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

 Here is another comparison of Oswald (on the left) and his double (on the right). They look similar, and at a glance, one might think that the double was Oswald, especially if you were looking at him alone without comparing him to the real Oswald.

But, when you do compare them- and I mean the way fingerprints are compared- you see the differences. Their hair is different. Their noses are different. And their ears are different.

Even the lips are different because Oswald had a very thin upper lip, but a prominent lower lip, but we don't see that on the double.

These are more than subtle differences, but we live in a world in which subtle differences can make a big difference. For instance, what radiologists notice on x-rays, is often much more subtle than this. The same is true of dentists looking at dental x-rays.

They are two different men, and it's only in the evil world of JFKing that anyone would claim that they are the same man. And it shows you what an evil world this is.

And it is a very corrupt world because people make claims, based not on honest, objective, unbiased analysis, but on their long-held beliefs and biases. They are stubborn and defiant to the point of absurdity.

So, I tell you, that if you can't see that these are two different men, then you are either lying, or, you are turning off the rational part of your mind, You are being stubborn and defiant to the end, as the ship you're on is sinking. And perhaps subconsciously, you realize the implications of this, that it means that Oswald was innocent; framed and innocent.

The fact that, in a general way, they look alike doesn't matter because they wouldn't have done it unless they could get the double looking close. And this isn't the only instance of it. It's widely admitted that Saddam Hussein had body doubles who rode in parades and waved at crowds for him. Stalin, Castro, and Sukarno were all known to use body doubles. During the 2016 campaign, Hillary Clinton was accused of using a body double too.

And there had to be Oswald doubles because of all the false Oswald sightings, which there are a lot of. I'll cite just one: the claim that he went to shooting ranges to practice and would shoot diagonally at other people's targets, just to be an a-hole. It is ridiculous. Oswald had no car, and supposedly, his rifle was hidden in Ruth Paine's garage. Also, Oswald had no friends. No friends, no friends, no friends, no friends, no friends, no friends. Get that in your head. So, somehow, he got out to Irving, and he snuck into Ruth Paine's garage, searched for and found the rifle, assembled it, and somehow got to the range, then he returned the rifle to Ruth Paine's garage, sneaking it in and hiding it again, and then somehow made his way home. And that was supposedly weeks before the assassination. But, the story also goes that Oswald didn't get the idea to kill Kennedy until he saw the motorcade route in the newspaper, just days before. So, what was he practicing for prior to that? What need did he have to do that?

And think about Oswald's priorities at that time. Why did he return to Dallas? Because his family was there. Why did he hitch rides with Frazer out to Irving on the weekends? Because that's where his family was, and they were his priority. He was at a point in his life that going to the rifle range to practice shooting, just for the heck of it, had to be the farthest thing from his mind.

David Reitzes is a lone-nutter, and I have done battle with him. And I'll battle him again, any place and any time. But, even though he supports the official story, he admits that Oswald never went to the rifle range. Doesn't it mean that someone who looked very much like Oswald went there and did what Oswald was said to do? And there is no innocent explanation for that.