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

Yeah, I saw the endnote, Backes. But that, presumably, was just a reference to a source. It wasn't going to show me a picture of the "scan of the original wire photo" for Altgens6 like the one Gary Mack provided for Altgens7. 

And if it exists, doesn't it seem like Gary Mack would have and should have provided IT rather than the one for Altgens7?

Let's remember something: Richard Trask's book is that of an apologist, a shill, a mouthpiece for the official story. And the official story is a lie. What happened is that the "national security state" (as per Vincent Salandria) killed Kennedy, and they framed Oswald for it. And they also killed Tippit and framed him for that. And then they killed Oswald in order to silence him and whatever defense attorney he would have had. So, it was a lot of killing and a lot of lying. Then, Joseph Backes says they also framed Oswald for riding a bus and cab, so that meant more lying. 

So, in the midst of all that lying, why would you believe the official story about the handling of the Altgens photo? Because it involved the AP? But, the US media was involved in the cover-up from the very beginning. That's not an OIC idea. It's not a Ralph Cinque idea. A great many researchers say it. Here, for example, is an article about it by Roger Stone entitled, The Establishment Media and the JFK Assassination.  

http://townhall.com/columnists/rogerstone/2014/03/19/the-establishment-media-and-the-jfk-assassination-n1811500/page/full

Now, to my mind, there really isn't that much difference between killing Kennedy and covering for his killers, helping them get away with it. So yes, I think the US media was and is bloodied, and that includes the AP.

But, the point is: with so much lying about so very many things involving the assassination, why would you believe what they say about the handling of the Altgens photo? If they would lie about the other things, why wouldn't they lie about that?

Before there was an OIC, Dr. David Wrone stated in his 2003 book that the Altgens photo was "crudely" altered. I think it was a good choice of word, and it stayed with me. 

So, the idea that the Altgens photo was altered is not a Ralph Cinque idea either. Lots of people said it before me. 

But, realizing that the Altgens photo was altered, and realizing that the whole official story of the assassination is a mountain of lies, why should I be bound by what Richard Trask said about the handling of the Altgens photo? 

They were faking stuff photographically even before the assassination. Jack White showed us how they faked the Backyard photos, implanting Oswald's face over the body of another man who may have been Roscoe White. Well, if they had the mindset to do that even BEFORE the assassination, then surely they had a plan to do similar stuff AFTER the assassination. And they did.