Friday, November 22, 2019

Robin Wegerle When Bobby Kennedy was shot . There was lots of blood. When Oswald was shot I see no blood. On the ground or people. And what if Oswald wasn't shot. They just made it look that way.
  • Oswald Innocence Campaign Robin Wegerle that is exactly what I think happened. But, they did not let Oswald live. They had to kill him. So, they must have done it afterwards, most likely in the police station. They probably had a room let up with sound proofing, plus they used a gun with a silencer.
Robert Jordan put this photo up, and I don't remember the source of it. But, I'd like you to compare the African-Americans ladies in it to the corresponding ones in the Altgens photo.

So, the woman with the big hair in the Altgens photo we have been told corresponds to the one in the black skirt and white blouse in the color photo. They made her hair bigger in the Altgens photo no doubt to hide someone, perhaps Bill Shelley. But, what I'm trying to figure out is exactly where they were located. 

In the Altgens photo, you can see that the woman with the big hair is above the obelisk, but in the other image, she is below the obelisk. 

You don't see the obelisk, and the obelisk is pretty close to the intersection, so she must be below it. So, why is she above it in the Altgens photo?

Let's get our bearings straight.

You see where the obelisk is. It's high. It's on like an island. Then as you go down Elm, you get to where the short white wall begins. Now look at the other picture again.

You see the white wall. Some people are sitting on it. The African-American woman who got captured in the Altgens photo is at the beginning of the wall. But, look at the other image again because the obelisk is far above the wall.
And here she is in the Altgens photo.

So, how could she be in two places at the same time?

It is the same woman, right?
It looks like the same face, but the difference in the hair is that on the left, her hair is in a bob, but on the right, I don't know what it is, but there is more hair there, and I think it's an enhancement. And this claim that they are the same woman did not originate with me. Others said they are the same woman. But, I am absolutely sure that no one can be in two different places at the same time. 

So, did they move her image to where it is in the Altgens photo in order to block the view of somebody? She is doing that there. 

Let's look at some more images. And that's probably pretty close to Altgens' view. 

You see the obelisk. You see the wall. You see the tree. 

So, she seems to be between the obelisk and the tree. Smack in the middle. Above one and below the other. 

But, in the other, she is farther down Elm Street where the little wall starts. 

So, I don't know what to make of this, and I am going to have to run it by others. 

It may be that they did some kind of weird compression in the Altgens photo to get that African-American woman to where  she would block the view. And notice that the oblelisk looks tilted in the Altgens photo.

I just checked, and none of the corporate media news websites are saying a word about JFK on this the 56th anniversary of his assassination.  That's what I expected. After the 50th in 2013, it all went dead, and I think it will continue that way, until 2023 when perhaps they'll cover it again for the 60th. 

I watched parts of Ruby and Oswald again, the tv movie from 1978, and it's interesting that depicted Oswald as snarly and street-tough and punk-like, which he wasn't. Recall his temperament at the Midnight Press Conference. In the movie, they made him ooze with criminality. And they had Fritz ask him whether he mail-ordered a rifle from Chicago, and Oswald replied with a wisecrack, "How was I supposed to do that on my salary of $1.20 an hour when I can barely afford to feed myself."

But, the fact is: they never informed Oswald of anything pertaining to Chicago. They simply asked him if he owed a rifle, and that's it. 

So, why didn't they show him the evidence from Chicago? And why didn't they ask him about his P.O. Box? I think I can answer that one. It's because he didn't have a P.O. Box, and they (the FBI) knew he didn't have one, so why ask him about it? It would only have alerted him to the fact that he was being systematically framed. 

And note that they didn't show him the rifle either. They could have but they didn't. I suppose it's because they knew that Oswald would say that it wasn't his and he never saw it before. 

And why show him the Backyard photo? Oswald said right away that it wasn't him and someone put his face over the body of another man, and that it was a photographic trick that he could demonstrate. There really was no need to show that to him. 

So, why did they do it? It may have happened by accident. They may have hoped that it would be discovered after Oswald was dead. They were discovered in the Paine garage on Saturday afternoon, but Oswald was supposed to be killed in the theater, and that didn't work out, and I believe he was then supposed to be killed at the Midnight Press Conference, and that didn't work out either. 

Think about how much better it would have been if they never showed them to Oswald. He would have never denied they were real. Supposedly, Marina told the FBI that they were real, but she first said that she only took one, not several, and that it was taken in February, which was before Oswald supposedly got the rifle. Later, she changed her story accordingly, but remember: in FBI custody, Marina became the Stepford Wife of the FBI, and you can't rely on anything she said. In a word, they flipped her. The combined effect of whatever mind-control techniques they were using on her, including drugs, and the tremendous "green poultice" that she got after the assassination, including not just contributions from the American public, but a movie deal with an Italian film company for a movie that was never made. It was something like $150,000 in 1963 money. Do you realize how much that is equivalent to today? Marina got rich off the assassination. And that Italian film company was very mysterious and suspicious. You can't find anything that they've done. It just vanished after that. Apparently, it was just CIA-generated money, and the Italian film company was a facade. They were paying Marina off for her cooperation. But, what a tortured life because deep inside, Marina had to know what she did to Lee.

And if they were going to show the Backyard photo to Lee, why not the Altgens photo? The controversy about it started right away. We have it in writing that they were talking about it on 23rd. The evening of the 23rd is when the Dallas Police and FBI stormed Billy Lovelady's house, with a copy of the Altgens doorway "as big as a desk" according to his wife Patricia. What justification was there for showing the photo to Lovelady and getting his take on it but not doing the same for Oswald? There was NO justification for that. They weren't going to show it to Oswald because they knew very well that he would identify himself as the Doorway Man, but I think he also would have recognized that the image was altered, that they moved the top of Lovelady's head over to him. He would not have recognized it as Lovelady's, but he would have realized that it was somebody else's and not his. You can see how well these hairlines match between Young Lovelady and Doorway Man, but the image of Lovelady is from the 1950s, probably 1957, and he lost a lot of hair after that. So, why would Doorway Man have the hairline of 1950s Lovelady? He couldn't. He couldn't if he was Oswald, and he couldn't if he was Lovelady. He just plain couldn't. 

I don't know why Lovelady on the right has that black mark on his forehead. I suspect it's an artifact. The white arrow points to where the junction may have been. So, everything above the arrow is Lovelady, and everything below the arrow is Oswald. 

Oswald recognized what they did to the Backyard Photo, so he may well have recognized what they did to this. So of course they weren't going to ask him about it. 

But, if you look at Oswald's image on the left, you can see how freaky it is, with all that distortion on the right. And it's just one of many weird distortions in the Altgens doorway. It really is a freak show. Remember, the song we wrote:

The Altgens Family
Da nah nah nah.

Da nah nah nah.

Da nah nah nah; Da nah nah nah; Da nah nah nah.

They're creepy and they're kooky, 
Mysterious and spooky, 
They're all together ooky, 
The Altgens Family. 

Their doorway's a museum 
Where people come to see 'em 
They really are a scree'um 
The Altgens Family. 




So get a witches shawl on 
A broomstick you can crawl on 
We're gonna pay a call on 
The Altgens Family.

Their names are still debated,
Black Hole and Obfuscated,
Their histories are related,
The Altgens Family.

See Oswald is the Doorman,
He doesn't have a prayer, Man,
Lovelady's got no hair, Man,
The Altgens Family




Lee's innocent, you dodo,
Scan Altgens' altered photo
For characters we all know,
The Altgens Family.

So, as we ponder this the 56th anniversary of the JFK assassination, one thing is certain: the official story is dead- completely and totally dead- and only fools and State pigeons, both paid or unpaid, spout it, and half of them probably don't believe it. Oswald's innocence is clearly established, proven, and widely recognized, and in time, Ruby's will be too. 

Thursday, November 21, 2019

It's noteworthy that the last thing Ruby said in his so-called "death bed confession" that if he hadn't made an illegal left turn, he never would have met his fate. I know what he meant. He was driving east on Main from Dealey Plaza. He passed City Hall on the left. A little past it was the WU office on the left. There was a parking lot right next to it, and he turned left through a double yellow line to enter the parking lot. 

But, consider the irony: IT WASN'T EVEN ILLEGAL. In Texas, a double yellow line only means that you absolutely cannot pass, not that you cannot turn left. 

Jack Ruby, what a poor soul. The idea that he would have had it in him to shoot Oswald when he was in the custody of Dallas Police, to usurp these officers whom he admired so much, is ridiculous.
The idea that he was a hit man, a mobster, a gun runner, and all that stuff is just ridiculous. He was just a guy running a couple night clubs for whom the biggest thrill in his life was that he was on a chummy, first name basis with the Dallas Police, and otherwise he was very devoted to his family and also to his religious faith as a Jew. That was Jack Ruby. That is who he was. Nothing else and nothing more. 

And the facts should tell you that he had no thought whatsoever of shooting Oswald. Anyone who thinks that Ruby went there to do it is being a complete fool. If he went there to do it, he would have not have brought his beloved dog along. He obviously expected to come back to her.  If he went there to do it, he would have shown up at the expected time. And if he went there to do it, it's highly unlikely that he would be absorbed in sending a $25 money wire to somebody. The seque between the two doesn't fit. It's like: "Pick up some milk, get the dry cleaning, kill Oswald." 

So, Ruby, undoubtedly, did not conspire with anyone to kill Oswald- not even with himself. He even made a joke about it. "No one knew about it. Not even me." It's in his narrative. 

So, how could that jury find him guilty of murder and sentence him to death when there was no premeditation? And what his lawyer, Melvin Belli, argued to the jury, made the most sense if he, in fact, had done it. Belli was incapable of thinking outside the box. But, he believed Ruby when he told him that he had no thought of shooting Oswald and only knew about it when police told him that he did it.  So, Belli did the Math, and that's what he came up with. If only Belli could have realized that the police were the bad guys in this situation- the lying bad guys. 

And it's easy to understand why Belli was so enraged when the jury sentenced Ruby to death. What were they thinking? That Ruby was lying about having no premeditation? And really, he had no motive either. Why didn't they realize that Ruby had no way of knowing that the jail transfer was delayed? 

So, what people are left with today is the choice between Belli's scenario that Ruby had a compulsive urge that suddenly came over him which he could not control or suppress, which was was spontaneous, unplanned, and according to Belli, done totally unconsciously, which really takes it to the limit of credibility, or, you can believe as I do that Ruby was innocent, and the reason he could not remember shooting Oswald is simply because he didn't shoot him.

So, why was the first officer on foot, the one Ruby saw, why was he leaning into Pierce's car? Well first, it tells you that Pierce must have STOPPED at the top of the ramp. The guy couldn't do it if the car was moving, right? But, Vaughn never said that the car stopped, and neither did Pierce. They both said that Vaughn stepped aside and waved him out. So, why did Pierce stop the first time? It was because he was waiting for Ruby. And the other guy was leaning in because what else could  he do when the car stopped? He had to be doing something.

So, Ruby saw something that was different from what Vaughn said he did. How do you explain that? You explain it by assuming that Ruby was seeing someone else. But, I'm a little surprised that Ruby could tell it was Pierce because if the other guy had his face in the window, it seems like his back is all Ruby would have seen. But, maybe he saw Pierce as he was driving forward. Or maybe, Ruby saw him from an angle as he started turning left to go down the ramp. In other words, he turned his head and looked to his right and recognized that it was Pierce. But, if so, then surely Pierce would have seen him as well, and I have no doubt that he did. He was waiting for him. Ruby was being monitored the whole time. They were probably on radio. And Pierce may have called someone down in the garage to say that Ruby was coming. This was about 10:30, most likely.  

It really is true that Ruby got there at a different time, an earlier time, and all his actions were being coaxed. His roommate George Senator was probably in on it. And the guy at the Western Union office or someone there had to be in on it. If Ruby was high on scopolamine, as I suspect, then all someone would have had to say is, "You should go down and see what's happening down at the ramp." And then, when he got there, all someone had to do was get Ruby's attention and point down the ramp and gesture, "go on down." And Ruby would have done it. That's how powerful scopolamine is. You don't think. You don't exercise your will. Without any judgment or contemplation, you just do what you're told. The CIA got that drug from the Nazis. Allen Dulles may have learned about it directly from the Nazi Intelligence Chief, Reinhard Gehlen. 

Wednesday, November 20, 2019

This is the route Ruby took from his apartment to Western Union. It was a little over 3 miles. 

So, he would have been heading to our right on Main Street at the top, between Elm and Commerce. He would have passed City Hall and the ramp, and Western Union was a block and a half further east. But, he had to go through Dealey Plaza. You see the 3-pronged road there, and that was Elm-Main-Commerce with all the pretty grass: Dealey Plaza. The story goes that before going to WU that Ruby went to visit the wreaths AGAIN. He did it on Saturday, but supposedly he did it again on Sunday. But, that's not that big a deal because all it means is that he came up Main, and then turned  left on Houston and then went down Elm to drive by the wreaths. And then a little further, there was a way to make a U to get back on Main. So, in other words, he would have just done an extra little loop. How long would it have taken? Probably 5 minutes or less. So, even if he did visit the wreaths, AGAIN, it didn't add much time to his drive. 

So, Ruby got up early, by his own admission. He dressed and ate breakfast. And then he left for Western Union. So, what time do you think he got there? Even today on mapquest it says that it only takes 6 minutes to drive from his address on Ewing Street to the the Main Street address of the old WU. That's today. Do you realize how much lighter traffic was in 1963? Let's allow a whopping 10 minutes (more than enough) plus another 5 for wreaths, so now it's 15 minutes door to door from his apartment to WU. Since he said he got up early, well, make it 9 oclock. He dresses and eats. Give it 45 minutes. Now, it's 9:45 AM. If you allow 15 minutes for him to get there, now it's 10:00. If you allow a whopping 15 minutes for him to conduct his business at WU and then walk the block and a half, now it's 10:30.  That's 48 minutes before he officially reached the ramp.  That is about when he reached it. I'm telling you: he got there early, and they got him secured up on the 5th floor; he was in holding; so that they could slip him into the story later. It was a bait and switch. 
I was wrong about something. Dallas City Hall was located down Main Street, east of Dealey Plaza. I thought that if you were driving east on Main Street that you got to the Western Union store before you got to Dallas City Hall, but I was mistaken. You passed City Hall before you got to WU. Ruby said as he was walking towards City Hall, he saw a policeman on foot leaning in and talking to Lt. Rio Pierce at the top of the ramp, and his back to Ruby. I thought that Ruby was coming from the other direction, from the west, but he was coming from the east, the Pearl Street side. And since Officer Roy Vaughn said he went to the east side of the ramp, the Pearl Street side, then Ruby would have seen his back if he was doing that, leaning in talking to Pierce. BUT, VAUGHN NEVER CLAIMED TO DO THAT. Vaughn claimed that as the squad car was pulling up, he just stepped aside, and walked onto the sidewalk, and seeing that the traffic was clear, he waved Pierce out. And that was it. He didn't stop to talk to him, and he didn't lean into his car. 

So, the point is that the mechanics were right that Ruby could have seen it if it happened, but there is no reason to think it did because there is no evidence that Vaughn did it. 

Vaughn said that he guarded the ramp by standing 2 or 3 feet deep into it and that nobody got by him. Can we give the man credit for being able to tell if someone was walking by him on an 8 foot wide ramp that he was guarding? And when he stepped out of the ramp to get out of Pierce's way, he continued to watch the ramp, and he said that his eyes were off the ramp for no more than an "instant." Jacky Ruby would have had to be invisible to get past Vaughan. But, it wasn't just Vaughn. There was another policeman there, albeit a former one, N.J. Daniels.

Mr. HUBERT. On what side of the. ramp was Daniels?
Mr. VAUGHN. He would be on the east side, toward Pearl Street there.

So, both Vaughn and Daniel were on the Pearl Street side of the ramp, the side that Ruby approached from. It means that Ruby would have to get past both of them unseen. 

How many people were there? Vaughn said at most 6. 

Mr. HUBERT. Were there many people standing around that entrance?
Mr. VAUGHN. No, sir; I would say at most, I believe, at most it would be a haft dozen, I think, who were standing there.

But, this is how they depicted it in the tv movie Ruby and Oswald.

Look at that mob. There was no reason for anyone to be there. It was an incoming ramp, so who were they waiting to see pulling in? Nobody. That mob wasn't there, but the few men who were there, were just there to be Ruby magnets. Now, in making this propaganda movie, they had to sell this shit, and look what they did. Notice that there is a blue vehicle of some kind parked in the street, and there are so many men there, some of them are standing in the street. But that is ridiculous. That is the very lane that traffic used. You couldn't have those men in the street or that wagon. But, it had a purpose. 

Where are those men standing in the upper right where you see the question marks, and why does the background look blue? They would have to be in the street. And what happened to the wagon? THE PURPOSE OF THIS WAS TO EXTEND THE DISTANCE TO THE STREET, SO THAT VAUGHN HAS FURTHER TO GO, GIVING RUBY MORE TIME TO GET IN. 

Recall that Vaughn said he had his eyes off the ramp for no more than an instant. Seven seconds after Ruby started making his move to enter the ramp, this is where he was.

So, even if Vaughn had his eyes off the ramp for 7 seconds, he would have still seen Ruby's back when he returned his eyes to it. What it means is that Vaughn was right, that there was zero chance that Ruby got by him. Listen to Vaughn:

Mr. HUBERT. Do you think it would have been possible for anyone to enter the basement who was approaching the Main Street ramp from Pearl Street or the Western Union direction, while the Pierce car was exiting?
Mr. VAUGHN. No; I don't believe it would.
Mr. HUBERT. And why do you say that?
Mr. VAUGHN. Because--due to the fact--the time, the period of time like I said, I had a view of the ramp from the period of time the car actually come out, and I waved it on and walked back to the ramp.
Mr. HUBERT. Now, you know, of course, that Ruby says that's the way he got in?
Mr. VAUGHN. Yes, I realize that.
Mr. HUBERT. What is your opinion about that statement?
Mr. VAUGHN. I don't believe he did.
Mr. HUBERT. You think he got in some other way?
Mr. VAUGHN. I don't know definitely, but I'll say he didn't come in at the ramp. How he got in--that, I don't know, but I know--I don't believe that he came in the ramp.
Mr. HUBERT. Is it your opinion beyond any reasonable doubt, and I think you are familiar with that phrase as an officer, aren't you?
Mr. VAUGHN. Yes.
Mr. HUBERT. That Ruby did not enter the basement through the ramp while you were there?
Mr. VAUGHN. Yes, sir.
Mr. HUBERT. Is that opinion so strong that if you were a juror, for example, you would convict a man or acquit him, whichever it would be, on the basis of your statement that he did not enter at that ramp?
Mr. VAUGHN. Well, now, What do you mean by that?
Mr. HUBERT. That's the reasonable doubt test, you see.
Mr. VAUGHN. You mean as far as I am concerned--as far as what I think about it, that I definitely do not think the man come down that ramp.
Mr. HUBERT. But I was testing the strength of your view.
Mr. VAUGHN. Well, I don't quite understand or follow you?
Mr. HUBERT. Well, here's what I had in mind--I'll put it this way--do you have the moral conviction that Jack Ruby did not enter the basement through the Main Street ramp to the degree that if that were an issue in a case on which you were a juror, you would say that it is beyond a reasonable doubt that he did not enter that way?
Mr. VAUGHN. So far as the knowledge I have of it--no, sir---I do not. I think if the question is that you think I would convict him on the doubt---of the knowledge that I have that he did not enter that ramp--yes, sir, I would.

Ruby and Vaughn were both telling the truth. Ruby DID get in that way, and Vaughn DID keep the ramp secure. There is no conflict between them. THEY WERE THERE AT DIFFERENT TIMES. Ruby was there and got in before Vaughn ever began his shift. Vaughn was set up. There is NO other possibility. If you try to say that Ruby passed Vaughn, that Vaughn actually missed sighting him, then get out a rag and start wiping Kennedy's and Oswald's blood off your hands and face because, in light of all this, you would have to be bloodied to say such a thing.