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

Backes, you stupid pluck:

The number of daily newspapers in the United States has declined over the past half-century, according to Editor & Publisher, the trade journal of American newspapers. In particular, the number of evening newspapers has fallen by 50% since 1970, while morning editions and Sunday editions have grown.^[3]

For comparison, in 1950, there were 1,772 daily papers (and 1,450, or about 70%, of them were evening papers) while in 2000, there were 1,480 daily papers (and 766—or about half—of them were evening papers.

Here's the link from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspapers_in_the_United_States

So, there were 1450 Evening papers in 1950. How many were there in 1963? I don't know, but let's say it declined to 1200. Do you really think it declined more rapidly than that? I doubt it. 

So, if the Altgens6 photo was faxed to the world at 1:03 PM, it should have appeared in every evening newspaper with a connection to AP. Instead, there was only a small handful out of those 1200 that published it.

And if the Altgens6 photo went out at 1:03, why did CBS wait until 6:30 PM that evening to show it? Why didn't they show it earlier? Why wait? They could have shown it earlier in the afternoon and then shown it again at 6:30. Why not?

There is the evidence that the vast majority of afternoon and evening papers did NOT publish the Altgens photo on 11/22.   

There is the evidence that the head of AP News said that it appeared in Saturday papers, and he said it without qualification or exception.

There is the evidence that not a single major metropolitan newspaper published the Altgens6 photo on 11/22. Not any paper from New York, Washington, Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston or other major metropolitan area, who of course have the most resources, the best connections, the fastest printers, the most access, etc.etc.etc. Not even the Dallas Times Herald, a late paper totally synced with the AP, did it. 

Instead, little papers like the Sheboygan Press and the Montana Standard did it. What's wrong with that picture? Plenty. 

There is the evidence that Roy Schaeffer said that the Altgens6 did not reach his paper, the Dayton Daily News, until 7 AM on Saturday November 23. He, himself, received it and immediately saw the unmistakable signs of photographic alteration.

And there is the evidence that the Altgens photo underwent extensive alteration which Dr. David Wrone described as "crude". And altering takes time. 

You're stupid, Backes. You were born stupid, and you're going to stay that way.