk-by. You saw the time on the clock: 2:01 pm. He was just arrested at the theater at 1:45, right? So 15 minutes later, they had it all wrapped up that he killed both Tippit and Kennedy?

That script above is pure propaganda, isn't it? I am speaking to Oswald-innocent CTs. Well, if they were propagandizing with the script they were reciting in conjunction with the movie, why not consider that they were propagandizing with the movie itself?  Just as they were bending the minds of the public with their words and with their thoughts, that they would also try to bend the minds of the public with their images. They were distorting reality and brainwashing with words, but they were also distorting reality and brainwashing with images- altered images. 

Here is the film, and it starts at 1 hour, 5 minutes, and 55 seconds. 

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxdoPaKJ64o&list=PL0O5WNzrZqIMUXlOqDYq423XHJbygpllj

Watch and listen and then ask yourself if at 2:01 PM, just 15 minutes after his arrest, if it was possible or reasonable to be speaking as conclusively as that reporter was speaking about Oswald being guilty of two murders. Was it not propaganda? Was it not mind control? What does it sound like? Does it or does it not sound like a script? 

Well, if the words and ideas were carefully-crafted and cunning propaganda and mind control, then why wouldn't they be just as crafty and just as cunning about the images that accompanied their words? 

We need to open our minds to the idea that all the images were carefully crafted. There was nothing pure and innocent about any of the images that we were allowed to see. 

Those who want to say that they lied terribly and viciously with words and ideas but made no attempt to lie with images are merely being stubborn and stupid. Oswald-innocent CTs need to face reality and admit that they definitely messed with the images.