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

I was asked whether there is anything wrong with Ruby's index finger in this image, if the tip of the index is missing. And it's not. It's there. Notice how long the segment in the middle is. That's two bones, the first and second digits. And the one beyond is the third. 

But, this is an important image of Ruby. He's at a Dallas Parade the year is 1960. So, 3 years before the assassination. He has taken off his hat to comb his hair. And what you see him do is comb the right side and then comb the left side, and he never runs the comb over the top. Obviously, he knew he didn't have enough hair up there to bother with. And if you look closely at what we're seeing, it is ridiculous. If he had a thick tuft of hair right in the front and was bald all behind it (which would be an extremely unusual way to go bald) why would he wear it so short? And why wouldn't he comb it? So that was probably added. But, you can see how bald he was in 1960. And you know that age-related, male pattern baldness is progressive. It only goes in one direction, towards losing more hair. There are temporary hair losses: such as those resulting from high temperature infections, from chemotherapy,  or from severe nutritional deficiencies which then get corrected. But, male pattern baldness only goes one way. So, if he was that bald in 1960, how could he have all the hair we see on him in his post-assassination photos? And what gives it away is that it doesn't include all of them. There are a few which show the true bald state of his head, and it makes the others look ridiculous and demonstrably evil. 

Do you get it that even this is a smoking gun that Ruby was framed?