Then went outside to watch P. parade ( Parts 1 & 2 )

[Alan Ford]

Thank you very much, Mr. Davidson!

The fact that Mr. Lovelady steps down in the later Wiegman frames only seals the disaster for those still insisting on the integrity of the images:



He is clearly facing forward and nowhere near west or back enough to catch shadow. It's not even close.

The guys who did this to Wiegman were like someone writing a PhD in 1963 full of plagiarisms, not foreseeing that a time would come when digital plagiarism software would detect their sins with painful clarity!

 

[Alan Ford]

Friends, in 2019 Mr. Pat Speer---------a real researcher unlike so many of the clowns who populate the 'research community'!---------wrote this:

I was in Dallas on the weekend of the anniversary, and found myself standing in front of the TSBD at 12:30. And I looked at the steps from the angle of Altgens. Well, it hit me then that the Lovelady figure in Altgens was standing in the middle of the steps, and not on the far west of the steps, as seems apparent from the photo.

So I walked over to the steps. And noticed something. The shadow of the wall by the steps cuts across the top step at an angle. Well, this proves Prayer person was in the back corner, and not on the top step. or standing halfway on the second to the top step and top step. I walked up to the top and turned around. When I stood up against the west side of the staircase, I was able to get my face half in shade/half in sun. But when I stood on the top steps in a normal relaxed manner, my face was always in sun. I'm not sure if this means anything. But I seem to remember someone holding out that Prayer person was straddled on the top two steps. And there's no way he/she could have done that without being at least halfway in the sun.

Mr. Speer is quite right about Mr. Lovelady in Altgens, but what he says about PrayerPerson does raise the obvious question: how on earth is Mr. Lovelady---------the same person we know to be nowhere near the shadowline in Altgens---------suddenly catching all this shadow in Wiegman?



Answer: The Wiegman frames have had shadow artificially added to them.

It's that simple. One may find this explanation shocking, but there is no other explanation that comes even close to making sense.

And, knowing, as we do, that shadow has been artificially added to one person in the doorway (Mr. Lovelady), we can hardly find it a stretch at all to posit that shadow has been added artificially to a second person (PrayerMAN) in the same frames. Especially when positing this, and seeing that PrayerMAN is in reality catching plenty of sun, suddenly makes sense of where his elbows are showing up in Wiegman in relation to a) white column, b) vertical metal strip in corner:



PrayerMAN only makes sense, in short, if he is standing at the same spot as we see Redshirt Man standing in Hughes-------------back a couple of steps from the black man who is standing on the second step up:



Boom!

 

[Alan Ford]

since Red shirt man is fully visible, they must have thought that the public could be convinced the man was Lovelady, therefore took no steps to alter the Hughes film?

However!

A very strange 'mix-up' happened in late-February 1964 when Mr. Billy Lovelady was called in to the FBI office in Dallas to have his photograph taken:



The official report said this:



The reader gets the impression that the shirt described in the report ("a red and white vertical striped shirt") is the one in the photograph------------and hence that the shirt in the photograph is the one worn by Mr. Lovelady the day of the assassination.

Mr. Lovelady would later say that he was NOT told to wear the same clothes as he had worn 11/22/63 to the photograph session, and so he just brought what he happened to be wearing this day (2/29/64). By the time he made this clear, he was showing folks his 11/22 shirt:



Okay, but read again the report's description of the shirt: "a red and white vertical striped shirt".

Note that there is no mention here that the shirt was short-sleeved, which the shirt in the photograph obviously is.

Nor does the report state explicitly that the shirt Mr. Lovelady wore for the photograph session was his 11/22 shirt.

What is going on here? A comedy of errors? Perhaps.

But I think what we're really seeing here is a deliberate mix-up by FBI-----------------------one that created enough ambiguity to allow a certain impression to be given (both the short-sleeved shirt in the Feb photograph and Mr. Lovelady's 11/22 shirt may be described as "red" and "white vertical striped"), while leaving room to correct that impression should folks notice the problem.

And why would such a deliberate mix-up be contrived? Because the 'investigating' authorities didn't want to photograph Mr. Lovelady in his actual 11/22 shirt.

And why not? Because of Redshirt Man in Hughes



The authorities, who knew damn well that Mr. Oswald was Redshirt Man in Hughes, were a whole lot LESS spooked by the LHO=AltgensDoorwayman chatter than by the LHO=RedshirtManInHughes truth which no one had yet clocked.

NB! Only when the Martin film came to light did folks get to see Mr. Lovelady's 11/22/63 shirt for the first time:



After that, the ambiguity game could no longer be played..................

 

[Alan Ford]

But I think what we're really seeing here is a deliberate mix-up by FBI-----------------------one that created enough ambiguity to allow a certain impression to be given (both the short-sleeved shirt in the Feb photograph and Mr. Lovelady's 11/22 shirt may be described as "red" and "white vertical striped"), while leaving room to correct that impression should folks notice the problem.

And why would such a deliberate mix-up be contrived? Because the 'investigating' authorities didn't want to photograph Mr. Lovelady in his actual 11/22 shirt.

And why not? Because of Redshirt Man in Hughes

'But why didn't they just put a reddish long-sleeved shirt like LHO's on Lovelady for the photograph session? Problem solved, no?'

Actually, problem very much NOT solved.

Because if they do that, and explicitly equate the shirt Mr. Lovelady has on for the photograph session with the shirt he wore 11/22/63, then they are giving a dangerous hostage to fortune: at any time, a photograph or film of Mr. Lovelady on 11/22/63 could emerge into the public domain. And it would show a different shirt.

Which is exactly what did happen:



Note that FBI were aware of the existence of this film as early as 12/3/63...............

They did not want to photograph Mr. Lovelady in his actual 11/22/63 shirt: Hughes, with its image of Redshirt Man, was concerning enough in this regard, but a color photo or film could yet emerge showing Mr. Oswald's reddish shirt in the doorway at close quarters.

But nor could they photograph him in one resembling Mr. Oswald's reddish shirt: such a claim would be immediately falsified by the emergence into the public domain of an image of Mr. Lovelady from 11/22/63.

 

[Alan Ford]

They did not want to photograph Mr. Lovelady in his actual 11/22/63 shirt: Hughes, with its image of Redshirt Man, was concerning enough in this regard, but a color photo or film could yet emerge showing Mr. Oswald's reddish shirt in the doorway at close quarters.

But nor could they photograph him in one resembling Mr. Oswald's reddish shirt: such a claim would be immediately falsified by the emergence into the public domain of an image of Mr. Lovelady from 11/22/63.

The early researchers who knew that something was off with the whole Lovelady Shirt business all made the same mistake of relating it to AltgensDoorwayman, and assuming that what the 'investigating' authorities were covering up was the fact that Altgens showed Mr. Oswald rather than Mr. Lovelady. This erroneous belief led them badly astray. However, it now turns out that they were a LOT closer to the truth of the matter than those clowns trying to put Mr. Oswald up on the sixth floor!

As for the Prayer Man folks, they were a LOT closer to the truth----------------not alone were they (like the LHO=AltgensDoorwayman folks) 100% correct as to the question 'In which part of the building was LHO?', they have been proven 50% correct in their identification of WHICH figure in the doorway he actually is:

!
No, Prayer Person in Darnell is NOT Mr. Oswald.

!!
But yes, PrayerMAN in Wiegman IS Mr. Oswald-----------------for he is the same man IN THE SAME PLACE whom we see in his reddish shirt in Hughes, only here he's had artificial shadow added to hide his facial features:



Amazing to think that we've been looking at Mr. Oswald in Hughes for all these years and not realizing it!

 

[Alan Ford]

The early researchers who knew that something was off with the whole Lovelady Shirt business all made the same mistake of relating it to AltgensDoorwayman, and assuming that what the 'investigating' authorities were covering up was the fact that Altgens showed Mr. Oswald rather than Mr. Lovelady. This erroneous belief led them badly astray. However, it now turns out that they were a LOT closer to the truth of the matter than those clowns trying to put Mr. Oswald up on the sixth floor!

As for the Prayer Man folks, they were a LOT closer to the truth----------------not alone were they (like the LHO=AltgensDoorwayman folks) 100% correct as to the question 'In which part of the building was LHO?', they have been proven 50% correct in their identification of WHICH figure in the doorway he actually is:

!
No, Prayer Person in Darnell is NOT Mr. Oswald.

!!
But yes, PrayerMAN in Wiegman IS Mr. Oswald-----------------for he is the same man IN THE SAME PLACE whom we see in his reddish shirt in Hughes, only here he's had artificial shadow added to hide his facial features:



Amazing to think that we've been looking at Mr. Oswald in Hughes for all these years and not realizing it!

 

Another way of thinking of this:

It has been established beyond any doubt that there are TWO men in red shirt over white tshirt standing in different parts of the west side of the doorway at the time of the motorcade:



Only one of these two men can be Mr. Billy Lovelady.

But which one?

Answer: The one whose facial features are NOT obscured in Wiegman through the addition of fake shadow:



And there is only one man whose facial features the authorities were desperate not to have show up in images of the doorway at the time of the assassination:

Mr. Lee Harvey Oswald------------------a manual worker in the Depository who said he wore this reddish shirt over his white tshirt that day:



[Credit for shirt photo: Mr. Pat Speer]

 

[Alan Ford]

And----------------by way of gratifying bonus-----------------Hughes even shows us the glass from the lower part of Mr. Oswald's Coca Cola bottle!



 

[Alan Ford]

Speaking of bottles!

Here's an aftermath photo showing something interesting just beside where Mr. Oswald was at the time of the assassination:



We see two items----------------a bottle and some sort of light-colored small paper bag or wrapping:



Oh but look more closely!---------



What an odd shape for the mouth of a bottle! Gee, it's almost as if there's something on top of, or stuck into the mouth of, the bottle............

What on earth could it be?

Well, what was it again Mr. Oswald------------the man who was standing right by here at the time of the assassination; the man we see drinking from a bottle in Hughes; the man we see holding TWO items in his hands in Wiegman-----------said he had for lunch?

1. Apple
2. Cheese sandwich
3. Coca Cola

Hmmm, what might one wrap a sandwich in?
Hmmm, what might an apple look like after being eaten?
Hmmm, what might a Coca Cola bottle look like after the drink has being consumed?

Check! Check! Check!