Thursday, May 19, 2022

 During his speech in Dallas yesterday, George W. Bush said that the lack of checks and balances in Russia enabled one man to launch the brutal and unjustified invasion- of Iraq. He quickly corrected himself, but, his statement still went viral.


Without a doubt, the Bush-ordered invasion of Iraq was as monstrous and evil as what Putin is doing in Ukraine. It would be macabre to compare them, but if you went by body counts, Putin has a long way to go to catch up to Bush. And let's not forget that Bush also ordered the invasion of Afghanistan, which was equally criminal and horrific. In terms of the number of lives ended, Bush is one of the worst mass murderers of all time. 

But, he walks around a free man, which speaks of the hypocrisy, the double standard, and the blindness of the American system.  It speaks of the moral rot that is at the heart of our system; the moral rot and the lies. Lies are what keeps America going- lies and phony money that is conjured up at will. I have to wonder what it's like to live with as much blood as Bush has on his hands. It won't wash off, George. It will never wash off. You are forever bloodied. 

Monday, May 16, 2022

The Altgens photo was not the only media that captured Oswald in the doorway. The Wiegman film, the Hughes film, the Towner film, the Bell film, one of the Betzner photos, and possibly others had to be altered to remove Oswald. All of these media wound up in government hands. They were all confiscated. 

However, the remedies that were applied to all the others seemed to work. No one suspected a thing. It was only the Altgens photo that failed. The crude and bizarre alterations that were done to it, which really turned it into a monstrosity, did not prevent people from recognizing Oswald and his clothing. 

Then, it became a matter of damage control. The Warren Commission dealt with it by getting a few TSBD employees to identify Doorman as Lovelady. Oddly enough, Lovelady wasn't one of them. You would think that Attorney Joseph Ball would have simply pointed to Doorman and asked Lovelady, "Who is that?" Instead, he played a game with him, asking him to draw an arrow to himself in the photo, and giving him a photo that already had an arrow pointing to Doorman- in case he needed a hint. With them both talking around it, Lovelady played along, perfectly aware of what Ball wanted, but trying, subtly and delicately, to inform him that he was the man visoring his eyes. 


So, that man who had so much light streaming in that it was blinding him, he was Billy Lovelady. In front of him with his arms crossed was Joe Molina the bookkeeper. The guy overlapping Oswald wasn't there. They put him in to hide the distinctive form of Oswald's shirt. It was NOT a standard American shirt. It wasn't an American shirt, period. It was Russian. Oswald acquired it when he was in Russia. And the shirt was so tattered and torn, it's very possible that he acquired it at some kind of thrift shop in Russia. This is such a freaky image, and no doubt the white smudge and the exaggerated hair on the African-American woman were used to take out one or more others who were there. You have to admit that you have never seen anything like this in a photo before- and that was true then. So, why didn't people scream bloody murder about the way this looked? The answer is that we Americans don't suspect that kind of malfeasance from our government and media. 

The killing of JFK was so much more than just a murder. It was a Psyop of the greatest magnitude. The target of the psychological operation was the entire citizenry of the United States, and you might say all the people of the world. It involved many facets of the federal government, spearheaded by the intelligence agencies, and all the corporate media. The operation began on November 22, 1963, and it continues, unabated, to this day. And they are into it so deep that the universal recognition of Oswald's innocence would really flip the apple cart; it would cause a lot of upheaval. There is no one left who was directly involved, except for pawns, such as Dan Rather and Ruth Paine. But, there is still a lot of blood on a lot of institutions. The credibility of the federal government and the mainstream media would be destroyed in an instant. 

Thursday, May 12, 2022

I went to Wyoming recently, and it was still pretty chilly there. The temperature was in the 40s.  And I wore a wool hat, like the one the boy is wearing in the Altgens photo. But, I didn't pull it down over my ears. That felt too hot. It wasn't cold enough for that. But, in Dealey Plaza at 12:30 on November 22, 1963, it was 71 degrees, and it was very sunny, and the sun was making it feel hotter than that air temperature. Jackie Kennedy complained about the heat. And yet, we are supposed to believe that a young boy was wearing a wool cap with it pulled down over his ears. And remember that young children have fast metabolism and good circulation. So, they don't get chilled easily, like old men like me. You'll see them running around in short-sleeves when it's in the 50s. 

So, the chances that this kid was dressed like that, there and then, are zero. It's a phony image. They put him in there, along with the woman who is presumably his mother. And they did it because they wanted to cover up the man behind them who is dressed like an FBI agent. He was one, and he was looking at Oswald in the doorway. He was not watching the motorcade. That's his back to us. He isn't facing the motorcade. He is looking at Oswald, and no doubt with great concern. And I believe he was James Bookhout, the FBI agent who went on to impersonate Jack Ruby during the Garage Spectacle. 

Friday, March 18, 2022

 Rick Bucciarelli

So true Ralph. The WC loaded their report with a lot of useless, even nonsensical information. I think it was Cyril Wecht who related that they included Jack Ruby’s mother’s dental records - which wouldn’t have mattered even if Ruby bit Oswald to death! LOL.
The WC loaded their report with fluff so it looked impressive to the average person and not interviewing the people closest to the crimes.
Allen Dulles summed it all up in a WC meeting saying that “people won’t read it”!
It’s disgraceful that our media infiltrated with CIA stooges never questioned and even worse supported this totally fictional tale!
  • Like
  • Reply
  • Share
  • 1h

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 


 


  

  

 



Saturday, March 12, 2022

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

Sunday, March 6, 2022

 



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