Watch this video of a guy shooting a Colt Cobra, which is the gun that Ruby owned and which was, presumably, shot in the basement. I want you to hear how loud it is.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/z5WfjPVaHUw

Now, imagine it being shot in the confined cubbyhole of that basement, where all it could do was bounce off the walls. How loud would it have been? How startling would it have been?-especially if you weren't expecting it.

And yet, in the Jackson photo, which was supposedly taken after the shot, where Oswald already slapped his arm to his chest from being shot, no one in the image looks startled. The Blackie substitute is calmly smoking his cigar. (he isn't Blackie). Tom Petit is stanind there cool as a cucumber. Detective Lowery is still clasping his hands in front like a Jehovah's Witness at the door. A shot just went off; one just like the one heard in this video. Yet, no one is affected by it.

A startle reaction is a reflex. It happens automatically. And it happens instantly in response to jarring, unexpected happenstance.

That photo is staged, and there was no shot when it was taken. And even afterwards at the Garage Spectacle, the gun's report was very mild. It may be because the blank Bookhout used just didn't have much explosive powder.

 DMT asked if I believe Oswald was loaded into the ambulance. I don't doubt that he was. But, it's very strange the way it went down.

The Garage Spectacle was all theater. Oswald wasn't shot there. And he wasn't carried inside. There was no need to carry him inside since he wasn't shot. So, they sent that wall of men rushing across the camera field like a stampede, which gave him a chance to get inside.

Now, after they were inside and order was restored in the basement, two minutes passed before we see anything at all inside the jail office. That's when they shot Oswald. They must have had a room set up for it. They had a 38 with a silencer. I presume they knocked him out first because they needed to place that bullet with surgical precision. Between having a silencer and having a circle of men around, it would have dampened the noise sufficiently.

And what we see, when we finally see something is, supposedly, Oswald on the floor being oogled by detectives who are standing around him. Was he really on the ground there? Who knows? We can't see him, so we just don't know.

But, they eventually wheel him out on a stretcher, and this is an image of it, but, it's very strange.

What is that white thing over his abdomen? And why does his hand look so waxen? It looks like a wax hand. And what's it doing there? He's unconscious and exsanguinated, so he couldn't possibly have put it there. So, who moved his hand there and why? Didn't they know that you shouldn't do that? That any pressure at all on the traumatized abdomen will increase the bleeding? Cops should know that. And since Oswald didn't and couldn't move his hand there, who did?

And why is his left arm dragging on the ground? They are in motion there. So, they just let his arm drag on the ground?

Now, look at Jim Leavelle on the left in his Easter suit. He has no legs. He's like a Munchkin.

On the right is Blackie Harrison, and if you compare, he's not the same man in the Jackson photo who is sucking on the little cigar.

And finally, in the back, having just come out the door is James Bookhout. That's him. And that's exactly where he said he was. If you read his testimony to the Warren Commission, he said that after the final interrogation, he remained in Will Fritz office- doing nothing. It was a lie, of course. Then, he said that once he got word that Oswald was shot in the basement, he went down there and viewed Oswald on the floor. And then, when they wheeled him out to the garage to load him up, he followed the stretcher out. He never explained why he didn't go to Parkland Hospital, although I know why. It's because he didn't want to be seen. After all, he was the Garage Shooter whom they had just seen minutes before pretending to shoot Oswald. You notice how he's looking down and looking guilty. He really never should have gone out there. He didn't need to. The result is that we have his image for all time.

 Howard Cosell was famous for wearing phony-looking wigs, and people made fun of him for it. But, even his looks good compared to the one Bookhout wore. It's obvious that both of them are wearing toupees.

 

Both the Jackson and Beers photos show the Shooter using his middle finger to pull the finger. Why would Jack Ruby do that? A revolver, and especially a tiny snub-nosed revolver, is designed to use the index finger to engage the trigger. It isn't arbitrary. If you use middle finger, you won't have as much strength or control. Nor will the grip of the gun fit into your palm as snugly if you use the middle finger. And worst of all, there is no place for your index finger to go except forward along the cylinder, which is dangerous.

So, why would anyone do that? In Ruby's case, his left index finger was partially severed, but his right index finger was whole and intact. So, he had no reason to use his middle finger.

And his lawyers asked him, "Why'd you use your middle finger, Jack?" And his response, "I don't even remember shooting Oswald, so how can I tell you why I used my middle finger?" And in the end, Melvin Belli just attributed it to the "psychomotor epilepsy" that he said Ruby had.

And it only goes to show that, then as now, people can't wrap their head around how evil the State is. Belli just couldn't see that the State killed Kennedy and then killed Oswald for which they framed the hapless Jack Ruby. Belli just couldn't see that the Dallas Police were lying, that it wasn't "psychomotor epilepsy" that explained what happened to Jack Ruby; it was that he was a targeted victim of the murderous State that wanted Kennedy dead so badly that they would do anything to accomplish it. The savage ruthlessness of it is and was daunting, and Belli just couldn't see it because he couldn't fathom that America could be that bad, that evil.

But, Ruby did have a partially severed left index finger, and that explains why they staged the shooting the way they did. Apparently, the plotters were misinformed. Someone must have told them that Ruby was missing his right index finger, and threfore, would have had to use his left. But, it wasn't true. It was just the opposite. Therefore, there was no reason why Jack Ruby would have used his middle finger.

So, the bottom line is that, like the sock fiasco which led to the Dallas Police having to claim that they changed Ruby's underwear, this was another production error.

But, how many production errors does it take for people to wake up to the fact that Jack Ruby was innocent? Framed and innocent.

 Are these two the same man wearing the same clothes? Anyone can claim anything, but to claim that they are takes disassociation from reality to the highest level. First, compare their shirts. Look at  Doorman's shirt on his right side, which is left  to us. It just looks grainy. There is hardly any contrast at all. On the right, the man is wearing a checkered shirt. They are nothing at all alike. What about their t-shirts? We can't see Gorilla Man's t-shirt because his shirt is buttoned up. But, if they are the same man, shouldn't their shirts be configured the same? Doorman's neck looks vertical. Gorilla Man's neck juts forward. It's an extreme case of Forward Neck Syndrome. In fact, I've never seen a worse case, and I was a chiropractor.  What about their builds? Doorman looks slender (like Oswald). Gorilla man looks thick and  barrel-chested. Gorilla Man has very prominent orbital ridges while Doorman does not. Gorilla Man also has an extremely sloping forehead like a gorilla; hence his name. Doorman isn't built like that at all. Who would you rather run into in a dark alley at night? I'd rather take my chances with Doorman than Gorilla Man, who has a very thuggish look. Doorman doesn't look thuggish at all. 

As far as the hair goes, Doorman's hair isn't even his. They moved it over from a picture of Lovelady from the 1950s. The only reliable image we have of Lovelady's hair is the photo taken by Mark Lane. Who are you going to trust? Mark Lane or J.Edgar Hoover? 

The Gorilla Man clip did not surface until 1966. It was fabricated in response to Harold Weisberg, who was crisscrossing the country extolling that Oswald was in the doorway. And Oswald said that he was in the doorway. He said he was out in front with Bill Shelley. And Shelley was in the doorway. So, how could Oswald know that unless he was there himself? He couldn't. He had to be there. He didn't guess it. 

The magnitude of the evil involved in all this was and is beyond the pale. Today, they are paying people to perpetuate the lies that Oswald shot Kennedy and Ruby shot Oswald. Both men were innocent.  At least Oswald  was of sound mind. Ruby was not. But, those whoi are decent human beings will  stand up for both of them and help me tear down the State lies. 

 On the left is James Leavelle saying that he recognized Ruby the moment he emerged from the crowd. On the right is what really happened: he deliberately looked the other way, to his right, so as to avoid seeing Ruby.

Leavelle went on to say that he jerked Oswald behind him and thumped Ruby on the left shoulder with his right hand, all lies. If he had done those things, we'd see it in the films. We don't.

The one who does seem to be seeing it is Detective Roy Lowery, but he continues clasping his hands. Ironically, that is what Oswald was doing as he stood in the doorway during the JFK assassination.

 This shows the extremes in which Ruby's hair was depicted. But, even on the left, as sparse as it is, they enhanced it.

Admittedly, the one on the middle is an outlier. They didn't usually go to that extreme in falsifying Ruby's hair. But, some artist got carried away there, and now it's part of the permanent record.

And in-between these two, there is a whole gamut of looks, no two of which are the same. And that's because each and every one was done by an individual artist with paint and a brush. That's how they did it back then. There was no Photoshop.

And they might as well have used red paint- red to represent the blood of Kennedy and Oswald. Those artists were accessories to murder- assessories after the fact. To believe that Ruby killed Oswald, you have to believe that all three images are the same man. You have to believe that beneath the hat of the Garage Shooter on the right was the bald head that you see on the left.

I am left wondering why anyone is willing to lie for the Draconian State, a state that kills people about as flippantly as it prints money. Why do you want to help it cover up its terrible deed? Is any amount of money worth it?

 How do you think Oswald would have reacted if he found out that Dallas Police and the Secret Service confiscated his wife? They did that on Saturday afternoon. They waited until after she visited Oswald. They weren't going to risk her telling him. But then, they moved her out of Ruth Paine's and into the Inn of the Six Flags.

And before you answer the question, recall how he reacted when he found out the FBI had talked to his wife. He stormed into the FBI office and made a ruckus. Apparently, he made some threats. And he took it out on Agent Hosty at the first interrogation. There he was being charged with double murder, but what he wanted to talk to Hosty about was the visit he made to his wife.

I presume all will agree that Oswald would not have liked it.

Furthermore, how would it have looked in court? We have spousal privilege in this country. A wife does not have to testify against her husband. How were they going to prosecute Oswald when they had taken his wife into custody?

But, you see, they knew it wasn't going to be a problem because they knew that Oswald was going to be killed the next day. They knew that the Dallas Police were going to kill Oswald and trick the deranged Jack Ruby into believing that he did it. And that is exactly what happened.

But, the fact that Marina was taken into custody BEFORE Oswald was killed is proof-positive that they knew that he WAS going to be killed. And, it was very stupid of them. It was tantamount to admitting that they knew Oswald was going to be killed.

I want you to see how air-tight the case is for Ruby's innocence. Here's a list of elements, every one of which proves that Ruby didn't do it.  

1. When Ruby was pounced upon, he spoke; the Garage Shooter did not.  Ruby said: "What are you doing? You know me. I'm Jack Ruby- not some criminal." But, we can see that the Garage Shooter did NOT speak. He rushed in; fired; then lept to get in front of Oswald with his back to the camera; and then did a swan-dive into the waiting arms of police. Greg Louganis couldn't have done it better. He didn't speak, and he didn't try to speak. We don't see his lips moving, and we don't hear him. And no one except lying cops claimed that he spoke. None of the reporters, in their accounts, said that the Shooter spoke. Therefore, there were two events: one with Ruby in which he spoke; and then the televised one with Bookhout, in which he did not speak. BELIEVE YOUR OWN EYES THAT THE SHOOTER DID NOT SPEAK.

2. It is well established and undispusted that the first thing Dallas Police did when they got Ruby upstairs was strip him down to his underwear. And they kept him in his underwear- for hours. They just talked to him in his underwear, and they brought in other men to talk to him- in his underwear. They needed Ruby's clothes to give to Bookhout and to get the documentation from Western Union and replace it with fraudulent ones. The fact that they kept Ruby up in the jail for several hours in his underwear is proof that they were up to larceny. 

3. The fact that they gave him a uniform (that was more like a Cuban waiter's outfit) is also unjustifiable. It was a City Jail, and prisoners were sent somewhere else as soon as they were arraigned, and they were usually arraigned the same day. It was and is very common for prisoners to be transferred to the County Jail on the same day as their arrest. So, why would you give them a uniform at the City Jail? It wasn't and isn't done. You can't name any other prisoners who EVER got a uniform at the DPD.  And of course, Oswald didn't. They had no clothes for Oswald. The clothes he wore on Sunday morning were his own clothes. Someone went to his boarding room and got them. And since it's untenable that they went out and bought clothes for Ruby after the shooting, it means  that they were prepared in advance to give him that uniform, which means that they knew that it was coming. 

4. But, the coup de grace was them claiming to change his underwear- replacing every stitch of clothes on his body and his shoes. The reason they made that claim is because the mug shot shows Ruby wearing black socks and high-top black shoes, while the Shooter wore light socks and dressy wingtip shoes. So, to rectify that discrepancy, they claimed to change Ruby's socks and shoes. But, it is laughable and ridiculous, and it proves that Ruby was not the Shooter.  

5. The shenanigans with his hair, in which his hair looked different every time- for the rest of his life- and over a wide range of looks. Here are just a few:

The fact was that Ruby was practically bald, while Bookhout wore a wig in the garage. He had to because he was an FBI agent, and they all had short hair, razored on the sides and in back.  So, he wore a mop that really stands out in the Jackson photo. Hence, it was calling all artists to doctor Ruby's hair for the rest of his life. And in the films, you can see his hair jumping around and fluctuaring. 

6. The jail transfer was scheduled for 10 AM, but they didn't do it until 11:20. They claimed to interview Oswald from 9:30 until 11:15- almost two hours. But, do you know what Fritz wrote down from it? Nothing. Do you know what he told Bookhout when Bookhout asked him what came from it? Nothing. But, according to Postal Inspector Harry Hines, Oswald completely reversed himself about Mexico City, waxing on about his trip, how cheap everything was in Mexico, etc. How come nobody else heard it?  Because it never happened. Oswald denied going to Mexico City. He said the only place in Mexico he ever went was Tijuana. He never reversed himself. Hines made it up. The reason the jail transfer got delayed was because they had to wait for Ruby to get there; then get him squared away up on the 5th floor. They had to do the photoshoot in the basement where the Jackson photo was taken in advance. Then, they had to get Roy Vaughn placed to guard the Main Street ramp, with Ruby already tucked away on the 5th floor.

7. This is huge: the fact that there were people gathered at the Main Street ramp. It was an incoming ramp. Who could they have been waiting to see arrive? Nobody. They were there to be a magnet for Ruby and that is all. It made no sense for them to be there.  

8. The fact that Ruby and Roy Vaughn gave different accounts of how it went when Lt. Pierce pulled out. Ruby said that the sqauad car stopped at the top of the ramp and the officer on foot, whom he didn't know, leaned in to talk to Pierce. Vaughn said that the squad car never stopped; that he never spoke to Pierce; that he checked to see that traffic was clear and then waved him through. And Ruby did know Vaughn, so if he had seen Vaughn, he would have recognized him and said so. Then, there was the fact that there were three men in the car when it passed Vaughn. Two sergeants accompanied Pierce. One was named Moxie. When Ruby was there, Pierce was alone in the car. They were different passings about an hour apart: the one with Ruby at 10:17 and the one with Vaughn at 11:17.

9. And do you know what time Ruby said he sent his money wire to Karen Carlin? 10:15. That's what he told the Warren Commissioners. He was corrected right away by a Secret Service agent; but, that is what he said. He wasn't mistaken. He hadn't lost an hour. And if you do the Math of what he did that morning, getting up early, eating breakfast, and then leaving...do you know how long the drive was from his apartment to Western Union? 5 minutes.  So yes, he sent that money wire at 10:15, just as he said. 

10. Jim Leavelle lied. He said that he saw and recognized Jack Ruby, including seeing the gun. That never happened because you can see in the films that Leavelle was looking the other way. He was, in fact, trying not to see the Shooter. He said he jerked on Oswald to pull him behind him to protect him. He did not. That never happened. Then Leavelle said that he thumped Ruby on his left shoulder with his right hand, which never happened. It was a bold-faced lie. You can hear Leavelle spewing his lies here at 2:40: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzKvMKkwvmc&t=248s

Then, Leavelle went on to say that he couldn't remember which officer helped him carry Oswald inside, which was another lie. And he said that he didn't remove the handcuffs until after putting him down inside. That is ridiculous. Then, how did he pick him up and carry him? Nobody would do that. Nobody could do it. If you had to pick someone up to whom you were handcuffed, you would remove the handcuffs first. Try doing it without removing the cuffs. You'll see what happens. 

I could keep going, but 10 is a nice round number, so I'll quit. Jack Ruby was innocent; framed and innocent. That he shot Oswald is a grotesque lie. Ruby's vindication is as certain as Oswald's, and both are coming.  

   

  

I have been in touch with some local police departments near me, in Cedar Park, Texas and Round Rock, Texas, and they both said that they certainly do not provide clothes to prisoners. They don't even have jail cells. They have holding cells. The difference is that a holding cell is to hold someone for a few hours, not overnight. They arraign prisoners the day of their arrest, and then they either go to the County Jail- or they go home.
Even in 1963, Oswald was arraigned for the Tippit murder the day it happened. And Ruby was arraigned for the Oswald murder the day it happened. So, even then, there was no basis to even think about providing clothes to prisoners at the Dallas City Jail.

But, think about this: that Cabana outfit that they had for Ruby was something they must have obtained IN ADVANCE and in his size. No one ever claimed that they went out shopping for clothes for him after the shooting. Doesn't that prove that they knew it was coming? But, the one who didn't know was Ruby. He was oblivious. He was tricked into going to the PD, and then he was tricked into believing that he shot Oswald.

Now, when it gets to the part about them replacing his socks and underwear, all I can say is: Shut the fuck up! You can't be spewing that nonense. They don't keep socks and underpants and shoes at a PD to give to prisoners. That they had the nerve to conjure up this invoice is astounding. And how anyone is gullible enough to believe it, I don't get.

Look: it was a production error,. Boohout wore light socks and wingtip shoes, while Ruby wore black socks and high-top shoes. All they had to do was keep his feet out of the mug shot. But, they didn't.

They killed Oswald and framed Ruby! That's the truth! Stop fighting it.

 Read this comment by James McNeil. It's very succinct and eloquent. 

 Having been a chiropractor, I am very observant of people's posture and bearing. Ruby, on the left, had sloping shoulders. Bookhout, on the right, did not. His shoulders were square. Of the two of them, Bookhout had better body usage .He definitely had less cervical tension and better bodily balance.

It's over, people. One's neuromuscular habits are as deeply ingrained as your fingerprints. These are not the same man. Might as well say that Joseph Biden and Donald Trump are the same man. You're out of your mind if you think these two are the same man.

 

On the left are the Penguins at work subduing the Shooter, and you can see that he wore light socks and dressy wingtip shoes. I circled them. On the right is Ruby's mug shot, and you can see that he wore black socks and high-top shoes. So, how can they be the same man? And no, they didn't give Ruby other shoes and socks. It was a City Jail. They don't do that at a City Jail. Pirsoners aren't held that long at a City Jail. They promptly get sent somewhere else: to the County Jail or home. They didn't give a stitch of clothing to Oswald. So, why would they replace Ruby's shoes and socks for an overnight stay? It was less than 24 hours. It was Noon the next day that he was transferred to the County Jail.

So, why would they replace every stitch of clothing on his body, including his underwear and shoes? They wouldn't. They couldn't. They didn't. It was just a production error. I know about them. I'm a filmmaker. They had a costume error with Bookhout. That's the way it goes. And now, posterity will know.

The official story is imploding, and there is nothing anyone can do to stop it. It is going down like the Titanic.

 It is amazing to me the lengths that the minions of the Leviathan State that killed Kennedy will go to protect their masters, such as Mike Morgan. Now, he is attempting to blame the obfuscation of Bookhout's eyes on shadow. He knows nothing about shadow. I'm sure he couldn't pass an 8th grade Physics class. But, that doesn't stop him from spewing about it.

He's claiming that the reduction of Boohout's eyes to blackness is due to shadow. First, note that Bookhout's face is completely in light, that the margin of his face isn't broken by shadow. We see the whole thing. Observe that his forehead is completely in light and so is his cheek below his eye completely in light. His face is brightly illuminated.

You can see where the shadow from Sims' hat is going: on the door behind him and at the same level. There is extreme blackness over Sims' left eye, and I have an arrow pointing to it. That, I presume, is supposed to be from Boyd's hat, but you have to understand something: blur in a photographic image is consistent. The only way that one element might be blurred, while another not, is if the blurred element was moving. But, that's not true in this case. Sims wasn't moving. But, why would Boyd cast such an inky black shadow over Sims' eye? Remember, that we've seen this before. In the Altgens photo, Billy Lovelady was visoring his eyes with his hands atop his head, and they blackened out his whole face. It isn't real. It's something that they did because he was Billy Lovelady. I have added him to this image to remind you.

I can tell you what these morons did, what their piddling minds were thinking. They thought that they could mar the image of Sims severely, blurring it more severely than Bookhout, to imply that distance caused it. So, Boyd is clear and sharp, then Bookhout has some problems, while Sims is a complete mess. On Sims, they tried to make it that shadow obliterated both his eyes, that even though the shadow over his right eye is much lighter, it still obliterated his eye, where we can't see it at all.

So, the idea was that Bookhout has visual problems, but Sims is much worse, so just accept it.

Now, as for Boohout's eyes, it may be that they intended to suggest that, by chance, shadow from Boyd's hat obliterated them, but it's impossible. Boyd was a huge object in front of Bookhout, and the idea that his shadow would intrude on Bookhout's face just specifically at that spot to obliterate his eye is ridiculous. It's as ridiculous as Lovelady's whole head being blacked out by his hands atop his head. And the irony in that case is that it was intense light that was causing Lovelady to visor his eyes to begin with.

Now, look at Bookhout's left eye. It's not in shadow, right? Yet, it's missing too. You don't see it. All you see is a weird line, and his eyebrow above it is just as weird and screwy too.

Aaron Peterson made an attempt to restore Bookhout's eyes, which I posted upper right. Bookhout also had a very slender nose that they tried to hide, so I replaced that too. His nose was very aqualine with very narrow nostrils. And you can see the vast difference between him and Jack Ruby, lower right.

But, keep in mind that the extreme difference in the shape of Bookhout's face being so round, and that of Ruby, which wasn't round, and the extreme shortness of Bookhout's neck, in contrast to Ruby whose neck was much longer, eliminates any chance that the Shooter is Ruby. It is simply impossible.

The one and only thing that Mike Morgan said that is true is that the four men were standing in the dark, and the only light came from the flash of the camera. So, why were the three detectives and their prisoner standing in the dark on the 3rd floor of the Dallas Police Department shortly after the Oswald shooting? I'll tell you what they were doing there. They were hiding. I'm sure they were hoping that that cameraman didn't see them and would just go away. And since it was the 3rd floor of the Dallas PD, which was the nerve center, why were all the lights out? Who turns off all the lights in a police department? What is the talking point for that?

And this is the only image there is of the face of the Garage Shooter. So, why isn't it the go-to image? Why is it that Ralph Cinque is the only one who publishes this image? And why was the video from which it came quickly taken down once I started talking about it?

It's because it's obviously not the face of Jack Ruby. And claiming that it is, when it so obviously not is a very bloodied thing to do. It is a desperate and reckless attempt to dismiss irrefutable evidence that Jack Ruby was framed through adamant denial. And they do that because there is nothing else they can do. The chessboard is saying "Checkmate" but even though their King has no move, they're adamantly saying, "No. It's not Checkmate."

Well, it is Checkmate. This image proves that Jack Ruby was innocent; framed and innocent, and that's the reason they don't publish it. That's the reason they wish I wouldn't show it and talk about it.

Anyone and everyone who is decent and honest will admit from this that Jack Ruby was not the Garage Shooter of Oswald. That poor, hapless man was tricked into thinking that he shot Oswald, but he didn't. It was an amazing, incredible psy-op, on him, and on all of us.

I wrote about Bill Shelley, that he had a background in military intelligence and the CIA, and now I'm going to write about Roy Truly, but first, I want to emphasize how non-credible the book-distributing was at the TSBD. 

They did NOT retail books to the public. It was entirely wholesale distribution to schools. Yet, those order-fillers, were opening boxes to remove units, and they were gathering orders the size of which that they could hold and carry in their hands. They didn't have carts or wagons. They had clipboards. And what did they even need a clipboard for? How about just a piece of paper that had the titles, the number of units, and the name of the school? What did they need the board for? 

So, even though schools were, supposedly, ordering books for classes, the order-fillers were filling small orders- exclusively. 

In the image, you can see the tall stacks of boxes, each of which was over 30 pounds. The small print on the box shows the word Mathematics, but that is the only word that is legible. Imagine if you had to look through those stacks for a certain title. And if you found what you were looking for, and the box was unopened, how did you open it? Wouldn't you need a razor-knife, or in 9/11 parlance, a box-cutter? They certainly weren't lifting 30-plus pound boxes down from high stacks and taking them to the first floor. That wasn't happening. 

The TSBD had 33 employees. If the income of the business was derived from book sales, how could a few guys gathering small, hand-held book orders, and taking them to Troy West, the mailer, to wrap in brown paper and tie with string generate enough revenue to cover the salaries, plus, all the other expenses, including the cost of the books; the cost of heating and cooling the building; electricity; advertising, etc. How does the economics of that work? 

Now, what about Roy Truly? We don't know much about him. He was born and raised in Hubbard, Texas, which is a small town about 100 miles northeast of Waco. During the war years, he worked for an aviation company, and apparently, he performed no military service. William Manchester, in The Death of a President, wrote that Truly was an extreme right-winger, that he hated Kennedy for being a "race-mixer." His job title was Building Superintendent. That sounds like he oversaw the maintenance of the building. So, why was he the one hiring order-fillers? Was he overseeing the building, or the book distributing, or both? 

Reportedly, Officer Marrion Baker got off his motorcycle and ran to the TSBD entrance, where Roy Truly offered to help him. Together, they proceeded to the back of the building to the freight elevators, but neither was available because no one sent them down. So, they took the stairs instead. Usually, the story goes that Truly led the way and Baker followed, but Baker got delayed on the 2nd floor landing because he saw somebody moving through the anteroom. 

It's important to understand what the anteroom was. It was a passageway room that had 3 doors. One door was from the office side; another was from the stairwell; and the third was to the lunch room itself. Oswald entered the anteroom from the office side, and we can be sure of that because the room was so small- just a cubbyhole- that if he had entered from the stairwell, that door would still have been moving. But, that door was closed and not moving. It was completely stationary. Since Oswald was still in the anteroom, he must have used the other door, the one on the office side. Therefore, it proves that Oswald did NOT come down from the 6th floor; he came up from the 1st floor. So, Baker's testimony completely exonerates Oswald. 

But then, upon seeing a man move through the anteroom, Baker drew his gun and followed him into the room. And by the time he got there, the man, Oswald, had moved about 20 feet through the lunch room when Baker ordered him to stop. Oswald had no Coke. Both, Baker and Truly were adamant about that. And they could not have conspired to lie. They didn't know each other. You don't conspire to commit perjury with a complete stranger. Then, Truly returned, looking for Baker, and that's when he reassured him that Oswald was harmless. By word and expression, Truly communicated to Baker that Oswald worked for him and could not possibly be involved in what happened. And that worked. Baker lost interest in Oswald, and he and Truly went on. 

I know there are people who deny that any of this happened, but it did. Oswld said it did. He told Fritz, Bookhout, and Hosty that he encountered a police officer in the 2nd floor lunch room. He wasn't referring to prior to the assassination because there is no chance that it happened then. It had to be after. And he certainly wouldn't have made it up. 

So, Oswald confirmed the 2nd floor lunch room encounter, and anyone who denies that it happened is calling Oswald a liar. But, Oswald had no reason to lie because he was innocent.  

But then, Roy Truly went on to sic the police on Oswald. Reportedly, there was a workers roll call and Oswald wasn't present for it. On that basis, Truly made him a suspect in the killing of Kennedy. And he had no trouble getting the Police to jump on it; to get them to issue an all-points bulletin for the arrest of Oswald- over the roll call and nothing else.  

But, Oswald wasn't the only one not present for the roll call. Charles Givens also wasn't present. He had left for the day. So, why didn't Truly suspect him? And if Truly had any capacity at all to suspect Oswald, why didn't he suspect him in the lunch room? Why was he so adamant to Baker that Oswald couldn't be the man, but then change his mind a short while later over a roll call? Oswald could have been using the head. He could have been talking to somebody. He could have been calling his wife. And remember that the roll call wasn't a regular thing; it was an impromptu thing. I don't know who else wasn't present besides Oswald and Givens, but there may have been others. But regardless, you don't suspect Oswald of murder over that. 

So, the contradiction of Truly brushing Oswald off to Baker, but then less than half an hour later, alerting police to Oswald's absence at a roll call, and with great suspicion that he was the killer, doesn't make sense. It's a complete reversal. 

The explanation is that Truly was involved in the plot. Baker wasn't, but Truly was. And Truly did not want Baker to arrest Oswald at the TSBD. The plan was for police to capture Oswald at the Texas Theater with the hope that they would kill him there. But, they couldn't kill him unless he was armed. There would have been no grounds to shoot an unarmed man. So, someone must have told Oswald to go to the Texas Theater and seen to it that he was armed. 

I have mentioned repeatedly that John Armstrong did a great job proving that Oswald did not order a rifle from Klein's Sporting Good in Chicago, and he did an equally good job of proving that Oswald did not order a pistol from Seaport Traders. You can read it here:

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

I don't know who gave Oswald the order to go to the Theater, but someone did. He certainly didn't go there to watch a war movie. And of course, Oswald didn't shoot Tippit, but someone who looked like him did. It's a speculation as to why Tippit was killed, but one reason may have been simply to turn Oswald into cop-killer, so that police at the theater would be trigger-happy and kill him before he said a word. It didn't work out that way, but it could have and almost did. 

But, to finish on Truly, he had no reason to suspect Oswald. Just think about all the people you know, including your friends, family, co-workers, neighbors, etc. How many of them could you suspect of being a murderer? It takes a certain capacity to be a murderer, doesn't it? Isn't it fair to say that most people aren't murderers by nature? Sure, in an emergency, in response to someone else who was being violent or threatening to be violent, they might be able to kill easily. But, the commission of cold-blooded murder is outside the realm of most people. Wouldn't it take more than absence from a roll call for you to suspect someone of murder?  What about Oswald made Truly think he was capable of murder? What about Oswald made Truly think he would want to murder John Kennedy? Why would Truly even think that Oswald owned a rifle? Since Oswald had never shown the slightest tendency towards violence, or even enmity or anger, what reason was there to think that there was any chance that he shot Kennedy? His absence from the roll call doesn't cut it.

The killing of Kennedy was a CIA operation, and the TSBD, which was a CIA front company, had the task of framing Oswald. Truly and his underling Bill Shelley were both involved. Truly is the one who placed Oswald in the police crosshairs.  I wish I knew how Roy Truly got involved with the CIA, but I probably never will. He worked for the book distributor since 1934, although back then, the company was called the Hugh Perry Book Depository. It has also been reported that both Truly and Shelley were not being paid by the TSBD but by David Byrd, the oil tycoon who owned the building. What's up with that? 

 You can't go by anything Bill Shelley said. He was a bad guy; one of the plotters. He was specifically involved in framing Oswald.

I have mentioned the paper by William Weston, The Spider's Web: The Texas Schoolbook Depository and the Dallas Plot. This is the abstract to it:

Journalist Elzie Glaze compared the Texas School Book Depository to a spider that can leave its web and stalk its prey. This article posits the view that behind Glaze’s metaphor was a weapons and narcotics smuggling operation moving under the guise of schoolbooks. Controlled by ultraconservatives, the depository harbored spies, who infiltrated left-wing organizations. It also had law enforcement agents, who monitored and controlled the drug traffic within the city of Dallas. These operatives acted at the instigation of the national security establishment. When President Kennedy threatened to break up that establishment, a plot developed to assassinate him. The schoolbook workers became involved in the plot, when they relocated into the seven-story building that overlooked a 120-degree turn at Elm and Houston Streets. The turn made the President an easy target, because it slowed his limousine down to a crawl. After the assassination, the victors of the coup imposed extra security measures at the schoolbook depository in order to protect ongoing smuggling activities.

Let's look at the life of Bill Shelley. He worked in military intelligence during the war. He joined the CIA when it was formed in 1947. And shortly after that, Shelley began working for Hugh Perry at the TSBD. Why would a guy whose background was in military intelligence want to devote himself to distributing schoolbooks and mostly early grade readers? It was just a front. The TSBD did not sell books to the public; they sold only to schools. Wouldn't schools order books by the box? So, why were the "order-fillers" given clipboards but no carts or wagons? Boxes of books are heavy. But, take a look at conditions at the TSBD. Does this look to you like an efficient book distribution center? We have no evidence of any wholesale shipping of books from that place at all.

Are you aware that the TSBD moved into that building that very summer? Why? It was far bigger than they needed. And the previous tenant was a meat distributor who left the floor wet with meat juices. So, their solution was to tack plywood down over the wet floor. Why don't you ask a builder or contractor what he thinks of that solution?

Supposedly, Shelley led a crew that included Billy Lovelady, Bonnie Ray Williams and others in laying the plywood on the 6th floor that morning. Why is it that we don't see any tools up there? Why don't we see any saws? The plywood had to be cut in places, right? And do you know how plywood is cut? You can use a circular saw, but you have to have a lot of support underneath it- not just a couple sawhorses. And to get accurate cuts, you need a saw guide, an edge guide; you can't just draw a line and try to follow it.

My father was a very efficient builder, and he liked to do things right. The only way he cut plywood was with a big table saw where you push the sheet through the blade with a guide in place the whole way.

But, they didn't have anything like that up there. And what about fasteners? Did you see any fasteners?

And why was Bill Shelley the foreman on this project? He came to work in a suit every day. And how did those young warehouse workers suddenly become craftsmen?

Look at this picture. It's the 6th floor, and at the bottom, you can see a sheets of plywood that were put down.

But, what were they going to do next? Move the boxes onto the plywood to clear the space on the floor to continue? But, plywood has to be sealed. It's porous.

But, look at the picture again. Is that any way to run a book distribution company? You've got open boxes. Did they leave them that way at night? What about vermin? It was a warehouse. There's an open box on top of a high stack, but how did one get up there? I have yet to see a ladder in that place.

You should read the testimony of Troy Eugene West, the mailer. They had all these 'order-fillers" who brought their stock to him to prepare for mailing. He, puportedly, would wrap the orders in brown paper and then use a Pitney Bowes string tying machine to tie them.

So, without using a box, he just wrapped raw books in brown paper and tied them? What schools were making such small orders? I thought these were books for classes, where every student got a book. But, if Oswald and Frasier and Jarman and Norman and others were bringing stock to Troy by hand, and he was wrapping them, why is there no image of finished parcels ready to go out the door?

You should read Troy West's interview of David Belin because early-on, Troy tries to tell him that he worked in another building, but Belin just ignored it and spoke as though he worked in that building.

https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/m_j_russ/west.htm

Mr. BELIN - Well I have a first floor map here of the Texas School Book Depository. Here is Elm Street and here is the front entrance. Here is Mr. Truly's office, and Here is Mr. Shelley's office. There is the stairway down to the basement, and there are the elevators and the back stairway. There are the toilets there. About where would you wrap mail there? Here is the Domino room and the shower. You are looking here, that is north Elm Street runs this way and Houston Street runs that way. It is shown on the diagram. Mr. WEST - Well, my place was in the west side of the other building. Mr. BELIN - Was it near the stairway? Mr. WEST - No; it wasn't close to the stairway. Mr. BELIN - Was it closer to the Elm Street side of the building? Mr. WEST - No, sir. Mr. BELIN - What was it close to? The west side is the side near the railroad tracks and the triple underpass. Is that what you think is the west side? Mr. WEST - Yes, sir; that is what I would call the west side. Mr. BELIN - When did you quit for lunch that day? Mr. WEST - Well, we always quit at 12 o'clock in the day.

What part of "my place was in the west side of the other building" did Belin not understand?

And Troy went along with it because Belin was the 800 pound gorilla, and what the 800 pound gorilla wants, the 800 pound gorilla gets. And this pattern of ignoring crucial information was typical of the Warren Commission. For instance, when Bonnie Ray Williams told Joseph Ball that he spent the whole lunch break up on the 6th floor, not leaving until very close to the arrival of the motorcade, Ball never followed it with, "Well, did you see Oswald building the Sniper's Nest?" Of course, he didn't. Williams didn't and Oswald didn't.

The point is that the TSBD was a CIA front company, and the book distributing was just a facade. We have no evidence of any school size orders being processed that day or any other day.

I believe that Bill Shelley ordered Oswald to go to the 2nd floor, and here's why: If you watch the Dave Wiegman film, you'll see that WIegman panned the doorway as his press car was rounding the intersection. But then, after the car was on Elm Street, Wiegman spun around and did a second pan of the doorway. Why? There must have been a commotion there. And when his camera got there the second time, Oswald was gone. There was no Doorman. But, put they put one in. They implanted a still image of a heavy-set bald guy whom I refer to as the 2nd Wiegman Doorman. The 1st Wiegman Doorman was Oswald. They blurred the film so much that it's hard to recognize him.

But, the bottom line is that the TSBD was a CIA front company, and Bill Shelley was involved, not in distributing school books, but in the clandestine activities that they were really doing: gun and drug running, espionage, etc. And they were also involved in killing Kennedy and framing Oswald.

So, any snd all statements that Bill Shelley made were for the purpose of advancing the plot, not telling the truth. Shelley was aiding and abetting the killers. He was one of them. So was Roy Truly. So were the higher-ups. The company employed 75 people, and I don't say they were all invovled. But, Shelley and Truly certainly were, and they are not to be believed. I could write a separate piece on Truly, and perhaps I will.

 This UPI article from May 23, 1964 is very telling. For one, I didn't realize that the Doorman issue was still red-hot in May. That was 6 months after the assassination, and people were still clamoring about it? I didn't know that. I knew that immediately there was a lot of clamor but not 6 months later.

The lines attributed to Lovelady were certainly concocted and not his. Lovelady was not arrogant at all. He didn't talk like that. If you listen to the long interview Ken Brooten did with him in 1976. you'll hear that he was very terse, soft-spoken, and unassertive.

The article states that "newspaper descriptions stated the man bears an extraordinary resemblance to Oswald," but they must have meant foreign papers. U.S. papers did not use that caption. A caption was written for the photo by the AP, although not by James Altgens, who usually wrote his own captions. The caption said that you can see the Secret Service Agents looking at the source of the shots. The irony of that is that is that if the shots came from the 6th floor, they would have been looking up, not down at the doorway. They were, in fact, looking not at the source of the shots but at the patsy who, for some reason, was standing in the doorway.

But, the most telling thing of all is that no photos of Lovelady were ever released. He stated in the article that the FBI took pictures of him from various angles, but they were never released to the papers. They were sent to the Warren Commission, which chose not to publish them- or even to acknowledge their existence. They just let them in the "document pile." The only reason we found out about the FBI photos and got to see them is because Harold Weisberg foraged in the document pile and found them. And he went ballistic. He published them in Photographic Whitewash, and he started touring the country giving speeches and appearing on local talk radio shows espuising Oswald in the doorway. And that caused the FBI to go into the movie business, creating phony clips of Lovelady in a plaid shirt, including the Gorilla Man clip (taken supposedly at a time that Lovelady was definitely not in front of the TSBD) and the Squad room clip (even though Lovelady stated, under oath, that the last time he saw Oswald was at the TSBD.)

But, just think: if Lovelady really had an uncanny resemblance to Oswald, why didn't authorities call a press conference and let the world see him and take his picture? Why didn't they let the cameras click? Instead, they did just the opposite. Dallas Police spread the word that anyone who tries to take a photo of Lovelady would be charged with a crime. And I know there was at least one incident on the street in which the police were involved when someone tried to take Lovelady's picture. Thank God Mark Lane's photographer was able to do it despite the prohibition. If not, we wouldn't have any valid images of Billy Lovelady.

It made no sense to claim that Lovelady bore an uncanny resemblance to Oswald- to the extent that his wife and kids mistook Oswald for him- without showing his picture. Why not? What was the national security risk? Why just lip-flap it?

"We're telling you that Lovelady looked like Oswald, but you can't see his picture. Now, move along."

But, the most important thing is that the whole world saw the Altgens photo and recognized Oswald in the doorway. They recognized his face, his clothes, his look, and his stare. It's very obvious that this is the same man wearing the same clothes. It is insane to think that Lovelady, who wasn't related to Oswald, and whose phsyicality to Oswald was comparable to Hardy's physicality to Laurel, would look this much like him in a photo. And even if two men did look alike (which these two didn't) what are the odds that they would, spontaneously, dress this much alike? How far you going to go playing the coincidence care?

It's been 60 years, and the world was right 60 years ago when they thought they saw Oswald in the doorway. The only thing that has held up the Lovelady lie is the fiat power of the U.S. government.

Stop thinking that Oswald and Lovelady looked a lot alike. They didn't. And this much likeness, in the man and the clothing, with any other man is impossible- unless Oswald had an identical twin, which he didn't. 60 years is long enough to put with such a horrendous and monstrous lie. I say: Stop the lies! Oswald outside!