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

Backes, you dumb pluck, if you read what I wrote and had any functioning brain cells, you would know that I vouched for the image of the older woman on the left and accounted for the other as mere distortion. I gave the example of kids seeing things in cloud formations. Remember?

 This is what the Idiot Backes said, and it is 180 degrees opposite of what I said.

"This shit copy does not show a young woman with a child, but you're going to say so so you can lie about the woman and child in Altgens."

No, Backes. I don't say it does. And I don't believe in the Altgens Woman and Boy (And stop thinking you can get away with equating a baby with a boy by using the generic word "child". You're the child.) So, I have no need to find them anywhere else. Therefore, I have no need to vouch for the validity of the woman and baby on the right. 

And get something else into your densely wooden brain: when I say "valid" I am referring to the suggested image. Is it valid? Are the woman and baby valid? And they are NOT valid. 

But, idiots will be idiots ...

"He wants you to believe that a shit copy of the Wiegman film frame really shows a young woman with a child.  It doesn't.  He's lying his ass off here."

... and go on being idiots:

"He wants you to believe that the shit Wiegman film frame is a young woman and child.  He wants you to think that it's the same as the woman and child in Towner, and it's the same woman and child in the Altgens photo."

No, Backes. The Woman and baby in Towner are fake, and so is the Woman and Boy in Altgens. They were put there, but in different ways. The Altgens Woman and Boy were real and taken from a real photograph but they were not standing there are the top of Elm. But, the Towner Woman and Baby are a total fabrication; they never existed anywhere. They were completely made up. But, in Wiegman, it is just distortion. The seeming Woman and Baby just came out that way when the film got distorted, and there was no intention involved. 

However, it doesn't mean there was no subterfuge involved. The mere existence of that good, clear frame on the left proves that high-quality Wiegman images exist. Remember that that is just a small, blown-up piece of a frame, and yet it still has a lot of detail, I want to see the first Wiegman frame in the same detail.

Calling Robin Unger. I want to know where you got that clear sharp Wiegman image on the left. And I want to see the image on the right in the same clarity. It shows Lee Harvey Oswald standing in the doorway.