Mr. Doyle,
You ignore questions of mine that you don't like. You just answer the ones for which you think you have a clever answer. Well, don't think that evasive behavior goes unnoticed.
You say I am "taking advantage of 'Lovelady's' open shirt and tee shirt" in their similarity to Oswald's? Yes, indeed I am. That is precisely the point. Their "similarity" is too close to be accounted for by chance alone. Consider: Both shirts wide-open/unbuttoned? Check. Both seem big, loose-fitting? Check. (although that is not true of Lovelady. I am speaking of Osawld and Doorman). Both have have a collar and small lapel on the right? Check. Both have a long lapel on the left? Check. Already that is a lot of similarities for two random men, and more than chance would allow. Because of the presence of Black Tie Man, we can't see Doorman's left collar, but tell me: Why is Black Tie Man facing sideways? Kennedy has already passed going the other direction. If you are right that he is a "military intelligence agent" or "mafia guard" shouldn't he be keeping his eye on the action? Why is he facing the wrong way?
I will tell you why. It's because he isn't real. They inserted him in there that way because it was a practical means of covering Doorman's (that is, Oswald's) left collar while keeping Black Tie Man relatively obscure and inconspicuous.
You ask why BT Man's face is "half-shaded." It isn't half-shaded. It's half-missing. Again, they made it that way so that it wouldn't stand out too much. People had seen the original Atlgens photo, and they reported seeing Oswald, but they did not report seeing Oswald glued to some weird guy.
Notwithstanding Armstrong's theory, the fact remains that the Lee Harvey Oswald from that day, the one who was arrested and later shot and killed by Jack Ruby, spoke Russian very well. He was no stupid guy. So, you can't dismiss it with a glib remark about Armstrong.
Little downside to lying to the police? How do you figure? Name one lie that he told and provide proof that it was a lie. I don't doubt that there was plenty that he withheld. But withholding information and lyng are two different things. I know you think he lied to Will Fritz about his whereabouts during the assassination. But, I dispute that that was a lie. I think he was telling the truth. And let the record show that you have NOT addressed my objections to your 2nd floor hypothesis. You did not address the fact that Carolyn did go outside herself during the motorcade and was not on the 2nd floor to observe Oswald there at the crucial time. You shrewdly avoid questions for which you have no answers.
So, besides this issue of his whereabouts during the shooting, which I consider a truth and you consider a lie, name another lie he told. You used the plural "lies."
"If Oswald was the lone nut shooter they wouldn't need to identify a bystander floors below?" Then, you are making my point of why they deliberately did not account for Black Tie Man. But, my question is how did they get with that, appearance-wise? Didn't they have to pretend to be an honest investigation? Let me put it this way: How could they investigate and ask a lot of questions about Doorway Man without even mentioning the guy that was glued to him? You know, if you see an elephant in the room, and you don't mention him, something is wrong. It's an obvious evasion. What they did was an obvious evasion. And I know that they ignored a lot of other evidence, but why doesn't it bother you that they ignored this piece of evidence? After all, you think this guy was a "military intelligence agent" or a "mafia guard." So, he was very much involved in the crime. You should be as outraged as I am that they didn't identify him. So, why are you defending them and attacking me? Cogitate: Military intelligence agent, Mafia guard, Military intelligence agent, Mafia guard, Military intelligence agent, Mafia guard.
How dare you just assume that Oswald's buttons got ripped off in the scuffle? You have no right to do that. That was never reported. The scuffle was described in some detail. Oswald tried to punch a cop, and another cop hit him and he was injured over his left eye. There was no mention of pulling on his shirt and ripping through any buttons. YOU CAN'T JUST MAKE STUFF UP. I demand that you provide a credible, independent reference for that or otherwise retract it- with an apology. Just the fact that you said, in reference to the buttons, that they "would be torn off" proves that you were speculating. Would, my ass.
Depository roll-call? Speaking of asses, whose did you pull that out of? Go ahead and tell me your source for the "Depository roll-call." I read through the WC testimony of Lovelady, and he never said anything about a Depository roll-call. And you just said it! You are amazing. I have to repeat it:
"Realizing there would be a Depository roll-call, Lovelady buttoned up his shirt."
No probably. No maybe. No perhaps. No possibly. Just you and your glibness. Everything just rolls off your tongue, doesn't it? Whatever hits your brain goes right to your fingers on the keyboard without the slightest pause, without the slight reservation, without the slightest review, without the slightest thought. I bet you type a mile a minute.
Hoover's refusal to investigate Lovelady may not prove forgery of Altgens, but it sure raises suspicion about Lovelady being the Doorway Man. And you are on record for accepting forgeries and manipulations of other evidences in the case. So, why are you categorically denying the possibility of corruption of this particular piece of evidence? If Lovelady WAS the Doorway Man then Hoover had NO REASON not to investigate him. Why didn't he do it just to appease the public and the naysayers? It was harmless from his perspective, right? because Lovelady WAS the Doorway Man. But apparently, Hoover wasn't as confident about it as you are.
Site standard enforcement? So, is that what you are counting on and hoping for? That they'll kick me out and end the agony for you? Well, maybe you are right. And in that case, I had better present that evidence now. Refer to this image of the Altgens photo.
http://www.jfk-fr.com/images/jfk/5.jpg
What is that white blotch at the level of the right armpit of Black Hole Man? It is obviously distinct from his white t-shirt, so it can't be that. And there seems to be the outline of a man's face around the white blotch. Do you see it? What is it?