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

Note: Beggin' Backes will never get this.

One more thing: Steve Haydon brought up the issue of honesty, and he accused me of being dishonest. 

Well, I'm just posting these images. I haven't done anything dishonest to them.



To say that they match, as the same cuff would to itself- that would be dishonest, if anybody tried to claim it. They are clearly different cuffs.

And that means, they are clearly different shirts. 

But, the shirt on the left is one that Lovelady posed in in 1976, claiming, at that time, that it was the one he wore on 11/22/63. But, the image on the right is reportedly him on 11/22/63, and the shirt is different. 

And that means that somebody was lying; somebody was being dishonest. 

Now, if Lovelady was lying, if he didn't wear that shirt on 11/22/63, then there is no reason to believe that he wore the one on the right either. Therefore, it means that both are lies, and he didn't wear either shirt. 

Can you see the logic of that? Because I can explain it to you further if you need help. It's not tenable that he actually wore the one on the right if he posed in the one on the left, because if he wore the one on the right, he'd have posed in it.  

And likewise, if that isn't Lovelady on the right, if that picture is a lie, then Lovelady must have been lying when he posed in the shirt that was very much like it. 

So, what logic dictates is that both are bogus; both are lies. On 11/22/63, Lovelady didn't wear the shirt on the left, and he didn't wear the one on the right.  Both are lies.