10-01-2012, 09:49 AM
Okay, now to defend Ralph Cinque, whom I know very little about.
Reading through this thread, I'm reminded of the old Universal Horror movies, where the angry citizens are marching through the streets with torches. Cinque appears to be playing the hapless role of Frankenstein's monster, trying in vain to elude the mob.
I don't see what you all are objecting to here. Cinque didn't even start the thread, someone else did, and they attacked his work. Yet virtually every post on this thread (except for Cinque's) portrays things as if Cinque came onto this forum and started attacking others. He didn't. He was attacked and is defending himself.
And why is there so much desperate vitriol directed at the hypothesis that it was Oswald in the TSBD doorway, and not Lovelady? This is yet another of those "neo-con" type issues, wherein too many good researchers have simply given ground on a potentially explosive piece of evidence proving conspriacy. The early critics, especially Weisberg, made a very strong case that Lovelady was not the man in the doorway, and that it could very well have been Oswald. No convincing research has been done, in all the years since then (at least to my knowledge) to justify the kind of certainty I see, in so many posts on this subject, from my fellow CTers, that the figure has been proven to be Lovelady. There is no concrete evidence that it was Lovelady. At the very least, there is a great deal of reasonable doubt here.
Is this an important issue? Well, we all know the case for conspiracy certainly doesn't rest on Oswald being the figure in the doorway captured in the Altgens photograph. However, IF it can be established that it WAS Oswald, then it becomes the kind of "smoking gun" we've all yearned for over the decades. Even the most brainwashed member of the idiocracy cannot fail to see the significance of a photo showing the alleged assassin, standing gunless with other spectators, as the victim is being shot directly in front of him. What better evidence for conspiracy, or at least Oswald's innocence, could there be?
Again, I've never communicated with Mr. Cinque ever, and really know nothing about him. I just wanted to step in and defend him, because I don't think he's being treated fairly.
Reading through this thread, I'm reminded of the old Universal Horror movies, where the angry citizens are marching through the streets with torches. Cinque appears to be playing the hapless role of Frankenstein's monster, trying in vain to elude the mob.
I don't see what you all are objecting to here. Cinque didn't even start the thread, someone else did, and they attacked his work. Yet virtually every post on this thread (except for Cinque's) portrays things as if Cinque came onto this forum and started attacking others. He didn't. He was attacked and is defending himself.
And why is there so much desperate vitriol directed at the hypothesis that it was Oswald in the TSBD doorway, and not Lovelady? This is yet another of those "neo-con" type issues, wherein too many good researchers have simply given ground on a potentially explosive piece of evidence proving conspriacy. The early critics, especially Weisberg, made a very strong case that Lovelady was not the man in the doorway, and that it could very well have been Oswald. No convincing research has been done, in all the years since then (at least to my knowledge) to justify the kind of certainty I see, in so many posts on this subject, from my fellow CTers, that the figure has been proven to be Lovelady. There is no concrete evidence that it was Lovelady. At the very least, there is a great deal of reasonable doubt here.
Is this an important issue? Well, we all know the case for conspiracy certainly doesn't rest on Oswald being the figure in the doorway captured in the Altgens photograph. However, IF it can be established that it WAS Oswald, then it becomes the kind of "smoking gun" we've all yearned for over the decades. Even the most brainwashed member of the idiocracy cannot fail to see the significance of a photo showing the alleged assassin, standing gunless with other spectators, as the victim is being shot directly in front of him. What better evidence for conspiracy, or at least Oswald's innocence, could there be?
Again, I've never communicated with Mr. Cinque ever, and really know nothing about him. I just wanted to step in and defend him, because I don't think he's being treated fairly.