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

There is a new article by Jim Fetzer and Larry Rivera on Veterans Today. And it's very interesting. Larry found evidence of multiple reports of motorcycle cops racing up the Grassy Knoll after the shooting. But, that quickly got deleted from the record. And Jim lays out the reasons why Altgens 7 must have been altered.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/11/17/the-grassy-knoll-rider-and-jfk-limo-back-seat-just-how-crowded-was-it/ 

But, I will let you read what they wrote without trying to give you a capsule version.  And you should definitely read it. 

However, their article includes this image of a newspaper, and I want to talk about it. 

So, that is the Oklahoma City Times, and it was Friday, November 22. And you see that it's the front page with the Altgens7 photo boldly featured. 

But, if they had in their possession Altgens6, if Altgens6 was faxed to them at the very same time, then why didn't they use Altgens6? 

There is no comparison between the two photos. Altgens7 just shows a guy, who isn't even recognizable, riding on the back of the limo. And we also see Jackie, and she, of course, is recognizable. But, we don't see JFK. 

In contrast, Altgens6 shows us JFK, and it shows him reacting to being shot, where he is bringing his hands up to his neck because he was shot in the neck. And it shows Jackie going to his side, trying to help him, trying to figure out what's wrong. It also shows Connally turning. It also shows the Secret Service agents peering back ominously. And, as they made a point of saying in the caption, it even shows (presumably) the "source of the shots". 

Now, considering all that action and all the content in Altgens6, all that meat, if you will, why would they publish Altgens7 instead of it? 

If there was an editor who was staring at Altgens6 and Altgens7 at the same time, why on Earth would he think for one second that Altgens7 was the better choice; the more riveting photo?

And don't tell me that I can't know the thinking of an individual editor. There is an objective process involved here. It comes down to information, and there is a lot more of it in Altgens6 than Altgens7. It's a mathematical thing; more is better than less. Any reasonable person, including any reasonable editor, would go with Altgens6 over Altgens7, and that's a given; it is an indisputable fact. And the very fact that that Oklahoma paper shows Altgens7 can be taken as proof-positive that the editor did not have Altgens6 in his possession. 

And of course, this is just one of many newspapers which published Altgens7 on 11/22/63 but not Altgens6. Why? BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE ALTGENS6. It was being altered, and that took time. 

It is probably true that the Altgens6 photo is the most altered photo in the history of political journalism.