The Oswald shooting was a staged spectacle, and I have selected 13 images from it that prove it. The images are so ridiculous, one would have to be a complete idiot not to realize that it was faked, and faked badly. This is 2023, and everyone's geiger counter ought to be exploding over this. To anyone who still claims that it was real, I say, "Stop it!" It's over. 

    1. We'll start with Leavelle's hand in Oswald's pants. He didn't do that, and it's lunacy to think that he did. No policeman is going to put his hand in a prisoner's pants, and no prisoner is going to let it happen without revolting, as in, "Get your fuckin' hand out of my pants. What the hell do you think you're doing?" You just have to look at that sausage they painted in to tell you that it's fake. He didn't do it. And why would he need to? If he was handcuffed to Oswald, wasn't that enough?

2. This is the famous Beers photo. For the first time, I'm telling you that they revised the Shooter's left leg. I drew in the rest of it. The Shooter was not all stretched out like that. He didn't have such a wide spread between his feet. He rushed in with a normal gait. He didn't stop short and stretch. I believe they did this to hide the Shooter's shortness, which is to say, James Bookhout's shortness. The whole perspective of that left leg is ridiculously large. But, also notice that the Shooter has rushed in right in front of Ike Pappas, yet Ike couldn't see him? Are you aware that your rods and cones are extremely sensitive to movement? How could he not have locked on the Shooter? How could he be oblivious to him? And the same goes for Oswald and Graves. Peripheral vision goes to nearly 180 degrees, and again, it is very sensitive to movement. Detective Lowery on the left appears to be looking directly at the Shooter, yet, he is still clasping his hands in front like a Jehovah's Witness at the front door. 

3 This is the Jackson photo, taken .6 sec after Beers, supposedly. So, in .6 sec, the Shooter fired; then got in front of Oswald; and Oswald reacted by slamming his left arm to his chest, which no other shooting victim has ever done be in the history of gun violence. How fast would he have had to move his arm to get it done in that amount of time, .6 second? Very fast, and it doesn't leave any time to decelerate. So, he would have had to slam his arm to his chest like King Kong. Notice that Detective Lowery on the left is still clasping his hands like a Jehovah's Witness, even though the shot has gone off. What did it take to upset that guy? And notice that the guy filling in for Blackie Harrison, on the right, is enjoying his cigar even as he reaches for the gun, supposedly to disarm the Shooter. Who says you can't do two things at once? But, the kicker is that he's holding the cigar like Groucho Marx.  All he needs is a good Groucho Marx one-liner: "How do I feel about women's rights? I like both sides of them." And finally, the cop in uniform in back looks like a deer in the headlights. He's not looking at Oswald. He's looking straight through them at the camera, but somebody forgot to say "Cheese." 

4 In this frame, the Shooter is rushing in, but Leavelle is deliberately looking right because he doesn't want to see him. There is nothing but cops to his right, so an attack couldn't come from that direction. But, he doesn't want to look left because he knows he can't react to Bookhout until AFTER the shot is taken. Like Sergeant Schultz, "I see nothing." 

5 But, there was a bit of a collision between Graves and the Shooter. It was a crowded situation. Graves doesn't want to see him either, so he looks down, to indicate that he doesn't see him, as he shoves him forward, helping to get him into position with his back to the camera. That's  what you call a spontaneous assist. 

 

6 Above, we see Fritz' delayed reaction. The shot has gone off; Oswald has screamed; the melee is underway, but Fritz still hasn't turned around. He's just starting to raise his arms, as in, "Oh no! Has something happened? Whatever could it be?" 

 7 Above, the short Shooter has made his swan dive into the waiting arms of the police. Ruby was 5'9", so if he was the Shooter, how tall did those other guys have to be? The Shooter was much shorter than 5'9", and he wasn't Jack Ruby. He was James W. Bookhout.

8, And speaking of sizes, what happened to Detective Thomas McMillan? He was a very skinny guy, but look how massive he became. I identified him in the image below.

But, sometimes you need coverage.

9. We can't leave out Detective Miller covering Bookhout's head after his hat fell off. See how Blackie Harrison waits patiently. He's in no hurry. Doesn't he look relaxed like there is no real danger?

10 I like the above frame because it shows how round the Shooter's face was. His head was round like Charlie Brown's. Ruby did not have such a round face. 

 

11 The guy on the left doing the Groucho Marx imitation is supposed to be Blackie Harrison, but he wasn't. I think he may have been James Hosty. The match of the ears, the flabby neck, the bushy eyebrows, and the nose are perfect. The Jackson photo was taken at a photo-shoot prior to the Spectacle, and maybe Blackie wasn't handy, so Hosty filled in for him. 

12 Above, it is photographer Robert Jackson, and he has conveniently become whale-like for a few seconds to obstruct the view. Nothing to see here.

13 And finally, we'll finish with the Stampede. Somehow, there were all these guys in suits who bolted in front of the camera, blocking the view. Where were they going? What were they trying to do? They were serving as a screen so that we couldn't see. Supposedly, Leavelle and another man (whom he couldn't remember, even on the day) picked up Oswald and carried him into the Jail Office. Three men engaged in that activity would be a very big object, yet, we never saw it at all, and it's because of all this screening. But, I don't believe it even happened. Oswald wasn't shot, and he moved into the Jail Office on his own power. We have a term for these kind of guys in the movie business: they're called extras.

The shooting of Oswald was a staged spoof, and it was done very badly. You laugh at this shit; you don't fall for it. Jack Ruby was as innocent as Oswald, which is to say, totally innocent. Oswald was killed by the same people who killed Kennedy. There is only one man who could have put the Dallas Police up to killing him: Lyndon Baines Johnson. I bet he spoke directly to Fritz. "This is a matter of national security. We know the man's guilty. A long trial would be paralyzing to the country. The country needs closure- and so does the Kennedy family. I know I can count on you and your men to do the right thing. As your Commander in Chief, I am asking you do to it."

This isn't just about Kennedy, Oswald, and Ruby. It's about us. We're victims too because we're the ones who got fed this horseshit for 60 years. It's time that we stood up and said, "That's it. It's over. The links, the beautifully conditioned links, are smashed. They are smashed as of now because we say they are smashed. We're busting up the joint. We're tearing out all the wires. We're busting it up so good, all the king's horses and the king's men will never put it back together again. We don't work any more. We don't buy your horseshit any more."  

  

 After firing the shot, the Shooter dove into the arms of the police. Why would he do that? Has anyone else ever done that? No. This is the only time. What was the purpose of it? He wouldn't do it if he wanted to fight with the police. If he wanted to fight, he'd fight. He'd assume a fighting stance and start fighting; he wouldn't dive. Nobody starts a fight by diving.

And if he wanted to give up, I presume he would drop the gun and raise his arms overhead. Isn't that how people give up? Who dives into the arms of police?

But, I know why he did it, and it wasn't to fight. He did it to take cover. He was James Bookhout, and he was working with the police. They were cooperating. The Police had to get him into the jail office without him being seen. So, he dove to them so that they could easily cover him up. And once they covered him up, they were going to maneuver him into the Jail Office though the corner door.

But, how did they all know they were taking him to the corner door? Nobody yelled, "Let's take him to the corner door." Nobody yelled anything. Doesn't it seem like some of them, if not all of them, would have had the notion to handcuff him in the garage? Don't you find it strange that no one took out his handcufs in the garage, but as soon as they got through the door, three got the idea at the same time. Reportedly, it was McMillan's cuffs that went on him. But, why not do it in the garage?

And why use the corner door? The big double doors directly behind them were much more accessible. How is it that no one got the idea to go through them?

And what was the Shooter supposedly doing the whole time? He wasn't fighting against them. He wassn't struggling. He was just going along. But, why was this freaky behavior being done? And why did no one have a problem with it? It's not normal police behavior. Their normal behavior is to get the violent offender under their control; to not go anywhere until he is in restraints and no longer a threat.

There was nothing normal about any of it. The whole idea of them turning a 40 foot walk to a car into a pageant wasn't normal. The whole idea that none of them saw, or was aware of, or responded to the Shooter until AFTER the shot was taken wasn't normal. It was physically impossible for LC Graves not to be be aware of the Shooter when he moved right in front of him. The Shooter crossed directly in front of Graves. That he didn't see him was impossible. It is indisputable that Graves was just pretending not to see him. None of the police reacted in any way until AFTER the shot was taken. All were oblivious to the Shooter until then. And that's because they wanted the shot to be taken.

The shooting of Oswald was a spectacle, and they (the police) were all acting. Oswald too was acting. And of course, Bookhout also was acting. It was all theater. Oswald was not shot in the garage. He was shot in the Jail Office afterwards. The shot was taken downward: it went from the 7th rib on Oswald's left to the 11th rib on his right. The only way the Garage Shooter could have taken such a shot is if he raised his elbow up and pointed the gun down.

It was all an act. This is 2023. Hasn't the age of gullibility passed? Don't people today have less respect for authority than ever before? Aren't they more skeptical than ever? And don't they doubt what government and media tell them more than ever? Then, why do they believe that ridiculous enactment of Oswald being shot in the garage?

It wasn't real. And if you can't see that it wasn't real, that none of it makes any sense whatsoever, then I pity you.

 This is Marina Oswald on November 22 and then again on February 3 testifying to the WC. I want you to see how much weight she lost under federal "protective custody." She went from normal weight to being nearly emaciated.

What, were they waiting for the government to raise the debt ceiling before they could feed her? No, it wasn't that. And it wasn't because she was grieving over Oswald either. It was due to the drugs she was given.

Marina underwent an intensive mind control/brainwashing program. It was an MK-ULTRA program, and it involved drugs, as MK-ULTRA always did. It had to because it involved rewriting memories in her brain, and you can't do that with just psychological manipulation. It required hallucinogenic drugs because she needed to hallucinate the new memories.

Which memories? I am referring to the fact that Oswald did not own a rifle, and again, if you haven't read John Armstrong about it, you should.

https://harveyandlee.net/Guns/Guns.html

So, just as he said, Oswald did not own a rifle. And when Marina was first asked if he did, she said that he used to (back in Russia) but it got sold. Why would she mention that if she knew he currently owned a rifle? She wouldn't. And as I have explained, the whole story of how the rifle got from Dallas to New Orleans and then back to Dallas is full of leaks. We have every good reason to believe Oswald that he didn't own a rifle.

Yet, in her testimony, Marina waxed on and on about Oswald and his beloved rifle, how he posed for a picture with it and went to shoot Walker with it. John Armstrong also demolished the mail-ordering of the pistol.

https://harveyandlee.net/Guns/Pistol.html

And yet, Marina said that Oswald was leaving to go out to shoot Nixon with it in April (Nixon was not in Dallas in April, although LBJ was. So maybe she got her Veeps confused?) So, to stop him from doing it, she locked him in the bathroom. When it was pointed out to her that you can't lock a bathroom door from the outside; only from the inside, she changed her story to that she used her brute strength to hold the door closed. Though he tried with all his might to open it, he just couldn't overcome the brute strength of his pregnant wife. And by the time she let him out, it was either too late, or he changed his mind.

Both those things happened before Oswald left for New Orleans. Ruth Paine recalled how it went when he called to say he had secured an apartment for them, how excited and happy Marina was. She said to June in Russian, "Papa loves us." If she knew he was a homicidal maniac, why would she follow him to another state to be with him, live with him, and put her child in danger of him?

Another wild story she told was that Oswald prodded her to join him in hijacking a plane to Cuba at gunpoint.

To what extent did she believe these wild stories? It's hard to say. I'm sure it wasn't a normal memory, and far from it. And I suspect it had lasting repercussions, which is to say, lasting damage on her. What does she believe today? I can't say, however, I have read reports that she now believes that Oswald was innocent. But wait. She was, by far, the most damning witness against him. And it's ironic because in court, a wife cannot be made to testify against her husband. Had Oswald lived, she, no doubt, would have been a witness for him. She would have testified that he didn't own a rifle; that he didn't shoot at Walker; that he had nothing against Kennedy, etc.

And I'll state again that their starting this "protective custody" while Oswald was still alive proves that they knew he was going to be killed. They knew it because they killed him, that is, they got the Dallas Police to kill him.

And I'll end with this: that like Marina, and like Sirhan Sirhan at the time of the RFK assassination, Jack Ruby also got quite thin. He wasn't pudgy like the Garage Shooter, James Bookhout. Ruby's doctor had him on amphetamines for weight loss. Of course, that is considered malpractice today, but was it appropriate even then? For a guy like Ruby? The drug he was taking, Preludin, got banned for being too addictive and dangerous. But, he got it from his doctor. So, who was his doctor, and why don't we know. We know who is rabbi was, so why don't we know who Ruby's doctor was? We know who his doctor became: Louis Joylan West, the Maestro of Mind Control, the top CIA mind control doctor in the world, flown in repeatedly from UCLA to treat Ruby. You want to know another famous patient of Jolly's? Sirhan Sirhan. Hmmm. I wonder if Jolly ever saw Marina Oswald.

If I could speak to her, the first thing I would ask her is, what the hell did they do to you when you were in protective custody? What drugs did they give you?

 

I said before that June was 2 years old, but I was wrong; she was only 1 year and 9 months. She was born February 15, 1962. And that makes the image of Marina walking hand in hand with June even more ridiculous. Can you imagine that they tried to pass that much older child off as a 1 year 9 month year old?

And not just then; even recently. They did an article about one of the FBI agents guarding her, Mike Howard, and they published this image in the Dallas Morninig News. The caption, which may be too small for you to read, says they were walking into Parkland Hospital to view Oswald's body. This conflicts with the footage in which June gets out of the car first and walks hand in hand with an agent ahead of Marina. Marguerite, carrying baby Rachel, was ahead of all of them. Marina had her coat on, and her hair was not pulled back tightly; it was sweeping down across her face.

When we see them inside the hospital, Marina still has her coat on; her hair is the same; but by then, she is holding June's hand. Then, when they come out of the hospital, now, Marina has her hair pulled back tightly; June is asleep in Marina's arms, and you can see that June is wearing short pants and high socks. There is some bare skin between her pants and her socks. My enemies will probably dispute it and claim that it's the same thing from another angle, but I am not going to respond to them.

So, who is the kid in the long jeans walking with Marina in the big picture? Perhaps nobody. They could have just added that- pasted it in. And when you consider how massive the coat was that Marina was wearing on the right, I can't see that light jacket that she was carrying in the first image to be the same thing. It looks like a very light jacket. And in the third image, lower right, she still has the big coat on. So, that makes the first image a complete, total fraud.

In the article, it stated that they got to see Oswald's battered eye from the scuffle in the theater, and the hole in his side made by Jack Ruby's bullet. But wait: what about all the surgery? Doctors sliced him open like a tuna. They had to get to all those severed blood vessels to try to close them. And then, when he went into cardiac arrest, they opened up his chest and did open cardiac massage. So, his body had to look like the body of Frankenstein. So, they took a 1 year and 9 month year old to see her father in that condition. It must have caused such a fright that she aged several years on the spot and came out a 5 year old.

 At his Midnight Press Conference, Oswald said that he protested to the judge that he was being denied legal representation. That can’t mean that he protested his inability to reach John Abt. It can only mean that he demanded a lawyer, any lawyer, and no one by name. And that should tell you something: that he never met with H. Louis Nichols and turned down his offer of a lawyer. You never heard that from Oswald. You only heard it from the State. From Oswald you heard an earnest cry for help that he wanted A lawyer, any lawyer. We need to listen to him and believe him- not the Leviathan State.

Oswald would have to be insane to plead for a lawyer so passionately early Saturday morning, and then turn one down later that day when it was offered to him. And he was not insane.

Oswald’s first interrogation didn’t start until 3:15. Why so late? I suggest it’s because Bookhout needed to talk to Fritz first and get through to him that Oswald could not have a lawyer. Yet, after Oswald was murdered, Ruby, who did not request a lawyer, was given one: Tom Howard, from Houston, who was not Ruby’s lawyer at the time.

The contradiction between Oswald being denied a lawyer and Ruby having one foisted on him is stark. Dr. Gerald McKnight told me that Tom Howard was at the MPC and was seen talking to Fritz. What that tells me is that they were also concerned about Ruby seeing a lawyer, but they were handling it by picking his lawyer for him. But, Fritz telling reporters that Ruby was talking to his lawyer “which is his right” is surreal considering how Oswald was denied one.

Marina was taken into custody on Saturday, and that tells you that they knew that Oswald’s death was imminent. You can’t prosecute a man for murder while detaining his wife. But, they knew it wasn’t going to be a problem.

So, why did they grab her on Saturday? Why not wait until Sunday after he was dead? This is from John McAdams’ interactive timeline of the life of LHO.

8:00 PM: LHO phones Ruth Paine and asks to speak to Marina. Ruth tells him she is no longer there.

So, Oswald did find out that Marina was taken. And they had to know he would find out because they knew he was calling her regularly and would call her that evening. But, take a look at this from the hallway on Saturday evening.

The reason why the short man on the left to whom Oswald was talking has a blank face with no features is because he was James Bookhout. They did that to him because he was James Bookhout. But, look at Oswald. He was practically smiling. And his voice was chipper too when he said, “So, what have you got against Broby?” Just think: Oswald went to talk to somebody in the hall; somebody he knew. Who could he have gotten to know? It had to be someone from law enforcement; someone who was attending the interrogations. The only one besides Fritz who attended all the interrogations was James Bookhout. No one else attended more than one. There is no one else besides James Bookhout whom Oswald could have gotten to know. And there is no one else besides james Bookhout whose face they would have needed to blank out. So, that is James Bookhout, and I was told that before I saw it. I was sent there to see it. I had requested an image of James Bookhout on Education Forum, and a man named Richard or Robert responded with that link and told me that Bookhout is the man Oswald speaks to in the hall. How did he know that? And why was he hiding that valuable information? Why wasn’t he screaming it in the street like “Soylent Green is people!” as I went on to do? Was he worried about his safety, that it could get him killed? It could be, and believe me, I get it. I worry about it every day and live with extreme caution.

But, the point is that by Saturday evening, there was a complete change of tone. Friendliness had set in. It is my contention that they told Oswald that they believed him, but they had to fake his death first to keep attackers at bay. So, even though he found out that Marina had been taken, by that point, they were all working together, so he was OK with it. But, all that was under cover. It’s not the official story. The official story was that they were prosecuting him for double homicide. And yet, they placed his wife into custody? You just can’t overstate how contrary that is to the U.S. legal system. You can’t prosecute a man while detaining his wife. They have a confidential relationship. She is HIS asset, not the State’s. It all got smoothed over by Oswald’s death, but they had to know that Oswald’s death was coming. The taking of Marina Oswald on Saturday is proof-positive that the feds and the Dallas Police knew then that Oswald was a dead man.

 Jack Ruby and Officer Roy Vaughn gave different accounts of what happened at the Main Street ramp, which supports my contention that they were there at different times. Vaughn said that as Lt. Pierce was coming up the ramp, he stepped to the sidewalk to make sure that the traffic was clear and then he waved him through. He said that Pierce didn't stop, and they didn't talk.

https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/vaughn.htm

However, Ruby said that when he got to the Main Street ramp, that Sam Pierce's car was stopped at the top of the ramp, and the officer on foot was leaning him talking to him. Vaughn denied that he eve did that. And Ruby said that they kept on talking, paying no attention to him, as he walked down the ramp.

https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/ruby_j1.htm

Note also that at 11:17 when Pierce exited the Main St. ramp, he had two other officers in the car with him, Moxie and another. You can see them in the KRLD footage. However, Ruby said nothing about seeing any passengers in Pierce's car. \

Also, Ruby said he didn't recognize the officer on foot who was talking to Pierce at the top of the ramp. However, Ruby knew Roy Vaughn. They had met several times. Vaughn had been to the Vegas Club in 1961 on a police call. And there was a time that he pulled Ruby over for a traffic violation, but he forgave it because he was a friend of the department. Ruby would not have forgotten that. Yet, he didn't recognize the officer talking to Pierce.

But, what about Lt. Rio Sam Pierce? What did he tell the WC? He told the same story that Vaughn told, that he was pulling out, and Vaughn stepped towards the street and then waved him on. He said nothing about stopping, and nothing about him and Vaughn talking.

https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/pierce.htm

And that made sense because he pulled out twice, but he was only admitting to one, the second one, which involved Vaughn. So, that's the one he described.

But, returrning to the testimony of Roy Vaughn: He was on duty at another location downtown when he got a call to report to City Hall and go to the dispatch office and wait for Lt. Pierce.. So, he drove over there and parked his car and then went to the office, but Pierce wasn't there. So, he sat around with two other guys who were also waiting for Pierce; they drank coffee and talked as they waited for him. Then, another officer, RC Nelson showed up, who was Tippit's partner. Vaughn didn't point that out, but I am. Finally, Pierce shows up, and he told them to all report to Sergeant Patrick Dean in the basement for their assignments. So, they went down to the basement to find Dean, and when they found him, Dean put Vaughn in the hands of Sergeant Putnam. And it was Sergeant Putnam who instructed Vaughn to guard the Main Street ramp and make sure no one got in.

Now, how long would all that have taken? From the time that Vaughn got the call from his original location downtown to report to City Hall to him standing at the top of the Main Street ramp guarding it? What if I told you he got the call at 9 AM. As you play out that scenario in your mind, as you watch it in your head, and not like a movie because movies jump around. You have to watch it in your head like you are experiencing every second of it. Well, when it finally came down to citing a time, the record states that Vaughn said "somewhere around 9:30; I couldn't be definite."

9:30? That's half an hour. To do all that? No way! And did Vaughn really say it? That could easily have been edited, and no one would have noticed. No one would have been looking for it. The whole idea that it wasn't Ruby in the garage didn't dawn on anyone until 2013- 50 years later.

But, there is no doubt that it wasn't Ruby in the garage because the images tell us so. Remember what a I said: that there is a hierarchy when it comes to evidence; that some things trump other things. And the images trump everything else, including all the lipflapping. That short, pudgy Shooter with the long, thick hair in back was definitely not Jack Ruby. And that is on ice.

These two cannot be the same man. Might as well say the sun is the moon, if you're going to say that.

It's the 60th anniversary year, and I call on all JFK truth-tellers to vouch adamantly for the innocence of Jack Ruby.

 Oswald told investigators that he brought a lunch from Mrs. Paine’s house in a paper bag (cheese sandwiches and an apple) which he ate in the 1st floor lunch room at the start of the lunch break. Did they believe him? I can’t say, but they reported it matter-of-factly like they believed him.

And if they didn’t believe him, they could have easily gone there looking for the remnants of the lunch he claimed: the bag, the wax paper, the apple core. It was something they could have easily confirmed, so did they? I don’t know if the Dallas Police asked Marina about it, but she did tell the WC that Oswald brought a small bag with his lunch. But, how did he carry it? Did he carry two bags, one with the rifle and other with lunch? Or did he put the bag of lunch inside the bag with the dirty rifle parts? I doubt that investigators pondered that question.

But, you ponder this one: Who prepares a lunch for himself on his way to killing the President of the United States/Leader of the Free World? Fixing and eating lunch is something you do on an ordinary day; not on a day on which you are going to kill someone and destroy your own life. Apparently, Oswald wasn’t much of a foodie, as skinny as he was, but to think that he would be fixated on eating on a day like that is ridiculous. However, the whole story of him wanting to kill Kennedy is ridiculous. He would have had to be insane. And we know, directly, that he wasn’t insane because we can hear him speak at the Midnight Press Conferences and in the hallways, and he didn’t sound insane. At the MPC, he sounded like the most lucid person in the room. Those goofy sound effects they put to it- that sounded insane, but not him.

Oswald was very focused at that time. His primary goal was to get his family back under his roof. He also wanted to find a better job, and he thought that getting a driver’s license would be help. So, he was working on that- with the help of Ruth Paine. Why did he go to Irving on Thursday evening? It certainly wasn’t to get a rifle that he didn’t own. If you haven’t read John Armstrong’s analysis of that, you should. [https://harveyandlee.net/Guns/Guns.html](https://harveyandlee.net/Guns/Guns.html) So, why did he go there? The money! He had $160 which was equivalent to $1578 today. That’s a lot of cash. There aren’t many people who have $1578 in cash lying around. I bet there are billionaires who don’t. So, how did Oswald get that money? He didn’t save it. He was out of work all of August and September, and he didn’t start working at the TSBD until October. He made $1.11/hour, and he had to support himself and give money to Marina. So, do the Math. How much could he have saved? Obviously, somebody gave him that money. And whoever gave it to him probably said, “Now, don’t leave that money in your boarding room. It won’t be safe there. Take it out to your wife in Irving.” I can’t tell you who gave him the money, but somebody did, unless he stole it, and there’s no reason to think that.

And he was probably excited to show it to Marina. “Look, Honey, I’ve got the money now. I can get us an apartment.” She turned him down, but not forever. She said she wasn’t ready. And they still spent the night together in the same bed. Supposedly, Oswald got up during the night and went out to the garage to find the rifle and disassemble it and put it in the paper bag he built.

And I’ll say again how ridiculous the making of the paper bag was as an element in the story. Nobody would do that. They would just put the rifle parts on the paper and wrap the paper around them, as you would wrap a present. There was no need to make a bag, nor did he have the know-how. What if I gave you some brown paper and said, “Make a bag.” What would you do? Since he surely never did it before, why assume that Oswald would know what do to?

But, the whole story of how the rifle wound up in Ruth Paine’s garage is ridiculous. Ruth Paine drove Oswald to the bus station when he moved to New Orleans, and she didn’t see a rifle with him. Don’t you think she would have noticed and said so? And when she came to get Marina in early September, Oswald wasn’t going with them, yet, he snuck the rifle that he never brought down into her station wagon? And then what? Did he expect Marina to sneak it into Ruth Paine’s garage? Why would Marina do that? Marina was grateful to Ruth for taking her in. You think she was going to start by sneaking a rifle into her garage, knowing how opposed she was to guns? She would have told Oswald the Russian equivalent of “Go fuck yourself” if he asked her to do that. And why would Oswald want to do that? He wasn’t going back to Dallas, not for a while, and he didn’t know when. He had friends in New Orleans, such as Guy Bannister’s groupies. Wouldn’t it make more sense to leave it with one of them? This was bad storytelling by an incompetent screenwriter.

So, how did the rifle get moved into Ruth’s garage? And how is it that Michael Paine handled it several times, always wondering what it was, thinking perhaps that it was tent poles for camping or a military shovel. The guy had been in the Military, yet, it never occurred to him that it was a rifle? Only in the JFK assassination. Then, there’s the story of the curtain rods. Oswald denied telling Frasier that he was going to get curtain rods. But wait: they weren’t even his curtain rods. Was it that he was going to steal Ruth Paine’s curtain rods? So, this woman is putting up his wife and kids, and he was going to steal her curtain rods? Why would he do that when he had $160 dollars? In those days, curtain rods probably cost fifty cents. But wait: curtain rods are useless without the hardware by which you hang them from the wall. And they never suggested that she had that. So, he would have had to buy the hardware anyway, so why not just buy the set? And how can you compare curtain rods to a rifle? The mass, the geometry, the weight…

How they got Frasier to say that Oswald said he was going there to get curtain rods I don’t know.

Now, look at this collage.

On the left, it’s Doorman; center Oswald; and right Lovelady, posing in his plaid shirt. Notice that the fold and crease in Lovelady’s shirt look ironed. It was deliberate, whereas on Doorman and Oswald, it’s a natural furl. Then, look at the complex, geometrical pattern of Lovelady’s shirt compared to the stark plainness of both Doorman’s and Oswald’s. Look at the visible button on Lovelady’s shirt. Oswald’s shirt had no buttons except for the bottom two, which is why it was unbuttoned, and that’s what we’re seeing on Doorman. If Doorman were Lovelady, don’t you think he would have buttoned his shirt? Why would he be standing there in an unbuttoned shirt to watch the President ride by if his shirt had buttons? Anyone who believes the official story of the JFK assassination is either extremely corrupt, extremely stupid, or both.

 I have added the collage of two similar looking men to that of Bookhout and Ruby to demonstrate a point about the JFK community. The two men I added look more alike than Bookhout and Ruby. With Bookhout and Ruby, it jumps out at you right away that they are two different men. With the other two, the likenesses between them jump out more than the differences. But, we all know that, except for identical twins, every individual is a genetic oddity. Though those two men look alike, they are definitely two different men.

It's just as certain between Bookhout and Ruby. We don't see as much of them, but what we do see is enough. One has a very short, burly neck; the other has a longer, more typically proportioned neck. Boom! That's it! You know they are different men.

However, the difference is that no one has a stake in the two other men, as they do in Bookhout vs. Ruby. Many JFKers WANT Bookhout to be Ruby, and they are willing to forego the normal visual discernment that tells them that they are different men. There is absolutely no basis to claim that Bookhout and Ruby even look alike. There is as much difference between them as there usually is between two men who have no genetic connection. And yet, JFKers insist on claiming that Bookhout is Ruby because they are already very comfortable with. and possessive about, the paradigm they have that Ruby shot Oswald. So, it is lunacy born of stubbornness.

And to me, it is pathognomonic of the deep level of intellectual corruption that exists in the JFK world. It also makes me realize that a fresh approach is needed.

 The fact is that when we see variance between Ruby and the Shooter, such as that the Shooter had a short neck, while Ruby had a longer neck; Ruby had tapered hair and a scruffy neck, while the Shooter had untapered hair that ended abruptly and with a clean neck below the long hair, it is absolutely certain that they were not the same man.

There is nothing else you can say that will negate this or overrule it. There is nothing else you can point to and say that this doesn't matter because of that. It comes down to being honest and mature as a thinker. In fact, when we look at these two side by side, we can see instantly that they were different men. We know it intuitively just from having looked at people our whole lives. On the left, it's the impression of a short man (you can see how much shorter he was than Graves who was average height) with a short neck and a lot of thick, baggy burliness to him. while on the right, Jack Ruby doesn't have that stuffed baggy look. His hair is tapered in back, but even his neck looks tapered compared to the Shooter's. On the Shooter, it looks like his head is resting on his shoulders with very little neck. And his hair is so long in back that it is curling under at the lowest poiint. It is nothing whatsoever like Ruby's.

These two men are as unlike as any two men you can name. There is absolutely no chance that the are the same man. And it is Checkmate. It means that we can state, categorically, that Jack Ruby was not the Garage Shooter of Lee Harvey Oswald.

It's over. It's settled. Ruby was not the one performing in that Spectdacle. And yes, people have the ability to hit any keys on their keyboards, and they will defiantly deny it. But, the very act of doing that in the face of this is sheer corruption. It's the evil that pervades the world of JFK.

 There are the Fritz Notes in which Fritz wrote down that Oswald said he was "out with Bill Shelley in front" during the motorcade, but they are not the only ones. There are also the Hosty handwritten notes in which he wrote that Oswald said that after eating his lunch in the 1st floor lunch room, that he went outside to watch the Presidential Parade. So, it's in writing twice that Oswald said he was outside.

Now, remember who we are. We're not CTs. We're not Conspiracy Theorists, which is a pejorative term invented by the CIA. We are Oswald Defenders and proud of it. And as Oswald Defenders, we need, first and foremost, to believe Oswald.

Oswald didn't do anything. He didn't shoot anybody. He didn't kill anybody. He committed no crime. So, he had nothing to lie to the police about. And being a smart man, as he was, he knew that to lie to the police at all- about anything- would be extremely reckless. For lying to the police is considered a telltale sign of GUILT. So, if you're not guilty, you shouldn't be lying to the police, and Oswald knew that.

So, Oswald said that he was out in front during the motorcade because that is where he was. He wasn't up on the 6th floor shooting at Kennedy. And he wasn't in the 2nd floor lunch room eating lunch (which he never did; he always ate in the 1st floor lunch room). He was out in the doorway during the shooting.

And, he was the Altgens Doorman, who has Oswald's features and is wearing Oswald's very distinctive clothes. He was not so-called "Prayer Man" who was nobody- just a distraction invented to muddy the waters.

So yes, if you are an Oswald Defender you need to believe him and champion his alibi, the one he gave to investigators, which was that he was standing in the doorway of the Book Depository during the shooting of JFK.

 This video of Will Fritz was sent to me by the man whom we call The Wizard. There are two main things to observe. First, Fritz shoves this young officer in a suit over to the right to make room for himself to do his uncoming "Oh no, has something happened?" routine, which looks like something out of Vaudeville.  And then, you get to see the routine, but notice how late it is. It's the slowest startle reaction in the history of startle reactions. 

The whole thing was an act. It was theater. And they were just as goofy about it on the radio, having spokesman say things like, "We're doing all we can, but there have been so many threats against Oswald,  anything can happen." Yeah, I get it. It sure would be a shame if he got shot.  

It's very obvious that Bookhout was wearing a wig. I put in a picture of Howard Cosell because he was famous for wearing lousy toupees. But, even his hair in back looks more realistic then Bookhout's. His really looks fake. Can't you see that?

It was 1963, and moptop hair styles didn't come in until the Beatles. And the idea that Jack Ruby had hair like that in back is absolutely absurd. And you can see that he didn't by looking at the image on the left. He was practically bald on top, so don't be fooled by the long strands they gave him. And he certainly didn't have a thick mop in back. Yikes!

I sent this out to some very important people, and I asked them to hold on to it. And I don't mean digitally. I printed it, along with other images, and mailed it. It's Year 60. The lies are going down.

At a glance, you can see that Ruby was not the Shooter of Oswald.

 Ruby (left) was thinner; with a longer neck; and very different hair. And was not the man on the right below wearing a wig?

The Garage Shooter was FBI Agent James W. Bookhout. 

Ruby had a longer face, a longer neck, a longer forehead. The Shooter had a very round face, which Ruby didn't. 

There are no images of James Bookhout from the JFK assassination. Yearbook images of him are all we have. This is him in 1937 and 1963. Both images were tampered with. 

That is the same man separated by 26 years of time. 

Ruby got to the basement an hour earlier, where he was grabbed, pounced upon, and hustled up to the 5th floor where he was told he shot Oswald. Even though he had no consciousness, awareness, memory, or thought of doing it, he believed Dallas Police that he did it- because he was mentally impaired. He was tricked into believing he did it. 

The killing of Oswald was an operation of the Dallas Police and FBI, and it is extremely likely that LBJ put them up to it. Oswald was not shot in the garage. That was all an act. He was shot in the Jail Office afterwards.