As we continue to probe the monstrous crimes of the U.S. government the weekend of November 22-24, 1963, (and it was the U.S. government that did all the killing: not Oswald, not the Mafia, and not Jack Ruby) I feel compelled to address the current colossal crime of the U.S. government: the war on Iran. I feel I have to do it because not doing it is like ignoring the elephant in the room. 

And I'll start with some practical advice. If you think this war is going to go on for a while, then eventually end, and then everything is going to go back to normal, you are sadly mistaken. Normal is gone. The world is NEVER going back to what it was. The whole global order has been disrupted. The crushing effect on the global economy means that high inflation, high unemployment are guaranteed, but, it's going to be worse for Americans because of the decline of the U.S. dollar. So, you better be ready for it.

But, let's be real: this war isn't close to ending; it's escalating. The worst may lie ahead. The big question is whether Israel and/or the U.S. will resort to nuclear weapons if all else fails. What a wretched irony that would be considering that Iran using nukes was the justification for the war. My opinion is: yes, Israel would nuke Iran, if necessary. If it came down to either losing the war or using a nuke, they will use a nuke. I rate the chance of the U.S. doing it a little less, but not much. After all, the U.S. is the only country in the world that has already used a nuke. And since the decision would be Trump's, then yes, I think he is fully capable of making that monstrous decision and rationalizing it. He is rash, by nature. Don't you realize that? 

The tragedy of this catastrophe is that it was so unnecessary. Iran is not and never has been a terrorist state. The accusation is based mostly on the fact that Iran has given money to Hamas and Hezbollah. But, so has Saudi Arabia and the other Arab states. It was given to help Palestinians and Lebanese. 

One of the most frequent citings of a terrorist act by Iran is the attacks on Jews in Argentina in 1992 and 1994. Get out a world map or better yet a globe, and look at the distance from Iran to Argentina. Jews live unpersecuted in Iran. They have their temples, their Kosher markets and restaurants, etc. They even have rabbical schools to train rabbis, and it all goes on unfettered. And they have a special representative in the Iranian Parliament. Iran's treatment of its Jews is nothing at all like Hitler's. So, why would Iran go to Argentina to kill Jews? What's in it for them, then or now? Nothing. It would be awfully stupid for them to do it, and Iranians aren't stupid. They invented hypersonic missiles, which we haven't done.  I don't think there is a snowball's chance in Hell that the Iranian government sought to kill Jews in Argentina.   

What I think it really comes down to is hate: racist hate. For decades, the culture in the United States has been sliding towards hating Iran and Iranians. We've been feeding that hatred. Just the other day, Trump said that "the Iranian people are quite nasty." Wow. What a thing to say. 

Just imagine if Putin had bombed Ukraine the way Trump has bombed Iran, where schools, hospitals, and residences have been hit. Putin has hit some civilian structures and killed some civilians in Ukraine, but not in the magnitude or in the concentration that Trump and Israel have been killing civilians in Iran. And you know that the "decapitation strikes" have not been precise and limited. Without the least hesitation, Israel has been willing to kill whole familes to take out one scientist, and the U.S. has followed them down that road. The same thing happened in WW2. When the U.S. joined the war, we sent our airmen to England, and they joined the British bombers in saturation bombing of civilian centers in Germany. Most all the Allied bombing against Germany in WW2 were attacks on civilians. Strategic bombing was largely abandoned for terror bombing. If you haven't read about the bombing of Dresden, you should do it before you die. 

It's very appropriate that I bring this up because at the time, neither the UK, the US, nor USSR were signatories to the Geneva Conventions which banned the targeting of civilians in war. But, the U.S. did sign it in 1949, though alas, the number of civilians we killed in the Korean War, and then in the Vietnam War, were in the millions. The total civilian death toll in George W. Bush's "War on Terror" is also in the millions.

But, the fact is that it's getting worse because in this war, the attacks on civilians started right away: on the very first day. It's widely admitted now that the killing of 175 people at the girls' school on the first day (most of the victims being young girls) was done by the U.S. Trump abjectly denied it for as long as he could. And Hegsted kept saying, like a mantra, that the only one who targets civilians are the Iranians. 

But, let's be crystal about something: the excuse that you had bad intelligence, or that the school was close to a military facility, and the notion that saying that exonerates you is false. it does not. You have a responsibility to spare civilians. You have blood on your hands, and you are guilty. In Afghanistan, we bombed 9 wedding parties, knowingly and methodically killing everybody: the bride, the groom, children, families- all in the hope of killing a few Taliban fighters. There is a 4-letter word for that: EVIL.

I hate to say it, but moral degeneracy has taken over in America. Even Trump's political opponents, the Democrats, are criticizing his war over stretegy, cost, and legality, but not the inhumanity of killing Iranians. I pointed that out to Chat GPT, and this is what it said:

 You’re right—most of the public political statements from U.S. politicians focus on legality, constitutionality, or strategic prudence, not on the moral dimension of killing civilians. Very few high-profile American politicians openly frame such attacks as immoral or equivalent to atrocity, which can make the system look morally complacent, especially from an external perspective.

This distinction is important:

• Legal/constitutional objections: “This isn’t authorized by Congress,” or “It’s not an imminent threat.”

• Strategic objections: “This could escalate into a quagmire,” or “It undermines diplomacy.”

• Regime change criticism: “We shouldn’t try to overthrow their government.”

But explicit moral condemnation of civilian deaths is almost absent from mainstream discourse. Even anti-war voices often couch their argument in law or strategy rather than human rights or ethics.

It’s a sobering reflection on how political frameworks can normalize violence when morality is subordinated to legality, nationalism, or realpolitik.

*          *          *          *         *         *          *            *             *

I believe in Karma, and I believe that the repercussions of this monstrous war, which we started, and during peace negotiations no less, are going to be horrendous for us.  And I think that the deranged people who did it: Trump, Hegsted, and their top military leaders, have committed gross crimes against humanity. But, I also think that it involves trends and attitudes and "group think" that go back many years, and involve many more people and institutions. 

This is what Trump just posted on Truth Social: “Watch what happens to these deranged scumbags today." Heaven help us. 

 

 I feel compelled to express my thoughts about the atrocious U.S./Israeli war on Iran because, otherwise, it would be like ignoring the elephant in the room. What they've done is utterly grotesque, abominable, and monstrous. And really, it is catastrophic. I could also say that it is insane, considering that Trump raged about not getting the Nobel Peace Prize. But, in his derangement, he probably thinks he still deserves it. 

Consider the claim that Iran has been a "state sponsor of terror." Is it true? The claim is based mainly on Iran having given money to Hamas and Hezbollah. But, Saudi Arabia has also done that, as have other Arab states. And many countries accuse Israel of terrorism and genocide in Gaza and elsewhere. And the U.S. was accused of terrorism by the ICC for bombing wedding parties and pistachio pickers in Afghanistan.  

And when you look at specifics, it gets even worse. Often cited are the attacks against Jewish targets in Argentina in 1992 and 1994. Get a map out, or better yet, get a globe out, and look at the distance between Iran and Argentina. What possible benefit was it to Iran to kill some Jews in Argentina? The Iranians aren't stupid. Look at their missile technology. And the fact is that Jews live unpersecuted in Iran. They have their temples. They have their Kosher restaurants. They have a representative in the Iranian Parliament. So, why, Why, Why would Iran go halfway around the world to kill some Jews? They are not that stupid. 

And speaking of stupid, it doesn't get more stupid than Donald Trump. Twice, he has interrupted negotiations with Iran to savagely attack them. And, this time, like last time, Trump is already clamoring for a ceasefire. It's very clear that he wants the war to be over. But, this time, Iran is saying no, and Donald Trump is bewildered.  I find it amazing that he even expects them to consider a ceasefire, considering what he did after the last one, and I consider it a sign of his severe mental deficit. 

In the decapitation strikes with which Israel and the U.S. began their savage war, they knowingly killed a lot of innocents. They would bomb an apartment building to kill one scientist. Everyone else was "collateral damage", including the guy's wife, his kids, his grandkids, and his neighbors.  And sad to say, it wasn't the first time. During the Iraq War, George W. Bush bombed a restaurant in Baghdad, a cheap place where you could get a chicken dinner for $2. They dropped a megaton bomb on it and wiped out the whole city block. They killed Iraqi families sleeping in their beds, including many Iraqi children, all in the hope of killing Saddam Hussein, which they didn't do.

And I brought that war crime up in my film, MY STRETCH OF TEXAS GROUND, which was my first. It is the only anti-war feature film of the 21st century. You can watch it for free on Youtube. 

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSGWzsmxWPg&t=1s   

Chat GPT is very pro-Amerian and pro-Israeli, but I have found that you can argue with it. At first, they didn't want to admit that the U.S. bombed the girls' school. But then, they came around to this:

The available evidence currently points toward a U.S. strike

Multiple reports citing officials briefed on the investigation say that U.S. investigators believe it is likely U.S. forces were responsible for the strike on the girls’ school in Minab.

Preliminary findings reportedly indicate:

• A U.S. Tomahawk missile likely struck the area.

• The intended target was a nearby Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps facility.

• Outdated intelligence may have caused the school to be mistakenly listed as a military target.

Because of this, many outlets describe the incident as a likely U.S. strike that hit the school by mistake.

 I am sickened by the fact that most of the criticism of Trump's war from Congress has focused on legality, authorization, and strategy rather than explicitly condemning the war as immoral, inhumane, and wicked. And I see it as evidence of the advanced moral degeneracy in our government. They all seem to have the conviction that America has the right to kill anyone.  

Finally, I will leave you with this: If you think this war is going to go on a while and then end, and then things are going to go back to normal; that by Opening Day of Major League Baseball, this war is going to seem like a blip from the past, you are sadly mistaken. THIS WAR HAS CHANGED EVERYTHING. IT HAS SHIFTED THE AXIS OF THE WHOLE WORLD ORDER. And what's coming next is not going to be pretty or easy or comfortable because the ramifications of this war are going to hit us all very hard and for a very long time. Brace yourself. 

 A Michelle Bube responded to my post about Lovelady and the shirt he wore on 11/22, which he wore again on 2/29 to pose as Doorman for the FBI, and she was arrogant and dismissive. She said we know it's not Oswald, and "we have witnesses that verify that." My post was about the shirt Lovelady wore on 11/22, and she didn't address any of the points I made or the images I presented. This was my response to her:

Michelle Bube: You don't know how to think, Michelle, and you don't know how to debate either. Specific points were made here, and you wrongly think that you can glibly dismiss them, as if you're holding a trump card that you can play at will. You're not. You don't know that it's not Oswald, and you are not the Queen of Siam. You don't get to make proclamations.

And although the WC got a few people to say that Doorman was Lovelady, there were 75 people who worked in that building. Since everyone who testified was screened in advance, it was a simple matter of finding ones who would say it. So, if they screened someone, and that person said that Doorman was Oswald, then he or she would not be allowed to testify. Carolyn Arnold said that she saw Oswald at the doorway, peering through the glass shortly before the shooting. She wasn't allowed to testify.

Furthermore, the photographic evidence trumps the lip-flapping. Lip-flapping is what got dozens of innocent men and women, who were sent to Death Row, exonerated by DNA evidence, thanks to the Innocence Project. The Innocence Project has also exonerated over 20 people who were executed by the State. Every single one of those wrongful convictions was the result of spurious lip-flapping, done either maliciously or mistakenly.

It was definitely Oswald in the doorway, and not because I say so, but because the evidence says so; the images say so. This is an image of Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady less than a minute after the assassination. If you look closely, you can see that Lovelady was wearing a short-sleeved shirt. The shirt had red and white stripes, but the red was more like pink because the shirt was old and faded. Lovelady wore that shirt on 11/22, as we can see; then he told the FBI that he wore that shirt, which they put in writing twice; and then he posed in that shirt for the FBI when they took photos of him.

This is a brand-new collage I just made to refute you, and I'm starting to think that it is one of the most powerful collages I have ever made. I am going to post it widely now, here on Facebook and on my blog, and I am going to mention you. So, I'm going to make you famous.

 I put the arrow on Lovelady's shirt because I suspect that someone pushed his shirt out to artificially create a spread that would mimic the one we see on Doorman. You can see that the other side of Lovelady's shirt remained in the midline. It isn't sprawled at all. So, the spread on the other side may have gotten some help with some nudging, and it probably did.

And what you see Oswald doing on the right, the way he is clasping his hands in front, left over right, is exactly what he was doing in the doorway in the Altgens photo. And we have other photos of him standing that way. He was even doing it in the garage during the Garage Spectacle as they were walking in. So, it was a deeply entrenched habit of his to do that.

However, the irony is that Lovelady had the opposite habit: to clasp his hands BEHIND his body, as you can see him doing on the left in his posing photo.

And what would be the point of trying to duplicate the shirt-spread if he wasn't wearing the same shirt? There would be no point. The FBI put it in writing twice that Lovelady said that he wore a vertically striped shirt and blue jeans on 11/22. And we can see that he wore it in the Couch film, which was discovered by Gerda Dunkel.

There is simply no doubt that Lovelady wore the short-sleeved, vertically striped shirt on 11/22, which is why he posed in it. It is true that later on, he started posing in a longsleeved plaid shirt. I could make a collage of him doing that, and maybe I will. But, Lovelady was pressured to do it, and I'm sure he was threatened.

And I tell you, with very strong conviction, that I believe that Lovelady was killed in January 1979, and hear me out. It was reported that he died of a fatal first heart attack at the age of 41. Although it is possible for a person to have a heart attack that young, or even younger, it is also very rare. It's even more rare for it to be fatal.

There is no doubt that Lovelady was a smoker at the time of the JFK assassination, I don't know if he was still smoking at the time of his death. He was slender at the time of his death. But, when I consider the unlikelihood of him having a fatal first heart attack that young and combine it with the ominous timing of it happening just as the HSCA Final Report was coming out, alarm bells go off in my head.

 Usually, the Kennedy-killers use the FBI photo of Lovelady as their go-to photo to compare to Doorman. And it's no wonder because it was altered to make him look like Doorman.

There are two versions of it. The original one, that J Edgar Hoover sent to the Warren Commission with a letter, has a hard face. In it, Lovelady looks like a thug. So, the HSCA used shadow to soften his face, which is the one on the left.

But, neither one of those images are authentic. To get to something that is real and uncorrupted, we have to go to the Mark Lane photo of Lovelady. It is, in fact, the ONLY image of Lovelady that we can rely on. And notice how little hair Lovelady had at the time. That was a lot of balding for a guy who was only 26 years old. But, that's the way it went for him. I wish it was the worst thing that ever happened to him.

 Oswald’s presence in the doorway was instantly recognized, and it should have induced the photo-alterers to destroy the Altgens photo, which they easily could have done.

But, these were arrogant men, and they decided instead to claim that he was Lovelady, who was standing right next to Oswald.

To turn Oswald into Lovelady, they replaced the top of his head, from the forehead up, with that of Young Lovelady from 1957. They had the photo, including Lovelady’s unique hairline, and they thought it would be enough to stamp Doorman as Lovelady. They were wrong.  

But, the other problem was Oswald’s unique Russian shirt, and they had to do two things to obscure it. The shirt was very tattered, and it showed. So, they had to put the black man, Carl Jones, over it, using the image of Jones that was captured by Phil Willis at 3 pm. And to cover the unique construction of the shirt collar, including the button loop that it had, they put that freaky man wearing a tie in over him in an optically impossible way that sheared Oswald’s face and his shoulder.

On the right, it shows what Doorman looked like before they altered him. I wasn’t able to take out the bogus image of Carl Jones, but what that did was hide the tattered shirt and also Oswald’s hand-clasping. Oswald had the habit of standing with his hands clasped in front of his body, like a Jehovah’s Witness at the door. We have many images of him standing that way that weekend, and he was doing it in the doorway.

Since I couldn’t take out Carl Jones, I instead inserted an image of Oswald standing with his hands clasped, so that you can see what he was doing in the doorway. In your mind’s eye, just shift that over to Doorman, and you’ll get the picture.

OUR GOVERNMENT DID THIS. It was undoubtedly a team from the CIA’s “National Photographic Interpretation Center” led by Dino Brugioni. It was the same government that launched its cruel, savage, monstrous, obscene, and depraved war on Iran, that has forever destroyed the pretense that the U.S. is civilized, and the same goes for Israel. I would call it beastial, except that that would be an offense to beasts.

The United States government killed Kennedy, and then they killed Oswald. It wasn’t the Mafia. It was the U.S. government.

 Aaron Paterson posted the clearest image of Bill Shelley that I have ever seen. I suspect it got some help from AI. But, because of it, I decided to make a collage of Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady on 11/22/63.

It was in 2013 that Gerda Dunkel found Shelley and Lovelady in the Couch film. They both said that, very soon after the shooting, they joined the throng of people who poured into the railroad yard, and we can see them doing it. You can see the excellent match of Shelley, with his pompadour hair, to Aaron's Shelley.

And that's Lovelady next to him, wearing the striped shirt that he told the FBI he wore on 11/22.  I put an image of Lovelady in his posing shirt for the FBI beneath it, so that you can see that they match.

It has to be Shelley and Lovelady in the Couch film because they both said they were there at the time doing that. Furthermore, if that's not them, then they still have to be there. It means that besides the couple who look like them, and are dressed like them, that they also have to be there. It means you would need two sets. But, there is only the one set. Therefore, it has to be them.  

And you can see that Lovelady's shirt is short-sleeved. So, he could not possibly be Doorman. So this, by itself settles the matter; Lovelady was NOT Doorman.

I added that diagonal black line because the three images to the right of it are the only images we have of Billy Lovelady on 11/22. There are others that are claimed, but they are all bogus. They don't look like Lovelady, and they don't look like each other either. And, they involve impossibilities. Since Lovelady left for the railroad yard right away, he was not milling around in front smoking 10 minutes later.

And Lovelady never said that he encountered Oswald at the DPD. He was asked, under oath, where he last saw Oswald, and he said it was at the TSBD. Never did he, or his chatty wife Patricia, ever claim that he was in a media frenzy with Oswald at the DPD.

 What it means is that, not only was Oswald the Doorman Man, but that the U.S. government went to a lot of chicanery and subterfuge to try to sell the idea that he was Lovelady. And the reason they did it was because the U.S. government killed Kennedy. It wasn't Oswald; it wasn't the Mafia; it was our own government. The same U.S. government that killed over 100 Iranian schoolgirls a week ago killed JFK, Tippit, and Oswald on the weekend of 11/22-24, 1963.