Monday, May 21, 2018

Robert Glenn Damn, still blows my mind whenever you pose new material.
LikeShow more reactions
Ralph Cinque looks like an opera mask to me.
LikeShow more reactions
Robert Glenn It sure do...
LikeShow more reactions


In that NBC footage for the 50th of Oswald arriving at Parkland, shown to me by Amy Joyce, it doesn't show Oswald at all. And, that is quite amazing, don't you think? That a media photographer went there to film Oswald's arrival and never imaged him? I say it's astounding. And I don't think that's what happened. I think they didn't want to show us Oswald. They were determined not to show him. So why? That's the $64,000 question. They could have showed us this, but they didn't. And do you know what that makes me think? That there is something wrong with this. 

Well, I have got to say that it appears to be his face. I don't see any deal-breakers.  

But, look what he's doing. He's got his elbow bent, his arm externally rotated, or you could say supinated, and his hand is way up.

 But, look at his position when they were loading him.
And before that, it was like this:
So, you  see that right arm crossing his chest? That's the arm that is elevated in the Parkland image. 

I have said for a long time that I don't think his right arm was doing what we see there. Who would put the weight of an arm right on top of an abdomen which has internal bleeding? You'd have to be nuts to do that. 

Can't you see that that right hand looks fake? Look how plastic it looks. Look how different the coloring of that hand is compared to the other hand on the ground. Look how much larger it is. And look how depressed the blanket looks on the right side.  It's like there is a well there. What would cause that? And, why would they want to put that hand over the entrance wound? It must be because they didn't want us to see the entrance wound. Why? I could only speculate, and several possibilities come to mind. But regardless, I think Oswald's right arm was alongside his body on that stretcher. But, even if you think they were stupid enough to put it across his chest, how did it wind up supinated above his head?

You would have to think that Oswald did that, himself, right? But, how could he? He was unconscious in the jail office, and he was not moving at all. No one said he twitched a muscle never mind moved like that. And a doctor, Dr. Fred Bieberdorf, examined him and thought he was dead. That was his professional opinion. Now, whatever condition Oswald was in in the jail office, it could only have gotten worse afterwards during the ride to Parkland. Blood was flowing out of his arteries and pooling in his abdominal cavity. With each passing second, he was losing more and more blood. There is absolutely NOTHING that could have reversed that. The idea that he appeared dead to Dr. Bieberdorf in the jail office and then went to moving around in the ambulance is preposterous. Oswald could not have done that movement. So, did somebody take his arm and move it up there? But, why would they do that?

Wait. Look at his face. Look how mask-like it is. There is a color change at the top of his head marked by a straight line. 
Do you see how  mask-like that is? Look at the junction of his forehead and his hairline. It looks like he is wearing a mask. 
Again, look at the sharp linear demarcation at the junction of his forehead and his hairline. And look how weird his hair looks. You can't tell me that Oswald's hair looked like that. Let's rotate it 90 degrees:

Before anyone blames Youtube, I'll point out that his is the only image that does that, becomes masklike. And yes, I know he was the only dead guy there, but look at the difference in coloring between his face and his hand. If he was drained of blood, wouldn't every part of him be pale? His hand doesn't look pale. His ear doesn't look pale either. 

This is just a working hypothesis, not a declaration, but what if that isn't Oswald? What if that is a photographic mask of Oswald's face put over the face of another man?   

One thing is for sure absolute sure: considering the condition that Oswald was in in the jail office, it is impossible for him to have moved his arm to that other position himself. He was in dire straits in the jail office and couldn't do it, and he could only have gotten worse as time passed. He was spiraling downward. Nothing can explain his sudden ability to lift his arm. His aorta got shot. Do you understand what that means? 

Sunday, May 20, 2018

I very much like this article by OIC member Dr. Thomas Halle. He makes an eye-catching point about the Warren Commission lacking the "scientific disinterest" it should have had, which is an interesting way of saying that that they should have begun the investigation without any bias. But, what a joke! Bias? They began the investigation with their minds made up that Oswald did it, and did it alone. They were hell-bent on proving it, with the new President telling them there would be World War 3 if they didn't. In reality, the Warren Commission was just a Stalinist show trial in the USSA, the United Soviet States of America. RC

Warren Report: Fact or Fiction
by Dr. Thomas Halle

The single redeeming characteristic of the Warren Report (WR) is that a careful examination of the text (and particularly of the material in the “Hearings” and “Exhibits”) reveals many contradictions and inconsistencies, inconsistencies that demonstrate that the formulaic conclusion of “lone, crazed gunman” is a fabrication, and bears as much relationship to reality and honest and comprehensive investigation as the notion of an orb of “green cheese” does to the actual moon appearing above our heads. There is great poignancy to this, of course. The Report abounds with problems, but to think that the damned thing even refutes itself can be a great source of fun. One can only reflect that this resembles the case of a petty thief who inadvertently drops his wallet at the “scene of the crime,” thus incriminating himself…without even the necessity of a bumbling Inspector Clouseau.
The most glaring problem with the Report is that it violates the principle of scientific disinterest (and of legitimate investigative principles and practices, such as the insistence on Intact chains of evidence and a refusal to resort to the “cherry-picking of evidence” to support one’s hypothesis). This is no idle claim, as the Commission over and over again shifts “pieces of the puzzle” (frequently already manipulated items of witness testimony and physical evidence) to fit its target formula, in a distinctly Procrustean way. But, wait!! Do we receive even the semblance of legitimacy…as the Commission members, lawyers and aides…listed a number of suspects, then gradually whittled this down to suspect Lee Oswald? Nope, no way. Even Jim Braden, a known mafia hit-man, apprehended in the Dal-Tex building with a rifle in his possession, was summarily released (and was never mentioned in the Report). This speaks to the enormity of the crime, and of the slip-shod and dishonest character of the investigation of this crime.
Of course, from a legal standpoint, the Commission also seems to have conveniently forgotten the central American criminal justice principle of “presumption of innocence” (which demands that the “government” bears the burden of proof, rather than the defendant). The Warren Commission never meets its burden, and a casual examination of the “Table of Contents” shows that it had no intention of doing so. Anyone of any intelligence and education will see that these problems render the Report a nullity, in reality a farce. And, as if to underline this fact, we have the reality that three members of the Commission—Russell, Cooper and Boggs—dissented from the Report’s conclusions, and only agreed to sign it with the promise that their dissent would be noted. It was not, meaning that these gentlemen were betrayed, even as the American people were betrayed (and as the memory of President Kennedy was betrayed).
Rather than mount an honest, objective and comprehensive investigation, the Commission decided upon two goals—the assuaging of our fears (particularly of a possible international connection, and even of a nuclear war), and of protecting American institutions. A very early memo from acting Attorney General Nicholaus deB. Katzenbach to Bill Moyers stressed the importance of convincing the American public of Oswald’s exclusive culpability…with no international implications. The fix was in!!
The Commission soon assumed the role of “Star Chamber” tribunal, sitting in judgment of one particular suspect, Oswald. And this poor schnook (probably a patsy, just as he’d claimed!) never received ANYTHING in the way of a legal defense. In fact, he never received ANYTHING in the way of “due process.” The Warren Commission (and the risible document it produced) was so bad, that it serves as its own indictment.
The Warren Report was an immense scandal, and bears a strong resemblance to the famous Dreyfus affair in the late nineteenth century. Like novelist Emile Zola, we shout “J’accuse!!”
One might forgive a few young and uneducated souls who have fecklessly accepted the conclusions of the Report, along with some mental defectives, but I would find it exceedingly difficult to extend this courtesy to anyone else. Many in public service and the media would rightly be placed in the general category of what Sylvia Meagher called “Accessories after the Fact.” And, what these repulsive individuals—like Gerald Posner and Vincent Bugliosi--deserve is a couple of weeks in the pillory and a public shunning. In fact, it would bother me not at all...should the profits from their books and talks be confiscated, and they be banished from the country for a decade.

Saturday, May 19, 2018

So, what do we know about this footage that Amy Joyce found?

Well, you can see what we know in the link above. It was put up by the NBC affiliate in Philadelphia as part of the 50th anniversary.  It says  Oswald arrival at Parkland, but we never see Oswald in it. 

It starts with the ambulance arriving. The weird thing is that the ambulance left the PD without a police escort, but rather, with a police car that followed it. I believe that car was driven by L.C. Graves, who lied and said he rode in the ambulance. But, Graves' car lead the ambulance into the Parkland parking area. 

But, questions loom about this. Why did Graves lie and not admit that he drove separately? And keep in mind that there is absolutely no doubt that this is true because there was no room in the ambulance for Graves. Leavelle and Dhority rode in back with Oswald on his stretcher- and there was barely room for them on the right side of the car. The Bieb rode in the middle compartment with the head of Oswald's stretcher. And then, there was Hardin and Wolfe in the front. And that's it: no place for Graves. He was DEFINITELY driving the police car that raced and bumped out after the ambulance. 

But, how did Graves get in front of it? We're talking about a speeding ambulance. And why did he get in front of it? Imagine how fast he had to go to overtake it. Why was it important for him to do that? How did it help? 

Then, we get to the oddly young looking image of Jim Leavelle.

 Note that there are no polka dots on his tie.

Here's another view of that tie. He doesn't look anything like Leavelle. 
Then, he's got these skinny legs.
This is Leavelle we're talking about.
Then, the last frame before it jolts ahead shows the guy leaning on Wolfe's back.
Look at that closely. "Leavelle" has planted his hand right down squarely at the top of Wolfe's back. That should show in the other film, right? It doesn't. In the other film, Leavelle leans on Wolfe as he's getting down from the tailgate, but it's much lower on Wolfe's back.

Compare again.
It's completely different. They are caught redhanded, which is to say, bloodied. 

Alright, so here's the guy. He's at the back of the ambulance, off to the side. And, we all know who the star of this show is: Oswald.

In all probability, the photographer does not know Leavelle. He doesn't know anybody- except Oswald, the person he is there to film. 

So, that's Harold Wolf on the right, the assistant to the ambulance driver Michael Hardin. I don't know who the other guy is who is conveniently covering up Oswald. It's the same guy who had his arm outstretched in the first frame. Then, we see his arm outstretched again.
So, I presume that he is someone in law enforcement. Notice that he has his arm outstretched perpendicular, like Christ on the Cross. 
So, we should see that in the other film, right? Because, after all, this is real.
So, there you see that there was a cop there, and he had his arm out, but it's not perpendicular, like Christ on the Cross. And, it never is. And, from this angle, shouldn't we see the other photographer? Shouldn't he be behind him? Let's go back:
So, the photographer has to be behind him, and he can't be too tall. So, why don't we see him in the other frame? Shouldn't we?
OK, returning now to the newly discovered footage, he continues keeping his arm out.
But then, it puffs up.
That's a fraction of a second later there, so what happened? Did the photographer move in closer to the cop? Why? What for? The camera can't see through him.

Now, Dhority is starting to get out. The arm seems lower. After this, there is a film break; a cut; a splice to something else. There is definitely a break.

 It very suddenly jumps to that. But, how could it? Our photographer had his movie camera running, right? He didn't stop it, did he? So, what does it mean that it should suddenly jump to this? Was this done in post-production? Was the film edited? Was it clipped? But, that doesn't make sense? Why would anyone clip it? To save a second or two because it was eating into commercial time?  And what kind of camera is that that guy is holding? He's really shooting down, isn't he? So, we should see him in the other footage too, right? I found this, but it was much later. 
 That's the Bieb in the center and Graves on the right. And that cameraman seems to be shooting straight down.  But, going back to the other:
I tell you, the guy who took this had to be the all-time loser among media photographers. He had to settle for taking pictures of other photographers taking pictures of what he should have been taking pictures of. 

But, we are no longer at the back of the ambulance. So, what happened? Why the break? 

Then, it goes to a herd scene.

Oh, that is so valuable. Historic.

After that, it jumps to inside the hospital, but for some reason, he pointed the camera at the ceiling:

Then, he gets a nice shot of someone else getting a nice shot.

Then, we get to see down the hall, but there is nothing to see.

This entire film showed us absolutely nothing. It's like it was designed to show nothing. Plus, it was heavily edited with breaks and splices. But even after the editing, it shows absolutely nothing.
What's clear is that this is a propaganda piece whose purpose is to make you think you've seen something, when you haven't. Think about it a moment: this is footage of Oswald arriving at Parkland hospital which shows not the slightest glimpse of Oswald. 

Friday, May 18, 2018

AMY JOYCE has come up with a very intriguing find. She found some rare footage of Oswald's ambulance arrival at Parkland which I had never seen before, and it is very different from the others I have seen.  You can watch it here:

What Amy noticed is that the guy getting out of the ambulance as Jim Leavelle does not look like Jim Leavelle. 

So, on the left, that's supposed to Jim Leavelle. He had his hat off, but he immediately put it back on. On the right is Leavelle from the Jackson photo. Do they look like the same guy to you? To me, the guy on the left looks younger. And to be honest, the guy on the right, who was definitely Leavelle, (it's from the Jackson photo) looks older than 43, which was Jim Leavelle's age in 1963. Doesn't he look older than 43 to you? And how old does he look on the left? I'd say mid-30s. Here is another comparison.

The image on the right was from March 1964, so a few months later. But again, the age difference is startling. But, there is something else that Amy found. Look again at the Jackson photo.
Notice that Leavelle on the right had a very slender ribbon or band going around his hat. Did the other guy?

Amy doesn't see the band, and neither do I. And before anyone spouts any technobabble claiming that it's Youtube's fault or the fault of the footage, this is from the same footage:
You see the band, don't you? And watch the footage again and notice that you never see Oswald. It was taken by a media photographer, right? Didn't he know that catching an image of Oswald was the whole idea of being there?

So, that photographer was sent there to capture a picture of Oswald being unloaded at Parkland Hospital, and he didn't come close to doing it, and that's incredible. And since there are the other images of Oswald, there is no reason to think it was any harder for this guy to get one. So, how could he possibly not point his camera at Oswald? Look below. How hard was that? 

That's from another footage, but how could the other guy not get something like it? How could he have gone there to capture an image of Oswald arriving at Parkland and not gotten anything?

Amy Joyce is utterly convinced that the young 30s looking guy was NOT Jim Leavelle, and if she's right, it means that that footage was some kind of reenactment, using actors.  

This is supposed to be the same guy on the same day.

I am drawn to Amy's conclusion. I can't fathom that guy being Leavelle. I just can't see it. And that means that that footage was a reenactment using actors. And they didn't have an actor to play Oswald convincingly, and that's why we don't see him in it.  

The Wizard made a good find too. He noticed that, in his final image, where Detective Dhority was clasping his hand as he lay on the stretcher, Oswald seems to be holding something in his hand. 

What is that in his hand? It looks like a rectangular object. But, there are other things to notice. Look how dark and hairy Dhority's forearm looks. It looks like the forearm of a gorilla. Look how small Oswald's hand looks. And why is his thumb blackened? And, there appear to be dark knuckles showing on Dhority, but then there are these white fingers coming around at an impossible angle.

I don't think anyone can make sense out of that arrangement of two hands. It is akimbo. It looks more like three hands. 

But, let's look at the big picture. I have been thinking for a long time that we have NEVER seen a real image of Oswald at Parkland Hospital. Why do I think that? First, we know he was in very bad condition- hovering near death when he arrived. His doctors said that he had zero blood pressure, that 80% of the blood in his body was exsanguinated, meaning outside of the blood vessels. And, they said that his heart was still beating, but very, very, very faintly. I'd expect a guy like that to look very very bad; to be extremely pale and to also be very listless and toneless. But, in this photo, which is supposedly Oswald's last photo, Oswald's color isn't bad, and he's making a fist. How can one make a fist without any blood? 

Then, there is another image of Oswald at Parkland that is definitely a different person.

Can you see that the man on the right had large cavernous nostrils while the man on the left had pinched nostrils? That's a deal-breaker, right there. Those two noses are extremely different. And before you ask which one was the real Oswald, stop and think: if they were resorting to phony images of him- even one- it means that they didn't want him to be seen, period. And that means that all the images of him are fake. So, both of these are not Oswald. 

Look: here's Oswald. Take a good look at his nose. 

Now, the other guy's nose:

Now, Oswald's nose:

Now, the other guy's nose:

Now, if you can't see that those are two different noses and two different men, just stay away from me.  I don't care what you think. I don't want anything to do with you. Just stay away from me.

So, why did they not want to show Oswald at Parkland Hospital? I suspect it's because they didn't want the public to see how bad his condition was, to see exactly what happened to him while under police custody and police protection. Perhaps they thought it would have garnered some sympathy for him. 

The bottom line is that the photographic imagery of Oswald at Parkland is just as riddled with photographic manipulations and photographic lies as the other images we've seen. And, it establishes, beyond a tiny shadow of a doubt, that the JFK assassination, of which the Oswald assassination is part, is the most photographically altered event of all time.