The Danger Of The Fetzer Assassination School

[Seamus Coogan]

I know I'm not real smart, but LHO not being in the doorway, at least to me, does not indicate that he was a lone assassin firing a rifle from the TSBD 6th floor window. I believe the picture is in fact, Billy Lovelady, and most likely LHO was on the 2nd floor at the time of the shooting. I am assuming that the person arrested in the Texas Theater and later shot by Jack Ruby, is Lee Harvey Oswald. And, a live LHO would most likely have been found not guilty if subjected to a trial.

Its what I go along with as well mate.

[Ralph Cinque]

This is Ralph Cinque. The posted URL for viewing my video series on the Altgens photo is wrong. The correct one is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_3sCGPQ3zk&feature=youtu.be
And now, I would like to respond to the various comments. I am not going to respond to the general put-downs and disparagements because I don't want to.
But, I will respond to any substantial comments that address the issues I raise, and I will address them in the order that I read them.
Regarding the shade line from the lintel, Doorman is not being shaded at all. We can see him brightly and clearly. So, why should the man standing next to him, in the same plane in relation to the lintel, with his arms raised, have his face completely blackened out? There isn't even a trace of an image there. It's like a black hole. So, I call him Black Hole Man. And remember that shade darkens an image; it doesn't usually turn it into a black hole, as we see there. But, as I discuss in video 7, there are plenty of other anomalies in that picture: there is the white blotch at the level of right axilla of Black Hole Man, and as Dr. Fetzer points out, it seems to be covering a man's face. But if not, then what is it? And below that there is an amorphous black configuration that merges with the black hair of the African American woman. Very strange. What is that? And please, no glib answers.
Regarding the Black Tie Man who seems to be fused to Doorman, Doyle says he is "real and there." Well, if he's real, who is he? What is his name? Don't you think 48 years is long enough to find out? Why didn't the Warren Commission ask? Weren't they interested? Black Tie Man was closest to Doorman of anyone. Wouldn't he have known best who Doorman was? Wasn't everyone standing there associated with the TSBD and therefore, identifiable? What excuse is there for not being able to provide his name?
And if he's behind Doorman, as Doyle insists, then why can't we see Doorman's shoulder? How can you stand behind someone and block his shoulder? Mr. Doyle, you said- glibly- that BT Man is behind Doorman. Do me a favor: drop the glibness and really delve into it. Explain it. Defend what you're saying and don't assume authority. Anyone can be glib. Anyone can make a declarative statement. But, being glib and being right are two different things. I maintain that BT Man is NOT real because he is in an impossible position in relation to Doorman, one that could never exist between two people and be recorded photographically. And if you think otherwise, then prove it by positioning two people and duplicating that image with a camera. I dare you.
Oswald was not in the lunchroom during the shooting, and he never claimed to be. He told Detective Will Fritz that he was "out in front with Bill Shelley" during the shooting. I have a copy of Frtiz' handwritten notes.
Why not take Lovelady out completely? Are you serious? The original Altgens photo had been blasted around the world within hours of the assassination. The Doorway Man had already been seen by millions and was suspected of being Oswald. Why do you think this whole controversy got started? They couldn't just get rid of him. Please, think!
The Doorway Man is wearing Oswald's shirt. Do you know how distinctive it was? It closed with a button loop at the top. Did you know that? That button loop jutted off the lapel on the left side, and its purpose was to secure the button located underneath the right collar on the other side. So, on the left side, there was a collar, a lapel, and a button loop jutting out from it. And it gave it the lay of a jacket on that side.
When we compare Doorman to Oswald we see that their collars matched perfectly on the right side. And on the left we see a long lapel on both. How often do you see shirts with a long lapel? Lovelady certainly was not wearing a shirt like that. On Oswald's left, we see the complex collar described above. But, on Doorman's left, that area is covered up by Black Tie Man. Ahhh! Tough break. Too bad. If only we could see what was there.

But, both are wearing a low-cut, v-necked t-shirt. Both are wearing an unbuttoned, loose-fitting outer shirt. Oswald's buttons were missing, so he couldn't button his. But Lovelady's buttons were NOT missing. Was he going around unbuttoned that day for some reason? But wait, in the picture we have of him from after the shooting, he doesn't look unbuttoned. So, did he button up afterwards? Did anyone see him do that? Did anyone even ask about it?
Realize: if Doorman is wearing Oswald's shirt, that is, if the shirt Doorman is wearing has the same structural form as Oswald's unique shirt, then he WAS Oswald. There is no other possibility. And he WAS wearing Oswald's shirt. They did what they could to love-lady-i-fy him, but the form, the fit, and the lay of that shirt are pure Oswald. It's him. He was outside watching during the coup. Please give my video an unbiased viewing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_3sCGPQ3...e=youtu.be

[Albert Doyle]

Edit: Double post.

[Albert Doyle]

Regarding the shade line from the lintel, Doorman is not being shaded at all. We can see him brightly and clearly. So, why should the man standing next to him, in the same plane in relation to the lintel, with his arms raised, have his face completely blackened out? There isn't even a trace of an image there. It's like a black hole. So, I call him Black Hole Man. And remember that shade darkens an image; it doesn't usually turn it into a black hole, as we see there.

The statement that Raised Arms Man is on the same plane as Lovelady is false. If you do credible analysis of the Altgens Texas School Book Depository front entry blow-up you'll see Raised Arms Man is clearly standing further back than Lovelady. This is why he is intersected by the shade line from the lintel and Lovelady isn't. Anyone with an ounce of common sense would realize the reason Lovelady is forward of this shade divide is because he's leaning forward in order to look around the corner column of the entranceway. Look at the photo. Lovelady is craning his head around this corner in order to look at the limousine that has passed by and gone further down Elm St. Furthermore, the reason Raised Arms Man is so perfectly cut by the shade line is because, in the act of raising his hands to shade himself from the glare of the sun, he is using the shade line deliberately to cut-off this glare. Smart investigators will realize Raised Arms Man's posture reveals a need to shade his eyes from the sun. He backed-up just enough to use the shade line from the lintel to achieve this and that is why his face is shaded. Instead of skewing everything to fit the theory of forgery just look at what's there and the shade from the lintel explains everything.

These phantom "black holes" being attributed to CIA forgery is actually the sharp divide between light and dark created by the film type and lens. This is enhanced by the blow-up process. At that distance there simply isn't enough light to capture shaded images so they appear as black areas. Simple as that.

Dr Cinque proposes that Black Tie Man is a forgery superimposed in front of Lovelady in order to hide the fact it is Oswald wearing Oswald's shirt from that day. Any simple look at the Altgens blow-up will show that Black Tie Man is real and was there and was standing behind Lovelady as seen.

And if he's behind Doorman, as Doyle insists, then why can't we see Doorman's shoulder? How can you stand behind someone and block his shoulder? Mr. Doyle, you said- glibly- that BT Man is behind Doorman. Do me a favor: drop the glibness and really delve into it. Explain it. Defend what you're saying and don't assume authority. Anyone can be glib. Anyone can make a declarative statement. But, being glib and being right are two different things. I maintain that BT Man is NOT real because he is in an impossible position in relation to Doorman, one that could never exist between two people and be recorded photographically. And if you think otherwise, then prove it by positioning two people and duplicating that image with a camera. I dare you.

This kind of argument is self-defeating in its form alone. Lovelady's shoulder is dropped into a sharp vertical position because he's dropped his left shoulder in order to look around the corner column in the doorway. If you look closely it's there. I can see it plainly, but I'm 100% confident credible photo analysts will prove me correct. His shoulder isn't "blocked" it is dropped. This is foolish and qualifies for credulity.

If we ask doctor Cinque to show us the photographic evidence for this unique "lapel" he is going to produce some very fuzzy images he makes great claims over. I personally have a sharp eye for this kind of thing, which is why I am able to detect the real interpretations of the doorway images he discusses. However I've looked at his lapel evidence and honestly don't see what he is contending.

Was Oswald missing his buttons because the police ripped them off at the theater?

[Ralph Cinque]

Raised Arm Man is NOT standing appreciably back from Doorman, and I implore the members to examine the picture for themselves. Here is a link to it:
http://media.photobucket.com/image/altgens photo/123steamn/AltgensFromLee.png
It is an outrageous statement, and I think the members will agree. And why just Raised Arm Man's face? Why are his arms lite up so brightly by the sun if he's in the shade? And regarding the effects of his hands, notice that the woman below him has one arm raised similarly. But, there is not even a partial black hole effect with her. And Doorman is not craning at all. You're seeing things.
And by the way, the whole issue of Black Hole Man is a fascinating tidbit, but it is not central to my thesis. My thesis primarily concerns Doorman's clothing, including his distinctive, unusual outer shirt with the missing buttons and the jacket-like lapel on the left, and his v-necked t-shirt. So, I don't even need Black Hole Man to make my case. It is purely a side issue, a curiosity.
And again, you have glibly stated that Black Tie Man is real and there and standing behind Doorman. I asked you not to do that. I'm not interested in your declarative statements. If he's real, who is he? That was not a rhetorical question. I expected an answer. If he was there, why didn't he provide testimony? It is a very reasonable assumption, under the circumstances.
And, Doorman most certainly has NOT dropped his left shoulder to any appreciable degree. And to whatever little extent he has, in no way would it hide his shoulder. It would just look a little lower, that's all, but it would still be there in front of BT Man. In fact, if anything, the left side of his body is torqued slightly to the anterior, that is, more forward. So, whether higher or lower, his shoulder should be fully exposed- if Black Tie Man is standing behind him.
Your attempt to counter my argument has failed miserably. I make no concessions to you whatsoever.

[Peter Lemkin]

Ah, while I appreciate some of the sentiments in the post, I thought we were not supposed to create false avatars here. Dr. Cinque was created today, and is obviously [to me] not likely a real name. While the link goes to a video created by someone with the same 'name', I grow suspicious. :nono:

[Albert Doyle]

Raised Arm Man is NOT standing appreciably back from Doorman, and I implore the members to examine the picture for themselves. Here is a link to it:
http://media.photobucket.com/image/altgens photo/123steamn/AltgensFromLee.png
It is an outrageous statement, and I think the members will agree.

He's at least a foot further back, maybe even two or more. I'm sorry for saying this Dr Cinque but we are now talking basic competency. Again, I am 100% (that is, betting the house) certain credible experts will prove me correct on this. There's a simple reality you need to acknowledge here. The simple reference point for the location of the subjects in question is the shade line itself. It is a basic fact that the reason the shade line cuts through Black Tie Man's face and then proceeds to darken Raised Arms Man's face is because they are in alignment to it. The shade line is a solid reference point that determines the reality here and people's locations.




[size=12]

And why just Raised Arm Man's face? Why are his arms lite up so brightly by the sun if he's in the shade? And regarding the effects of his hands, notice that the woman below him has one arm raised similarly. But, there is not even a partial black hole effect with her. And Doorman is not craning at all. You're seeing things.

Uh, maybe because his arms are just forward of the shade line perhaps? You seem to be directly ignoring what I already explained. Raised Arms Man's arms are lit up and his face is darkened exactly because he backed-up just far enough to shade his eyes. In other words he used the shade line as a tool to shade his eyes. This left his arms still in the sun to do their job of shading. He's right where he should be if he was using the shade line to shade his eyes.

The woman shading her face with one hand isn't a valid comparison. There's no shade line with her and she's closer to the camera.

If you don't see Lovelady's obvious craning posture around the doorway corner column we are back to competency issues again - sorry.


[/SIZE]

[size=12]

Your attempt to counter my argument has failed miserably. I make no concessions to you whatsoever. [/SIZE]

Probably due to my tendency for glib declarativeness.


By the way, you could perfectly repeat that shade line today if you took a photo on November 22nd at 12:30.

[Ralph Cinque]

Dr. Ralph Cinque is my real name, and it is the only name by which I have posted on this site. You are completely mistaken.

[Ralph Cinque]

We are talking about basic INcompetency- YOURS! If Black Hole Man's face is being shaded by the lintel, why are his arms so brightly lite up and also his shirt? We are talking about extremes here. His arms and shirt are dazzling bright; his face is a black hole. Yet, they are essentially aligned with each other. In fact, in a human being with normal posture, the face is anterior (forward ) of his torso. That's because the head leads and the body follows. Why is his face behind the shade line if his torso is not?

And clearly, Black Tie Man is farther back than Black Hole Man. Yet, we can at least see part of Black Tie Man's face. (not that he's real)

And I totally dispute and deny your claim of Black Hole Man being a foot or two or more further back than Doorman. I implore someone else to come forward to render an opinion about that. And if so, how is the light reaching him at all? If he's that much further back, when clearly Doorman is largely under the lintel himself, then why isn't Black Hole Man completely in the dark?

The difference in terms of the plane of location between Black Hole Man's head and his arms, with his arms being around his head, would not be great enough to account for such an extreme difference in illumination: bright illumination vs. total darkness. No way. Those parts of his body are too close to each other. So, don't conveniently make assumptions, such as that his arms are "just" forward of the shade line while is head is "just" behind it. You'd like to think so, wouldn't you? And you're entirely willing to just glibly declare it, aren't you? How irritating. Competence? What nerve.

I realize that the woman in front of him is forward, but notice that her arm is directly in front of her face, whereas his arms are very lateral and very wide in comparison. Do compare. I'm just saying that any attempt to argue that the shading effect of his arms would completely blacken his face is ludicrous.

In regard to the "craning" I suggest to any reader that you get a ruler and run through the vertical axis of Doorman's body and see if his head seems to be rising straight up squarely. Then, turn the ruler sideways and run it across his shoulders. You will find that he is twisted slightly, but the forward side is his left side, the side that is allegedly in front of BT Man. There is no valid reason why we should not be seeing that shoulder. There is no valid reason why the white stripe effect of BT Man's shirt should be covering his shoulder up. The point of Doorman's shoulder should be visible, plain as day.

And again: Who is Black Tie Man? Who is Black Tie Man? Who is Black Tie Man? Who is Black Tie Man? Cough it up! And if you don't know, why don't you know?

Finally, again, this is all a sideline. Apparently, you don't want to talk about my central thesis, which has nothing whatsoever to do with Black Hole Man. My thesis concerns Doorman and his clothes. Apparently, you are afraid to talk about that. You want to keep talking about light and optics like you're Galileo. Well, Doorman isn't in the shade. He's in the light of day, buddy boy. And there's a lot to see.

And why just Raised Arm Man's face? Why are his arms lite up so brightly by the sun if he's in the shade? And regarding the effects of his hands, notice that the woman below him has one arm raised similarly. But, there is not even a partial black hole effect with her. And Doorman is not craning at all. You're seeing things.

Uh, maybe because his arms are just forward of the shade line perhaps? You seem to be directly ignoring what I already explained. Raised Arms Man's arms are lit up and his face is darkened exactly because he backed-up just far enough to shade his eyes. In other words he used the shade line as a tool to shade his eyes. This left his arms still in the sun to do their job of shading. He's right where he should be if he was using the shade line to shade his eyes.

The woman shading her face with one hand isn't a valid comparison. There's no shade line with her and she's closer to the camera.

If you don't see Lovelady's obvious craning posture around the doorway corner column we are back to competency issues again - sorry.

Your attempt to counter my argument has failed miserably. I make no concessions to you whatsoever.

Probably due to my tendency for glib declarativeness.


By the way, you could perfectly repeat that shade line today if you took a photo on November 22nd at 12:30.[/QUOTE]

[Charles Drago]

Ah, while I appreciate some of the sentiments in the post, I thought we were not supposed to create false avatars here. Dr. Cinque was created today, and is obviously [to me] not likely a real name. While the link goes to a video created by someone with the same 'name', I grow suspicious. :nono:

Does "Dr." indicate a promotion or demotion from General Field Marshal?