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

There's a common dismissal that people will use who are dismissive of Oswald in the doorway. It is to say that "two government investigations determined it wasn't Oswald but Lovelady."  But, do you know what the operative word is there? It is the word: government. They were government investigations. Now, if you support the government's whole story of what happened, then it follows that you would respect government investigations. But, I am talking about people who reject the official story of what happened. So, even though they reject the government story of what happened, they want to accept the government investigation of this issue. 

But, if you don't accept the government's story that the crazed lone nut Oswald did it, then you have no reason to accept any of the government's work on the matter. 

And it's important to remember that if Oswald didn't kill Kennedy, then it means the government killed Kennedy. There's no one else it could be. The Mafia? Well, the Mafia had a role in it; they were brought into it; but, it wasn't their operation. The Mafia couldn't change the motorcade route. The Mafia couldn't control the press and make them push the official story. The Mafia couldn't introduce phony evidence and get it to stick. Only government could do that, and the FBI was government. How and why would there be a big cover-up, that continues to this day, to protect the Mafia? 

No, if Oswald didn't kill Kennedy, then the government killed Kennedy, and it was a coup d'etat. Those are your choices, and there is nothing in-between.  And that's why if you know that Oswald didn't kill Kennedy that you have no basis to trust any government investigation. 

And when you look at what the government did the two times it investigated the Doorman issue, you realize how corrupt it was. 

The Warren Commission relied entirely on witnesses to vouch for who Doorman was. They had images of Lovelady that were taken by the FBI for the purpose of comparing him to Doorman. They even unbuttoned Lovelady's shirt to imply that that's how it was on 11/22/63 even though Lovelady never said his shirt was unbuttoned that day. 

The unbuttoning on Lovelady is very important because it shows that they were consciously trying to duplicate the look of Doorman. It's a Benjamin Braddock moment. 'There is Lovelady, standing the way he did on 11/22 with his shirt unbuttoned." I think that someone may have pushed the shirt aside where the arrow is to create a gap artificially. Of course, the two men are miles apart. Lovelady's shirt isn't even long-sleeved. And how ironic that Lovelady had the habit of clasping his hands in back while Oswald clasped his hands in front.   

But, the Warren Commission didn't use that photo of Lovelady. They just got a few TSBD employees to say that Doorman was Lovelady. But, they didn't pick those employees randomly. They screened them ahead of time, and that's where the FBI came in. Do you realize that just about all of the witnesses who testified to the WC were first screened by the FBI? So, when Joseph Ball asked Buell Frazier who Doorman was, he did so knowing beforehand that Frazier was going to say Lovelady. And the same went for Danny Arce. But, with Lovelady, Ball had been given no assurances that he would cooperate. And that's why instead of just asking him who Doorman was, Ball cunningly had Lovelady "draw an arrow to himself." And it turned into a fiasco because Lovelady drew an arrow to another figure, the one we call Black Hole Man. He drew it in the black space of the enclosure of Black Hole Man's arms, and with a black pen, and we just got lucky that a little bit of it overlapped his forearm. 

The big arrow on the left is definitely Frazier's arrow, and the only other mark on the photo is that little line on the forearm of Black Hole Man. And really, the whole image of Black Hole Man is bizarre because visoring one's eyes with one's hands can't possibly blacken out your whole face. "They" blackened out his face, and they also removed the vertical stripes from his shirt. 

Lovelady really did tell the FBI that he wore that short-sleeved shirt on 11/22, and we have another image of him in that shirt on 11/22.

That is from the Malcolm Couch film which was taken about 20 seconds after the shooting, as Lovelady was heading for the railway yard with Shelley, and there was a throng of people who did that. 

What about the HSCA? They brought in Robert Groden, who is supposedly an Oswald defender, cough, cough, and he vouched for Doorman being Lovelady. But, his photographic comparisons included not a single image of Oswald and Doorman, and it's because those collages scream that we are seeing the same man wearing the same clothes. 

Admittedly, the tops of the head look different, where Doorman's has a simian shape in contrast to Oswald's geometric shape, and the hair looks very different. But, that's what they changed. They weren't going to just say that he was Lovelady. They had to do something to "Lovelady-ify" him, and that's what they did. Look at it without that. The match is perfect in every way: the face, the features, the slenderness, the sunken t-shirt, the outer shirt. 

And no, there is no "plaid pattern" on Doorman's shirt. The contrast that you see is due to light reflection as well photographic haze and distortion from the gross enlargement that it is. And they may have added a line or two to throw us off. But, it's nothing like plaid. And then, to deter us from Oswald's signature hand-clasping in front, they tried to make it look like the black man his his arm going up in front of Doorman, like he's hailing a tamale vendor. But, it's ridiculous. How could his skin exhibit the exact same greyscale as his supposedly rolled up shirt? And they put the thumb in the wrong place. His thumb should be on the other side. The whole thing is fake; breathtakingly fake. The arrogance of these people to do such a thing. And then there is the stupidity of those who actually believe this shit, and I mean both LNS who believe and supposed Oswald defenders who believe it. Shame on them.