Friday, January 29, 2016

After having fine-tuned it some, I am going to again plug my e-novel, My Stretch of Texas Ground. I think you'll find it to be an enjoyable read. I really do. 

It's about a terror attack in which Al Qaeda decides to abduct and kill a Texas Senator while he's vacationing at a lake near a small town in Central Texas called Arlettsville. There is no Arlettsville; it's actually based on Marble Falls, which is a beautiful Hill Country town. Take a look:

The jihadist warrior in charge is Abdul Latiff Hassan, who is the baddest dude since Anton in No Country For Old Men. And the one who gets thrust in the cauldron of it is the local sheriff: Sheriff Joe Haladin. In contrast to Hassan who has traveled the world and speaks multiple languages, Joe was born and raised in Arlettsville and hasn't gone anywhere else to speak of. His whole life has been local, colloquial, and ordinary. He's an ordinary guy, a regular Joe. But now, he has to rise to the occasion because international terrorism has come to his small town. 

I'll tell you ahead of time that the outcome is mixed. It doesn't go entirely favorably for either side  The story is not politically correct. It is politically incorrect. But, it's not as politically incorrect as it used to be. I toned it down a little. But, it still contains some food for thought in addition to being an action thriller for its own sake. 

The character of Joe Haladin was inspired somewhat by Marlon Brando's character in the 1966 movie The Chase. You'll notice that I even use the image of Brando's character in my cover. Sheriff Calder too was the sheriff of a small town in Texas. And if you haven't seen The Chase, then consider this post to have been worth your while because it is a great movie.

Marlon Brando, Robert Redford, Jane Fonda, Angie Dickinson, Robert Duvall, E.G. Marshall. What a cast. It's a classic. 

But, getting back to my e-novel, it is very fast moving and easy to read. It is all about the action, the forward progression of the story. It's like a train barreling down the track heading, in this case, for a collision. Frankly, it's written for a person who isn't in love with the written word- who thinks there can be too many of them- who just wants to find out what happened.

And I guarantee you that for the actor who gets to play Sheriff Joe Haladin in the movie, it will be a career-defining role. 

As I said, "Joe" is based on the idea that he's a regular guy, a regular Joe. And Haladin is a twist on Paladin, the name of the protagonist in Have Gun Will Travel. 

So, if you are my friend, or if you just support my JFK work, please consider buying my e-novel, My Stretch of Texas Ground. If you have KindleUnlimited, it's free. Otherwise, it's $2.99.  You don't need a Kindle device. You can download Kindle for PC for free. The book is only 75 pages long. It's not like I'm asking you to read War and Peace. 

And to my adversaries who would be inclined to issue a negative review just out of spite, please don't do that. For one thing, I have already alerted Amazon that I have a lot of enemies, some of whom might do it, and they assured me that they would be on the lookout for it. And, they told me that when there is doubt about whether a review is genuine or not, they err on the side of getting rid of it. If they're not sure, it goes away. They don't have an obligation to post anyone's review. But, beyond that, I would urge you not to do it because it is a nasty, rotten thing to do.

I think My Stretch of Texas Ground is a real thrill ride, and I'm confident you'll feel the same way, and that you got your money's worth.  Here's the link, and thanks.

I've got the name of that UK guy who does the 22November63 website.

Hmm. What kind of name is Bojczuk? It sounds Slavic, like maybe Polish, Czech, Georgian or Russian. 

He is listed as the author of the book, which I presume is just the website in book form. They even provide a bio of him, but it's pure bull. I'll put it up. Basically, this is his way of telling you:  "Hey, you want to know about me? Well, fuck you, mo-fo." 

Jeremy Bojczuk


At the last count, there were four Jeremy Bojczuks in the English–speaking world. This website is about this one, not the other three.
This Jeremy Bojczuk was born more than a decade ago. When last heard of, he was still alive.

Educational History and Achievements

Jeremy Bojczuk was educated from an early age. He attended educational institutions, and has taught himself various things, including the skills necessary to build this website.

Intellectual and Sporting Achievements

Jeremy Bojczuk has achieved things: intellectual, sporting and otherwise.

Successes and Failures

Jeremy Bojczuk has succeeded in doing some things, but has so far failed to do others, such as scoring a hat–trick in the FA Cup final or winning an Olympic gold medal.


He has travelled widely, on foot, on a bicycle, on a motorcycle, in an airliner, in a light aircraft, in a helicopter, in a single–decker bus, in a double–decker bus, in a car, in a train, in a car inside a train, in a single–decker underground train, in a double–decker underground train, in a tram, on a ferry, in a rowing boat, and in a hovercraft.
He has not yet travelled on a horse, on an ostrich, on a surfboard, on a unicycle, in a chariot, or on a pogo stick.

Employment History

Jeremy Bojczuk has been employed. When last heard of, he was associated with Lab 99 Web Design.

Wise Sayings

Jeremy Bojczuk has uttered several wise sayings and pithy bons mots, such as: “If you can’t stand the heat, don’t put all your chickens in one kettle of fish.”

Interests and Hobbies

Jeremy Bojczuk has had interests and hobbies.

Personal Details

He is aware that once you place your personal details online, you lose control of them. Every piece of information you place online is stored on computers owned by other people. These other people, mostly acting together under the rules of social institutions, have the power to retain, delete, copy, share, alter and combine those pieces of information, and in almost every case there is nothing you can do about it. As the saying goes: you can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube.
Nevertheless, the following personal details have been made available, although readers are warned that at least one of them is untrue:
  • In 2003, Jeremy Bojczuk was briefly Devon and Cornwall Disco–Dancing Champion, until he was obliged to resign because of a technical infringement, an episode now known to disco–dancing enthusiasts as Medalliongate.
  • Jeremy Bojczuk at the Grand CanyonHe has visited the Grand Canyon, or at least has posed in front of a convincing backdrop.
  • Jeremy Bojczuk lives on a farm in Wales with his boyfriend and their three labradors.
  • He once spent four days in a coma.
  • For the last few years before his retirement in 1997, Jeremy Bojczuk worked as a lighthouse keeper off the coast of Norway.
  • In November 2013 he gave an interview on French television.
  • In his spare time, Jeremy Bojczuk enjoys banger racing and playing the lute in an early–music consort.
  • His first job after leaving school in 2005 was as a door–to–door harp salesman.
  • Jeremy Bojczuk can occasionally be found on a Saturday evening in The Plough on Little Russell Street in London, near the British Museum, or a short walk away in the Queen’s Head just off Gray’s Inn Road.

So, is that his real picture? Who knows. Is Jeremy Bojczuk even his real name? Who knows that either. 

Also, the book's publisher is Boxgrove Publishing, but when you go to their website, 22November63 is the only book they publish. So, that tells me that it's not a real company but rather a DBA. The book is essentially self-published.  

Boxgrove Publishing

is pleased to announce the publication of:

22 November 1963: 
A Brief Guide to the JFK Assassination

A readable, objective account of the central issues in the ever–controversial JFK assassination. The book includes detailed discussions of several important topics, and is fully referenced, with more than 400 footnotes. The ebook versions include more than 500 links to primary source documents.
22 November 1963: A Brief Guide to the JFK Assassination
The book is published in three formats:


  • 193 + vii pages.
  • 8.5″ x 5.5″ (approx. 21.5 cm x 14 cm).
  • ISBN: 978–0–9931003–0–7.

Amazon ebook

  • For Kindle devices and software.
  • ISBN: 978–0–9931003–2–1.

Standard ebook

  • In EPUB format, for other devices and software, including Nook, Kobo, Apple and Sony devices.
  • ISBN: 978–0–9931003–1–4.

Recommended Prices

The paperback and Kindle versions are available from Amazon. The EPUB version will be available from the book’s website shortly.
Please note that these are our recommended prices. Amazon may charge slightly more or less than these prices.

Contact Boxgrove Publishing

Email: books–at–boxgrovepublishing–dot–co–dot–uk
Or use this form, filling in every box:

Then lastly, the design of the book and 22November63 website are attributed to a web design company in England called lab99. I presume they are a real company. 

There are some people on McAdams' forum who claim that Oswald referred to being in the domino room eating and then seeing, through the window, James Jarman and Harold Norman outside on Houston Street, and he referenced them. I have said all along that that is ridiculous, that he would never have referenced people outside to establish his presence inside.  But now, I have found this from James Bookhout's report. 

"Oswald stated that on November 22, 1963, he had eaten lunch in the lunch room at the Texas School Book Depository, alone, but recalled possibly two Negro employees walking through the room during this period. He stated possibly one of these employees was called ‘Junior’ and the other was a short individual whose name he could not recall but whom he would be able to recognize."

Now, that's it. That's what happened. That is all there was to it. Oswald never said that he ate with anybody. And he certainly wasn't referencing anyone outside to establish where he was inside. And his lunch-eating was not an alibi for the assassination because it was well before the assassination. His alibi for the assassination was that he was "out with Bill Shelley in front." None of the reports and testimonies contain that statement and for the obvious reason. However, the joint report by Hosty and Bookhout contains the vague statement that Oswald said he was on the first floor during the shooting. Well, the doorway was on the first floor, and the first floor was not at ground level. So, they kind-of told the truth but left out that he had stepped out the door.

"Out with Bill Sheley in front" is where Oswald said he was during the assassination, and he said it because that is where he was during the assassination. He wasn't lying. He had no reason to lie. And no fact about the JFK assassination has greater importance than this. 

The Oswald Innocence Campaign is unique because, as far as I know, we are the only organization in the world which vouches for Oswald by name, as well as his innocence. There are other organizations, like CTKA, COPA, and ROKC which dispute the official story of the JFK assassination, but their names don't mention Oswald and they have nothing to do with Oswald. 

If you believe that the official story of the JFK assassination is a lie and that Oswald was framed and innocent, then nothing trumps that. That would be numero uno in your proclamations: that Oswald was innocent. Innocent, innocent, innocent. 

CTKA says that they are the citizens for the truth about the JFK assassination, but what's the truth? What are they talking about? What are they claiming to be true? You certainly don't know from the name. So, what is the point of having a name like that which doesn't communicate anything? It doesn't tell the person one damn thing about what you believe or what the truth is.  

COPA wants to be a coalition on political assassinations. So, they are lumping them altogether? Bad idea. That's trivializing. Each one deserves its own limelight. 

But really, COPA is even worse than CTKA because at least CTKA implies that the truth is something other than what is being told. But, you could have a coalition on assassinations that doesn't dispute anything.  That name is totally vacuous and empty. 

ROKC stands for Reopen the Kennedy case which doesn't even distinguish between John and Robert. They were both Kennedys. JFK Jr. was a Kennedy too, and shouldn't his case be reopened as well? So, what a horrible title and also what a horrible idea. The fascist state is who killed Kennedy. So, why assume that they could ever investigate his murder honestly? Could Stalin have investigated the crimes of Stalin? 

JFK Lancer is named after JFK's Secret Service code name. Obviously, it doesn't say anything. JFK Lancer is run by one person, Debra Conway. On her website, she says that the position of JFK Lancer is that there was more than one shooter. Oh, really? I get it. So, instead of Government Story #1, she wants you to believe Government Story #2. Debra Conway is the author of an absolutely horrible piece on Oswald in the doorway, in which she misstates and misinterprets every piece of evidence pertaining to it. 

But, I just checked for it, and I have a feeling that she shortened it. It used to be two pages, and now it's just one. And the other thing she did was link to the person who has the 22november1963 site, which is a well-placed sit.

Well, I am going to go out on a limb here: I believe very strongly that the guy who does the 22november1963 site, which again is very well placed and very highly ranked in the search engines, is an Op, even though he disputes some aspects of the official story. He just challenges it around the edges. 

The CIA, and whomever they are working with, decided a long time ago to take over the JFK conspiracy movement, to have their people be the leading spokespersons of it. It was a practical decision. They knew there was always going to be a conspiracy movement. They knew that opposition to the official story of the JFK assassination was never going to go away. The important thing was to control it, to limit it, to steer it away from really threatening things, like Oswald in the doorway.   

There is another reason why I think 22November is an Op site: it's location, the UK.

There is WAY too much interest in the JFK assassination in the UK. It isn't warranted. It isn't justified. It doesn't make sense. He wasn't their President. The UK is a hotbed of JFK assassination disinfo agents. And I can understand why they would work out of the UK. First, they are English speaking, so they can communicate with Americans, the target audience. But second, they are far away, so the organization of it and the managing of it, the running of it, can be conducted with less risk of exposure.

Do you want another reason? That 22November site doesn't even identify its owner.  All that writing, all that work, and the guy doesn't even identify himself? I am reminded of 9/11 disinfo site called run by "Mike Williams". Well, Mike said that the reason why he had so much time and money to do it is because he is a successful author and software developer. Well, I wrote to him and I pointed out that if he's a successful author, I should be able to find his book or books online. I couldn't find any. I also did a search for him in connection with software and found nothing either. Everything is online today. And guess where Mike Williams is from? The UK. But, I found out that his website was hosted by a company in Arizona that does 90% of its business with the US Military. 

Personally, I think it looks awfully bad that the 22November site is nameless. But, they may have felt that they didn't want the same kind of trouble that I gave Mike. Hey, if you stick your neck out, you get what's coming to you. 

But get this, the nameless UK guy on 22November did an attack on ME. That's right. Yours truly. But, he didn't name me either. 

First, he disputed the whole idea of there being any photographic alteration in the JFK assassination. He admitted that Oswald said that the Backyard photos were faked, but he said that the HSCA found otherwise, and that settles it.  

Then he wrote that allegations of Zapruder film alteration are "poorly supported." You'd think that he would have supported that statement, but that's all he said. But then, get this: he said there might be problems regarding the autopsy photos and x-rays, "the possibility of fraud can't be ruled out." Listen to me: What that amounts to is just throwing the reader a bone. And it doesn't even make sense. Do you really think that if they were going to alter autopsy photos and x-rays that they wouldn't seek to alter other photos as well? Once they had any mindset to alter imagery, it would have been across the board.   

Then, he rules out Altgens photo alterations. He says that anomalies in it are due to "the nature of the photographic medium" rather than fraud. But, the thing is: we've all been around photography our whole lives. We are pretty darn familiar with the nature of the photographic medium.

Then, UK guy admitted that the FBI put in writing that Lovelady said he wore the short-sleeved striped shirt, but that he later claimed that he was misquoted. But, that's not true. We never heard that from Lovelady. What happened is that when Tink Thompson was writing his book, he went, not to Lovelady, but to CBS, and CBS spoke for  Lovelady. But, that was 1967, and Lovelady was alive and well at the time. What Tink should have said is: 

"Screw you, CBS. I'm going to talk to Lovelady. I want to hear it from him." 

Why, in the name of Pete, would he rely on such hearsay? The truth is: Lovelady didn't like talking about it. Lovelady dreaded talking about it. You see, Lovelady was not a good liar. If he had been politician instead of a warehouse worker, he would have known how to lie, and he would have probably been good at it. But, he was not a politician. Anybody can lie, but the question is: can you lie convincingly? 

Then, UK guy referred to Doorman's shirt as having a plaid pattern, which is clearly not true.

So, everything UK guy said about this was false. I'm telling you, he is an Op. He's another "Mike Williams." He may be Mike Williams. He's just working the JFK cover-up from the UK, like so many others. 

Then, UK guy brandishes the 30 minute interval from shutter to fax nonsense, that we've heard so many times. It's nonsense. Altgens6 was separated out and delayed. Read Paul Rigby on the OIC website. You'll have to scroll 2/3 down the page.

Then, without identifying Ralph Cinque or the Oswald Innocence Campaign, he mentions some of my/our terminology, such as the names for the doorway figures. Of course, this was to mock us. But, the first figure to be named was the Man in the Doorway. So, if you can give him a name, why can't you give the others names? You have to have a way of referring to them. Then, he faults us for not providing "precise mechanisms" of how they were altered. That's not exactly true. It was OIC member Roy Schaeffer who introduced me to the terms "masking and opaquing", the signs of which he saw in the Altgens photo when he first saw it on the fax early in the morning on November 23, 1963 at the Dayton Daily News. 

Then UK guy wonders why they would have replaced Oswald's face with Lovelady's. First, they only replaced the top part of his face with Lovelady's. They just gave him Lovelady's cap, not the whole face. Much of Doorman's face is still Oswald's. Certainly, no more than half of Doorman's face is Lovelady's, and probably less than half. 

But, UK guy implies that it would have been more reasonable for them to pick somebody who looked nothing like Oswald. 

First, Oswald and Lovelady did not look alike. They were hardly twins. 

Why would anyone say that those two guys looked alike? It's just another big lie. But, UK guy needs to think about the practicality of his suggestion- that they should have picked someone who looked even less like Oswald. He didn't put a pencil to that. 

Then, UK guy mocks our claim that all the images of plaided Lovelady are fake. The truth is that not one of them was really Lovelady. He referenced my claim that the squad room scene with Lovelady is a fake, but he accuses me (without naming me) of saying that Lovelady was a midget. 

I never at any time said that Lovelady was a midget. Lovelady was 5'8". That's not a midget. What I said is that Lovelady's figure is too small in the frame.

Lovelady at the time was at least 170 pounds. Oswald was 131. Lovelady is too small. He's too small in comparison to Oswald who was farther from the camera, and Lovelady is way too small compared to the man in back. Lovelady was plopped into that frame. He wasn't at that desk, and he never claimed to be.

And there could was nothing casting the shadow over that big man's right shoulder. That was put in just to provide an adequate background for Lovelady's image, so that it would stand out properly.  Consider that in 1976, Kenneth Brooten, who is still alive, asked Lovelady when was the last time he laid eyes on Oswald, and Lovelady said it was when they broke for lunch at the Depository. He said nothing about seeing Oswald at the PD. His wife was there, and she was participating, adding her two cents now and then, and she didn't pipe in either. She didn't say, "Honey, what about later when you were sitting in the squad room, and they brought Oswald in, and it was a media circus?" She didn't say it because she didn't know about it. The whole story was made up. It's fake. It didn't even surface until 1977. Not a word. Not a reference. Complete vacuum until the HSCA. Even though the footage was supposedly shown on November 22, 1963 and then put into various compilations, nobody noticed Lovelady at the desk until 1977. 

Then, UK guy tried to vouch for the squad room scene by saying that the Martin film confirmed it. But, do these two look like the same guy?

They're not the same guy. They're not even the same shirt. Isn't it obvious that the one on the left is oddly sprawled open and the one on the right is buttoned up? It also has a big pocket flap, not present on Lovelady's posing shirt.

 UK guy asked where the alterations were performed. OIC Chairman Larry Rivera has argued soundly that it was at Jaggars/Chiles/Stovall, where Oswald used to work.

I have no doubt whatsoever that UK guy who runs the 22November site is an Op. He is working the cover-up under the guise of being a mild sceptic.

And that Debra Conway linked to him tells me all I need to know about her. 

Look: the JFK community is heavily populated with Ops, and they are working both sides of the debate.  Some vigorously support the official story while others mildly dispute it- and they all get along fine. And that isn't normal. This is Hatfields and McCoy type situation. 

So, the whole JFK world is a corrupt, phony place, filled with liars, fakers, actors, and pretenders, and don't doubt for a second that people are being paid. It's a job. It's a vocation: working the JFK cover-up. I wonder how much money was spent in 2015 to work the JFK cover-up. But, through it all, the Oswald Innocence Campaign is beacon of truth, and we are prevailing.

Hey, UK guy! Say hello to Mike Williams for me. You guys work in the same office? He knows me. 


Thursday, January 28, 2016

I am very pleased to announce that the newest senior member of the Oswald Innocence Campaign is Mees Baaijen. 

Mees  has lived an amazing life. Born and raised in Holland, he became world traveler, going off to live in a vast array of countries from Peru to Mozambique, including plenty more. Much of his traveling has been done under the auspices of the Dutch International Cooperation Service, which sounds to me like it may be the Dutch equivalent of the Peace Corps, which was founded by JFK. Mees is a friend of Jim Macgegor and Gerry Docherty, and like them, he has studied world history from a very unshackled and independent perspective. 

Mees has a special interest in the history of banking and its relationship to wars. He believes that, essentially, "all wars are bankers wars," and that includes the war against JFK, where his defiance of the Federal Reserve and attempt to go around them was a motive in his murder. 

Mees currently lives in Costa Rica. 

Wednesday, January 27, 2016

Apocalypto is one of the greatest movies of all time, and I have to think that had Mel Gibson not gotten himself in trouble with Hollywood that it would have been heralded as the masterpiece that it is. 

Reviews of it were mixed, but the negative reviews were all based on one thing: the violence. Nothing else. That was the only fault they could find with it.  

And yes, the movie is extremely violent, but, the story is extremely violent; the violence is part and parcel to the story. 

I'm going to lay out the situation for you, so that you know what it is about, and hopefully, without ruining it for you in case you want to see it. But, if you don't like getting any details about a movie before you see it, then stop reading now.  

It's about the end-days of the Mayan empire, where their agriculture was failing, disease was spreading, and they thought they needed to appease their Gods with blood sacrifices. So, they fell upon the local hunter/gatherer tribes, raided them, savaged them, dragged the surviving men back to the Mayan capital to be used as human sacrifices, and the women to be sold as slaves. And one of their victims is a young man named Jaguar Paw. He has a pregnant wife and a 3 year old son, whom he managed to sneak away during the attack and hide in an underground cave. But, he had to go back to lend his support to the tribe, and he fought valiantly. But, it was hopeless from the start, and he was among those being marched back to die.

So, there he is, shackled, brutalized, exhausted, and destined to die, but he knows full well that if he dies, then his family dies too.

Talk about being in a predicament. 

So, why is this such a great movie?  Because it completely draws you in. If you're a man, you become Jaguar Paw. You're trapped in his situation. Forget about the rest of your life; that's on hold. That's how effective this movie is. It completely immerses you in the story. 

Did it need to be as violent as it is? I would say so. The brutality and the monstrousness go to the heart of the story. 

Some have questioned the historical accuracy of it, and I can't speak to that. But, it certainly seems authentic when you watch it. I know that Mel Gibson hired Dr. Richard D. Hansen, Assistant Professor at Idaho State University and a specialist on Mayan culture, as a consultant to ensure a level of historical accuracy.

And frankly, I think these critics are hypocrites. What the Mayan empire did in the movie, is it more violent than what the American empire does? Didn't we raid villages in Vietnam? What about Mai Lai? 

"The Mỹ Lai Massacre was the Vietnam War mass killing of between 347 and 504 unarmed civilians in South Vietnam on March 16, 1968. It was committed by U.S. Army soldiers from Company C of the 1st Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment, 11th Brigade of the 23rd Infantry Division. Victims included men, women, children, and infants. Some of the women were gang-raped and their bodies mutilated."

"Twenty-six soldiers were charged with criminal offenses, but only Lieutenant William Calley Jr., a platoon leader in C Company, was convicted.  Found guilty of killing 22 villagers, he was originally given a life sentence, but served only three and a half years under house arrest."

Now, anyone who is going to complain about violence in a movie should definitely be at the front line in condemning violence in real life, particularly the institutionalized violence of governments. 

I mentioned that Jaguar Paw realizes throughout that his death will be a death sentence for his family. If he dies, they die. 

Well, it was the same way for John Kennedy. His slaughter on November 22, 1963 was a death sentence for, not thousands, but millions of people. They had  no idea that the killing of this man, half a world away, meant that they were going to die soon too. The total death toll in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos is estimated to be over 3 million people. How many of them died at the hands of Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon? The vast, overwhelming majority. Lyin' Lyndon and Tricky Dick were both very evil men, obsessed with power, and totally indifferent to exterminating human beings. 

But, it wasn't them alone, and there was nothing unique about them. During World War II, Winston Churchill ordered the firebombing of Dresden, an art center and hospital city in eastern Germany. After the first raid, in which they used incendiary bombs, which spread fire throughout the city, where many victims were incinerated, there was a calm which led survivors to think that it was over. So, they came out.  But then, low-flying planes swooped in with machine-gunners who shot anyone on sight. A mother with a child shot dead. An old guy hobbling along on crutches shot dead. It was a merciless and unmitigated attack on civilians.  The death toll was higher than Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. Churchhill is usually blamed for the Dresden massacre, but you can be darn sure that Roosevelt was in on it. It wasn't just British planes; it was also American planes. They worked together in synchrony; and their targets were civilians. Maximizing civilian deaths was the goal.  

Do you know what they called it in Germany? They used a term that is still in use today. They called it terror bombing.  

What follows is from Rense about Dresden. You should read it. And you should see Apocalypto because I do believe that Mel Gibson was trying to send us a message. 

The WWII Dresden Holocaust

'A Single Column Of Flame'

"You guys burnt the place down, turned it into a single column of flame. More people died there in the firestorm, in that one big flame, than died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined." --Kurt Vonnegut, Jr
On the evening of February 13, 1945, an orgy of genocide and barbarism began against a defenseless German city, one of the greatest cultural centers of northern Europe. Within less than 14 hours not only was it reduced to flaming ruins, but an estimated one-third of its inhabitants, possibly as many as a half a million, had perished in what was the worst single event massacre of all time.
Toward the end of World War II, as Allied planes rained death and destruction over Germany, the old Saxon city of Dresden lay like an island of tranquillity amid desolation. Famous as a cultural center and possessing no military value, Dresden had been spared the terror that descended from the skies over the rest of the country.

In fact, little had been done to provide the ancient city of artists and craftsmen with anti-aircraft defenses. One squadron of planes had been stationed in Dresden for awhile, but the Luftwaffe decided to move the aircraft to another area where they would be of use. A gentlemen's agreement seemed to prevail, designating Dresden an "open city."

February 13/14 1945: Holocaust over Dresden, known as the Florence of the North. Dresden was a hospital city for wounded soldiers. Not one military unit, not one anti-aircraft battery was deployed in the city. Together with the 600.000 refugees from Breslau, Dresden was filled with nearly 1.2 million people. Churchill had asked for "suggestions how to blaze 600.000 refugees". He wasn't interested how to target military installations 60 miles outside of Dresden. More than 700.000 phosphorus bombs were dropped on 1.2 million people. One bomb for every 2 people. The temperature in the centre of the city reached 1600 o centigrade. More than 260.000 bodies and residues of bodies were counted. But those who perished in the centre of the city can't be traced. Approximately 500.000 children, women, the elderly, wounded soldiers and the animals of the zoo were slaughtered in one night.
On Shrove Tuesday, February 13, 1945, a flood of refugees fleeing the Red Army 60 miles away had swollen the city's population to well over a million. Each new refugee brought fearful accounts of Soviet atrocities. Little did those refugees retreating from the Red terror imagine that they were about to die in a horror worse than anything Stalin could devise.

Normally, a carnival atmosphere prevailed in Dresden on Shrove Tuesday. In 1945, however, the outlook was rather dismal. Houses everywhere overflowed with refugees, and thousands were forced to camp out in the streets shivering in the bitter cold.

However, the people felt relatively safe; and although the mood was grim, the circus played to a full house that night as thousands came to forget for a moment the horrors of war. Bands of little girls paraded about in carnival dress in an effort to bolster warning spirits. Half-sad smiles greeted the laughing girls, but spirits were lifted.

No one realized that in less than 24 hours those same innocent children would die screaming in Churchill's firestorms. But, of course, no one could know that then. The Russians, to be sure, were savages, but at least the Americans and British were "honorable."

So, when those first alarms signaled the start of 14 hours of hell, Dresden's people streamed dutifully into their shelters. But they did so without much enthusiasm, believing the alarms to be false, since their city had never been threatened from the air. Many would never come out alive, for that "great democratic statesman," Winston Churchill--in collusion with that other "great democratic statesman," Franklin Delano Roosevelt--had decided that the city of Dresden was to be obliterated by saturation bombing.

What where Churchill's motives? They appear to have been political, rather than military. Historians unanimously agree that Dresden had no military value. What industry it did have produced only cigarettes and china.

But the Yalta Conference was coming up, in which the Soviets and their Western allies would sit down like ghouls to carve up the shattered corpse of Europe. Churchill wanted a trump card--a devastating "thunderclap of Anglo-American annihilation"--with which to "impress" Stalin.

That card, however, was never played at Yalta, because bad weather delayed the originally scheduled raid. Yet Churchill insisted that the raid be carried out--to "disrupt and confuse" the German civilian population behind the lines.

Dresden's citizens barely had time to reach their shelters. The first bomb fell at 10:09 p.m. The attack lasted 24 minutes, leaving the inner city a raging sea of fire. "Precision saturation bombing" had created the desired firestorm.
A firestorm is caused when hundreds of smaller fires join in one vast conflagration. Huge masses of air are sucked in to feed the inferno, causing an artificial tornado. Those persons unlucky enough to be caught in the rush of wind are hurled down entire streets into the flames. Those who seek refuge underground often suffocate as oxygen is pulled from the air to feed the blaze, or they perish in a blast of white heat--heat intense enough to melt human flesh.
One eyewitness who survived told of seeing "young women carrying babies running up and down the streets, their dresses and hair on fire, screaming until they fell down, or the collapsing buildings fell on top of them."There was a three-hour pause between the first and second raids. The lull had been calculated to lure civilians from their shelters into the open again. To escape the flames, tens of thousands of civilians had crowded into the Grosser Garten, a magnificent park nearly one and a half miles square.

The second raid came at 1:22 a.m. with no warning. Twice as many bombers returned with a massive load of incendiary bombs. The second wave was designed to spread the raging firestorm into the Grosser Garten.

It was a complete "success." Within a few minutes a sheet of flame ripped across the grass, uprooting trees and littering the branches of others with everything from bicycles to human limbs. For days afterward, they remained bizarrely strewn about as grim reminders of Allied sadism.

At the start of the second air assault, many were still huddled in tunnels and cellars, waiting for the fires of the first attack to die down. At 1:30 a.m. an ominous rumble reached the ears of the commander of a Labor Service convoy sent into the city on a rescue mission. He described it this way:

"The detonation shook the cellar walls. The sound of the explosions mingled with a new, stranger sound which seemed to come closer and closer, the sound of a thundering waterfall; it was the sound of the mighty tornado howling in the inner city."
Others hiding below ground died. But they died painlessly--they simply glowed bright orange and blue in the darkness. As the heat intensified, they either disintegrated into cinders or melted into a thick liquid--often three or four feet deep in spots.

Shortly after 10:30 on the morning of February 14, the last raid swept over the city. American bombers pounded the rubble that had been Dresden for a steady 38 minutes. But this attack was not nearly as heavy as the first two.

However, what distinguished this raid was the cold-blooded ruthlessness with which it was carried out. U.S. Mustangs appeared low over the city, strafing anything that moved, including a column of rescue vehicles rushing to the city to evacuate survivors. One assault was aimed at the banks of the Elbe River, where refugees had huddled during the horrible night.

In the last year of the war, Dresden had become a hospital town. During the previous night's massacre, heroic nurses had dragged thousands of crippled patients to the Elbe. The low-flying Mustangs machine-gunned those helpless patients, as well as thousands of old men, women and children who had escaped the city.

When the last plane left the sky, Dresden was a scorched ruin, its blackened streets filled with corpses. The city was spared no horror. A flock of vultures escaped from the zoo and fattened on the carnage. Rats swarmed over the piles of corpses.

A Swiss citizen described his visit to Dresden two weeks after the raid: "I could see torn-off arms and legs, mutilated torsos and heads which had been wrenched from their bodies and rolled away. In places the corpses were still lying so densely that I had to clear a path through them in order not to tread on arms and legs."
Kurt Vonnegut was in Dresden when it was bombed in 1945, and wrote a famous anti-war novel, Slaughterhouse Five, in 1969.
In February 1945, Vonnegut was witness to another pretty good imitation of Mt Vesuvius; the firebombing by Allied forces of Dresden, the town in eastern Germany, during the last months of the Second World War. More than 600,000 incen-diary bombs later, the city looked more like the surface of the moon. Returning home to India-napolis after the war, Vonnegut began writing short stories for magazines such as Collier's and The Saturday Evening Post, and, seven years later, published his first novel, Player Piano. ...
Finally, in 1969, he tackled the subject of war, recounting his experiences as a POW in Dresden, forced to dig corpses from the rubble. The resulting novel was Slaughterhouse Five. Banned in several US states - and branded a "tool of the devil" in North Dakota - it carried the snappy alternative title: "The Children's Crusade: A Duly Dance with Death, by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr, a fourth-generation German-American now living in easy circumstances on Cape Cod (and smoking too much) who, as an American infantry scout hors de combat, as a prisoner of war, witnessed the fire bombing of Dresden, Germany - the Florence of the Elbe - a long time ago, and survived to tell the tale: this is a novel somewhat in the telegraphic schizopfrenic manner of tales of the planet Tralfamodre, where the flying saucers come from, Peace." ....
In December 1944, Vonnegut was captured by the German army and became a prisoner of war. In Slaughterhouse Five, he describes how he narrowly escaped death a few months later in the firebombing of Dresden. "Yes, by your people [the English], may I say," he insists. "You guys burnt the place down, turned it into a single column of flame. More people died there in the firestorm, in that one big flame, than died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. I'm fond of your people, on occasion, but I was just thinking about 'Bomber Harris, who believed in attacks on civilian populations to make them give up. A hell of a lot of Royal Air Force guys were ashamed of what Harris had made them do. And that's really sportsmanship and, of course, the Brits are famous for being good sports," he concedes.
The Independent, London, 20 December 2001, p. 19
The death toll was staggering. The full extent of the Dresden Holocaust can be more readily grasped if one considers that well over 250,000 -- possibly as many as a half a million -- persons died within a 14-hour period, whereas estimates of those who died at Hiroshima range from 90,000 to 140,000.*

Allied apologists for the massacre have often "twinned" Dresden with the English city of Coventry. But the 380 killed in Coventry during the entire war cannot begin to compare with over 1,000 times that number who were slaughtered in 14 hours at Dresden. Moreover, Coventry was a munitions center, a legitimate military target. Dresden, on the other hand, produced only china--and cups and saucers can hardly be considered military hardware!

It is interesting to further compare the respective damage to London and Dresden, especially when we recall all the Hollywood schmaltz about the "London blitz." In one night, 1,600 acres of land were destroyed in the Dresden massacre. London escaped with damage to only 600 acres during the entire war.

In one ironic note, Dresden's only conceivable military target -- its railroad yards -- was ignored by Allied bombers. They were too busy concentrating on helpless old men, women and children.

If ever there was a war crime, then certainly the Dresden Holocaust ranks as the most sordid one of all time. Yet there are no movies made today condemning this fiendish slaughter; nor did any Allied airman--or Sir Winston--sit in the dock at Nuremberg. In fact, the Dresden airmen were actually awarded medals for their role in this mass murder. But, of course, they could not have been tried, because there were "only following orders."

This is not to say that the mountains of corpses left in Dresden were ignored by the Nuremberg Tribunal. In one final irony, the prosecution presented photographs of the Dresden dead as "evidence" of alleged National Socialist atrocities against Jewish concentration-camp inmates!

Churchill, the monster who ordered the Dresden slaughter, was knighted, and the rest is history. The cold-blooded sadism of the massacre, however, is brushed aside by his biographers, who still cannot bring themselves to tell how the desire of one madman to "impress" another one let to the mass murder of up to a half million men, women and children.



Jeremy Granade In Peter Dale Scott's book "Deep Politics and the Death of JFK" (p. 268-9), he writes that translators Peter Gregory and Ilya Mamantov incorrectly translated several of Marina's statements regarding Lee's alleged rifle. For example Marina said (in Russian) "I cannot describe it because a rifle to me like all rifles. Yet Gregory translation was "She said she cannot describe it. It was sort of a dark rifle just like any other common rifle." Later he asked Marina if the rifle was the same size as the one they showed her. Marina replied (in Russian) "I think so." Gregory's translation: "She says that a rifle approximately the same length as you are showing her; however the stock was longer." Other information the Dallas Police and FBI got from Marina was translated by Ruth Paine. In nearly every case, the translations proved more incriminating of Lee than what Marina actually said.
Michael Rebaczonok-Padulo Any Soviet (or ex-Soviet) citizen back in the '60s would have been terrified by authority, be it of the Soviet variety or - in Marina's case - the American. The threat of deportation, whether real, perceived, or simply imagined, would have sufficed to persuade her to cooperate with the US authorities and testify according to their expectations. Soviet citizens had an acutely developed sixth sense when it came to such matters and Marina would have done whatever she considered to be necessary.
LikeReply2 hrs
Ralph Cinque That is certainly interesting, Jeremy. But, what Michael is saying sounds like that Marina flat-out lied knowing full-well that she was railroading her tragically deceased husband into history as the most monstrous assassin of all time. Could she really have been capable of that? Has she really been living for 52 years with the knowledge that she did that to him? I think it's more complex than that. I think they got her to say that, and I also think they got her to believe it, on some level. There was mental manipulation involved, and it was MK Ultra-ish.