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.

Yesterday, a man named Scott Tozier, who served for over 20 years in the U.S. Army, posted that Jackie and the driver Will Greer both shot JFK at the same time. 

How could a loyal soldier of the U.S. Army say that? Will Greer was one of JFK's Secret Service agents. If the Secret Service killed Kennedy, it means the U.S. government killed Kennedy. 

But how, after serving the U.S. government for over 20 years could Tozier glibly say that the U.S. government killed Kennedy? Doesn't that seem incongruous? 

It's not incongruous to me at all. Just because Tozier said it doesn't mean that he believes it. One would have to be insane to believe it. It is what you call a psy-op. It's about creating noise, sowing confusion, and engaging in mockery. It is about ridiculing everyone who challenges the government's story of the JFK assassination. 

Next thing he'll be saying that Kellerman got a shot in too. 

And this kind of thing happens all the time. These JFK groups are crawling with operatives.  But, I have to hand it to Tozier. In all the years and decades I've been doing this, I never before heard anyone claim that Greer and Jackie both shot Kennedy and simultaneously.  

You went too far, Tozier, and it was stupid. You exposed who you are and what is going on.  

I wonder how many Americans realize what is happening right now. How do they think this horrific war, that Israel and the U.S. started, is going to end? Do they think that, at some point, a ceasefire is going to be declared, and everything will go back to normal? Well, they're wrong. It's never going back to normal. 

Israel's and Donald Trump's war is sinking the world into the abyss. The worst case scenario is World War 3. But, even if we can avoid that, there will be no avoiding the economic and chaotic consequences of this war.

And the naked evil of war has never been as transparent as it is in this war. The U.S. bombed Shajereh Tayyebeh Elementary School, killing 175 people, most of them young girls. When asked about it yesterday, Trump said that "Iran did it. They have no accuracy whatsoever."

It is the single most evil thing any American President has ever said, since the founding of this country. And after he said it, right away I began drawing the parallel to the claim that Jackie shot JFK, which is just as evil and just as preposterous. 

I don't know if there are any real people who believe that Jackie shot JFK, but the vast, overwhelming majority of those who say it are dis-info ops, like Tozier, who are just muddying the waters, creating cognitive dissonance, and mocking the whole effort to challenge the government's story about the JFK assassination.

So, saying that "Jackie did it" is just pure evil. However, the claim that Greer did it is based on a specific bogus claim that the Zapruder film shows him turning around and shooting JFK. They claim that in the frames before 313, you can see that he has a gun in his hand. It's a lie. There is no gun in his hand. 

 

But, was the Secret Service involved in killing Kennedy? Absolutely. There is no excuse for what Greer did, and what he didn't do, which was speed off as soon as he realized that JFK was under attack. You can see Greer viewing the situation, and it wasn't the first time. In 286, he turned and saw what it was. So, why didn't he speed off then? It's because he wasn't going to speed off until JFK took the fatal shot. 

And the same goes for Kellerman. Look at 312 again. Notice that Kellerman is just sitting there, facing straight ahead, and doing nothing. Prior to that, he did turn around. You can see him doing it in 286. Greer and Kellerman are both turned and looking at the action. 

And that image of Mary Moorman in 312 is totally fake. Supposedly, she HASN'T taken her photo yet. Even though she started setting up for it long before the Kennedys reached her, she still hasn't done it. And she is facing the street squarely, even though the Kennedys have passed her. Supposedly, she is going to take her photo in 1/6 second. But, if she did, she couldn't possibly capture the Moorman photo. As the Physics Professor told us, the Moorman photo was taken diagonally from behind. The photographer wasn't facing Elm Street. The photographer was turned diagonally towards the limo which had pssed her.  It was taken from the angle that Babushka Lady took her photo. The Zapruder film is telling us that Mary Moorman could not possibly have taken the Moorman photo. 

People, we are immersed in evil: the evil of this savage, monstrous Trumpian-Israeli war, the evil of lies about the JFK assassination, and much more. Alas, all we can do about the war is condemn it and denounce the people who are doing it, but it's not going to stop it. 

But, we can do something about the lies about the savage, monstrous acts of the weekend of November 22-24, 1963. That we can expose, and those lies we can destroy. So, let's just do it. Please like this and share it, and thank you.    

 

    

 

 I consulted with a Physics professor, with a specialty in Optics, about the Moorman photo. He is a tenured professor who teaches at a prominent university, but I won't tell you his name because I don't want him to be harassed or worse. He drew this mathematical diagram of the Moorman photo, on the left. 

He said it is very significant that the line of the limo is not parallel with the bottom of the photo; that it is diagonal to it. He said that proves that the photo was taken diagonally. Another tell-tale sign of that is that the Kennedys aren't centered in the photo. He also said that the fact that Hargis looms so large compared to the Kennedys reveals the location of the photographer. He said that it is obvious that distance from Hargis to the Kennedys was additive to the distance from the photographer to Hargis. He said that you could draw a straight diagonal line from the photographer to Hargis and then on to the Kennedys. That is how they were aligned, and that is what caused the proportions that we see. 

So, when he said that, I showed him the Muchmore frame, and asked, "Do you mean like this?

His eyes widened.  He said yes, that is exactly it, that BL took the Moorman photo. He said that Muchmore (whoever that was, as he was not a JFK person) shot from about the same angle as BL, but from much farther back, and that's why Hargis and Martin don't loom large in the Muchmore frame because they weren't close to her camera. But in the Moorman photo, BL was very close to those motorcycle cops. The professor also agreed with me that the laws of physics demand that Martin had to be in the Moorman photo the same way he is in the Muchmore frame. In the Moorman photo, Martin is obscured under the thumbprint. 

Finally, I asked him, "Are you absolutely sure that the woman labeled MM didn't take the Moorman photo?" And he laughed out loud. I really mean that he laughed loudly, and I'll never forget it. He said, "Absolutely not. She would have had a triangular relationship to the Kennedys and Hargis; not a linear one."

What I have been telling you is the truth, that Mary Moorman did not take the Moorman photo. Mary's real photo captured JFK right before he was shot in the throat. But, he had already been shot; in the back, and he was slumped from it, and his face must have looked distraught. And Jackie was already aware that something was terribly wrong, and she was tending to him. Yet, according to the official story, nothing had happened yet.

So, they had to replace Mary's photo, and right away, they came up with the lie that she took several motorcade photos.  She did not. She only took the one. But, she took hers early, and they were going to replace it with one taken later, after the final shot. So, they needed the story to be that she took more than one photo. 

And remember: it was the FBI that did this, and the FBI is the U.S. government. The U.S. government killed Kennedy, and then, because they killed Kennedy, they had to kill Oswald. That is the frightening truth, and it's a nightmare. But, we have to face it, and there has to be a reckoning. 

 Let’s compare what Mary Moorman said at the time to what she said years and decades later. In Spring 1964, she returned to Dealey Plaza and demonstrated how she took her photo, which was in the street, facing east, and shooting the Kennedys as they approached her, seeking to capture their faces, just as she did when she photographed her friend Officer Glenn McBride.  

On the right is her in 2013 on the Today Show with disgraced host Matt Lauer, although his scandal didn’t break until 2 years later. He is pointing across the street because Mary had said that she took her photo when the Kennedys were even with her. And notice that she isn't in the street any more, but rather, way back on the grass.

Well, that does NOT satisfy the requirements of the Moorman photo. She would have had to say “I waited until they passed me and then shot the backs of their heads.”

All they accomplished by having her say that was to close the gap a little. But, this is exactly like pole vaulting: either you get over the bar, or you don’t.  And that doesn’t get over the bar.

But, I want to emphasize that I am not saying that Mary ever committed conscious fraud. I am not saying that she lied. I am saying that she was manipulated. Remember that she said that she was visited, over and over, by the FBI, the CIA, and the Secret Service.  And I’m sure they sent agents who were very trained in psychological manipulation. And I’m sure they never played hardball with her. They never got tough with her. They never threatened her- the way they threatened other people like Joe Molina, Billy Lovelady, Carolyn Arnold, etc. I’m sure they were as sweet as cherry pie with Mary. But, over time, they conditioned her to accept the new photo and the new story that they wanted her to tell.

That Mary Moorman segment on the Today Show is no longer available on Youtube. And this has happened repeatedly, that I start talking about something, and they take it down. The NBC 30 year retrospective of the Oswald shooting, which includes the image of FBI Agent James Bookhout surrounded by detectives on the 3^rd floor got taken down too.

And I have come to realize something today: that Mary’s affidavit was falsified. She did not say the things that are in it. It falsely states that she took multiple photos of the motorcade. She did not. She took the one of Officer Glenn McBride about 10 minutes before, and then she took her photo of the Kennedys, and that was it. Right from the start, the FBI lied about how many pictures she took. They reported on the first day that she took several images of the motorcade. They did it because they knew that her photo was taken long before the fatal head shot, and they also knew that they were going to replace it with an image taken by Babushka Lady after the fatal head shot. So, they needed the story to be that she took both the image she claimed to take and the one they were going to say she took.

You think I’m wrong about that? Are you sure? Because: doesn’t it seem like if she had taken multiple photos of the motorcade, that they would have shown us all of them? What possible excuse did they have not to show us all of them?

And they not only didn’t show them to us, they didn’t explain it either. You weren’t supposed to notice that they claimed multiple photos but only showed us one. Why did they assume that they could get away with that ? It’s because they think Americans are stupid fools and can be played like Pavlovian dogs.

Mary Moorman did NOT take the Moorman photo. She did NOT wait until the Kennedys passed her and then shot the backs of their heads. We have been lied to for 62 years about this and so much more. The evil of our Government and Media is thick enough to cut with a knife. And of course, what is happening today, the disaster and ruination that Donald Trump has brought upon the entire world with his war on Iran shows us that nothing has changed, that the evil persists.

 This is the interview Mary did on 11/22, and they cropped the start of it. After an introduction by Bill Lord, it goes to her, and she says, "picture. And I took the picture."

So, what did she say before "picture" that they cropped? Obviously, it must have been something that they didn't want us to hear. Very likely, it was her saying that she captured their faces in the picture.

Then, the next thing she said was that she took her picture at the instant of the first shot. She said:

"After I took the picture, the shots were still being fired. There
were 3 or 4 shots close together, and it must have been the first one that hit him because that is when I took the picture."

She said that her picture shows JFK slumping and Jackie leaning towards him.

 But, she could not have been right about it being the first shot. I know very well that the first shot was the one that hit JFK in the back high on the hill which delivered the nerve agent. But, that shot was silent. It involved no combustion; rather, it was battery-operated. This is from Google AI:

AI Overview

The CIA "heart attack gun" developed in the 1960s, was designed to shoot a small, frozen dart coated in a potent shellfish toxin, intended to induce a fatal heart attack without leaving obvious traces. It operated silently, causing rapid death, designed to leave little to no trace of the poison during an autopsy. 

 It was NOT developed in the 1960s but in 1953. Charles Senseney said so to the Church Committee in 1975. And he was talking about the heart attack gun:

 Mr. SMOTHERS. Is this a device that looks roughly like a .45-caliber pistol with a sight mount at the top?

Mr. SENSENEY. This was a follow-on. It was to replace the M-l projectile to go into the army stockpile. It did look like a .45.

But, even Google AI admitted that it operated silently. And in his testimony to the Church Committee, CIA Director William Colby said that the heart attack gun worked silently.

Church:  Does this pistol fire the dart?

Colby:   Yes, it does, Mr. Chairman. The round
thing at the top is obviously the sight; the rest of it is what is practically a normal .45. However, it works by electricity. There is a battery in the handle, and it fires a small dart.

Church:   So that when it fires, it fires silently?

Colby:  Almost silently; yes.

So, Mary Moorman was not talking about that shot. And frankly, I think Mary captured JFK right before he was shot in the throat by Umbrella Man. She said her picture showed JFK slumping and Jackie leaning towards him. But, when JFK was shot in the throat, he had a panic reaction, raising his hands to his throat and mouth. It was not a reflex, but it was an instinctual panic reaction. He couldn't breathe! Mary's photo didn't capture that because she didn't describe it that way. So, I'm thinking that Mary's photo must have captured the instant BEFORE he was shot in the throat.

So, what she caught was him slumping and looking distressed from the effect of the back shot and Jackie turned and focused on him. It was probably very much like what we see in Zapruder 207 except without the smudge that they put over his face to hide his distressed look.

This is Mary's statement on 11/22/63, and it certainly tells us that the existing Moorman photo is not the photo she took.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEavxZReo84

 All right, so people want to play hardball; then let's play hardball. First note the monument in each photo because in each photo, there is a tree above the monument (east) and below the monument (west). I numbered them 1 and 2 in each photo. So, the monument is between the two trees in each photo. Then, there is lone third tree on the side of the building in each photo. I numbered that 3 in each photo.

But, what about the very tall tree in the McBride photo? It isn't present at all in the other photo. It's not just that it's too tall; it's that it's there. Because it is not in the other photo at all; not at any height.

So, that whole big tree behind McBride is a lie.

So, what are the State moles going to say now? I don't know, but I know there is no limit to their audacity. They are like the Cheka in the early Soviet Union.