Friday, August 14, 2020

My good friend Paul Popa is back, and we have done a song together, that soul classic from 1973, You Are The Sunshine Of My Life by Stevie Wonder.  I hope you like it.

Wednesday, August 12, 2020

The Assassination of FDR 

by Ralph C. Cinque 


I think it's very likely that Franklin Roosevelt was assassinated, and of course, that theory has been around for a long time. It started soon after his death on April 12, 1945. 

He officially died of a cerebral hemorrhage, but are you aware that he was never autopsied? 

"The doctors, seeing no real need for an autopsy, decided that it must have been a cerebral hemorrhage."

So, all the History books glibly claim that FDR died of a cerebral hemorrhage, when it's just a guess; a very convenient guess. And FDR's medical records completely disappeared after his death. Ten years later, when Eleanor Roosevelt had her own suspicions, and she went looking for his medical records, she couldn't locate them. 

And his body was rushed out of Georgia in defiance of state law that he be autopsied there. Sound familiar?  By Texas state law, JFK should have been autopsied in that state, and some of the Parkland doctors tried to stand up to the Secret Service agents about it. I wonder if they realized that those agents would have used any amount of force necessary to remove his body from Parkland Hospital. And when I say any amount, I mean including lethal force. Something similar happened in Georgia, although I don't know how tense it got. In Texas, it got very tense.

The most popular theory is that FDR was slowly poisoned with arsenic, which they put in his food. But, who did it? One popular theory is that Stalin did it. Stalin is also accused of killing General George Patton, and Bill O'Reilly wrote a book on it. But, both ideas are extremely stupid, in my opinion. 

I'm not going to go into Patton, but it is absolutely insane to think that Stalin killed FDR. Do you know what FDR did for Stalin? He sent him guns, ammunition, bombs, tanks, and even planes. That's right. He sent Stalin all the parts needed to build planes. He also sent him tons of food to feed the Soviet Army and tons of fiber to make uniforms, blankets, etc. He also conceded to him all of Eastern Europe. 

Now, why would Stalin want to kill the guy who did all that for him? He wouldn't. He couldn't. He didn't. And there is something else to consider: Anyone who contemplates killing a President has got to know that someone is going to take his place. And so the question becomes: will his successor be better or worse for the perpetrator than the guy he's contemplating killing? And in this case, there is no way that Stalin could have thought that Truman would have been better for him than FDR. Nobody could have been better for him than FDR. Truman was a machine politician, the ultimate team player. He did what he was told. The situation was such that Stalin would have sent elixirs to FDR- not poisons. 

And, it is a historical fact that Stalin was one of the first people to claim that FDR was murdered. He even wrote to Eleanor Roosevelt about it. Now, why would a guy who murdered somebody that the whole world accepted had died of natural causes propose that he was murdered?  In other words, why would a guy who got away with murder, start rocking the boat and talking up murder?  

So, who did Stalin say killed FDR?  He said Churchill did it. And I wouldn't put anything past Churchill. He was a dastardly man; a pathological liar; a eugenicist before Nazi Eugenics got started; and a war criminal. Churchill's whole, entire strategy for fighting World War II was: to kill German civilians. Kill as many of them as possible. Target women and children, etc. If any leader today fought a war the way Churchill fought World War II, he would be dragged into The Hague and prosecuted for war crimes. And I am not saying that rhetorically or facetiously; I really mean it; he really would be. But no, there is no way Churchill did it. He may have been involved in some way, it's possible; but the idea that he just independently and single-handedly killed FDR is ridiculous. Look: no matter who killed FDR, the cover-up was done here and by us. It was done by Americans who were in control immediately after his death. And it included agencies and institutions of the U.S. government which went along with the official story of his death, just as they went along with the official story of JFK's death. THEY are the ones who killed FDR. You should never think for a second that the assassination of a U.S. President can be anything but homegrown. 

So, who killed FDR? Well, who wanted him dead? Who stood to gain? And what did they gain? 

We're opening a hornet's nest here, and this is going to take a while.  It will be fun, at least for me, because I think it's very interesting. But, I'll leave you with something to think about in the form of a question. And the question is:  When did the Cold War begin? Or to rephrase: What exact day is the most reasonable designation of when the Cold War between the US and the USSR began? I'm looking for an exact calendar day, and I'll tell you what it is in the next installment. Stay tuned. Meantime: here are Uncle Joe and his greatest benefactor. 


There have been increasing calls to pay black Americans reparations for the enslavement of their ancestors, and today, Joe Biden said that, if elected, he will appoint a commission to explore the idea. 

Well, if we're going to do that, what about the Native Americans? We decimated them. We decimated their food supply, the buffalo, so that the ones we didn't kill outright would starve. We stole their land. And when we told them to move west, where we would leave them alone, we eventually decided that we wanted that land too. So, it was reservation time for them. 

We are a funny country. I mean the way we live in a delusional world where we think that the government can conjure up any amount of money out of nothing. You see: the government actually doesn't have any money. All it has are debts. But, they do have a printing press. So, they can print any amount of money that they want and for any reason they want it, whether it's to fight a war, build a bridge to nowhere, or pass money out even if  they have to drop it from helicopters. 

But, the reality is that you can no more create money from nothing, by snapping your fingers, than you create anything by snapping your fingers, such as: gold, apples, or corn. And when the reality of that sinks in, then all the money they have created is going to revert to its intrinsic value, which is nothing. 

How much longer can they keep doing what they're doing before that happens? I am not going to hazard a guess, but I do know that they can't keep doing what they're doing forever. The music is going to stop. And when it does: Heaven help us. 


Monday, August 10, 2020

I am very pleased to announce that we have decided on the villain in His Stretch of Texas Ground, Draven Denisen. He is going to be played by George Welder. 

George has played opposite Jeff Weber before, and that was in A Deadly Charter. There, he played an assassin whom Jeff's character was hiring, and George came across as tough as nails. I liked the intensity between them.  I like the parity between them in size, both height and weight. And I like the sharp contrast between them in their faces and hair. 

So, at the same time, there is an equality between them, but also a polarity between them, which I think is going to stir up people's imagination. The face-off between these two men is going to be visually dramatic and compelling all by itself. 

We had other candidates who were eager, and I apologize to them. But, I truly believe that this is the right choice for the project, and I am absolutely sure that George Welder is going to soar as Draven Denisen. 

George is joining a cast now consisting of Jeff Weber, Mike Gassaway, and Jeff Caperton. We also have some exciting prospects for the female roles (Carey, Becky, and Sarah)  brought to us mostly by Mike Gassaway and Jeff Weber, whom I thank.  All in all, we are well on our way to making an exciting and engrossing film.

 I don't know how Lovelady's shirt could look the way it does on the left, unless it was something Lovelady did with an iron. But, if he ironed the shirt, why didn't he iron the bottom part of it?  One thing is for sure: shirts don't come out of the drier looking and laying like that. According to Mrs. Lovelady, the shirt was bought used at a thrift store. And he was going to work at a warehouse that morning where he was going to be laying plywood flooring. So, why would he iron his shirt? What a pretense. What a pretend. That is not the shirt he wore on 11/22/63. This is:

I don't know whether this guy is just plain stupid or if he's one of the many Ops working the JFK cover-up. But, he claims that the collage below supports Lovelady as Doorman. 

 If you look closely, you can see that the faces match between Doorman and Oswald. The t-shirts definitely match between Doorman and Oswald. And Doorman's shirt pattern matches to Oswald too because it's not plaid like Lovelady's. The highly contrasting pattern is due to photographic haze and distrotion due to the gross enlargement not the pattern. Then, they etched that ridiculous hand in there as if the black guy was doing a Heil Hitler. That black guy wasn't even there. Therewas a black guy there, but he was largely or wholly obscured by Altgens' camera angle which obscured the west side of the doorway. Notice how Doorman's right shoulder is obscured. You can't see it, right? Do younotice how you can see Oswald's right shoulder in its entirety but you can't see Doorman's? Well the black guy was further west than Oswald's right shoulder. 

 This was taken about the same time as the Algens photo. You can see that the black man was nowhere near Doorman. And since Doorman's right shoulder got cut off by the parallax in the Altgens photo due to the angle from which Altgens was shooting,  then there was no way that the black man was visible to Altgens at all. 




So, they put that black guy in there, having taken the image from a Phil Willis frame, and then they carved that ridiculous hand.

This is all so bad, wickedly bad. They didn't give the hand the correct anatomical orientation. And it's all to cover up what Oswald was doing in the doorway, which was clasping his hands, as you can see him doing on the right, except there he's doing it right over left whereas in the doorway, he was doing it left over right. 

And look how well the lay of the shirt matches between Oswald and Doorman, with the little furl on the right and the long thick lapel on the left. What we see on Lovelady is weird and impossible, as I'll explain. But, suffice it to say for now that it is definitely Oswald on the left and right, and there isn't a shadow of a doubt. 

Sunday, August 9, 2020

I have mentioned before that one benefit of the Covid pandemic (or plandemic, depending on how you see it), is that war fever has been quenched. It wasn't that long ago that we were on the brink of war with Iran, and night after night, the war-relishing mainstream media foamed at the mouth in their delight over the prospect of yet another war. And it culminated in January of this year with the brutal and savage killing of General Soleimani and 9 Iraqis who had gone to Baghdad Airport to meet him and escort him to the Prime Minister of Iraq for scheduled talks. Are you getting it? This wasn't just a message to Iran; it was a message to Iraq to dash any thoughts of getting chummy with Iran. It was a monstrous, terrorist act for which I will never forgive Trump.  Here we couldn't even beat the ragtag Taliban in Afghanistan, which has no Air Force, no Navy, and no Army either, not a single tank, rather just guerrilla fighters; yet, they still drove us to say "no mas, no mas." Yet, the reality of that defeat did nothing to quench our desire and bravado to go to war with Iran.

But, Covid has taken war off the table, it not being practical to wage a war wearing masks and practicing social distancing. You see: you can't have everything. If you want your pandemic, you can't have your war. Sorry.  

But, it is nice that the airways are currently free of Iran-bashing and war fever, and the only war we're hearing about now is the war against Covid. 

I said the other day that the Taliban website is down. 

 Actually, it isn't. It's just the home page that's down.

But today, August 9, a traditional grand assembly of Afghans known as the Loya Jirga, demanded that the rest of the Taliban prisoners be released by the Afghan government. and President Ghani responded immediately by signing the order to release them. Again, the Loya Jirga is a traditional, historic gathering that long precedes the existence of the Afghan government. Yet, the Afghan government is the one that called for it to assemble, and the Taliban responded with derision. Yet, despite that, the Loya Jirga called on the government to release the prisoners. In other words, for Ghani, calling up the Loya Jirga backfired. 

So now, the intra-Afghan talks are presumably going to happen. And I think it is going to be more of the same, crowned by the demand that Ghani, and other high officials in the Afghan government, step down. Will he do it? I don't know, but let's hope that he does. In the end, Afghanistan is going to have a non-Western government, with a strong religious bent, that is not a puppet to anyone. For the most part, it is going back to how it was 2001 before the war, but hopefully with some improved elements, such as girls being allowed to attend school. For us, it will go down as another Vietnam- a war that we lost. 

Saturday, August 8, 2020

 With Covid dominating the news and our lives, it's not surprising that Afghanistan has disappeared from the news. I read tonight that 40 million Americans are on the brink of being evicted for not paying rent. Such people cannot be expected to worry about what is going on in Afghanistan. 

But, I continue to have a keen interest in it. The Taliban website was hacked again and has yet to resurface.  So, I don't know what they are saying. But, other reports are saying that the intra-Afghan talks, between the Taliban and the Afghan government, are about to begin once the prisoner releases are fulfilled by both sides, as per the agreement between the U.S. and the Taliban. It is amazing that the U.S., apparently, committed the Afghan government to doing something without telling them. 

The Taliban agreed to talk to the Afghan government, which is something that they refused to do for a long time. So, why did they agree to do it, to talk to the "puppets"? I think it's because it got them what they wanted: for the U.S.government to agree to get out of Afghanistan completely, which is something we refused to do for a long time. 

But, the Taliban got the better of that deal because, as the saying goes, talk is cheap. They can meet and say, "What we want is a government run by Sharia law. We don't want a Western-style democracy. And anyone who was a Quisling during the occupation has got to go. That means you, Ghani."

There may be some give and take, but if so, it will mostly be the Taliban taking and the other side giving. And if that doesn't happen, it is just going to be war.

Americans are an evasive people. We evade reality. For instance, we don't admit it when we lose a war. For instance, we lost the Vietnam War, and we've never admitted it. We have the Vietnam War Memorial, and I have visited it. To the extent that its purpose is to mourn the Americans who died in the war, I say fine. But, I hope it's not to celebrate their actions or to thank them for protecting us and keeping us free. Because: they didn't protect us, and they didn't keep us free. They weren't free themselves. Look how many of them were drafted. 

What's going to happen in the future? Are they going to build an Afghanistan War memorial? Please don't. The war was a complete catastrophe. It was 100% tragedy and without the tiniest speck of glory. The bravest Americans involved were the ones who refused to deploy there, and the same goes for the Iraq War. The wars of George W. Bush were complete, unmitigated disasters for all the people involved on both sides.  God, is it ever unjust that he walks around a free man after what he did. He killed so many people.

Will there be peace in Afghanistan? I don't know. I hope so. But, the sad truth is that, at this point in time, peace there is as elusive as ever. There is nothing to grasp onto as a foundation for peace. I can't think of any theoretical basis for an accord between the Taliban and the Afghan government. I'd love for it to happen, but I just can't see it.

Thursday, August 6, 2020

Today was a big day because we signed our third actor to the cast of His Stretch of Texas Ground, which is the sequel to My Stretch of Texas Ground. That actor is Jeff Caperton who will be taking over the role of Nelson, Sheriff Joe's top deputy. 

Jeff Caperton has a long and honored career as an actor in movies and on television, and he is also a film producer. Jeff has played a lawman before, and the role of Nelson in this sequel is huge. 

This follows our signing of Mike Gassaway who will be playing retired Sheriff Clint Haladin, Joe's father, who is a spunky, straight-talking old lawman. And the truth is that this role was written for Mike, in the same way that the role of Jake Gittis in Chinatown was written for Jack Nicholson. And I'll tell you as the writer, that it is a very different writing experience when you build a character around an actor. 

And that brings me to Jeff Weber whom we sought and signed first and for good reason because I would not have proceeded without Jeff Weber. I was NOT going recast Sheriff Joe Haladin because Jeff Weber and Sheriff Joe are inseparable. Jeff Weber IS Sheriff Joe, and if we couldn't get him, I would have let Sheriff Joe pass into oblivion to take his rightful place in the pantheon of legendary screen lawmen of old. But fortunately, Jeff Weber can do it, and therefore, Sheriff Joe shall ride again, and it is going to be great to have him back.  

I shall continue to make postings as we make cast acquisitions. And there are some exciting prospects for the roles of Draven Denisen the villain, also Sarah who is Draven's ex-wife, and also Becky, the Sheriff's daughter. There are quite a few more, and we need to get hopping because the first day of filming is less than two months away. But in the words of the vernacular: so far, so good. My heartfelt thanks to the two Jeffs and Mike, and it's onward and upward, full speed ahead.

Wednesday, August 5, 2020

They have released another body cam of the George Floyd disaster, and it is incredible, as in: I can't understand it. This was about a phony $20 bill, but counterfeit money is designed to be good enough to circulate for a while. So, the person who spent it at the place where it was recognized isn't necessarily the forger. And police know this, right? So, what reason was there to start off by being so belligerent to George Floyd? Did they really think that he was the counterfeiter? Apparently, he wasn't because they have never followed up with any evidence that he was involved with counterfeiting. And if he knowingly passed off a phony $20 bill, why would he just sit in his car? Why wouldn't he get out of there? 

So, there was no evidence that he was guilty, and his behavior wasn't consistent with his being guilty, since he didn't flee.

So, the two cops get to the car and tap  on the window. The window and all the windows were up all the way. George would say later that he was claustrophobic, but you would think that, if so, he would have lowered the window to let some air in. There were three people in the car. That's three people - all of whom had to breathe -sitting in a parked car with the windows up.

 I realize that a window may have been down on the passenger side; it's possible; but, I am not going to assume that it was. 

So, the cop taps on the window, and says, belligerently:"let's see your hands." Then, when Floyd opened the door, the cop said, "stay in the car; let me see your other hand." So, he's being treated like a violent criminal from the start. 

Then, while they're arguing about Floyd's hands, we see that the other cop has his gun drawn.

And he must have had it drawn all along. But why? Do cops draw a gun to question someone about the origin of a $20 bill? 

Reportedly, the ink was wet and running on the phony $20. That implies that George must have made it and recently. How long does it take for ink to dry? But, we don't have a picture of the bill. All we have is a picture of bills that were found crumpled in Floyd's car, and they all look fine to me. 

So, we haven't seen the bill with the ink running, and it's hard to believe that George Floyd had anything to do with such a bill. And surely if he was involved in counterfeiting, police would have gotten to the bottom of it by now. 

But, back to the video. So, they're still arguing about his hands, and the cop is using the F-word. First, he tells him to put his hands on the wheel, but then he tells him to put his hands on top of his head. But why? Hands clasping the steering wheel is more immobilizing than hands atop the head. 

Then, the officer tells him to get out of the car. Then, why did he tell him to put his hands on top of his head? People use their hands to get out of a car. Don't they? So, Floyd gets out, and the officer takes his arm as he's getting out, and then he cuffs him.

The officer who led Floyd away was a black man; a light-skinned black man, Alex Kueng. The mistreatment of George Floyd has been characterized as racially-motivated, but it can't be true of Alex Kueng, right?

But, why was this happening at all? What had Floyd done? They had no certainty nor any strong suspicion that he had done anything.  They didn't even ask him about the $20 bill. I thought that when cops place you under arrest, they tell you what you are being arrested for. "You're under arrest for DWI." What was he under arrest for? For counterfeiting? For resisting arrest? But, you can't call what he did resisting arrest. He begged them not to shoot him, but that's not resisting arrest. 

The other officer was busy talking to the two passengers, male and female. He was more civil to them than he was to Floyd. But, he didn't ask them about the counterfeit money either. He asked them why George was acting so weird and whether he was on something, and they said that he had  problems, and I presume they meant: mental problems. 

The audio fades in and out, but very clearly you can hear the officer ask George if he's on something, and George says no. They cross the street with him and get him to the police cruiser. First, they try to get him in from the sidewalk side. Then they walk around to the street side and do the same. He repeats that he is claustrophobic. Then he says: "I can't choke. I can't breathe, rather."

They left out the "rather." Then, he says repeatedly that he wants to lay down on the ground.

So, it was his idea to go to the ground. Then after that is when the horrific kneeling took place, with Chauven's knee on his neck. 

I am a screenwriter. I won a screenwriting award for the screenplay to My Stretch of Texas Ground, among many awards that the film has won. But, if someone presented this to me as a screenplay, I would say that it stinks, that it is totally implausible.  It makes no sense. The cops' behavior makes no sense; Floyd's behavior makes no sense; and the whole circumstance with the phony, wet, ink-running $20 bill makes no sense. 

We need to hear from those cops. We need to hear from Chauven to learn why he knelt on the man's neck. Why didn't he kneel on the ground and just use his hands to contain the man? He obviously wasn't going anywhere. 

The whole thing is bizarre, and I don't see how you can attribute it to racism when there was a black and an Asian officer involved. 

Tuesday, August 4, 2020

It is absolutely crazy that Jack Ruby had inside knowledge of the JFK assassination and was in cahoots with Lyndon Johnson. It's true there is a famous piece of footage in which Ruby, talking to reporters, said that Johnson had a role. But, that's only because he read a book called A Texan Looks at Lyndon by J. Evetts Haley, which came out in March 1964. Somebody- I don't know who- brought the book to Ruby, and he read it there at the County Jail. And what the book says is that Oswald was the lone gunman but Johnson put him up to it. It's ridiculous. As you know, Oswald wasn't a gunman at all and didn't own a gun. 

If Ruby had any inside knowledge, if he had the means to incriminate and make revelations about the movers and shakers and what really happened, THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO KILL HIM IMMEDIATELY. 

Recall the movie Casablanca, when Police Captain Renault, played by Claude Rains, says of Ugarete played by Peter Lorre, 

"We haven't quite decided yet whether he committed suicide or died trying to escape." 

The fact that Ruby lived for 3 years should tell you that he knew nothing. Absolutely nothing. And it is likely that they did kill him in 1967, but it wasn't because of what he knew and could say about the assassination, which was nothing. It was because he won a new trial, and they weren't going to risk having a second one.  They knew that his lawyers would have learned from the first trial, and it was possible that a light would go on in their heads.  For instance, what if they smartened up and put Ruby on the stand? His childlike nature would have come through to the jury. His religiosity. And just how completely devoid of awareness he was of what happened. The gist of it would have been, "I don't know what happened. I had no thought of shooting Oswald. All I know is that police told me I did it."  

The point is that even by accident, a crack could have occurred in the story if he was tried again. And then, what if his layers really studied the Shooter in the films and photos and really compared him to Ruby? And I mean in the way that a fingerprint comparison is made, comparing fine points. 

Don't you think it's awfully convenient that Ruby should suddenly come down with lung cancer right after winning a new trial? He was practically a non-smoker. He rarely smoked a cigarette. And when he was taken to the hospital and asked about his health, he didn't say anything about lung cancer. He thought he was there because of a rectal problem. He officially died of a blood clot, and there are a lot of drugs that can cause blood clots. 

Jack Ruby was innocent, and the stories that he was a hit man, a Mafioso, a pimp, etc. are just bull shit. He was a nicer, softer, kinder person than most people you are ever going to meet. He was almost childlike in his simplicity and his assumptions. And he was deeply religious in the Jewish faith.  He did not shoot Oswald. He showed up there much earlier than reported and was skirted up to the 5th floor where he was held during the televised spectacle. Then, they wove him into the story by bringing him back down and parading him around. 

It is just so dastardly what they did to him, so Machiavellian, but I'm not surprised that no one in 1963 thought of it because it was a naive time when people trusted authority and trusted the media. People were incapable of fathoming this much evil back then. But, this is 2020. It's almost 2021. And nobody is naive any more, right? Everyone knows how rotten and corrupt and driven by lies the whole system is.  So, anyone who fights this now is just an ostrich with his head in the sane. 

Oliver Janssen "Why did they have to fly Jolly out from California when there were plenty of psychiatrists in Dallas?"
LBJ had the power over all Texas police it was easy for him to cover it up there. a few hours later he had the power over all american police forces and the power to cover up anything and everything. i don't believe he was the head of the assassination. but he sure was one of the accomplices.
Jack Ruby knew this and therefore wanted to go out of texas. if a psychiatrists would come that he didnt know, it could have been anybody who would have rat him out.

Also: Jack Ruby owed the Internal Revenue Service $86,000 ($600,000+ today) at the time of the assassination. He didn't owe the mob. He was under a lot pressure due to this debt. What would he do to earn money to clear it?
Jack Ruby And The IRS | JFK Assassination Board
Jack Ruby And The IRS | JFK Assassination Board
Jack Ruby And The IRS | JFK Assassination Board
  • Ralph Cinque Oh no, You are completely, totally wrong. Everything that Jack Ruby knew about LBJ he learned from a book called A Texas Looke at Lyndon by J.Evetts Haley. And the fact that Ruby owed money to the IRS only proves that he was not the high flyer that people think. He had no money. He just handled a lot of money because the night club was a cash business. This was 1963 before there was widespread and universal use of credit cards. Would you please just think???? If Ruby knew LBJ, if he had any inside knowledge of the assassination at all, they would have had to kill him immediately. The fact that he lived for 3 years should tell you that he didn't know a thing. Oh, and by the way, I'm making you famous.
These interviews of Sirhan Sirhan and Jack Ruby are very much the same, where they both say that they do not remember what happened, and they do not remember shooting RFK  and Oswald, respectively.

They were both innocent. They were both manipulated and mind-controlled, through psychological and pharmacological means. Why do you think Dr. Louis Joylan West became Ruby's psychiatrist in prison? Why did they have to fly him out from California when there were plenty of psychiatrists in Dallas? And guess what? Sirhan Sirhan saw "Jolly" too. There is no official record of it, but when he was shown an image of Jolly, Sirhan said that he recognized him as one of his handlers. 

Oswald was different. He had an aversion to taking drugs, and perhaps their inability to drug him is what limited their ability to manipulate him mentally. Oswald was of sound mine; Jack Ruby and Sirhan Sirhan were not.  

Ruby was the first of the MK-ULTRA patsies, and Sirhan was not the last. Oswald was the first and last sound one, and they were not going to go down that road again. He did a lot of damage to them in the last two days of his life. He did so much damage that they had to shut him up before he talked to a lawyer. 

Why did they have to kill Dorothy Kilgallen? It was because she talked to Ruby, and the fear was that she was getting a glimmer of the truth that he was innocent. They couldn't take the chance.  

Sunday, August 2, 2020

As a rule of thumb, don't believe any of these people who started to claim, years or decades later, that they were there and part of it all. That includes the ladies JB and BO, as well as this guy, Louie Steven Witt, who claimed in 1979 that he was Umbrella Man. He told the preposterous story that what he was doing there with that umbrella on a bright sunny afternoon was demonstrating against JFK's father, Joseph P. Kennedy Sr. for appeasing the Nazis. It is absurd for anyone to expect JFK to see a guy with an umbrella in 1963 and think, "Oh, he must be protesting my father, because my father, like Neville Chamberlain, tried to appease Hitler, and his umbrella is a symbol for Chamberlain's umbrella. Of course!"

For Goodness sake, it was 1963, and World War II was long over. The Nazis were defeated- except for the 2800 of so that we brought over here and gave lush lives to for what they could do for us, including Michael Paine's boss, Nazi General Walter Dornberger. 

But, we had a new enemy by then, our former ally, the Soviet Union. So, why would JFK's mind be on Hitler and Chamberlain, with or without his umbrella? It's just ridiculous. Louie Witt was full o' shit.

But, while I'm at it, I'll point out that Joseph P. Kennedy Sr. was a hero. He, at least, tried to stop World War II from happening. His goal was not to appease the Nazis but to prevent the slaughter of millions of people that would come with another world war. 65 million people got killed in World War II. And don't anyone try to tell me that it was the "good war." There was absolutely nothing good on either side of that war. If you really get into studying World War II, as I have, you'll realize that it was just plain evil. And that's why we have to stop having wars because wars are inherently and inevitably evil. War makes monsters out of men. I can't say it too many times. War makes monsters out of men; war makes monsters out of men; war makes monsters out of men. Joseph P. Kennedy could not prevent World War II, but at least, he tried. And yet, they continue to smear him to this day. And by the way, they killed his first son Joseph P. Kennedy Jr. too, and for the same reason they killed JFK except pre-emptively. His was more like the killing of JFK Jr. which was also pre-emptive. Why wait until they get into office? It's much easier if you do it beforehand. A stitch in time saves nine. 

Saturday, August 1, 2020

All the amateur films and photos got confiscated by law enforcement.  So, what do you think? I think they had people there combing the crowd. And they weren't in uniform. Every photographer's catch got taken- except for one, Babushka Lady's. 

So, you figure she just slipped through the cracks, did she? They just didn't notice her? But, she was right in the center and got photographed herself by many people. 

Oh, and by the way: that is not a 17 year old cocktail waitress, although she may have had a 17 year old daughter. Babushka Lady was in on it. She was there to record the event, and I mean: the kill. Her film went directly to the plotters. It did not disappear; only she did. Babushka Lady was, you might say, the official photographer.  

Friday, July 31, 2020

On the film front, the BlastOff Festival is holding their online screenings of their winners, including My Stretch of Texas Ground. Jeff Weber and Junes Zahdi won for Best Lead Actors, and the film won the Jury Award for Best Feature Film.

I like their description of MSOTG: "a riveting action/thriller that will make your hair stand on end."

And Allied Vaughn has the DVD of the film for sale for $14.58 on Movie Zyng.

It includes the film, the trailer, and a 15 minute commentary by me about the making of the film. 

Wednesday, July 29, 2020

I continue to ponder that mother and boy in the Altgens photo. Most people assume that she is holding him, but based on what? He's seems upright. He's not leaning towards her. And she doesn't have her arms wrapped around him. The Fedora Man behind them is turned around and looking at Oswald in the doorway. That's his back we're seeing, You can see the point of his right shoulder. I'll point an arrow to it. 

So, the President of the United States, the Leader of the Free World, and his glamorous wife are riding by, and this guy has got his back to them. And that's why they put that mother and boy in there, to obscure him. I'm thinking that he may have been James Bookhout. He definitely was not Jack Ruby. Ruby told the truth:that he was in the Dallas Morning News building during the motorcade tending to his newspaper ads. Ruby told the truth about everything. 

But, the very idea of a mother standing there watching a parade holding such a child is preposterous. She would have to be Superwoman. Lifting the child is one thing. And even that gets hard. How many times have we heard women say that such and such child is getting too big for her to lift? I've been hearing it all my life. But, we're not talking about lifting; we're talking about holding. The object gets heavier and heavier the longer you hold it. It doesn't really, of course, but it seems to as your muscles tire. 

Here's an experiment: just hold your arms out and see how long you can hold them up. See how long before you are aching to put them down. And in holding a child, women do things such as lean backwards or lean sideways- anything to take the pressure off her relatively weak arms. What we're seeing in the Altrgens photo is impossible. 

And it's one more example of the ugly, murderous photo alteration that was done to hide the truth and protect the killers. They must have had a crack team there. And it's not that they were so good but that they were so fast. I wonder if Dino Brugioni was on it. I'd bet he was. 

Tuesday, July 28, 2020

Wes Stover Yes! Finally someone with some sense! I agree, it clearly shows Oswald was in the Doorway. However, supposedly a newspaper depicting this photo on its front page was printed and circulated that very same afternoon. Can someone please explain that or debunk it please. Otherwise, they would have had to been extremely quick to alter the photo immediately after the assassination???
  • Ralph Cinque The first public showing of the altered Altgens photo was on national television by Walter Cronkite at 6:30 PM Eastern, 5:30 PM Central, so 5 hours after the shooting. That was plenty of time for their crack team to alter the photo.
Ralph Cinque When you look at the degree of distortion in the Wiegman film, it is insane. Wiegman was shooting for NBC, which means that he had the best equipment in the world. So, why would his camera produce this ugly mess? It's because they deliberately blurred it and distorted it so that Oswald would be blurred and distorted. The evil of it all is staggering. And don't anybody make excuses for it. YOU are killing Kennedy if you make excuses for this shit. 

Monday, July 27, 2020

I was recently asked about Oswald in the Wiegman film; is he in it? Yes, he is. He is standing in the top of the doorway in the center just as the press car, in which Dave Wiegman was riding, rounded the turn from Houston to Elm. It's right at the beginning.

It is extremely blurry and distorted, which they did to it, in order to obscure Oswald. But, after passing the doorway, Wiegman did a second pan, in which he rotated his body around to the right to capture the doorway again. Why did he do that? It must be because he detected a commotion in the doorway. He either heard something or he saw something out of the corner of his eye. And so he swung around. And by the time he got to it, there was no Doorman there. So, they put one in, a cut-out, a still-image that was put into the film. 

 That circled image on the far right is not Oswald; not Lovelady; and not there. And note that it would be impossible for you or I to create this image from the film because it happens so fast, it's all a blur. The glimpse that you get of that guy in the film lasts for a tiny, infinitesmal fraction of a second. 

What I believe happened is that between the first and second capture of the Wiegman Doorman, Oswald left the doorway. He left for the 2nd floor lunch room. But, since they needed a Doorman to still be there, they put that still-image in. 

Here is a toggle of the two Wiegman Doormen, one real and the other not. You'll notice the pronounced qualitative difference in the frames. Now, why would that happen within Wiegman's camera? It wouldn't. It couldn't. It didn't. They did it. It's all them. 

The JFK limo was already down the hill as Oswald looks in that direction, west. It corresponds quite closely in time to the Altgens photo. The second image occurs about 4 seconds later in the Wiegman film, but remember, it's highly edited. So, you can't go by that, no more than you go by what the Zapruder film shows. But, why would Doorman go from being turned and looking down Elm at the President to facing squarely out the doorway looking straight ahead, as stiff and stolid as a Cigar Store Indian?  It makes no sense behaviorally, in addition to everything else.

So, that is Oswald in the Wiegman film, and that's how they dealt with it. No doubt there were other captures of Oswald in the doorway that were dealt with in different ways. Oh, what a hassle Oswald created for them when he stepped out into the sunlight. 

Saturday, July 25, 2020

I am pleased to announce that the sequel to My Stretch of Texas Ground, to be called His Stretch of Texas Ground, is going to be produced.  I have signed a contract with Spork Productions, which is the production company of Geoff Ryan.  Geoff will be directing, and helping him produce and doing the line-producing will be his longtime associate Robert DeSanti.   

Geoff Ryan is an accomplished filmmaker. He wrote and directed the award-winning film Fray, which is about an Iraq War veteran who is struggling with PTSD. Geoff's most recent film is Blood from Stone, "a genre-defying vampire film" which came out in June.

Geoff is also the one who fixed the editing of My Stretch of Texas Ground. We were having problems with lighting, visual effects, and other things that were very challenging, but Geoff fixed them all. He was never credited because the Closing Credits had already been drawn up. But, I'm sure we never would have won so many film festival awards without Geoff. 

Here is an interview of Geoff about filmmaking from VoyageLA:

Reprising his role as Sheriff Joe Haladin will be Jeff Weber, and this was an absolute must because I would not have considered re-casting Sheriff Joe. Jeff is the one who makes Sheriff Joe Haladin the iconic lawman that he is. And this time, Jeff is also going to lend his singing voice to the film.  If you haven't heard Jeff sing, then listen to this recent song of his because it is one swingin', catchy tune.

Another great development is that Mike Gassaway has agreed to play Sheriff Joe's father, retired Sheriff Clint Haladin, a rugged and straight-talking old lawman with a dynamic role in the story. 

The screenplay, which I wrote, is finished, and I like it very much. I doubt there are many screenplays that were toiled over more than this one. It is a crime drama in which an ex-con returns to Arlettsville and does something so vile, some will say we crossed the line putting it into the film. But, evil knows no bounds. 

Indie Rights Corporation, the largest distributor of independent "films, has sent me a "letter of intent to distribute" His Stretch of Texas Ground. So, this film has found distribution before it's even made. 

Filming is scheduled to take place in Austin in October, followed by post-production by Geoff, with an expected completion date of  January 15, 2021.

Sheriff Joe Haladin, that very independent Texas lawman who can take on all comers is coming back. I am thrilled to be working with this production team, with these actors, to tell this riveting story. Watch: it is going to sizzle. 

Sunday, July 19, 2020