Sunday, April 29, 2018

Founded In Fetzering Part 7c

Now we get to the section on the OIC website that gives all of the reasons that Billy Lovelady cannot be Billy Lovelady. I apologize for this part taking this long to post. Quite frankly, it's hard to read such constant bullshit and know where to begin. This portion of the OIC website is the next most ridiculous, only behind the 7 anomalies which I will cover soon.

Here we go....

Sorry to burst Raff*'s bubble, but there are multiple, reliable images of Billy Lovelady. Raff* just refuses to admit it, because it destroys his own delusion.

 Billy Lovelady was a guy that happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. His name has been dragged through the mud by Raff* Sink and the OIC for simply showing up to work and watching the "parade" as the President was killed. He was hounded by the likes of Mark Lane and posthumously, by Raff* Sink for simply being a guy that resembled an arrested Lee Harvey Oswald, from over 200 feet away, in a grainy black and white photo. His existence and early demise was a perfect opportunity for whackjobs around the world to make his life meaningless, by wiping him from the steps of the TSBD and claiming their golden haired loser was actually the one standing there. It's all a bunch of bullshit and quite sickening if you think about it.

I'm not sure why Raff* has chosen this photo, as being the only reliable photo of Lovelady, unless it's because moonbat Mark Lane hired someone to take it.

The entire paragraph above is pure bullshit.

It has been pointed out to Raff* repeatedly, that there are plenty of examples of people with thinning hair where their hair looks thinner under certain conditions. Raff* can't grasp the simple. Everything has a sinister origin. In the photo above, Lovelady is looking down while walking but according to Raff*, people don't do that. Just recently in his famous "floating hat" picture, he claims that is impossible for someone to look down while walking.....

Apparently, Raff* has no knowledge of blind people walking around every day. But then Raff* is blind to most things that people with common sense understand. Billy Lovelady would never bring food up and down an open outer shirt. People's hair always looks the same regardless of lighting or photographic conditions.
Raff* Sink is a walking contradiction. Police officers can't look down and walk but in the only "reliable" photo of Billy Lovelady, Lovelady can.

Here is Lance Uppercut schooling Raff* on his failure to understand how photographs work...

Now for Raff*'s ear collage....

You can clearly see that Lovelady's ear in the left picture sticks out from his head, further than Oswald's. Raff* chooses to make a comparison with the only "reliable" picture of Lovelady, on the right because with Lovelady's head looking down, it gives the impression that his ears stick out further than on the left, but they don't.

There's more...

Now Raff* chooses to make comparisons with pictures that he says were altered. How can you make a comparison between pictures if you know one was altered? Raff* is full of crap. The picture on the left shows his ear sticking out. The photo on the right shows his ears stick out to the side and don't lay back.

Raff* Sink is a two bit con man trying to claim the he proved the impossible. Unfortunately for Raff*, Billy Lovelady is Billy Lovelady. And Raff* will certainly say more about that later.

Raff* likes to make up words. There is no "hard" version of anything. One photo was developed and it was copied altering the contrast of the photo. But Raff* can't tell you which is which because he doesn't know the source of the photos. He does a yahoo search and pulls things from other websites and never checks to see where the image originated. So according to Raff*, one of the mysterious "they" made a version of the photo hard for some nefarious purpose.

Again, pure bullshit. Raff* has no proof that anyone did anything for a specific purpose. Billy Lovelady apparently had a habit of wearing his shirt partially unbuttoned. He did it on that day and on Novermber 22 when he was standing in the doorway of the TSBD. Proof of this is that he was captured by two news cameras, in the police department, when they brought Oswald in after arrest. Raff* has no proof that the FBI asked Lovelady to do anything. Raff* repeatedly states that Lovelady claimed to be wearing a red and white stripped shirt up until March of 1964. That's strange when you consider that he identified himself in Altgens 6 within a day after the shooting and recognized himself in copies of Altgens 6 that appeared in newspapers and magazines. He even pointed out that fact to the FBI on the day they said he said he was wearing a red and white stripped shirt.

Bullshit. Lovelady identified himself in a copy of Altgens 6 when the FBI questioned him within a day of the assassination.

Raff* has been harping on the statement by the FBI claiming that Lovelady stated he was wearing a red and white stripped shirt. However, Raff* tries to downplay something pointed out to him by Robin Unger years ago....Lovelady also identified himself in Altgens 6 on that day. 

Now why didn't the FBI catch the fact that Lovelady said he was the "Doorman" and yet wasn't wearing a red and white stripped shirt? The FBI fucked up. Wasn't the first time in this case. But Raff* insists that Lovelady didn't claim to be the "Doorman" until May. That again, is bullshit....

And it wasn't just Lovelady making the claim....

Raff* has been shown this evidence, before. It doesn't matter to Raff* because he can still holler FAKE!

There is one still photograph of Billy Lovelady wearing a plaid shirt on November 22, 1963 and it was sent around the world....

The film from which the still shot above was taken, is legit.

The proof is the film taken by Hughes....

Credit: JFK Assassination Photo Research Galleries

There's Billy Lovelady with his bald spot and reverse widow's peak standing on the steps of the TSBD.
A perfect example of how two different cameras can capture the same thing and it look different. Raff* claims that both of the films are fake but has absolutely no proof to back up his claim. None. I repeat, None.

Dr. Wrone is another crackpot who happened upon the JFK scene prior to Raff*. But Raff* thinks that his own inability to research a subject proves his claims to be true. Instead of doing the research, Raff* screams FAKE! and expects the world to believe him. Raff* is an idiot. The information behind the DCA film is out there for anyone with "google" to find. Raff*'s hero, Harold Weisberg has the information from Trask's Pictures of the Pain right there in his archive that describes how the film came about. But that would mean that Raff* would have to give up his ripped-off crusade. I say ripped-off because Raff* is just regurgitating 50 year old tripe with a new "fashion sense" twist. The guy went from the "bowels" of the medical world, Chiropractics to "fasting" Doctor which is even lower on the evolutionary chain of quackery. Give me a fucking break.....

Here's Raff*'s most recent comments about the Martin film...

No, fuck you Raff*. The majority of researchers find the Martin film to be corroboration of the claims that Billy Lovelady was exactly who he claimed to be...the guy standing in the doorway of the TSBD as captured in Altgens 6.

If Raff* had taken the trouble to research the films he's ripped off, he might have found out that one piece was enhanced or cleaned up. But that's too much work for Raff*. He'd rather stay ignorant to facts because if he admitted that the martin film was legit, he'd have to remove a good portion of his website and a bazillion blog posts. Keep in mind that Raff* claimed that the Martin film proved Lovelady was definitely wearing a plaid shirt on the day of the assassination. Then when he realized his screw up, he screamed FAKE!

More to come....


  1. Good work in identifying the skewed logic and the blatant manipulation of information by Ralph Cinque.

    Ralph's mantra of "FAKE!" for photographs that do not serve his purposes is the rough equivalent of the story of the boy who cried "WOLF!" too many times. The end result is that no one believes him.

    I liked your observation that Ralph prefers a sense of feigned ignorance over integrity; otherwise, he would need "to remove a good portion of his website and a bazillion blog posts." But if he at least acknowledged his errors, he might merit a bit of respect that could eventually remove his name from the Fetzering Hall of Shame.

  2. I am especially dumbfounded by Ralph Cinque's statement that "there is only one reliable image" of Billy Lovelady.

    How specifically did Ralph come to rule out every other photographic image of Lovelady?

    This is only one example of the wild conclusions that Ralph draws, based upon purely subjective criteria.

    What rubbish!


Anyone can comment but anyone's comment can be nice!