Tuesday, June 19, 2018

The people who deny that Oswald rode the bus and cab are really being childish. And stupid, I might add. They are not thinking. They don't know how to think. The bus transfer ticket was found on Oswald and entered into evidence at 4 PM. The driver of the bus, Cecil McWatters, wasn't found until 2 hours later. So, how could Dallas Police have gotten that ticket except by getting it from Oswald? 

You do get it, don't you, that Oswald was being cast as the lone gunman? And not just the lone gunman, but the lone perpetrator, where he didn't breathe a word of it to anybody. So, how could a lone gunman have a getaway driver? Once you have a getaway driver, you don't have a "lone gunman" any more. And remember whose story it was. It wasn't Oswald's story. It was the plotters' story. They wrote his story. Oswald didn't have a story. 

So, why would the plotters have given their lone gunman a getaway driver? They wouldn't. They couldn't. They didn't. How stupid do you think they were? And Oswald, himself, could never have arranged such a thing. Oswald had no friends. You hear me? No friends, no friends, no friends, no friends, no friends. It's not as though he could have gotten someone to pick him up. And why would he? He went to work that morning not knowing that anything was going to happen. He asked Junior Jarman why people were gathering on the sidewalk outside the building. Jarman was the one who told him that the President would be passing the building that day. Oswald didn't even know that, let alone that the President was going to be shot. 

So, there is no basis whatsoever to think that Oswald could have arranged a pickup. And even if he wanted to, there was no one he could have asked. Did I mention that he had no friends? 

So, that leaves the plotters, the killers of Kennedy, the ones who were framing Oswald as the lone gunman, as the only ones who could have arranged such a ride for Oswald, but they had every reason in the world not to do it because they wanted Oswald to be seen as the lone gunman.

But now, let's look at it from the perspective of the Dallas Police. Let's say, hypothetically, that they knew that Oswald left Dealey Plaza in a car driven by somebody, but they decided that they wanted to make it that he left by public transportation, first bus and then cab. Even if you think they could have sold the public on that, do you know who they never could have sold on it in a million years? Oswald. That's because he knew what he did, and he obviously wasn't going to believe he did something that he didn't do. He wasn't Jack Ruby.  That was Jack Ruby's trait, but it wasn't Oswald's trait. Oswald was clear. Oswald was lucid. Oswald was grounded. Oswald was with it. 

So, the second he heard that Dallas Police were claiming that he rode a bus and cab (assuming he didn't) he would know that they were corrupt, that they were framing him, that they were engaged in falsifying evidence and obstructing justice. It would be like a high-pitched alarm that the Dallas Police were up to no good, that they were engaged in criminality. And remember that if Oswald had done something else, if he had left Dealey Plaza another way, he'd have had no trouble proving it. He'd be more than able to substantiate it. And then who was going to be in the hot seat? The Dallas Police were going to be. 

So, what I am asking is that you be smart enough to realize that the Dallas Police were smart enough to realize that they couldn't possibly get away with framing Oswald for riding a bus and cab if he didn't. It wasn't just risky for them if they did it; it was absolutely reckless and self-destructive. 

And once they put up that transfer ticket into the story, there was no taking it back. If something surfaced which proved that Oswald did something else, they would have been cooked. They would have been fried. It would be one thing if they just said that they thought he rode the bus and cab. But, by putting up that transfer ticket and claiming to have found it on Oswald, there was no taking it back. So, if something surfaced that dashed it, they'd have been caught with a lot more than egg on their faces. They would have been totally and utterly screwed. No way were they foolish and stupid enough to do such a thing, to take such a chance. The foolishness and stupidity lies with those who claim that they did it. 

Oswald rode the bus and cab. HE SAID HE RODE THE BUS AND CAB. He provided the information on the cab fare: eighty-five cents. He admitted that it was his bus transfer ticket and did not dispute it when police said they found it in his shirt pocket, and that's Boyd and Sims who found it. 

Oswald certainly didn't know anyone who could pick him up in Dealey Plaza. For that to happen, the plotters would have had to arrange it, but they weren't going to arrange such a thing for their "lone gunman." A lone gunman can't have a getaway driver. How many times do I have to say it?

Do you know what is holding back the JFK truth movement? It isn't people like John McAdams and David Von Pein. Those clowns are hapless and hopeless. What is holding it back are the stupid idiots who put forward false conspiracy theories about what happened, such as, that Oswald was involved with Ruby, that they were involved with Malcolm Wallace and David Sanchez Morales, and that Oswald got picked up in Ruth Paine's station wagon.... all the very stupid nonsense that they spew, God-damn spewers that they are. That's what's hurting the movement. We've made progress despite them, but we'd have made a lot more were they not around. I wish they would just go away.   
In this video, Will Fritz claims that Oswald was unconscious from the minute he was shot in the garage.


So, how then could Detective Combest claim that Oswald was responding to questions by shaking his head in the jail office?

Mr. HUBERT. Did you hear Oswald say anything?
Mr. COMBEST. No, sir. He--I didn't hear him say a word hardly, after he had been shot. He was moaning at the time Jimmy Leavelle, Graves, and I laid him down on the floor and removed the handcuffs that he had on him.
Mr. HUBERT. That was in the jail office?
Mr. COMBEST. Yes, sir. At the time I asked him and talked to him trying to get him to make a statement to me at the time. Especially, after I realized how serious the wound was. When we first asked him he appeared to comprehend what I was saying. 

Mr. HUBERT. What did you ask him?
Mr. COMBEST. Well, I told him was there anything that he wanted me to tell anybody or was there anything he wanted to say right now before it was too late, and I don't remember my--exactly the words that I did say to him, but after I realized the seriousness of the wound, of course, trying to let him know if he was ever going to say anything he was going to have to say it then.
Mr. HUBERT. You thought he was dying?
Mr. COMBEST. Yes, sir; I did.
Mr. HUBERT. And do you think you used language to him to convey to him your idea that he was dying?
Mr. COMBEST. Yes, sir.
Mr. HUBERT. Did you get any indication that he actually understood what you were trying to convey to him?
Mr. COMBEST. When I first started asking him he did. He looked up at me, seemed to recognize that I--who was talking to him.
Mr. HUBERT. You don't mean that he recognized you as a person?
Mr. COMBEST. He recognized that I was the person talking to him.
Mr. HUBERT. But he didn't say anything?
Mr. COMBEST. No, sir; just shook his head and I said, "Do you have anything you want to tell us now," and he shook his head.

Now obviously, that was a bold-faced lie on the part of Combest. If that had happened, others would have seen it. And remember what Dr. Bieberdorf said, that he believed Oswald was dead in the jail office. He said he took the man's vital signs and could detect no heartbeat and no respiration. How can a guy with no vital signs shake his head in response to a question or look at someone? 

Combest lied. HE LIED! Do you understand what that means? It means that the whole story was a lie. It means that he was embellishing on a lie. This was Combest's tall tale, his fish story. He thought it sounded good. He thought he'd give it a flourish.  And what's amazing is that this was March 1964, and you'd think they'd all have had their stories straight and synchronized. 

And what about Mr. Hubert, his interrogator? Here, Combest was telling him that Oswald was aware and responsive in the jail office. So, shouldn't his first thought have been to compare Combest's testimony with others who saw Oswald in the jail office to see if they corroborated it? And if he had done that, he would have found that they didn't corroborate it, that no one did, that everyone else claimed that Oswald was completely and totally unconscious and unresponsive in the jail office. So then, what do you do? You call Combest back in and put him on the spot about it. Then you arrest him for lying to federal investigators?.But, did Hubert even think about the uniqueness, the singularity of Combest's claim, and the fact that it was in stark contradiction to every other witness? I doubt it, and even if he was aware of it, he wouldn't have done anything about it anyway. Hubert just milked what Combest said, as best he could, and then moved on.   

But, what an actor. What a liar. B.H. Combest. He tried a little bit too hard to support the ruse. You might say he got carried away. And in the process, he laid it all bare, that it was all a colossal and unmitigated lie, that what happened to Lee Harvey Oswald was nothing like the story being told. It was all a lie. It was all a lie. It was all a lie.  

Monday, June 18, 2018

It's like with Oswald. He knew things, right? He knew that he was innocent. He knew that he didn't own and didn't order a rifle. He knew he never posed for the Backyard photos. He knew he was in the doorway during the shots. And all that he was going to tell his attorney upon seeing him. So, what did they do? They didn't let him see an attorney. They killed him before he could see an attorney. But with Jack Ruby, they not only let him see an attorney, but they let him see one immediately. They even provided him one. So, why the difference? It was because Ruby didn't know anything. He had nothing to tell his attorney except that he went down there; they jumped him; he didn't know why at the time, and then upstairs they told him that he shot Oswald. And that was it. It was all he could say because it was all he knew. Ruby was totally and completely unaware, uninformed, and uninvolved. He eventually came to make charges against Johnson, but it wasn't because of anything he knew. It was all from a book he read while in the County Jail, A Texan Looks at Lyndon by J. Evetts Haley. That's all. Nothing else. Ruby had no connection to Johnson. And he had no connection to Nixon either. That letter is a fake. It included a Washington DC zip code at a time in which they didn't exist (the 1940s). They have been playing us from the start. They wanted to be sure that those who were gong to dispute the official story of what happened on 11/24 would dispute safely- for their perspective. And if the perspective is that Ruby knew Oswald, and he was involved in the JFK conspiracy, and he killed Oswald to silence him, then it reinforces the whole idea that he killed him. And that's what they care about. They don't mind if you want to enhance Ruby's motive for killing Oswald. The important thing to them is that you believe that he killed Oswald. That's all they require of you. You can embellish it any way you want, and they don't care. Don't forget: "they" the mainstream media spread the ridiculous and provably false story that Jack Ruby watched the "fireworks" in Dealey Plaza, and even though there is no chance that he did that. But, the powers that be want people like you and me to think that Ruby was deeply involved in the JFK assassination plot, and that he was ordered to kill Oswald to silence him, etc. etc. When you advance crazy stories like that you are supporting your slaveholders. You are giving them peace of mind. You are giving them that "all's well" feeling. But, if you want to scare the living shit out of them, then start telling the truth, that Jack Ruby was innocent.
The people who think that Jack Ruby was neck-deep in the conspiracy to kill Kennedy are being not just childish, but babyish. And the same goes for those who think that the Dallas Police collaborated with Ruby to kill Oswald, that they tipped him off as to the time, etc. If it were true, THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO KILL RUBY IMMEDIATELY. 

How could they trust Ruby to keep his mouth shut when they were prosecuting him for murder and seeking the death penalty? They wanted to put him to death. You get that, don't you? And if Ruby revealed what he knew about what really happened, it would have changed everything. You realize that too, don't you? And even if you think he knew all that but just didn't care, that he was ready and willing to die for them, for whatever insane reason your mind has conjured up, how could the others trust him? How could they depend on him to keep his mouth shut? 

They couldn't. They wouldn't. They didn't. They would have had to kill him immediately. But, they didn't kill him immediately. They let him live for 3 years. They didn't kill him until he won a new trial. So, why did they kill him then? It's because a new trial would have been far more risky the second time around- for them. His legal team would have learned from their mistakes the first time. And what if they took a closer look at the films and saw that it wasn't him? They just weren't willing to take the chance and go through it all again. As soon as he won that retrial, he was a dead man. Enough was enough. They wanted to put it to bed, and they did.

All this talk about Ruby being involved with Oswald, meeting him at the safe house etc., it's childish. It's childish nonsense. They would have had to kill him immediately. How can you trust a guy to keep his mouth shut when you are prosecuting him for murder and seeking the death penalty? We're talking about death; the thing people dread most in life and try hardest to avoid. The whole idea in life is to stay alive. So, why wouldn't he use what he knew to save his life? 

It would have been different if the plan was that he kill Oswald, and then they smuggle him out of the country. But, that wasn't the plan. The plan was that he kill Oswald and then face the electric chair. How can you trust a guy in that situation? You can't. So, you just kill him. 

Jack Ruby didn't know anything, and he wasn't involved in any conspiracy- with anybody about anything.  He NEVER met Oswald. He didn't know anything about any safe houses. He was not in Dealey Plaza during the JFK assassination. He was in the Dallas Morning News building tending to his ads, just as he claimed. And witnesses who claimed to see Ruby in Dealey Plaza or with Oswald or with E. Howard Hunt, as one claim goes, were wrong, although they may have seen a Ruby double. But, they definitely weren't seeing the real Jack Ruby. The real Jack Ruby just ran his nightclubs, and it was plenty enough to keep him busy. He wasn't involved in any of that other stuff. He really did like and admire President Kennedy and would never have dreamed of hurting a hair on his head, let alone killing him. That Jack Ruby had it in him to do such a thing as kill him is preposterous. You apparently don't get the guy. He was childlike! 

Jack Ruby lived for 3 years precisely because he didn't know a  damn thing. 

Don't you get it? The alternate story for Jack Ruby was written before the killing went down so that suspicious people like you and me would have something to preoccupy ourselves with.  Jack Ruby the gun runner. Jack Ruby the Mafia hit man. Jack Ruby the pimp. Jack Ruby the guy who threw people down stairs. It was the lore that they wrote so that the doubters could be safely corralled and contained in a safe mental place. It kept them far away from the truth, that Jack Ruby was completely and totally innocent. 

Jack Ruby was innocent. And whatever reasons you have for resisting it, you need to look deep down in your soul and find out why you are fighting it. It is the most important fact about the JFK assassination that there is, after the fact that Oswald was standing in the doorway during the shooting. 

To those who think Jack Ruby planned to shoot Oswald but showed up 1 hour and 20 minutes late, on the basis that Dallas Police tipped him off to the right time, you have some explaining to do.

How could Jim Levealle trust Jack Ruby to shoot straight? Leavelle was on the other side of Oswald but in the direct path of the bullet. The only thing between him and that bullet was the skinny body of Lee Oswald. So, how could Jim Leavelle trust this wacky nightclub owner to shoot Oswald and not him?

Then, how could all of the Dallas Police trust Jack Ruby to keep his mouth shut afterwards? They all testified against him in court, calling him a homosexual- and more.  And remember that the prosecution was seeking the death penalty. It's amazing because the same prosecutor, Henry Wade, had said that he was going to seek the death penalty against Oswald. SO, HE WAS GOING TO PUT TO DEATH THE GUY THAT HE INTENDED TO PUT TO DEATH?  That's amazing. "God damn it! I was supposed to kill him! Not you!"

So, how could there have been any collaboration between Jack Ruby and the Dallas Police when the Dallas Police were trying to put Jack Ruby to death?

And since there could not have been any collaboration between the Dallas Police and Jack Ruby, how did Ruby show up 1 hour and 20 minutes late to the killing that he intended to do?

Don't you get it? The Jack Ruby-did-it scenario does not hold up to scrutiny. If Jack Ruby were going to shoot Oswald, he would have showed up on time. Plus, he would not have brought his dog along.   

How hard is it to figure out: "I want to kill Oswald. Oswald is going to be moved at 10 AM. So, I better show up before 10 AM so I can kill him."

Jack Ruby was a sucker. He was a fall guy. He was, in Oswald's word, a patsy. But, he was so lame-brained, and they knew he was lame-brained, that they figured they could tell him that he shot Oswald, and he would believe them. That is exactly what happened.

You can't understand the JFK assassination without realizing that Jack Ruby was innocent. You are completely and totally in the dark unless you realize that Jack Ruby was innocent. Jack Ruby innocence is the brave new world of the JFK assassination. Don't fear it. Embrace it. Make it your own. Without it, you are lost.  


Sunday, June 17, 2018

There are no images of the real Lee Harvey Oswald at Parkland Hospital. None. The few we have are all fake.  Including this one:

That is NOT Oswald. Oswald's doctors said that when he arrived, he had zero blood pressure and 80% of the blood in his body was exsanguinated,  meaning lost from his circulatory system. And it's easy to understand why, since both his aorta and his vena cava were ruptured. And they said that his heart was beating so feebly, it was hard to tell if it was beating at all. He was extremely close to death, and probably past the point of being savable. But, if you look at this guy above, he's not in bad condition at all. He's making a fist with his right hand. He's clasping the detective's hand with his left hand. And his color is fine. He looks as bronzed as anyone else. The real Oswald must have looked ghastly white at that point. And that's why they didn't want to show him to us. I think they were afraid that it would generate sympathy for him, that this could happen to him while he was in police custody and under police protection. 

Notice in this picture that Detective Graves on the right is wearing a belt with a hollow buckle. Well, on November 24, when he led Oswald out, he was wearing a belt with a military buckle- with a solid piece of metal. Look at him on the left, the inserted image.

The image of Graves on the left is from the Johnston photo, the third must famous photo from the garage, after the Jackson photo and the Beers photo. 

Now, Graves certainly didn't change his belt that day. The Parkland picture must have been taken on a different day. It was a recreation. And the guy lying on the stretcher can't be Oswald because Oswald was dead. Oswald did die on November 24. 

So, they didn't show us Oswald at Parkland Hospital. They never have, and they never will. 

Saturday, June 16, 2018

I have written this song in dedication to my father, Mark John Cinque. He was a policeman his whole adult life, first in New York City and then in Los Angeles. He faced grave danger quite a few times. I remember when he had to work the streets at night during the Harlem riots in New York. The year was 1964, and what I remember most is how distraught my mother was. She was beside herself with worry. Fortunately, he always made it home. It wasn't true of his partner, who got shot dead when they made a domestic disturbance call. They got to the apartment, and it was apparent that the man was brutalizing his wife inside. So, they broke through the door, and my dad's partner got killed in the fire fight.  The name of the song is: I'll Always Come Home To You. My thanks to Paul Popa for accompanying me.