Jump to content

New discovery concerning CE 369: Lovelady's arrow


Recommended Posts

Interesting post Ralph - welcome back

I my recent post on the thread Lovelady Was Wearing His Unbuttoned Shirt In Front Of The TSBD After The Assassination I explained I had some questions that for me render discussions about the shirt (and now the arrow) irrelevant until I can find answers,

Apologies for re-posting this from the other thread - but as this one has gone back to the same arguments, it seems appropriate here.

These may be basic, beginners questions and far below the usual level of debate here but, until I can reach some sort of 'clarity' on these points (something that makes at least some sense to me), much of what is being discussed here (and in the other thread) seems irrelevant.

I'm not going to re-post the entire thing but if you want to look at the detail, it was post 62.

Here is a summary and some additional comment as regards this possible finding. Right at the end you will find an answer to your question which I summarize as "if not part of the missing arrow, what is it?".

1. The figure in the doorway resembles Oswald to any casual observer

Why, if they altered the pic extensively, did they need to place Lovelady or anyone else resembling Oswald in the picture? Why not just obscure any identifying features on doorman including the shirt, as some claim was done elsewhere in the picture or, insert a composite random man in random shirt.

Extensively altering the photo only to leave an image that resembles Oswald would have been, in my opinion, just too much of a risk and one hell of a double-bluff. Until I get an answer for this one, I cannot accept extensive alteration to be the explanation of the anomalies we see in the photo.

Its ironic that a way out here is for you to say "yes it does look like we might have been wrong about the extent of alteration or whether there was alteration at all"

IF that is an arrow, you no longer need to claim alteration and my question goes away.

I am not anti alteration - but if it's there, this question needs to be answered.

2b - Who, other than Lovelady and Oswald themselves, places Lovelady and Oswald in the doorway? For instance, what did Bill Shelley have to say about being there with Oswald. This takes us back to question 1 (if they altered the image) why did they have to have an Oswald like figure in doorway at all.

The reason for this question is to find a possible answer to question 1. I have to confess I didn't know about Buell Frazier (who according to you), pointed to the wrong man but I have yet to hear what Bill Shelley or anyone else had to say on this.

3. The insistence that Doorman has to be one of 3 people, Oswald, Lovelady or Checkered Shirt Man –

........... (is this) considered to be accepted fact?

James Fetzer's conclusion is based on the exclusion of Lovelady and Checkered Shirt Man. Oswald is the only remaining candidate - therefore Doorman = Oswald

Even if we had a large, clear arrow this would still be a problem for me -

James Fetzer responded that

'We only have three choices: that it was Oswald (who told Will Fritz he was "out with Bill Shelley in front"), Billy Lovelady and Checkered Shirt Man, where neither of the latter two are viable candidates for the reasons that I have been hammering home in this thread and elsewhere. There really is no place else to go'

'With all the resources of the federal government at its disposal and knowledge of the personnel who worked at the Book Depository, surely the government could have established the identity of everyone who was in that doorway area, HAD IT BEEN SO DISPOSED.'

Here is the problem, why would the FBI (or anyone else) look for other candidates for doorman, when Lovelady himself confirmed it was him (as per the FBI memo). Lovelady not only told the FBI he was there, he pointed himself out in the photo as being Doorman. It was good enough for the FBI, especially as they believed they had identified the location of the shooter and that Oswald was that shooter, so (to them) it couldn't have been Oswald in the doorway.

Even with a large arrow, confirming Lovelady identified himself as not being doorman, there is still the possibility that Doorman is not Oswald or Checkered Shirt Man.

Possible Explanation for the Arrow

Could it be dirt or other contaminant?

Also, have you subjected the entire Altgens6 to the same level of scrutiny as the doorway zoom? I suspect that were you to do so, you may well find other pieces of arrow (and additional evidence of alteration).

All that said - I do think this deserves more research - Will it be difficult to get the (actual) marked photo examined, I'm not sure how else you will be able to confirm that what you have found is an arrow.

Edited by Lindsay Anderson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Large Jack White slides Wiegman Crops

While looking at this yesterday i noticed what appeared to be a person, possibly a woman slotted in between elbow man and black hole person ?

as i looked at the image yesterday, and started colorizing the elbow man and black hole person.

It appeared to me that there was something in between them in the Gap.

IF THIS IS THE CASE

THEN IT MAY ACCOUNT FOR ALL THREE WOMEN ON THE STEPS ?

Judith McCully, Avery Davis, Sarah Stanton

The woman standing on the left of Elbow Man

The Woman standing on the right of elbow man

And the woman refered to as a "Black Hole"

Edited by Robin Unger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Lindsay,

Why do you suggest Lovelady had confirmed THAT HE WAS DOORMAN?

The shirt he took to the FBI and was photographed wearing was a short-

sleeved, red-and-white vertically striped shirt, which looked NOTHING LIKE

THE SHIRT DOORMAN WAS WEARING. The point of Ralph's short piece

is to explain that the arrow that has been attributed to Lovelady in the past

was actually drawn by Frazier, where Ralph has found the arrow that Billy

actually drew. It was a "bait and switch". Did you simply misstate your view?

Jim

Interesting post Ralph - welcome back

I my recent post on the thread Lovelady Was Wearing His Unbuttoned Shirt In Front Of The TSBD After The Assassination I explained I had some questions that for me render discussions about the shirt (and now the arrow) irrelevant until I can find answers,

Apologies for re-posting this from the other thread - but as this one has gone back to the same arguments, it seems appropriate here.

These may be basic, beginners questions and far below the usual level of debate here but, until I can reach some sort of 'clarity' on these points (something that makes at least some sense to me), much of what is being discussed here (and in the other thread) seems irrelevant.

I'm not going to re-post the entire thing but if you want to look at the detail, it was post 62.

Here is a summary and some additional comment as regards this possible finding. Right at the end you will find an answer to your question which I summarize as "if not part of the missing arrow, what is it?".

1. The figure in the doorway resembles Oswald to any casual observer

Why, if they altered the pic extensively, did they need to place Lovelady or anyone else resembling Oswald in the picture? Why not just obscure any identifying features on doorman including the shirt, as some claim was done elsewhere in the picture or, insert a composite random man in random shirt.

Extensively altering the photo only to leave an image that resembles Oswald would have been, in my opinion, just too much of a risk and one hell of a double-bluff. Until I get an answer for this one, I cannot accept extensive alteration to be the explanation of the anomalies we see in the photo.

Its ironic that a way out here is for you to say "yes it does look like we might have been wrong about the extent of alteration or whether there was alteration at all"

IF that is an arrow, you no longer need to claim alteration and my question goes away.

I am not anti alteration - but if it's there, this question needs to be answered.

2b - Who, other than Lovelady and Oswald themselves, places Lovelady and Oswald in the doorway? For instance, what did Bill Shelley have to say about being there with Oswald. This takes us back to question 1 (if they altered the image) why did they have to have an Oswald like figure in doorway at all.

The reason for this question is to find a possible answer to question 1. I have to confess I didn't know about Buell Frazier (who according to you), pointed to the wrong man but I have yet to hear what Bill Shelley or anyone else had to say on this.

3. The insistence that Doorman has to be one of 3 people, Oswald, Lovelady or Checkered Shirt Man –

........... (is this) considered to be accepted fact?

James Fetzer's conclusion is based on the exclusion of Lovelady and Checkered Shirt Man. Oswald is the only remaining candidate - therefore Doorman = Oswald

Even if we had a large, clear arrow this would still be a problem for me -

James Fetzer responded that

'We only have three choices: that it was Oswald (who told Will Fritz he was "out with Bill Shelley in front"), Billy Lovelady and Checkered Shirt Man, where neither of the latter two are viable candidates for the reasons that I have been hammering home in this thread and elsewhere. There really is no place else to go'

'With all the resources of the federal government at its disposal and knowledge of the personnel who worked at the Book Depository, surely the government could have established the identity of everyone who was in that doorway area, HAD IT BEEN SO DISPOSED.'

Here is the problem, why would the FBI (or anyone else) look for other candidates for doorman, when Lovelady himself confirmed it was him (as per the FBI memo). Lovelady not only told the FBI he was there, he pointed himself out in the photo as being Doorman. It was good enough for the FBI, especially as they believed they had identified the location of the shooter and that Oswald was that shooter, so (to them) it couldn't have been Oswald in the doorway.

Even with a large arrow, confirming Lovelady identified himself as not being doorman, there is still the possibility that Doorman is not Oswald or Checkered Shirt Man.

Possible Explanation for the Arrow

Could it be dirt or other contaminant?

Also, have you subjected the entire Altgens6 to the same level of scrutiny as the doorway zoom? I suspect that were you to do so, you may well find other pieces of arrow (and additional evidence of alteration).

All that said - I do think this deserves more research - Will it be difficult to get the (actual) marked photo examined, I'm not sure how else you will be able to confirm that what you have found is an arrow.

Edited by James H. Fetzer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lindsay, I believe the streak of white that momentarilyi appears which people are taking as evidence of unbuttoning is fraudulent. It's trickery. It was added because they actually forgot about the Doorman's open sprawl when they made that phony movie. They were only interested in showcasing the plaid shirt (which Lovelady did not wear). I have a bevy of doctors who say that that guy, whom we call Gorilla Man, was not Billy Lovelady; his anatomy was different.

But, could we get back on point, please? People: there's a black line that intersects Black Hole Man's forearm (and this talk about him being a woman is making me sick) and that black line has got to be something. Now, if you don't think it's part of the arrow that Lovelady drew, then tell me what you think it is. It can't be a shadow because it only occurs on CE 369 and not on any other copy of the Altgens photo. So what is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point of Ralph's short piece is to explain that the arrow that has been attributed to Lovelady in the past was actually drawn by Frazier.

True. But it couldn't be any clearer from Joseph Ball's words during Lovelady's Warren Commission testimony that the arrows drawn on Commission Exhibit No. 369 by both Buell Wesley Frazier and Billy Lovelady are both pointing to "Doorway Man" in the Altgens photo:

"You got an arrow in the dark and one in the white pointing toward you." -- Joseph A. Ball

Jim, don't you think that Mr. Ball was fairly clear as to WHO Frazier's arrow "in the white" was pointing to when Ball said these words -- "IN THE WHITE POINTING TOWARD YOU"?

The "you" in the above quote is, of course, Billy Lovelady.

Plus, Ball's quote is certainly not implying that the two arrows were each pointing toward a different person in the photo. Just the opposite, in fact. Since we know, via Ball's words, that Frazier's arrow "in the white" is definitely pointing to a person deemed to be "you" (Lovelady), it HAS to mean that any arrow drawn in by Lovelady MUST also be pointing to the same person Frazier's arrow is pointing to. Because why in the world would Lovelady draw an arrow pointing to someone OTHER than himself in the Altgens photo?

Ralph has found the arrow that Billy actually drew.

Ralph found no such thing.

We can KNOW that Ralph found no arrow pointing to someone OTHER than "Doorway Man" because of what I just said about Ball's "in the white pointing toward you" quote.

More:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/03c46aba3b5d4ce0

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lindsay,

Why do you suggest Lovelady had confirmed THAT HE WAS DOORMAN?

The shirt he took to the FBI and was photographed wearing was a short-

sleeved, red-and-white vertically striped shirt, which looked NOTHING LIKE

THE SHIRT DOORMAN WAS WEARING. The point of Ralph's short piece

is to explain that the arrow that has been attributed to Lovelady in the past

was actually drawn by Frazier, where Ralph has found the arrow that Billy

actually drew. It was a "bait and switch". Did you simply misstate your view?

Jim

No, I didn't mistake my view, I looked again at the FBI letter.

FBI-letter.jpg

You confirmed on the earlier thread that Lovelady would not have been playing games with the shirt -

I don't think he would play games identifying himself to the FBI as the individual on the far left side of the doorway (if that was not him) either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cinque is playing word games again !

Quote:

To our adversaries, I request to know what that black line is over Black Hole Man's forearm if it is not Lovelady's arrow. Please answer the question. And if it can't be answered- convincingly- it is over. The game is over. And it is Oswald in the doorway.

So Cinque comes on the forum, posts the poorest resolution most highly pixilated image that he could find

.

And then goes on to insist that if we CANT find the black line over lovelady's forearm supposedly representing an arrow

That then means it is over. The game is over. And it is Oswald in the doorway.

NO IT DOESN'T

What it means, is that you posted a crappy pixilated image, that can't be studied due to the piss poor resolution.

1620fgi.jpg

Edited by Robin Unger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robin Unger, I just made it larger. I can reduce the pixellation by keeping it small.

2ujnrx0.jpg

I want you to notice that the arrows are at the exact same angle, the exact same diagnonal. Why? It's because Lovelady saw the first one on the left, which is so prominent, and it influenced his mind.

But, he drew it very small. Why? I'd say it's because he wanted to keep it personal- between him and Joseph Ball. He knew he was delivering something other than what Ball wanted. So, it was his way of saying: "You don't want me drawing any big arrow on this photo because I can't draw it the way you want it; no way, no how."

You see, Lovelady was still being noble at the time. He was sticking with the truth. Later, he got with the program- their program. And it's probably because they threatened him. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that it was probably more the threats than the money that pulled him in, although I presume he got both. After all, how does one go from being a lowly warehouse worker to the owner of a shipping company in a jiffy?

And to Mr. Anderson, would you take a look at that FBI letter again? It says: "He stated that he was wearing a red and white vertical striped shirt and blue jeans." And of course, we know they photographed him wearing those very clothes, and they even had him unbutton the shirt- to look like Doorman. It is VERY obvious that they were trying to re-create the Doorman look, supposedly, with the same man and the same clothes. So, there is no doubt that that is what he claimed. And there is no doubt that that is what he wore because we can see it on Black Hole Man to whom he drew an arrow indicating himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

This is very strange, Lindsay. He wore the shirt and identified himself as

having worn it. It was THE FBI AGENTS who wrote that this confirmed

his having been Doorman, when it actually CONTRADICTED IT. They

had been directed by J. Edgar to verify that Lovelady was Doorman, but

he hadn't been (given the shirt he had been wearing). So they bluffed it

with Hoover, not wanting to be sent to Siberia. And are you forgetting

that Billy told Jones Harris that he had been wearing the red-and-white,

vertically striped short-sleeved shirt? What are all of you ignoring that?

And nothing could be more obvious than that Ball was not only in-on-it

but was the master of ceremonies at this sleight-of-hand. The arrow

that Frazier had drawn should have been IDed with his initials: "WBF".

But they did not do that AND GAVE BILLY A BLACK PEN so it would

look as though Frazier's arrow had been his! Changing a few words

in the transcript as a form of reinforcement was child's play. That's

how it was done--one more clever deception of the American people

and, it would appear, some of the members of this research forum!

Lindsay,

Why do you suggest Lovelady had confirmed THAT HE WAS DOORMAN?

The shirt he took to the FBI and was photographed wearing was a short-

sleeved, red-and-white vertically striped shirt, which looked NOTHING LIKE

THE SHIRT DOORMAN WAS WEARING. The point of Ralph's short piece

is to explain that the arrow that has been attributed to Lovelady in the past

was actually drawn by Frazier, where Ralph has found the arrow that Billy

actually drew. It was a "bait and switch". Did you simply misstate your view?

Jim

No, I didn't mistake my view, I looked again at the FBI letter.

FBI-letter.jpg

You confirmed on the earlier thread that Lovelady would not have been playing games with the shirt -

I don't think he would play games identifying himself to the FBI as the individual on the far left side of the doorway (if that was not him) either.

Edited by James H. Fetzer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Dallas, Texas

March 3, 1964

ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT

JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY,

NOVEMBER 22,1963, DALLAS, TEXAS

On November 25, 1963, Mr. Mike Shapiro, Manager, WFAA-TV, exhibited to Special Agents of the FBI an enlarged photograph taken by an Associated Press photographer on November 22, 1963, showing President John Fitzgerald Kennedy in his car immediately after he was shot. This photograph also showed an individual standing in the entrance of the Texas School Book Depository Building (TSBD), 411 Elm Street, Dallas, Texas, who was wearing similar clothing and has some general physical characteristics similar to those of Lee Harvey Oswald. This photograph was described as "DN 5, 11/22/63, Dallas, Texas."

Mr. Shapiro advised that immediately after this photograph was taken it was forwarded by wire to the Associated Press at New York, New York, and subsequently distributed to other AP offices throughout the country. He stated an individual in the Associated Press Office at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, had noted the similarity between the individual in the doorway and Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. Shapiro made available a copy of this photograph for immediate use by FBI Agents and this photograph was returned to him on the same day.

On November 25, 1963, the FBI received information that the Associated Press in New York had a photograph that bore the number on the bottom: "FK61345STF" with the note, "Editor, this is a blowup of DN 2, making images larger DN 5, Dallas, Texas, 11/22."

This photograph was of a man who appeared to be standing in the doorway of the TSBD who resembled OSWALD.

[End Page One]

RE: ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT

JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY,

NOVEMBER 22,1963, DALLAS, TEXAS

On November 25, 1963, Mr. ROY S. TRULY, Warehouse Manager, TSBD, was exhibited an Associated Press photograph described as "DN 5, 11/22/63, Dallas, Texas," depicting an individual standing in the entrance of the TSBD who resembled Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. Truly, after viewing this photograph, stated, "That picture resembles Oswald, but it's not Lee Oswald, it's Billy Lovelady."

On November 25, 1963, Mr. Billy Nolan Lovelady, 7722 Hume, Dallas, Texas, was exhibited an Associated Press photograph described as "DN 5, 11/22/63, Dallas, Texas," depicting an individual standing in the entrance of the TSBD who resembled Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. Lovelady advised that he is an employee at the TSBD and is acquainted with Oswald. Lovelady immediately identified himself in the above-described photograph as being the individual who resembled OSWALD and stated he had observed himself previously in this photograph in the newspaper and was saving it. Lovelady stated there who was no question whatsoever but that this was a photograph of him.

By letter dated January 11, 1964, J. D. Royce, 496 West Scott Avenue, Clovis, California, advised Parade Publications, Inc, New York, New York, that he had what he believed to be "positive proof that Lee Harvey Oswald did not assassinate the President of the United States."

On January 23, 1964, J. D. Royce advised Special Agents of the FBI that the "positive proof" he referred to in the above-mentioned letter was based entirely on a double-page photograph which appeared on Pages 24-25 of the December 14, 1963, edition of the Saturday Evening Post. He stated that after examining this photograph with a magnifying glass, which photograph was reported to have been taken the instant President Kennedy was shot, he was convinced that the individual standing in the background in the left edge of the doorway was Oswald.

On January 22, 1964, the U.S. Secret Service, Washington, D.C., furnished the FBI the following letter received from Mrs. Hellen Shirah, 5530 Santa Monica Boulevard South, Jacksonville, Florida, 32207, dated January 17, 1964:

2

RE: ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT

JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY,

NOVEMBER 22,1963, DALLAS, TEXAS

"Chief of the Secret Service

Washington, D.C.

"Dear Sir:

"On January 15, 1964, I purchased a magazine, 'Four Dark Days in History' published by Special Publication, Inc. - 6627 Hollywood Blvd., Los Angeles 28, California.

"On page 4 as the motorcade of our late President passes the Dallas School Depository, there, on the left, emerging in a hurry from the building, is a man who bears a striking resemblance to Lee Harvey Oswald. As a matter of fact, even the clothes he has on seem to be like the ones Oswald had on when arrested. I realize that you have concrete evidence agaisnt him but if you find that the picture is of Oswald, it would mean he had an accomplice, who is still at large.

"I know you are very thorough in your investigations and have probably checked out all available pictures but there could be a chance that you missed this one. I have spent two sleepless nights wondering whether or not to write.

"I would appreciate it if you were to check this picture out. I 'm sure that in getting the original from the Publisher, it can be blown up to find out for sure if that man is Lee Harvey Oswald. I would send you my magazine but it is the only one I have and they are all sold out.

"Thank you very much for giving attention to this letter. " Very truly yours,

"/s/ Mrs. Helen Shirah

"Mrs. Helen Shirah"

3

RE: ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT

JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY,

NOVEMBER 22,1963, DALLAS, TEXAS

On January 30, 1964, Mrs. Helen Shirah, 5530 Santa Monica Boulevard South, Jacksonville, Florida, was contacted by Special Agents of the FBI regarding a letter she wrote to the U.S. Secret Service, Washington, D.C. Mrs. Shirah exhibited the magazine, "Four Dark Days in History," and pointed out an individual in the photograph on Page 4 which showed the Presidential motorcade passing the TSBD, 411 Elm Street, Dallas, Texas, as being that of an individual she believed to be Lee Harvey Oswald. Mrs. Shirah based her identification of Oswald solely upon having seen previous photographs of him. On February 19, 1964, Mrs. Shirah was again shown the photograph of the Presidential motorcade appearing on Pages 4-5 in the magazine, " Four Dark Days in History," by Special Agents of the FBI. Mrs. Shirah pointed out the same photograph as she had previosly, stating that it was of an individual she believed to be Lee Harvey Oswald.

On January 30, 1964, a copy of the magazine entitled, " Four Dark Days in History," published by Special Publications, Inc., Los Angeles, California, was obtained by a Special Agent of the FBI and a photograph on Pages 4 and 5 of the Presidential motorcade passing the TSBD on November 22, 1963, was exhibited to William H. Shelley, Assistant Manager, TSBD, who readily identified an individual standing just inside the entrance of the TSBD on the left as TSBD employee Billy N. Lovelady.

Mr. Shelley advised he was actually standing next to Lovelady when this photograph was taken, but was not in view of the camera. He pointed out that he had seen the photograph before and there has been much comment on the fact that in the photograph Billy N. Lovelady resembled Lee Harvey Oswald.

On February 29, 1964, Billy Nolan Lovelady was photographed by Special Agents of the FBI at Dallas, Texas. On this occasion, Lovelady advised that on the day of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, November 22, 1963, at the time of the assassination, and shortly before, he was standing in the doorway of the front entrance to the

4

RE: ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT

JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY,

NOVEMBER 22,1963, DALLAS, TEXAS

TSBD where he is employed. He stated he was wearing a read and white vertical striped shirt and blue-jeans.

Lovelady stated his picture has appeared in several publications, which picture depicts him on the far left side of the front doorway to the TSBD. Lovelady was exhibited a picture appearing on Pages 4-5 of the magazine entitled, "Four Dark Days in History," copyright 1963 by Special Publications, Inc., 6627 Hollywood Boulevard, Los Angeles 28, California. He immediately identified the picture of the individual on the far left side of the doorway of the TSBD as being his photograph. He stated this same photograph, or one identical to it, has appeared in the Dallas Times Herald newspaper of November 23, 1963, and in the Cincinnati Inquirer, of December 3, 1963. He stated it also appeared in an edition of " The Saturday Evening Post," the date of which he does not know. Mr. Lovelady stated his close resemblance to Lee Harvey Oswald has become somewhat embarrassing. He stated his stepchildren, Timmy Ekstedt, age 6, and stepdaughter, Angela Ekstedt, age 4, were watching television shortly after the assassination at a time when Lee Harvey Oswald was shown while in custody of the Dallas Police Department and both of these children remarked that they thought their daddy was on television referring to his close resemblance to Lee Harvey Oswald.

The following physical description and background information was obtained from interrogation and observation of Lovelady: Name: Billy Nolan Lovelady Race: White Sex: Male Born: 2/19/37, Myrtle Springs, Texas Height: 5'8" Weight: 170 Eyes: Green Hair: Brown, thin Build: Medium Complexion: Medium

5

RE: ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT

JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY,

NOVEMBER 22,1963

Residence: Apartment C, 7722 Hume Drive, Dallas, Texas, no telephone Business Address: Texas School Book Depository Bldg., 411 Elm Street, Dallas, Texas, telephone RI 7-3521 Wife: Patricia Ruth Lovelady Children: Stepson, Timmy Ekstedt, age 6

Stepdaughter, Angela, age 4

Daughter, Sheryl Lovelady, age 14 months.

6

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this animation i used one of Ralph Cinques re-enactment photo's

and compared it to altgens 6 doorman.

I then cropped the black doorway man from Willis 8 and added him into the image

This is how i see Lovelady in Altgens6

Lovelady's left hand obscured by the blackmans left shoulder

I'm not sure WHY Ralph decided to have his shirt buttoned up to the neck

in that re-enactment, like Fetzers "Gorilla Man" from the Martin Movie

Click on the thumbnail to activate the GIF

Edited by Robin Unger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

We all know there is massive evidence that substantiates various aspects of the "official account",

where the agency has even gone to the trouble of producing fake issues of obscure newspapers

to support the claim that the Altgens6 was published that day, when it actually only appeared the

following morning. Notice, in particular, that, if it had been available to this obscure newspapers,

it would also have been available to the major dailies, yet it did not appear in any of them Friday

and many, such as The New York Times, not even on Saturday (which I determined my looking

through my facsimile copy and believe I did not miss it), where Roy Schaeffer, who was working

for a Toledo newspaper at the time, took it off the photo fax that morning and noticed (given his

background in photography) that it has been altered in the doorway area. They have even gone

to the extreme of remodeling the entryway to the Book Depository to make it physically possible

for Buell Wesley Frazier's claim to have been "back in the shadows" remotely plausible. He was

the prime candidate for being "Black Hole Man" and, if he had been there at the time (before the

remodeling), he could not have been anyone else. So I am seriously disappointed to read posts

that appear to be regurgitating planted stories to make it look as though Lovelady was Doorman

and Frazier was Lovelady, as we have explained. Given the resources of the federal government,

it is hardly surprising that there is so much planted information out there; but it is surprising, at least

to me, that so many members of this forum turn out to be gullible enough to buy into it, especially

given the mount of evidence of fakery that we have exposed. I have no illusions that someone like

Greg Burnham is going to change his mind. I only observe that his position is not credibly and, in

the past, is not a position that I would have expected him to have swallowed, hook, line and sinker!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Whatever Burnham may have or not have said, he has no argument here.

We have explained Lovelady's location virtually from the beginning. That

you seem to have missed it is beyond me. There are at least eight or nine

article about all of this on Veterans Today. I have made no attempt to re-

publish all of them here. But we know that Billy was wearing a red-and-

white, vertically striped short sleeved shirt, which he showed to the FBI

and confirmed to Jones Harris. We have long since published studies

that confirm his presence at the back, where he was holding his arms

up to enable him to watch the motorcade. There is no mystery there.

This whole business about that figure having been a woman is a bit

much, but I certainly understand why you and Robin Unger are out

to explain away the evidence, because no one who was wearing a

short-sleeved shirt could have been Doorman, any more than some-

one else wearing a shirt buttoned up to the top could have been him.

Robin is doing his best to obscure the remarkable find of Ralph Cinque,

where you seem to have joined the chorus of negativity about one of

the most important confirmation of one of the most important finds in

the history of the study of the assassination. Given the extent to which

the governments has gone to cover-up that Oswald was in the doorway,

it is rather remarkable that we have been able to expose the truth on the

basis of a multiplicity of arguments that converge in that conclusion. So

this appears to be the latest instance in which you make claims that you

cannot sustain. You are showing why no one should take you seriously.

Robin,

Since Fetzer was cornered in the thread here: http://educationforu...92

...where I said:

[bEGIN] ==========================================================================================================

Since I (monk) predicted accurately that you (Fetzer) would not answer the simple questions posed to you in this thread, thus going OFF TOPIC,

let's ask again. Although I find "Len Colby" rather annoying, to say the least, he has observed, accurately, that some of us were asked to answer

a few simple questions by you, which we did. Now...

Simple questions, Jim:

1) Was Lovelady lying?

2) Were all the people who said that Lovelady was in front of the TSBD all lying?

3) If they were not lying, can you find him somewhere in Altgens 6 or in other images?

4) If they all were lying, where do you think he really was since he was not out front?

5) Why have no witnesses ever turned up stating where Lovelady actually was?

FETZER said in another thread:

"So, according to Robin Unger and John Dolva (and many more, no doubt), when these eyewitnesses--

who, unlike Unger and Dolva, WERE ACTUALLY THERE--reported that the limo had come to a halt,

they (according to Unger and Dolva) must have been LYING THEIR EYES OFF. How absurd can this get?"

Using your own standard, I ask you:

6) So, according to James Fetzer and Ralph Cinque, when these eyewitnesses--who, unlike Fetzer and Cinque, WERE ACTUALLY THERE--

reported that Lovelady was Doorman, they (according to Fetzer and Cinque) must have been lying their eyes off. How absurd can this get?

[END]==============================================================================================================

So what happened? Fetzer and Cinque know that they are beaten by this argument (using their own standard) UNLESS they can find Lovelady

somewhere in Altgens 6. So, in an obviously desperate attempt to justify their folly they suddenly find him in the most obscurely hidden area of

the entire photo! Why? Because if Lovelady isn't Doorman and isn't "somewhere" on the steps, then ALL eyewitnesses on the steps were lying!

A theory so absurd that even Fetzer & Cinque don't buy it!

...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

No, Ralph is not "playing games" at all, but the same cannot be said of Robin Unger,

who attempts to obfuscate the proof Ralph has uncovered of the second arrow on

CE 369. Any photograph--when blown up beyond recognition--will tend to lose its

value as evidence, which is why we need to be looking at the original. I am more

and more disillusioned with the games that Burnham and Unger have been playing.

Anyone who is serious about this would want to consider the photograph, CE 369,

not a version that is blown up beyond recognition. Everyone ought to admit that is

is the case, since it is no mystery. Here is the image that everyone should study:

Cinque is playing word games again !

Quote:

To our adversaries, I request to know what that black line is over Black Hole Man's forearm if it is not Lovelady's arrow. Please answer the question. And if it can't be answered- convincingly- it is over. The game is over. And it is Oswald in the doorway.

So Cinque comes on the forum, posts the poorest resolution most highly pixilated image that he could find

.

And then goes on to insist that if we CANT find the black line over lovelady's forearm supposedly representing an arrow

That then means it is over. The game is over. And it is Oswald in the doorway.

NO IT DOESN'T

What it means, is that you posted a crappy pixilated image, that can't be studied due to the piss poor resolution.

1620fgi.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...