This is a letter that went out to some very big names in the JFK community;  the biggest. Alen is Dr. Alen Salerian.

Alen, whatever the poison-laced missile was, it had to be something that would dissolve and disappear. Concerning the umbrella, this is the original paper by Richard Sprague and Robert Cutler, although I can't say I vouch for it. 

https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/TUM.html

My focus has always been on the back shot that preceded it, which I think is much less speculative. That's because 12 years later, in 1975, the "heart attack gun" was presented to the world, and William Colby admitted that it worked, and it could deliver, via a frozen missile, paralytic shellfish toxin. 

The "story" of the Zapruder film is ridiculous, that Kennedy reached the freeway sign smiling and waving, and then after being obscured behind the sign for less than 2 seconds, emerges from it a completely different person, exhibiting freaky and bizarre neuromuscular and mental behavior. It's like he became a zombie in less than 2 seconds. Now, the film underwent Frankenstinian alteration for sure, and the sign in the film isn't even real. But, the changes to Kennedy cannot be attributed to the physical trauma he received to that point- except by conjuring up a fanciful speculation like Dr. Bob Livingston did. The fact is: JFK was not badly hurt until the fatal head shot. So, how could he lose his mind and the control of his body so fast? He was poisoned. There is no other possible answer.  Ralph   

This is another photo from our premiere last night, the musicians' photo. On the left is famed bassist Terry Hale, from George Strait's Ace in the Hole band, and on the right is George Coyne, the best sound engineer/mixer/masterer in Austin, Texas. 

  

It was a big night last night, the Austin premiere of my upcoming movie: Joe Haladin: The Case of the Missing Sister. This is a picture of me with one of our actresses,  Reynee Long, who came down from Dallas for the premiere. Of course, she also came down from Dallas for the film shoot in March. 

 

An Open Letter to Dr. Bob Livingston

by Dr. Ralph Cinque

Dr. Livingston, Jim Fetzer tells me that you believe that the throat shot to Kennedy hit a bone, and that a spicule of bone was thrown up into the cerebellum. I am asking you to consider an alternative idea. What I am seeking is an explanation for Kennedy's bizarre behavior, appearance, and presentation in the Zapruder film. 

Kennedy emerged from behind the freeway sign in a panic. He, apparently, had a blocked airway. He brought his hands up. With his left hand, he grabbed his tie and pulled on it, and he put his right hand over his mouth and coughed. We can see all that in the Zapruder film. And it worked! After that, he seemed to be breathing OK. 

However, I think that it's important to recognize that he raised his hands in a very abnormal way. Using his deltoids and biceps, he swung his elbows up and out, in a wing-like manner. But, that's unusual. If you want to bring your hands up to your mouth, you leave your elbows down, and you rotate your arms internally, that is, you supinate. That's the efficient, mechanically sound way of doing it. So, why did he get all weird about it? 

That also involves his posterior cervical muscles, his triceps, and more. He's a mess. It's an excessive, dyskinetic movement. 

But then, when he was finished, after he cleared his airway, he couldn't put his arms down. They just stayed up there. Jackie even tried to coax his arm down, but to no avail. 

He has NO control there. He cannot release his contractions. He's seized up. And it just gets worse. He continues contracting into a ball. Here he is in 312, the last frame before the fatal head shot.

He may be in quite a bit of pain there, and he is out of control; he can't stop it. Jackie may be continuing to press down on his left arm, but she can't get him to relax. If she's doing anything at all, she's tipping him. His muscles are in spasm.  And I'll tell you that he reminds of my dog Firsky, who had a grand mal seizure at my house, and he seized up like that. I took him to the vet, she urged me to just let her put him down, and I very reluctantly agreed. 

So, what happened to Kennedy's neuro-muscular system that it completely malfunctioned, and he lost control of his muscles? But wait. There's more. That's not the only observation we can make. There is also the fact that his mind collapsed. He could not understand what was going on. He could not respond to it. He could not communicate. He could not do anything. It was a complete mental collapse. 

So Kennedy reached the freeway sign smiling and waving. Then he disappeared behind the sign. Then he emerges from behind the sign with all this derangement, both physical and mental, going on. 

So, what could have caused it? We have to look at them together. So, what could have happened to cause Kennedy to experience a complete and sudden mental collapse and also extreme dyskinesia followed by spasmodic paralysis? We're talking about a lot of pathology and pathophysiology, right before our eyes, from passing behind a sign. The Before and After are stunning in their polarity. 

JFK experienced no spinal cord damage at all, and he experienced no brain damage prior to the fatal head shot. So, at the time of this, there is absolutely no physical trauma that can account for the bizarre clinical presentation that we see. Physical damage cannot explain it. 

I tell you it was poisoning. The shot to the back, which occurred high on the hill, was no ordinary shot. It was an ice bullet that contained a drug, most likely shellfish toxin. And it may have contained more. Maybe there was something else in it as well. JFK was poisoned, and we are seeing the effects of that poisoning in the Zapruder film, both his permanent muscle contractions and his inability to think and function and respond; the complete collapse of his mind. Physical trauma cannot explain it. Only toxicology can. Thank you. 

 

In the Z film, I found exactly where JFK was shot in the back 

by Ralph C Cinque

First, look at Z-198. If you look at it very closely, you will see that JFK's head is turned toward the crowd, and his arm is raised to wave.

I was able to blow the picture up, which you can't do, but take my word for it that his head is turned, and he is looking at the crowd. So, all is well here. He wouldn't be doing that if he was shot. So, nothing has happened yet. However, I do think they blurred his hand, turning it into a blob, to blend with what comes next. Also, be aware that that freeway sign is completely bogus. It wasn't located there, and it didn't face the street. This was high on the hill. Notice that he is still adjacent to the entrance fort on the south side of Elm. He's right across from the TSBD. That's where he was shot in the back. The freeway sign was farther down the hill. And one last thing: notice that Jackie is not looking at JFK. She is doing her job and working her side of the street. So, all is well here. But now, look at Z-203.

Theoretically, this is about a quarter second later, but forget about it because they removed so many frames, you can't do the frame math. If you look at it closely, you'll see that JFK is not turned towards the spectators any longer. He is in neutral position, looking straight ahead, except that he has his hand over his face. Did he really do that? I doubt it. I think that's paint. They needed to cover his face because he must have had a look of alarm on his face that they did not want us to see. The word that Jackie used in her testimony was "quizzical." She said she turned and saw that Jack had a quizzical look on his face, which told her that something was wrong. And note that she is looking at him there. She isn't working her side of the street either. BUT, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL STORY, THIS WAS BEFORE HE WAS SHOT. So, they had to cover up that quizzical look, and they used his hand to do it.  

So, how much time passed between the time that JFK was shot in the back with an ice flechette until he was shot in the throat with an ice flechette? That's a difficult calculation because you have to account for the distance the limo traveled from Position 1 to Position 2, and the speed at which it was going. However, we do know that it slowed down to a crawl. Jackie complained about how slow it went. Officially, it was going 15 mph, but it may have been slower than that. But, you should get in your car and try to drive 15 mph and see how it feels. It's slow. 

But, that part of the Zapruder film, the space between the back shot and throat shot, which were positionally and temporally separated, got cut out. I have the sweep of it marked on this diagram in red. 

So, number 1 is where the back shot occurred, and he rode down the steepest part of the hill that way, the poison seeping in. Number 2 is where the throat shot occurred. And number 3 is where the fatal head shot occurred. 

How did they blend the two disparate parts? I am a filmmaker, and in editing, there is a "morph program." Let's say you have a take in which your actor did well, but he repeated a word. You can't just remove the audio and keep the video of him saying it again because that would look odd. So, you cut both the audio and the video of the redundancy, and then you apply the morph program to both sides. The software analyzes what you have, and the bridge you need to make it work, and then, it creates new video that does it. 

But, they didn't have that back then. It was a pre-digital world. So, they had to do it another way, and it may have taken them years to figure out how. 

This is a painting by Dr. Alen J. Salerian, who is one of the rare MDs who has stood up to the State about its medical nonsense and chicanery about the JFK assassination. I have medical heroes who have stood up to the State about its medical nonsense and chicanery about Covid, but also about JFK. 

And I can tell you that Dr. Salerian has vouched for the fact that JFK was hit with a neurotoxin. He's been saying it since at least 2010, and I didn't get started in my JFK work until 2011. So, he came way before me. He saw JFK's spasmodic paralysis in the Zapruder film as a sign of neurotoxicity. He concurred that both the back wound and the throat wound fit the flechette profile. 

An Open Letter to Dr. Alen Salerian

Dear Alen,

I see you have been through hell. I have been harassed too for my JFK work. But, since you are an MD, I would like to point out that there are medical aspects to the JFK assassination that have been ignored, not just by the lay people but by doctors, who should know better. The most significant thing pertains to JFK's medical condition during the attack. In the Zapruder film, we see him smiling and waving. Then he disappears behind the freeway sign, and when he emerges, he is in a state of panic, apparently needing to cough to clear his airway. I asked Dr. David Mantik, and he said it wasn't necessarily a bullet that obstructed his airway, that it may have been a piece of tissue or a bolus of blood. But regardless, whatever it was, he seemed to have cleared it, but, he was gone mentally after that. He was totally incapacitated mentally. Why hasn't that been talked about? He had suffered no brain damage to that point, so why should his mind have failed him? 

What I believe is that high on the hill, Kennedy was hit in the back with a frozen flechette that contained shellfish toxin, and perhaps more, and this chemical attack is what accounts for his complete and total mental collapse. The Church Committee met in 1975 to discuss the "heart attack gun" with CIA Director William Colby answering questions. Nobody suggested it, but they were talking about a weapon that was used on JFK. 

Then, another medical issue that has been ignored is the extreme muscular spasticity that Kennedy displayed, where his arms were flexed and raised, and he could not release them. Jackie tried to coax him to lower his arm, but to no avail. I'm sure you are aware that neuro-toxins cause muscle spasticity by inactivating cholinesterase in the synaptic cleft. In the Zapruder film, we can plainly see that Kennedy gets all seized up, and yet no one talks about it, clinically. Such a thing does not happen for no reason. Again: no physical trauma to that point could have caused it. The attempt to call it a "Thorburn" reaction is completely bogus. I read Thorburn's article from 1898, and his patient experienced a complete crushing of the spinal cord at the level of C5. The patient lived 18 days, and during that time, he experienced muscle creep. It was not due to spasticity, but rather, the complete denervation of opposing muscles. He only had a few somatic muscles that were functioning. The biceps was one of them, but since the opposing triceps were gone, he had no way to reverse the creep of the biceps, so they crept all the way into full flexion. It has no bearing on Kennedy, who experienced no spinal cord damage and no denervations. My hypothesis of neuro-toxin poisoning is the only plausible explanation for what happened to him.    

And it correlates with what Dr. Humes found: a clean, neat, shallow hole in Kennedy's back. An ice bullet would do that. It was hard and durable enough to penetrate the skin and underlying tissue (fascia and muscle), but it melted rapidly, as heat was applied to it, and it vanished. 

So, Kennedy rode down the steepest part of the hill having been shot in the back, but that part of the Zapruder film was cut out. That is why in the Z film, you see Kennedy pass the TSBD and get immediately to the freeway sign. The part in-between the TSBD and the freeway sign was cut out. 

You know the official story has it that he was traversed by a single bullet, but medical doctors, with their medical education, should know better. Even if the course of the bullet avoided the spinal cord, it certainly would have gotten close enough to it that the inflammatory reaction alone would have been extremely disruptive and even life-threatening. The only reason why Christopher Reeves survived his fall is because he was given massive doses of steroids to suppress the inflammation. My point is that if the Single Bullet Theory were true, Kennedy would never have been able to sit there. He would have collapsed. So, the SBT is just ridiculous. But, what are we left with? We are left with a shallow wound in Kennedy's back, which traumatically speaking, was of no consequence at all.  Then also, there was a shallow wound in Kennedy's throat, but we don't know the extent of the damage because the Secret Service agents would not allow Humes to dissect it. But regardless, the trauma was nowhere near his brain, so it should not have impaired his mind. At that point in time, in terms of physical trauma, Kennedy was less bad off than Connally, Yet, what we see of Kennedy in the Z-film is a freak show that can't be explained by his physical trauma. 

Kennedy's complete mental collapse and his extreme dyskinesia, as seen in the Zapruder film, are the elephant in the room of the JFK assassination. Thank you.

Ralph Cinque D.C.

 

The Jackson Photo: a Pulitzer Prize winning monstrosity

The Jackson photo was, supposedly, taken after the shot. So, where is the shock? Where is the startle? Look at Tom Pettit on the right in the white trench coat holding the mic. Does he look startled to you? How could he not react to a gunshot? The startle reaction is physiological; it is a reflex. Look at Roy Lowery on the left, who is clasping his hands in front, like a Jehovah's Witness at the door. Does he look like he is reacting to a gunshot that just went off? Plus, he's a cop, so how could he just stand there like that? I would tell you that he looks about as relaxed as a person can be. There isn't anyone in the picture who looks like he's reacting to a sudden, unexpected gun blast. 

Oswald has supposedly slapped his left arm to his chest, but how could he do it so fast when this was just a split-second after the shot? Imagine the velocity that his arm had to move to get up there that fast. He would have had to slam it to his chest. And how could he do that if he just had his aorta and his vena cava blown out? The response to that would be to collapse, not slap your arm to your chest.  

Jim Leavelle supposedly has his hand in Oswald's pants. And the story went that they were walking along like that, with Leavelle having his fingers buried into Oswald's pants in his groin region. Just try to imagine it happening today. Say a policeman is escorting a prisoner, and without saying anything, he just digs his fingers into the guy's pants. Does the guy not react to that? And to make it even worse, Leavelle was supposedly already attached to Oswald. Supposedly, they were handcuffed together. So, if they were handcuffed, why did he need his hand in Oswald's pants? Why wasn't the cuff connection enough? Why, in addition, did he have to put his hand in his pants?

You've never seen that anywhere else, have you? A cop with his hand in a prisoner's pants? So, why do you accept it here? Is it because this was the JFK assassination, where weird shit happened?

What the hand in the pants thing was really about was covering the area of impact. Remember that the Jackson photo was supposedly taken post-shot, but no shot actually occurred. There was no damage to Oswald or his clothing. So, all that stuff they did with Oswald's arm and Leavelle's was to cover up the area of impact, so that the absence of blood and trauma could be explained.

They didn't know what to expect before they took this staged photo. They didn't know how hard it was going to be to cover up the impact site. The left arm of Leavelle that we see is not real. Oswald's arm isn't real. It's actually two arms with hands clasped, as in prayer. Blackie Henderson on the right (who doesn't even look like him) is supposed to be reaching for the gun as he continues to suck on his cigar. Who says you can't do two things at once? And notice how thick his arm is. That's another screen. Apparently, they didn't have Ike Pappas when this was taken, so they had to paint him in. This is so bad, it's comical.  

And then, there's Ruby. Everybody looks at the picture and thinks they see Jack Ruby. But, they don't do a comparison to Ruby. They don't think they need to. They have already accepted that he's Ruby, and they are mentally locked into believing it. They have the mindset that Ruby was a porky guy, and that's all they need to confirm that he's Ruby. Well, guess what? Ruby wasn't that porky.  

On the left is Ruby entering the courtroom. He never, ever had hair like we see on the right, with a curly mane and a long, perfectly horizontal hairline. Observe that it looks like it could be a wig on the right, and it was. It actually came off during the melee and had to be put back on by Detective Miller. That's what he is doing below.  

And Ruby did not have such a short neck like the man on the right.

Just compare the distance from the jacket collar to the hairline on each. Can't you see that Ruby had a much longer neck? There is no basis at all to conclude that those two are the same man. So, why do people believe that the Garage Shooter was Ruby?  

It is only because the belief was inculcated in them. And, it was helped along by the fact that Ruby went along with it. He accepted that he did it because Dallas Police told him that he did. And it shows you how deranged he was because most people, if told that they did something that they did not remember doing, did not intend to do, and did not consider themselves capable of doing, would reject the claim that they did it. So, when shown a picture of himself doing it,  he would study the picture with great determination and resolve to prove that it wasn't him. But, Jack Ruby did not have the mental capacity to do that. 

What about Jack Ruby's family? Why didn't they pour over the images, comparing the details, trying confirm or disprove that it was him?  And the same goes for his lawyers. Why didn't they do it?

What it really comes down to is blindness: mental blindness; the ability of thought to override what the eyes see. They looked without seeing. They saw what their mind had already accepted. 

And people still do it to this day. Even though there are glaring contradictions between images of Jack Ruby and the Garage Shooter, it doesn't register on people. And they don't put images of the Garage Shooter side by side with Ruby to compare. They just see Jack Ruby when they look at the Jackson photo, and that's it.  It's a facilitated circuit within their brain, where the very sight of the chubby guy pointing a gun at Oswald triggers the thought "Ruby." Do you have any idea how fast nerve impulses travel? It's fast; very fast. 

The myth that Jack Ruby shot Oswald is surely one of the biggest mass delusions ever. And it may have been the first time an impaired, manipulated subject was made to believe he did something he did not do.  The monstrousness of what they did to Oswald and Ruby is incredible. The depth of the evil of it is shocking. 

  

 

 

Dr. Kevin Barrett asked me to respond to a patron of his who bashed the Altgens Doorman assertion and then endorsed the Prayer Man idea. Here is my response:

It is difficult to talk about this without imagery because we are talking about a photograph and what it shows. But, what it shows is the Man in the Doorway with the face, the features, the expression, and even the stance of Lee Harvey Oswald. And then, as a separate and distinct element, it shows that he is wearing the clothes of Lee Harvey Oswald. It is patently absurd to claim that Oswald and Lovelady not only looked a lot alike, but dressed the same. 

The claim that Oswald was Prayer Man is preposterous. It's beyond preposterous. it is based on total fabrication; which is to say, based on nothing. So, who was Prayer Man? He was nobody. There was no Prayer Man. The whole clip is completely bogus. It's supposed to be from the Darnell film, but the Darnell film can be viewed on Youtube, and if you go view it, you'll see that the Prayer Man clip isn't in it. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCHTdTF7YbE&t=114s

So, since the Prayer Man clip is not in the Darnell film, why believe it is from the Darnell film? 

Second, the Prayer Man clip was supposed to be filmed just 10 seconds after the last shot, which was the fatal head shot, but the people in the Prayer Man clip are unrecognizable. All of the known, proven occupants of the doorway are gone, and all these strangers are there. Who are they? Who knows? They aren't real.   

The Prayer Man hypothesis was put forward to distract from and to ridicule the Altgens Doorman hypothesis, which has been proven beyond the slightest shadow of a doubt. It's as certain that it was Oswald in the doorway as it was Christ on the Cross. The likeness of the man and the clothing are too great for it not to be him. 

Same man. Same clothes. Doorman can't not be him, Oswald. 

In the Z film, JFK was out of his mind

It is truly amazing what we see in the Z film: JFK smiling and waving as he passes behind the sign and then emerging in a state of panic and his mind completely gone. And the indisputable thing is that he did NOT smile and wave before reaching the sign. You only have to look at the Croft, Betzner, and Willis photos to see that he stopped waving long before he reached the sign. That part of his descent of the hill was cut out of the Zapruder film. 

The Willis photo is, reportedly, the last image of JFK before he got shot, and taken a split second before he got shot. Does he appear to be waving? And notice that Jackie had stopped working her side of the street. She's facing him. Why is she doing that and ignoring her responsibility? There is no indication that he is waving there. And note that his whole image is very muddled. It lacks photographic detail and precision. It could very well be paint. And note that we're seeing the freeway sign there. We can see just the bottom of it at the top right. 

But, my interest now is on Kennedy's mental state in Z225 and beyond, and the fact is that he was gone mentally. He could not grasp what was going on, what had happened to him, and he could not respond to it. 

Here's the before shot Z189. It's the last we see of Kennedy before he disappears behind the sign. Notice that he's turned to the crowd and waving. He is doing his job, and he is totally fine mentally. That really is him, and it really did happen. What's fake in this is the sign. This was much higher on the hill, far from the sign. The sign that we are seeing in this image is fake. It's not even at the right angle. The sign was at 90 degrees to the street, while this sign is facing the street. The line of the limo, which is a stand-in for the the road, should be at 90 degrees to the sign. Is it? Does that look like 90 degrees to you?  

Here's the real sign:

That's what a 90 degree angle looks like. 

They used their fake sign like a magician's curtain. Before: Kennedy was OK: and After: he was a different man, not just physically, but mentally. 

So, this is him after, with his arms in spasm. He cannot release the contractions. Jackie is trying, in vain, to get him to relax the arm that she is holding, but she can't do it. He is as stiff as a board. 

But, at this point, he has suffered no brain damage. There is no reason why his mind should not have been sharp. And remember who he was: the hero of the PT 109 attack, where he was entirely in capacity and in focus throughout the crisis of survival. But, as you watch the Z film, you can see that he does not understand what is going on, and he is totally incapable of generating any response to it or taking any evasive action. Is he aware that he has been shot? He had to know that something was terribly wrong, but I doubt it rose to the level of a coherent thought.  If he was aware, and if he could think straight, he'd have gotten down, and gotten his wife down, and covered her.  Note that he didn't speak. It's been claimed that he couldn't speak because he was shot in the throat. Was his voice box damaged? The Secret Service agents at the autopsy would not allow Dr. Hume to dissect Kennedy's neck. So, we don't know about it. But, even if it was damaged, he would try to talk, if his mind was intact. He would have said things like "Get down" and "Floor it." And if he couldn't talk, he would have gestured it. But, JFK never spoke, or tried to speak; nor did he do anything. 

Rapidly, his muscle rigidity increased. Such spasticity is related to upper motor neuron lesions, but Kennedy didn't have any. His central nervous system was intact. 

So, his physical trauma to this point can't account for that muscle binding. But, it's his mental torpidity, that is, his complete and total mental dysfunctionality and helplessness that screams at us that something happened to him: something that physical trauma cannot explain. 

And from that point on, he was like the proverbial pillar of salt. Look how little movement he made up until the final frame before the fatal head shot.

Compare those two images of him. He was zombified. He was frozen. He was frozen physically and frozen mentally. 

How do you account for that? And why has nobody but me raised it as an issue? And I'm not saying it to brag or credit myself. I'm saying it in disgust, that so many people could be so blind. KENNEDY WAS COMPLETELY GONE MENTALLY, DESPITE HAVING SUFFERED NO BRAIN DAMAGE. How do you account for that? 

Well, it's a default situation. If he suffered no brain damage, and yet his brain was effectively gone, what took it out? It had to be a chemical. He must have been hit early-on with a special missile that contained a chemical agent or agents that could cause these effects.  And I mean the spasmodic paralysis and the mental collapse. 

That missile was a frozen flechette that contained shellfish toxin that hit him high on the hill before the Croft photo was taken, when he was still adjacent to the TSBD- a long way from the Kill Zone. It was a preparatory shot, meant to take the PT 109 out of him, before the real attack began. 

We are talking about a visible phenomenon that has to be explained, and there is no other explanation but this. This is checkmate. This is what happened. JFK was shot with the "heart attack gun."

 

How Jack Ruby was framed

Someone asked Pat Shannan about this, and he asked me to respond. We can rephrase the question as: "How did they get Jack Ruby to the DPD garage on Sunday morning?"

It started with the Karen Carlin ruse. They got her to call him, saying that she needed money, $25, for rent and groceries. He asked her, "Can't you wait until Monday?" She was scheduled to work as an exotic dancer on Monday at the Carousel Club. She said no, that she couldn't wait. 

Karen Carlin was effectively put in the witness protection program afterwards. They moved her to Michigan, where she started over under a new name. I don't know if she ever worked again or if they just supported her. But, they tricked Penn Jones into believing that she had died. Someone caught up with her many years later, but I don't remember who he was. She was very reluctant to talk. 

So, by getting Ruby to Western Union, that put him within a block of the Main Street ramp. So, it was part of one block, then crossing the street at Harwood, and then down the next block to the Main Street ramp. 

So, how did they get him to go that short distance from Western Union to the Main Street ramp? First, the people milling around that ramp were there for him and no other reason. It was an incoming ramp, and nobody was expected to arrive. So, they had no reason to be there except to attract Ruby. 

Ruby wrote a narrative of what happened that morning, but his words were edited by a Hollywood screenwriter, William Read Woodfield. I have a copy of it. It used to be on the internet, although I can't find it any longer. But no worries: I downloaded it. 

Woodfield added a bunch of parenthetical remarks and also quite a few subtitles. For instance, Ruby said that he arose early on Sunday morning, and Woodfield added the subtitle, "About 9:30 AM." 

Rising at 9:30 isn't early on any day of the week, including Sunday.

So, Ruby didn't say he got up at 9:30; that was Woodfield. Ruby just said he got up early. Then, he said he took his diet pills, which were amphetamines. then, he said he had doubled his dosage 4 or 5 days before. But why? And if you were writing that, wouldn't you say why? Wouldn't anybody? The purpose of writing is to be coherent, right? Then, he said that that morning he also took some other tablets. But, what other tablets? Who writes this way? Nobody. I have to think that Woodfield edited out the incriminating stuff. He whitewashed what Ruby said. The most likely thing is that somebody put Ruby up to taking the other tablets. But who? A good candidate is his roommate George Senator, who was very likely his handler. 

At the time of his arrest, Ruby was high as a kite. A reporter said that he was muttering incoherently. But, that was only said once.  You can see that his eyes were glassy and dilated- the effect of the drugs. Look at that blank stare. Compare his eyes to the focused eyes of the others. 

One of the drugs they gave him was probably scopolamine, the zombie drug. It takes away your free will. You do whatever you are told. That's why the Nazis used it as a truth serum. Allen Dulles learned about it from them. With Ruby high on scopolamine, all they had to do was have someone suggest that he walk over to the ramp to see what was going on. And then when he got to the ramp, all that was needed was for someone to nudge him to go down. 

And that was exactly what happened. It was about an hour before the televised spectacle. In his Warren Commission testimony, Ruby said that he wired the money at 10:15. Ruby described the shooting by saying that he must have taken the gun out of his pocket and take a few steps forward. But, that expression "must have" is used to surmise something that you don't know. The fact is that Ruby had no memory of shooting Oswald. It was assumed that he blanked out about it, but the truth was much simpler: he had no memory of it because it's impossible to have a memory of something that didn't happen. 

Ruby said that he didn't see anyone he knew in the basement. But, Fritz was there, and we know he knew who Fritz was. And he knew many of the officers and detectives. So, why didn't he recognize anyone? Then, Ruby said that Oswald came out with a smirky, vicious, defiant, cursing look on his face. Do you confirm that description of Oswald when he came out in the footage? I don't. Ruby said that there was no one standing by him. But, the Garage Shooter was right in the cluster, was he not? Ruby said, "I had no thought of doing any violence to anyone when I went down there. I didn't even think about it." He said absolutely nothing about firing the gun at Oswald. Again, how could he remember something that didn't happen? But, he did remember the melee'; not the one we are familiar with; but his. He recalled saying this to police as they were wailing on him: "You don't have to beat my brains out. I'm Jack Ruby. What are you guys jumping me for? I'm Jack Ruby. I'm not someone who is wanted."

That's how he remembered it in his narrative. But, if he had just shot Oswald, didn't he know that police frown on that kind of thing? The reason he didn't know what he had done is because he hadn't done anything. He went on:

"They dragged me to the elevator. They took me upstairs. That is where they told me I shot Oswald. That was the first time I realized it. My response was, "My God! My God!"

So, what I have been telling you is true: that Ruby's entire basis for believing that he shot Oswald was just because Dallas Police told him that he did it. But, in reality, they lured him to the garage; they attacked him and dragged him upstairs, where they told him that he did it. This was about an hour before the televised spectacle. Without a doubt, no shot went off at that time, not even a blank. They had isolated the area, but there were still a lot of people in the building, and a shot would surely have been heard. Once they had Ruby safely tucked away up on the 5th floor, stripped of his clothes, they began filling the basement again with cameramen and reporters. Then, they put on the dog and pony show for television audiences, and then, long after James Bookhout was back in his own identity, they displayed Ruby on the 3rd floor of the PD being led to the Homocide bureau to be questioned by Fritz. And that is when they slipped him into the story in a perfect bait and switch.

 You have been manipulated like a Pavlovian dog into believing that Ruby shot Oswald. He didn't! This is perhaps the greatest psy-op of all time. They hookwinked the entire world until recently, just 9 years ago. They desperately needed Oswald dead. Killing him was no problem. That was easy. They could do that. But, they needed a poor patsy to frame and blame, and that was Ruby. Jack Ruby was the Sirhan Sirhan who preceded Sirhan Sirhan. And you realize that to this day, poor Sirhan still thinks he shot and killed Robert Kennedy, although like Ruby, he can't remember a thing about it. And like Ruby, he was high as a kite at the time. You see, it worked so well with Ruby, they just repeated it with Sirhan.  

 

 

 The Croft photo is a naked revelation of conspiracy

The Croft photo was taken high on the hill. If you look at the top right corner of the photo, you can see the TSBD, that orange building. So, this was long before Kennedy was first hit, according to official lore. But, was it? 

Start with Jackie. She has her head turned towards the crowd. She was supposed to be smiling and waving at them, but she is neither smiling nor waving. Her arm is down;  her face looks glum. Why, if all was well at this point? And, as a former chiropractor, I ask: why is her head turned so much? Adults don't have that much cervical rotation. Kids do, but not adults. Turn your own head to the left. How far does it go before it wants to stop? You don't get more than 45 degrees, do you? And if you're old, it could well be less than 45 degrees. Beyond that, it's strain. There, she seems to be rotated, what, about 80 degrees? It's too much, even for her in her 30s. and look at the size of her head, how huge it is compared to his. She was a little closer to the camera but not much. Here is a shot that is proportioned correctly.

 

That head of hers must have been pasted on there to cover up the fact that she was looking at him at the time. And why is her hair sticking out? Look how it angles. It wasn't doing that. It isn't natural. Nobody's hair does that. What would make it do that? There was a wave there, but not an acute angle. 

So, they poofed out her hair there because they needed more coverage- of him. He was reacting to being shot there. He had been shot in the back. So, maybe his mouth was open in shock. And notice that his eye is missing. There is just a line there. He probably had a startled look in his eyes that they couldn't let us see. 

The photo that followed is the Betzner photo, which shows nothing of the Kennedys because of the guy in the way. 

How hard would it have been for Betzner to step to his right to avoid that guy blocking his view? Not hard at all. It's very likely that that guy was added to keep us from seeing the Kennedys. So, let's move on to the next one, the Willis photo.

So, the red line is pointing to JFK. We can't trust anything about that image. What we're seeing of his head there could have been paint. What I want you to notice is that she is not working her side of the street; rather she is turned and looking in his direction. We are seeing the back of her head, and her head is turned to the right. So, my thesis is that she was doing that in the Croft photo too. So, she rode down the hill ignoring the crowd, not doing her job working the people on her side of the street; instead, she was turned and looking at him. Why? She said in her WC testimony that the first she knew something was wrong was when she turned and looked at Jack and saw that he had a quizzical look on his face. But wait: according to official lore, nothing was wrong until he was shot a fraction of a second before we see him at frame 225 in the Z film, panic-stricken and raising his hands to his throat, and no one would describe that as "quizzical." That's the word she used to describe his look: quizzical. 

Why don't we see any of this in the Zapruder film? Point to the part of the Zapruder film that corresponds to the span from Croft to Willis. You can't. It doesn't exist in the Zapruder film. They cut it out. 

At the top of the red span is when the Croft and Altgens photos were taken. Popular lore has it that Altgens was taken at Z255. Wrong. Terribly wrong. The Altgens photo was taken much earlier. But, that's for another day. At the bottom of the red span is when Kennedy got shot in the throat from the front. So, he rode down the steepest part of the hill reacting to being shot in the back and that alone. But, they couldn't show us that, not when they were trying to sell the idea of a single bullet. So, that entire area of the red span was cut out of the Zapruder film. And that's why the limo gets to the freeway sign so fast in the Zapruder film. He no sooner passes the TSBD and he's at the sign. It's because they took out so much. They wanted the story to be that he was smiling and waving; all was well, and then he passes behind the sign (which was like the magician's curtain) and then everything happened behind the sign, and when he emerges from behind the sign, he is a different man, physically and mentally.

It wasn't that way. He was already a different man before he reached the freeway sign. He was shot in the back long before that. 

Finally, for today: So, Kennedy was shot in the back high on the hill. The missile did not traverse him; in fact, it barely went into him. It stopped short; very short. But, how could a bullet do that? How could a bullet reach him at bullet speed, which was something like 2000 feet per second and then stop in an inch and a half? How could the bullet decelerate from 2000 feet per second to 0 feet per second over that infinitesimal distance? And if it was a bullet, what happened to it? That was no ordinary bullet. It was no bullet at all. It was a flechette made of ice that was pharmaceutically armed.   

 

Think about what Oswald's blood stain on the floor entailed.

 Oswald was, supposedly, placed on the floor. and presumably, on his back. Since his back was on the floor, how could blood go from his back to the floor? That is: why was there blood on his back? He was bleeding from only one place, and it was in front. His gunshot wound was only 5 inches from his sternum, and it was the only place from which blood could have been coming out. So, if blood was coming out there, how could it get on his back and then get transferred to the floor? Imagine how much bleeding would have involved for that to happen.  

And just a few seconds after he was removed from that spot on the floor, we can see him on the stretcher in the garage.

I don't know what we're supposed to be seeing there. Why does his hand look waxen, and what is that white underneath his hand?

What the hell is that supposed to be? My guess is that somebody decided to sell the idea that someone placed a white cloth over Oswald's wound, and then they placed his hand over the cloth, I guess, to hold it in place. Or, were they trying to suggest that his hand was placed directly over the wound, and then they put the cloth over his hand? Is that what it's supposed to be? Who the hell knows. But, the point is that there is no sign of any blood. And since that's the only place blood could have come from, how could the floor get  bloodied?  

It's all just storytelling. It's all made up. The official story of the Oswald shooting is just as preposterous as the official story of the JFK shooting. And if you think you're helping by pushing the story of Ruby being a Mafioso and killing Oswald to save his sister, you are doing the bidding of the very people you are trying to expose. They are conning you. They own you. If you don't know that Ruby was innocent, you don't know a damn thing about the Oswald shooting. 

 

The image directly above is a staged photo that was taken on another day, which means that that guy isn't Oswald, since Oswald was dead. And even at that point in time on 11/24/63, Oswald was effectively dead. He was as dead as Kennedy. Both of them were past the point of no return, with just a few agonal breaths left to take. Parkland doctors didn't even try to save Kennedy. He didn't get any blood transfusions. All they were trying to do for him was make him less uncomfortable. But, Oswald they did try to save. But, in reality, it was just as hopeless. Even though, they filled him up with blood and sewed up his broken blood vessels as best they could, it was too late. His heart was irreparably damaged, and no doubt other organs too. But, you notice that this guy playing Oswald just looks like he's asleep. Really, he was just pretending to be asleep. 

In the picture of James Lavelle, you notice that his jacket went from buttoned up to completely open. I realize he could have done that. But, L.C. Graves has no tie pin in the Johnston photo above, but he does have a tie pin in the staged photo below. Oops. 

Oswald's Midnight Press Conference was a one of a kind event in the history of law enforcement. It was a black swan event. Since when do police give defendants a press conference? They don't. 

So, why did Dallas Police do it? Officially, it was because the press were clamoring for more time with Oswald. You buy that? 

Of course you don't. So, let's get down to the real reason. 

Before first, note the implication of them doing it.  The implication was that they were aware that Oswald didn't know anything about the JFK assassination. If they thought he did, they never would have done it because he could have said what he knew to the world. And you know what they say about getting genies about into bottles. 

However, it was still very risky for them to do it. You realize that Dallas Police would not let Oswald speak to an attorney. If they did, they would have had to kill the attorney.  So, why let him speak to an attorney at the MPP? There were attorneys listening, weren't there?  

So why, if they wouldn't let Oswald speak to an attorney, individually, would they let him speak to a whole gamut of attorneys, the world over, at the MPP? 

It was very risky, so why did they take that risk? They must have had a powerful reason. The only thing that I can think of; the only thing that makes any sense to me at all, is that they intended to kill him at the MPP.

If you have never considered that before, don't react by being dismissive. Hear me out first- with an open mind. 

You know that Jack Ruby was at the DPD, and that he had his handgun. You know that there were cameras there. You know that a swarm of police were there. Therefore, it had all the elements of Sunday morning. So, if they were willing to kill him at the P.D. on Sunday morning, why not do it on Saturday morning? 

Of course, some reading this may still be clinging to the delusion that the killing of Oswald was instigated by Jack Ruby. It wasn't. The Karen Carlin request was used as a way to get him to Western Union, which was just a block away. The crowd gathered at the Main Street ramp had no reason to be there except to attract Ruby. It was an incoming ramp. Who could they have been waiting for to drive in? Nobody. They were there for Ruby, to nudge him down the ramp in his highly drugged state. The whole operation was planned and carried out by the Dallas Police; not Jack Ruby. He was a victim. And he got there before the televised spectacle. Once he got to the garage, the police jumped him. No shot went off, and he had no idea why they were doing it. And he said so: "What are you doing? You know me. I'm Jack Ruby; I'm not a criminal."  Dallas Police admitted that he said that when they jumped him, though it's apparent the Garage Shooter did not. But, why did Ruby say it? He said it because nothing happened prior to them jumping him. He had no idea what was going on. He found out when they told him up on the 5th floor, which is where he was during the televised spectacle. 

But, to those who still think Ruby did it, either because he was torn up about Kennedy or because the Mafia put him up it, why didn't he do it on Saturday morning? He had his gun. Ruby was asked that question, and he said he never had the thought to shoot Oswald. Not Friday night, not Sunday morning; never. Do you understand that his entire basis for believing that he did it was because Dallas Police told him that he did? 

But, let's get back to the Midnight Press Conference. It was highly risky for the Dallas Police to do it, and Oswald did do them a lot of damage, declaring his innocence, and informing the world that they were denying him a lawyer. What was the potential pay-off for taking that risk? It was to kill him. There is nothing else. 

Then, why didn't it happen? Apparently, they couldn't frame Ruby. He must not have been situated correctly for it. No doubt, it was supposed to happen right away, before Oswald said much of anything, but with each passing second, he was doing damage, defending himself and sounding lucid. So, they had to abort it.

So, where was Ruby during the MPP? There is this image of him, but it's fake. It is a still image added to a movie. His figure never moves. The camera scrolls right, and it's only when he is off camera that the action starts. 

And it's not even the right time. It's referred to as Oswald's Press Conference, but Oswald was not even there then. That was when Henry Wade was speaking. It was his press conference; not Oswald's.  

So, they faked an image of Ruby at Henry Wade's press conference and called it Ruby at Oswald's Press Conference.

Watch this video of it because you hear Wade talking; then he gets to saying Free Cuba Movement; then a voice corrects him saying Fair Play for Cuba, and then, right away it cuts to the still, pasted image of Ruby, as if to suggest that he was the one who corrected him. But, it's all so very fake; I mean screaming out loud fake.  

https://vimeo.com/303111425

Ruby never corrected Wade. Apparently, he wasn't even in the room. If he were in the room, they would not have had to fake an image of him in the room.  

Then, there is this alternate image of Ruby at Oswald's MPP. But, look how huge he looks. Look at his breadth compared to the men in front of him and next to him. What, was he a sumo wrestler? 

Then, there is another version that is just the opposite, where he looks small and thin, and also younger.

And they forgot all about his amputated left index finger. 

So, that settles it: Ruby was not at the Midnight Press Conference. The images are fake. And that is why they could not go through with killing Oswald there. 

Don't you see that it was the same situation? It was at the PD; Oswald was surrounded by cops; the press was gathered; cameras were flashing. But, they couldn't pull it off, so they concocted another press conference over the jail transfer. 

It goes to show that they did not have complete control. So, what would they have done on Sunday if Ruby just didn't make it to the garage? They got him to Western Union over Karen Carlin. That was a sure thing. They had him drugged with scopolamine to make him highly conducive to suggestion. But, we're talking about the vagaries of a person's mind. What if he just didn't do it? He had plans for the day. He was going to drop his dog Sheba off at the Carousel Club for someone to watch her there, and then he was going to his new apartment to check things out. So, what if he pivoted? What if he shrugged off the suggestion? It's not like they held a gun to his head. Could the Sunday morning shooting have gone wrong like the Friday night one did? You bet it could have. And they knew it. So, they must have had yet another plan, probably to kill him at the County Jail. One way or another, they were going to kill him. The most important thing wasn't where, but that it not fail. They were only going to get one attempt. If they tried to kill him, and it failed, they couldn't try again because nobody would believe that. At that point, everyone and his brother would say, "Ah, come on. How stupid do you think we are?"