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

Backass, I don't know how you found out about my hiring Mission Possible to investigate you, but I know it was through illegal means. You broke the law, Backes. I didn't break the law by hiring an investigator, but you broke the law by hacking into my email or my online banking account to discover the transaction. 

And you put it in writing, you stupid fool. And I have a copy of the letter in which you admit acquiring information which you could not possibly have obtained through legal means. Your letter of admission is like a confession, you stupid moron.

I am delighted that you admitted sending the letter. I was waiting for you to do so.  

And, your long rambling letter only shows how insane you are, expounding to the investigator and trying to win his sympathy. There, there now. You are just plain stupid, Backes.   

And no, Backass: the point is that there were many hundreds of evening papers, likely more than 1000, yet only a small handful published the Altgens photo. And, don't you dare suggest that some editors didn't consider it newsworthy. It was only a photo of the assassination in action, with Kennedy reacting to being shot. As your friend from Maryland bpete said, it's the only professional photo there is of the assassination. There is no question that it was newsworthy. 

And let's get something straight, moron: When we point to anomalies in the Altgens photo which can only be the result of human intervention, that is, deliberate alterations, you can't dispute it by making claims about a timeline. There is only ONE way to dispute it, and that is to dispute the existence of the alterations, to dispute that there are any unnatural elements in the photo, with "unnatural" referring to something that is not the spontaneous result of the photographic process with the camera, the film, the normal developing process, and that's it; nothing else; with no acts of sabotage to the picture. That's what you have to do.

I list 7 anomalies on the Anomalies page of the OIC website, and even if I was wrong about 6 of them and only right about 1, I still win. The hurdle you have to climb is to disprove every single one.

http://oswald-innocent.com/anomalies.html

That's the burden you have. And, you can't sweep it all under the rug by waxing on about a fictitious timeline. 

We even have documented evidence that the Altgens photo was first wired to AP headquarters in New York and then on to other AP offices around the country. 

The idea that the claim about the Altgens6 photo having been wired to the whole world at 1:03 being proven is laughable. You haven't begun to prove it. All you've done is claim it. You don't know the meaning of the word "proof." 

Now, if you have any working brain cells left, I suggest you hire a good lawyer. You committed a crime, Backes. And, you put it in writing.