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

The Idiot Backes is only reinforcing my point. The letter from J. Edgar Hoover to the WC about Lovelady was included as Warren Commission Document 457.

And the photos of Lovelady were attached to it. 

Somehow, Harold Weisberg was able to access the Documents because he obtained the letter and the photo and wrote about them. And it shows what a hero he was because it's obvious that neither the Warren Commission nor anyone else in government wanted the public to get any image of Lovelady with which to compare to the Man in the Doorway, whom they thought looked so much, and dressed so much, like Lee Harvey Oswald.

But, you don't appreciate that heroic side of Harold Weisberg, do you, Backes, and it's because you are a vicious fucking Kennedy-killer, so soaked are you in the blood of John Kennedy. 

Whether it was within an entity called an "Appendix" or an entity called "Warren Commission Documents" only means that I was right that a very concerted effort was made to keep prying eyes away from those images of Lovelady. 

And note that no use was ever made of those photos by the Warren Commission. They could have done photographic comparisons. They could have hired experts to do photographic comparisons. And note that the HSCA never used or even acknowledged the existence of those FBI photos of Lovelady. Here, they had photos of Lovelady from February 1964, within 3 months of the assassination, taken by the FBI no less, and yet, they ditched them and instead used a photo of Lovelady from the 1950s. 

  
The above picture was taken directly from the HSCA Final Report. Why did they prefer to use an image from the 1950s where Lovelady looks like he's about 18 years old when they had better images from early 1964? And you should also note that the above picture from the HSCA was left-to-right flipped. It should have looked like this:

Why did they flip it, Backes? And why did they use a flipped image of Oswald?

But, you don't see anything wrong with any of this, do you Backes? This is all innocent to you, isn't it Backes? 

Go back to the beginning: The World thought it saw Oswald in the doorway. Authorities quickly announced that it was another employee Billy Lovelady. But, they never intended to prove it with images. They never intended to release any. But then, as the scandal grew, they released a torrent except Lovelady never looked the same way twice:

And don't forget this classic:

And what about this one?

What do you say, Backes? Same guy?

Officialdom- the same Officialdom that you say faked a bus ride and a cab ride for Oswald and faked long swaths of WC testimony- says that they're all the same guy. I want to hear you say that they are all the same guy. Put your fucking name to it, Backes.

This whole Lovelady fiasco has been revolting and digusting since the day it started over 50 years ago. But go ahead and endorse it, Backes, in all its gory details. Show your true colors. Show that Anonymous was right in every word he said about you. No, that wasn't me. That came in, and I'm glad it did. And if you're listening, Anonymous, and you have more to say about Joseph Backes, you can write to me oswaldinnocent@yahoo.com