Rick Bucciarelli

So true Ralph. The WC loaded their report with a lot of useless, even nonsensical information. I think it was Cyril Wecht who related that they included Jack Ruby’s mother’s dental records - which wouldn’t have mattered even if Ruby bit Oswald to death! LOL.

The WC loaded their report with fluff so it looked impressive to the average person and not interviewing the people closest to the crimes.

Allen Dulles summed it all up in a WC meeting saying that “people won’t read it”!

It’s disgraceful that our media infiltrated with CIA stooges never questioned and even worse supported this totally fictional tale!

• Like
• Reply
• Share
• 1h

• Active

  Ralph Cinque

  Author

  Admin

  Rick Bucciarelli You put it well, Rick. Thanks.

  • Like
  • Reply
  • Share
  • 1m

I want to address the Warren Commission testimony of the brother of Jack Ruby: Hyman Rubenstein. But first: do you realize that the FBI determined who the Warren Commission talked to? With very few exceptions, the FBI interrogated all the Warren Commission witnesses before the Warren Commission got to them.  Essentially, the FBI told the Warren Commission who they could interview, and who they couldn't. 

For instance, it is significant some of the people the WC did NOT interview. They didn't interview Carolyn Arnold, even though she claimed that she saw Oswald standing at the doorway (behind the glass) shortly before the shooting. How was that not relevant in an honest investigation? But, this was not an honest investigation. And they didn't interview Mary Moorman either. But, why not her? 

I know why, and everybody should know why. From the beginning and all along, Mary Moorman said that she took her photo at the instant of the FIRST shot. But, the Moorman photo, supposedly, shows the limo after the last shot. According to the FBI, it coincides with Z-315. So, how could she take it at the instant of the first shot but capture the scene after the last shot? And why, after waiting for hours in the hot sun to capture their faces, would she wait to snap the shutter only to capture the backs of their heads? This was Jack and Jackie Kennedy- the most celebrated couple in the world.  And when you're photographing celebrities, you want their faces- not the backs of their heads. 

But, the FBI knew the truth, and it was what I've been telling you, that Mary Moorman did not take the Moorman photo. It was taken by Babushka Lady- at an angle from behind. Apparently, Mary's real photo revealed more than the world could be allowed to see, and I can only imagine what that was. The FBI made sure that MM never got to speak to the WC because that would have been way too dangerous a mine field for them- the FBI. 

But, the FBI did direct the WC to talk to people about Jack Ruby, including several of his siblings. They talked to his brother Hyman even though he was much older and hadn't spent that much time with him. And then, they wanted to know every detail about Hyman's life. It is absolutely incredible the detail they went into with him about himself- and I mean every little thing he did in his entire life. 

What was the purpose of it all? Well eventually, they did get around to asking him about his brother's violent tendencies. And Hyman obliged, citing several instances of fights that Jack had. But, he also admitted that he never saw Jack engage in any violent acts; it was just stuff he heard about- urban legends.

The killing of Oswald and the framing of Jack Ruby was a joint operation of the Dallas Police and the FBI. And, it was FBI agent James Bookhout who played Ruby during the televised spectacle.  So, J. Edgar Hoover was keenly aware of what really happened, and he was determined to create a violent past for Ruby. And that was the one and only purpose of having Hyman testify, even though they ensconced it in all this other tedious and irrelevant stuff. I could give you the link, but you'll never read it; it is so filled with boring and tedious minutia about Hyman's life. It's excruciating.  

It was similar for Jack's brother Sam who was interviewed by the FBI 5x before he spoke to the Warren Commission. And most of the tales of Jack's violence involved incidents from many years before.  But, it was Jack Ruby in late 1963- his tendencies then- that mattered. A propensity to violence does not occur in a vacuum. Violent acts are the progression of violent rages. We should think of civility, or the lack of thereof, as a spectrum, and transcending into violence is at the end of the spectrum. In other words, except in self-defense or the defense of others, getting violent entails losing it- losing control of yourself. Violence is preceded by belligerence, hostility, arrogance, aggressiveness, and anger. Those are the preliminaries to violence. Did Jack Ruby show them? Did he show them to us? We can evaluate that by looking at his behavior following his arrest.  And what we see is a man who was extremely and inordinately docile. Jack Ruby showed not the slightest tendency to violence, and his whole attitude and demeanor were submissive, and not just submissive but also respectful- respectful of authority. 

There is a complete disconnect between the Jack Ruby that the FBI tried to picture, and the one that we can see and hear and experience ourselves. And who are you going to believe?

Jack Ruby did NOT have a short fuse. He, in fact, had a very long fuse. I'm not sure he had any fuse at all. He had little capacity to get angry, and anger is the prelude to violence. 

I am asking you to appraise Jack Ruby yourself. Watch him here. Listen to him. 

And note that he's crying. What came easy to him wasn't violence but crying. He had a childlike nature. That was his nature. This is the real Jack Ruby. Stop believing the false narrative. This was him, and he was not a violent man. He was a childlike man. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxBrlzi744Y

 

 

  

  

 

John Hankey has made another JFK video, and it is excellent. This time, he delves into the question of who the shooters were. It is not an aspect of the assassination that I have tried to explore definitively, but I am intrigued with what he has come up with. I shall give you the link, and I encourage you to watch it. But first, this is what I wrote to John about it:

It's brilliant, John. I had never considered that Hunt was a shooter, but you make a well-reasoned case for it. I had already concluded that James Files is a fake and a phony. But, I want to make a point about Shackley. It's clear now why he didn't want to be photographed. You showed us why, since, like Bush and Hunt, he was one of the men who was briefly arrested in Dealey Plaza after the shooting.  

Well, you know who else didn't like having his picture taken? FBI Agent James Bookhout. He followed Oswald around like his shadow that whole weekend, yet we have no pictures of him from the JFK assassination. The only pictures we have of him are his yearbook photos. 

After I started bellyaching about it, a couple of phony images of him were drummed up. In one of them, they used an image of famed Texas Ranger Bob Crowder and claimed he was Bookhout. But, Crowder was tall and lanky, while Bookhout was short and portly. They couldn't be more opposite in builds. Bookhout didn't even have an image in his obituary. So, if Shackley didn't like being photographed, Bookhout didn't like it in spades. And why? Because Bookhout was the Garage Shooter of Lee Harvey Oswald in the televised spectacle.  Oswald wasn't really shot then, but Bookhout was the one pretending to be Jack Ruby. 

John, it's true that the bullet in Oswald never exited. It lodged right beneath his skin at the level of the 11th rib. They just had to slit the skin, and it fell out. 

And yes, Oswald was essentially exsanguinated, meaning that he had lost all his blood. They transfused 5 and half quarts of blood into him. That's a total body supply. Believe me, Oswald was D.O.A. They had as much chance of saving him as they did Kennedy. He had zero blood pressure. He had just a tiny, very slight and feeble heartbeat, which is the only reason they didn't declare him dead on arrival. But, the damage was done. He was gone. That bullet was placed to do maximum damage; to cause maximum bleeding. 

Ruby was being held on the 5th floor at the time of the televised spectacle. He sent his wire at 10:15, and he said so himself. He got to the garage much earlier than reported. I don't even know if the real Oswald was there when Ruby got there. But, he went there; he was pounced upon by police; and then he was hustled upstairs. The reason Ruby couldn't remember anything else is because there wasn't anything else to remember. That's all that happened.  

Here is the only picture we have of the face of the Garage Shooter. He isn't Jack Ruby, and he is a spot-on match to James Bookhout from 24 years before. It's the same man before and after 24 years of aging. 

Here now is the link to John Hankey's new JFK video. I watched it twice. 

https://vimeo.com/687315070/9b838e4d11

 

This is the only image we have of the face of the Garage Shooter, and you can see that he's not Jack Ruby. But, notice that no one is securing him. No one has him by the arm to make sure he doesn't go anywhere or do something. Is he even handcuffed? It's hard to tell. I suppose he might be, but not necessarily. But, even if he is handcuffed, they still wouldn't let him stand untethered to a cop. Somebody would have a hold on him- always.  Remember, he was a killer, and it was just two minutes before that he was struggling with cops. According to Leavelle, after shooting Oswald, Ruby tried to shoot him, and he owed his life to Graves. So, how could Boyd and Hall just have their backs to "Ruby"? And even Sims seems unconcerned. None of them were afraid that "Ruby" was going to try to do something, to further his violent rampage. How could you trust someone like the Garage Shooter, when just a few minutes before, he was in the throes of homicide? You can see that Boyd and Hall are concerned with the photographer. That's where their minds are. They're not concerned about "Ruby" at all. They know very well that they have nothing to fear from him, and that's because he was James Bookhout. They were there to protect him, and it was shortly after this that they let him go, and he went back to being James Boohkout again. This is not a normal picture of cops and a perp being hauled off to jail. It's more like they are posing at a family gathering or class reunion.  Except: Boyd and Hall aren't smiling because they really don't want to be in the picture. 

I really thought that the most Putin would do is send his troops into the Donbass and reinforce the resistors there. He would have been denounced by Ukraine and the West, and he would have been sanctioned too, although not to the extent he is being sanctioned now. I didn't think there was any chance he would try to take Kyiv, and for two reasons: because it involves killing and destroying, and that is always wrong. And second, because it's impossible. The Ukrainians would never stop fighting him. And they would continue to get material support from the West forever. Perpetual war is the best Putin could have hoped for.  He could never win, and he should have known it. And really, it was insane for him not to know it. 

So, Putin, is, for all practical purposes, insane. An individual man can go insane. But, can a whole country go insane? Can the leadership of a whole country go insane? How could his whole inner circle be insane? And once they realized that he was going to do an insane thing, why didn't they stop him? No matter how powerful and autocratic he is in Russia, ultimately, he is just one man. And one man can be stopped. 

The trumpet player I hired to play this musical score with me for Joe Haladin: The Case of the Missing Sister is Oleg Tymoshenko, from Nikolaev, Ukraine. I hope he's OK. I have written to him. I haven't heard back yet. Hopefully, I will. So this is him on trumpet and me on piano.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wyz0Zh-kHbo&t=10s

What I said about the ridiculousness of the Beers photo also applies to the Jackson photo. Supposedly, the shot has already gone off. Imagine how startling it would be. The Colt Detective Special snub-nose 38 is even louder than the Smith and Wesson snub-nose 38 that I have, and it's loud. Imagine if you were in a setting with no expectation of hearing it, and it happened. You would startle. Anyone would. But, no one in the Jackson photo is startling. 

 The startle reaction is very well defined. It involves tensing of the neck, hunching of the shoulders, flexing of the limbs, and a generalized state of anxiety. No one in the photo is exhibiting a startle reaction, although Fritz on the left seems to be faking one by putting his hand out. 

On the right is Blackie Harrison puffing on his cigar like Groucho Marx. In the Beeers photo, taken a fraction of a second before, his arms was down, and you could see the cigar in his left hand. So, in half a second, he brought the cigar up to his mouth at a time like that?

So, Blackie's response to the situation in the Beers photo was to bring the cigar up to his mouth. But notice Ike Pappas between Blackie and Tom Petit. Where is Pappas in Jackson? He wasn't there. And that's why they gave Blackie that thick arm and painted in that artifact below it, because Pappas wasn't there. 

That brown elbow below Blackie's armpit is supposed to be the arm of Ike Pappas. But, it's an artifact. Pappas wasn't there at the time. This was taken about an hour before the telvised spectacle. It's a staged photo. Again notice Lowery looking right at "Ruby" but looking relaxed and not disturbing his comfortably clasped hands. No startle reaction for him. 

This is truly a Benjamin Braddock photo. Remember him from The Graduate? Dustin Hoffman? "There is Oswald. Oswald is being shot by Ruby. Oswald doesn't see Ruby because Ruby is not in front of him. Apparently, he hasn't heard Ruby either. Graves and Leavelle don't see or hear Ruby either. Ike Pappas doesn't see Ruby even though Ruby is in front of him. Even though Ruby  moved swiftly right in front of Pappas' eyes, he didn't see him. Ruby is also in front of Blackie Harrison, who is still holding his cigar. Blackie liked a good cigar. Detective Lowery, on the far left, certainly can see Ruby, but he hasn't stopped clasping his hands. He isn't doing anything even though he must be aware that Ruby rushed in. So, why isn't he doing anything? It's because he thinks Ruby is a Jehovah's Witness handing Oswald a Watchtower. There's no need to call the cops." 

It is surreal to me the way the U.S. is posturing in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. You would think that we never attacked and invaded any country. All memories of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam are apparently gone. The most recent one, Afghanistan, ended just months ago, and what a calamity it was. After 20 years of savage and unrelenting war, in which the avoidance of civilian casualties was a very low priority, it ended the way it started, with the Taliban in power. In other words: we lost- but not before killing hundreds of thousands of Afghans and getting over ten thousand Americans killed. But, it's already ancient history and long forgotten. Again, you would think at this moment that we never did any such thing. 

But, the same goes for Putin. He was around during the disastrous Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, which ended much like ours did. But, why would he think trying to seize control of Ukraine would be any easier than seizing control of Afghanistan? The Ukrainians are much better supplied, equipped, and trained. They're a 21st century fighting force, while the Taliban certainly is not. The Ukrainians are getting help and support from countries all over the world. But, who was helping the Taliban? For all practical purposes: nobody. So, knowing that the Soviet Union could not prevail in Afghanistan (and some pundits believe that the Soviet debacle in Afghanistan led directly to the collapse of the Soviet Union) why does he think he can prevail in Afghanistan? What he could have done is just gone into Donetsk and Luhanask, since they are pro-Russian, and settled for that. The world would not have liked it, but I suspect they would have gotten used to it. After all, those regions are already separated from Ukraine. But, doing what he is doing is absolutely crazy. It is so not in Russia's interest. 

Some people are telling me that maybe there are things we don't know, like secret CIA bio-weapons labs in Ukraine. But, I can't think of anything, including that, that would justify what he's doing. 

No, this is going to go down as one of the most colossal mistakes ever made, right up there with the Kaiser going into Belgium and France and Hitler invading Poland. And at this point, he's probably not capable of calling it off because he's crossed the Rubicon, or should I say the Dnieper, and he feels he has to keep on going, and that kind of thing often happens in war. That's why I keep saying, over and over again, that nobody should ever start a war. If there's no war: don't start one. You got problem x with country y? Regardless, you should not start a war. Never, ever, ever start a war. 

This video exposes much of the fake footage from the coverage of the Russia/Ukraine War. It's all pro-Ukrainian, but they point out that Russia may be doing the same thing for their home audience. I am appalled that our media does this, but it doesn't alter my view that Russia had no right to do what it did. No one has the right to start a war- no matter what their grievance. The U.S. had no right to do it in Iraq and Afghanistan, in Vietnam, and elsewhere. But, in this case it's Russia, and they are monsters for doing it. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98cXig0hOVw

The "experts" tell us that the Beers photo was taken .3 second before the shot went off. In that case, shouldn't the bullet have gone through Oswald's arm?

 

This really is a preposterous image because people have peripheral vision, which is particularly sensitive to motion, and they have hearing. There is simply no way that Leavelle, Oswald, and Graves could have been unaware of the Shooter. 

It was an act. They were all acting. It was theater. And that short pudgy guy was not Jack Ruby, who was 5'9", the same height as Oswald. That man was about 5'6" and he was FBI Agent James Bookhout. 

Just two weeks before he died at Parkland Hospital, Ruby said that he couldn't remember anything from the time he reached the bottom of the ramp until the officers pounced on him and had him on the ground. Now, he remembered a lot else. He remembered that the officer in the squad car was Lt. Sam Pierce. That shows that there was nothing wrong with his memory. The reason he couldn't remember what happened between the time he reached the bottom of the ramp and the time the officers pounced on him is because nothing happened. That's how it went down. There was no shooting. I don't even know if Oswald was there. Maybe they had an Oswald double there. But, Ruby's mind did not go blank. He did not have an episode of psychomotor epilepsy- a term that has not been applied to anyone but him. He couldn't remember because there was nothing to remember. He went to the bottom of the ramp. The time was about 10:20. He was pounced upon and hustled upstairs. And then, they got ready for the televised spectacle with Bookhout filling in for Ruby who was being held upstairs, waiting for the most opportune time to insert him into the story. 

Another very important thing that came out of that Death Bed interview was that Ruby was unaware of what time Oswald was going to be moved that Sunday morning. He said that LATER he found out that it was 10:00. So, Ruby had no expectation of seeing Oswald at all. So how could he possibly have the intention to kill him? 

I have to believe that the psychological con that Ruby shot Oswald was one of the biggest mind control operations of all time. That's because it worked on practically everybody. It wasn't until 2013, exactly 50 years later, that anyone publicly disputed it. Just think: James Bookhout lived all the way to 2009, and he must have died thinking that he (and they) got away with it. After all, if you get away with something for 46 years, where nobody doubts that Ruby did it, you probably think you got away with it scot-free. I bet you James Bookhout left the world a happy man. But, if there is life after death, and if those on the other side can see what's going on here, then I don't think James Bookhout is happy any more. And I realize that I'm not setting the world afire. I'm not being invited on Fox News to discuss it (although I was invited on Alex Jones). But, what I'm saying is that even though my impact has been small, just the fact that anybody figured it out and exposed it has to be disturbing to those who did it. I'm telling you: it may have been the most Machiavellian scheme of all time.  

Like others, I continue to be staggered by what is happening in Ukraine. I have to wonder what outcome Putin was expecting. What was his best case scenario? There wasn't any. Even if he succeeded to oust the current government from Kiev, that wouldn't end the war. The U.S. ousted the Taliban from Kabul, but that didn't end that war. It just resulted in a 20 year insurgency. And if we had stayed there, the insurgency would have continued for another 20 years and beyond. 

The same is true in Ukraine but in spades because the whole world will support the Ukrainians with money, weapons, and even manpower. People are going over there to fight with the Ukrainians, including Americans. 

This was all foreseeable. There never was an end-point. The best Russia could have hoped for was a state of perpetual war. 

In other words, militarily, victory is out of the question. It is impossible. Putin should have known it. I presume he is mentally ill. But, the Russian Military is vast, and they can't all be mentally ill. So, how could they all go along with it?

It is my sincere belief that no one has a right to start a war. Even if you have legitimate grievances, it doesn't give you a right go into another country and start shooting and bombing. Of course, the U.S. did it in Afghanistan and Iraq, and we largely got away with it. But, Russia is not going to get away with it. I don't know how long it will take Ukraine to recover, but I'm sure they will recover. But, I have no basis to think Russia will ever recover.