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.

 These are the words that Mary Moorman spoke as she demonstrated how she took her photo. It was several months later; probably the Spring of 1964. The Stemmons Freeway sign had already been removed. By that time, both Mary Moorman and Jean Hill were very calm and reflective, and not immersed in the shock of what happened.

But, read Mary's words carefully because she said, very matter of factly, that she got into the street. And she made it clear that she lingered there in the street for quite a few seconds because she wanted to capture their faces.

However, it is physically impossible that she let them pass her and then shot the backs of their heads, as we see in the Moorman photo. And that's because it was physically impossible for her to do it. There was no room for her in the street once they reached her. That's because Officer BJ Martin, on the outside motorcycle, was hugging the curb.

You don't think she was going to obstruct and block the motorcade of the President of the United States, do you? Of course not. That is a real picture of Mary during her demonstration, and the other image is an accurate representation of what she was seeing.

And please don't suggest that she jumped out of the street at the last second; let the limo and the motorcycle escorts pass, and then got back in the street, turned the other way, to shoot the backs of their heads. It's a ridiculous claim. Besides, she didn't say it. And if she didn't say it, you can't say it.

So, as wild as it may sound to you that Mary Moorman's photo got replaced, that is what the evidence is telling us.

 You can thank Peter Manson for this because he spotted it, not me. The FBI enhanced and falsified the photo of Officer Glenn McBride that Mary Moorman took 10 minutes before the limo arrived. What they did was place another tree, a very tall one, behind the one that was there. Notice that the added tree, with its own canopy, is extremely dense. You can't see a thing through it. Why did they do it? I presume it's because something was showing in the window that they didn't want us to see.

Now, I am going to show you why they added that white thumbprint to the Moorman photo. And I hope you realize that they lied to her when they said it was an accident. I would pity you if you are that submissive to the Imperial State.

The crux of it is that Mary took her real photo well before the “Moorman” photo was taken. She took it at a time that the motorcycle cops were in regular formation, with Hargis leading and Martin back a ways, to create that attractive wing formation.

But, what happened after that is that Green braked which slowed the limo, and Hargis responded faster than Martin did. The result was that Martin gained on Hargis to where they were practically even.You can see it in the Muchmore film. And notice that in the Muchmore film that that JFK and Jackie look about the same as they do in the Moorman photo. You could say they look identical. And what do you think Babushka Lady is doing? SHE IS TAKING THE MOORMAN PHOTO.

So,the "Moorman photo" captured Hargis and Martin just as we see there in Muchmore, but Mary’s real photo did not. It captured Hargis well ahead of Martin. So, they wanted to restore what was in Mary’s original photo. So, they used the white thumbprint to blot out Martin, so that there’s only Harris. And then, they added some very crude art to show Martin behind Haris, in the proper formation.

So, in the collage, it shows on the left what the “Moorman” photo originally looked like. And on the right, it shows that Martin was there in front of Hargis. You can see Martin’s back and leg. You can see his toolbox behind him. And you can see that the front wheel that is in view is Martin’s front wheel.  Then, in the lower right corner, you can see their crude art-work, which consists of Martin’s right arm as he holds the handlebar. His arm doesn’t even look anatomical.

So, the bottom line is that Babushka Lady took the Moorman photo. Don’t believe the lies about BL. She was not Beverly Oliver. And she didn’t fail to come forward. It was just the opposite. She was an operative, and she turned her camera over to the plotters immediately. They sent her there to record the assassination. The scarf and the long coat were her disguise.

But, you need to think about the physics and the optics of the photo that BL took. She shot it at an angle from behind; so, on a diagonal. And that resulted in a much larger camera field than Mary’s photo. So, the Moorman photo is really a cookie-cutout of BL’s photo.  

And remember that the official story, that the FBI accidentally damaged Mary’s photo by pressing a thumb into it, is not plausible. It is simply impossible for that to have happened by accident.

 This is the photo that Mary Moorman took of her friend from church: Officer Glenn McBride. It was several minutes ahead of JFK. It's exactly what you would expect; a photo of his face. The only way she could get that was by taking the picture BEFORE he reached her. And, the only way she could capture the faces of the Kennedys, which she said was her intention, was by taking their picture BEFORE they reached her.

You should take a close look at this picture because JFK was probably in the exact same spot when she photographed him. McBride is probably right across from the Stemmons freeway sign, which is not in the picture. You do see the RL Thornton freeway sign, which is right above his head. That sign was different because instead of having narrow metal poles to support the sign, it had thick wooden posts. And you can see that in this photo. Notice how you can see the slope of the road. It really looks like he is going downhill. Mary kept saying that she was poised and positioned to take the photo of the Kennedys for quite a few seconds before she pressed the shudder. it's obvious that she was waiting for them to get as close to her as possible to maximize the capture of their faces before further progress of the limo started putting them in profile to her- which she didn't want. There was a "sweet spot" in which they were as large as possible and with their faces in full view. And I think she did a good job of capturing that sweet spot with Glenn McBride.

But, what reason is there to think that, starting as early as she did, having the camera trained on them well in advance, that she postponed taking the picture until they had passed her, leaving just the backs of their heads? There is no reason to think that at all. It is nonsensical. And with this picture of Officer McBride, Mary proved to us that she had no trouble capturing the sweet spot.

So, are you going to take the attitude that, despite all that, the Moorman photo shows the backs of their heads, therefore, it must be what Mary did? No! Don't do that. It is not good thinking. This is the JFK assassination- the evil and Machiavellian JFK assassination.

The feds kept going back to Mary to borrow her photo, over and over again. Why? it was admitted that, not only was the photo duplicated on 11/22/63, but they made a negative of it, so that they could make unlimited copies in the future. So, what did they keep needing Mary's original for? And then, they told her a preposterous story about how a white thumbprint got put on the photo. You can't press your thumb into a dry Polaroid photo and leave a mark. There would have to be some white, labile medium on your thumb to leave such a mark. But, why would there be any such medium on a FBI agent's thumb, and why would he handle the photo if there were? It is not credible. It is not plausible.

The thumbprint was deliberate. It had a purpose. It was to obscure something. And I will soon show you what it was.

But for now, I will leave you with this: I think the feds kept borrowing Mary's photo, over and over again, because each time, they altered it a little bit. And finally, they replaced it. But, there was something in the alternate photo that they needed to cover up. And they covered it up with the thumbprint.

 I am amazed that this video is still up on Youtube because it reveals so much about the JFK assassination. It's a video of Jean Hill and Mary Moorman that was shot months after the assassination. I believe it was done in the Spring of 1964.

Jean Hill came first, and you can skip her part. Just watch Mary who starts at 1:43.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lx34V4-nk1M

The first thing she says is: "I stepped out into the street." Then, she shows how she took her picture, which was facing up Elm, that is, facing the approaching limo. She said she stood there for quite a few seconds "because I wanted to make sure that they were looking at me." She said, "I followed it for so many seconds, and then I did take the picture."

Now, we have to take her at her word. There is no basis to believe that she lied or that she didn't remember what she did. It's obvious from what she said that she wanted to capture their faces. And there is no reason to doubt that she did.

And a few minutes prior to that, she photographed her friend Officer Glenn McBride, whom she knew from church, and she captured his face the very same way she described capturing the faces of the Kennedys.

Over time, Mary changed her story. She started to deny that she stepped into the street. And she changed her story by saying that she didn't take the picture until the Kennedys were right across from her, directly in line with her. There is no reason to believe that she did that. We have to go by her first statement. But, her revised statement does not match the Moorman photo either. To match the Moorman photo, she would have had to say, "I waited until they passed me; then I shot the backs of their heads."

So, accepting what she first said, as we must do, we have to assume that the photo she took was very different from the Moorman photo that we have. In fact, it must have been the opposite of the Moorman photo. Instead of shooting them after they passed her, she shot them before they reached her. And instead of capturing the backs of their heads, she captured their faces, just as she captured the face of Officer Glenn McBride.

So, how did Mary Moorman come to accept the extant Moorman photo as her own? How did she talk herself into believing that that was the photo that she took?

I tell you that there was mind control involved. In 2013, she did a very long interview for the 50th. It was 4 hours long. I watched the whole thing. It used to be available on Youtube, but it no longer is.

But, in that interview, she said that after the assassination, federal agents kept coming back to her and borrowing her photo. The FBI. The CIA. The Secret Service. And the FBI again. And when the FBI returned it the second time, the big white thumbprint was on it, which they said was an accident.

Now, do you believe that? That the white thumbprint was an accident? If you do, you are either the dumbest mudderbloker who ever lived OR you are soaked in the blood of John Kennedy and Lee Oswald, both of whom were killed by the U.S. government.

But, when they returned that photo to her, which they said was accidentally damaged, what do you think they did? They admitted that they damaged her invaluable historical photo. Do you think they just made an apology and left it at that? What happens when a person damages someone else's property? What does the person who suffered the damage do afterwards? And in this case, the one that did the damage was the U.S. government. And what does the U.S. government have? It has a printing press. And what can it do with that printing press? It can create any amount of money that it wants. It can do it without a printing press. How is the U.S government paying for its evil, monstrous war on Iran right now that is costing billions every day, heaped on top of all the other spending?

I have no evidence that Mary Moorman was paid for the damage that was done to her photo. And she has never said that she was paid. But, the situation is that the U.S. government damaged her very valuable historical photo, and I can't imagine that they would do that damage without compensating her, especially since we live in a country in which damaging another's property results in legal judgments.

So, the question is: Why wouldn't they have given her some money? And by "some" I mean a substantial amount of money.

Again, I have no concrete knowledge of any payout to Mary, and everything I am saying is hypothetical. Mary has never said that she was paid any money. But, to the best of my knowledge, she has never said that she wasn't paid. Non-disclosure agreements get negotiated every day in this country.

Again, I am NOT claiming to know that Mary was paid. And I admit that she has never said that she was paid, and the U.S. government has never said that they paid her. However, I do know, concretely, that Marina Oswald was paid a lot of money after the assassination. There was money from a ghost-written book; money for Oswald's "Historic Diary" and $75,000 for the film rights to her life story that was paid to her by an Italian film company that never made the film and soon went out of business after paying her the money. That company was called "Tex-Italia." How appropriate.

And of course, Marina went on to tell the Warren Commission all the things that the FBI wanted her to tell them, including that Oswald sought to kill Nixon in Dallas in April 1963, even though Nixon wasn't in Dallas in April 1963.

But, enough about that. What I really want to talk about is what Mary's real photo captured. Since she got into the street and waited in the street for quite a few seconds before taking her picture, it means that the limo couldn't have been that close. Remember that Officer BJ Martin was hugging the curb on his motorcycle. So, how could she be in the street if he was bearing down on her? So, the limo and its escorts must have been a ways off.

So, what did Mary capture that was so dangerous to the official story? IT MUST HAVE BEEN WHATEVER HAPPENED BETWEEN THE TIME THAT JFK DISAPPEARED BEHIND THE FREEWAY SIGN AND THE TIME HE REAPPEARED ON THE OTHER SIDE. If you accept that what the Zapruder film has from frame 225 on is legit, then what did it matter if Mary captured the same thing? SHE MUST HAVE CAPTURED WHATEVER THE PHONY SIGN WAS PUT IN THERE TO HIDE.

So, what happened in that space? We're talking from frame 208 to 224. So either Mary captured JFK being shot in the throat OR she just captured him reacting to the back shot before he was shot in the throat. Either one was fatal to the official story.

Everything I have told you is true. JFK was shot in the back high on the hill with an ice dart containing a nerve agent that caused only a shallow wound. And it was long before he was shot in the throat by Umbrella Man, which was a puncture wound in the midline of his throat. And that shot too involved a dissolvable missile.

 I am now going to lay out exactly how the attack on Kennedy went down. I don’t address all aspects of the assassination. I don’t claim to be an expert on all aspects. But, I am absolutely certain about what I’m about to tell you, and it is supported by evidence that is extremely compelling, as I will explain.

As they were rounding the corner from Houston to Elm, with LBJ’s SS agents having their door open, the last conversation that JFK had in his life took place between him and Nellie Connally. She said, “You can’t say that Texans didn’t turn out for you.” And he responded, “You’re right; I certainly can’t.”  He never spoke again after that, and HE NEVER TRIED TO COMMUNICATE AGAIN IN ANY WAY AFTER THAT. That is extremely significant because he was a very smart man, and he had been in combat in WW2. And he certainly would have known that he was being shot at- if he were in his right mind.  

And even if you think he couldn’t speak because of the throat trauma, he would have sought to communicate some other way- non-verbally.  But, he couldn’t communicate at all because he suffered a complete mental collapse.

And to everyone who believes that the Single Bullet Theory is bull shit, and it is, what is he left with after you reject the Single Bullet Theory? HE IS LEFT WITH JUST A SHALLOW WOUND IN HIS BACK AND A PUNCTURE WOUND IN HIS THROAT.  His mind would have been 100% intact. But, it wasn’t. His mind was gone. It wasn’t from trauma; it was from poisoning.

So, right after his exchange with Nellie, JFK was shot in the back high on the hill, and it struck him just to the right of third thoracic vertebra. And there is no doubt about that location. When his body was lying prone on the table at Bethesda, the doctors had no trouble locating that wound. That’s because even prone, the Vertebra Prominems sticks out as a visible bump. And that is C7. This is from Google AI:

AI Overview

Yes, the Vertebra Prominens (C7 vertebra) typically remains a visible or palpable, protruding bump even when a person is lying in a prone (face-down) position.

 So, they counted down from C7 and got to T3, which is where the wound was. JFK’s own physician, Dr. George Burkley, drew a diagram of it. And he even put it on JFK’s death certificate that he was shot in the back at the level of T3.

 But, it was a very shallow wound- much to shallow for a metal bullet to have made. Consider a metal bullet traveling 2000 feet per second. When it makes contact, its energy has to be dissipated before the bullet can stop. How is it dissipated? By the resistance of the tissue. It comes down to Newton’s Laws of Motion. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The bullet was acting on JFK’s tissues, but, at the same time, his tissues were acting on the bullet, which was the reaction. 

 But, how much soft tissue would it take to exert enough resistance on the bullet to stop it? A lot more than 2 inches. And that bullet traveled less than 2 inches. How do we know? Well, it didn’t enter his lungs or even violate the pleura. It went through only skin, fascia, and muscle. And that’s why it is physically impossible that a metal bullet struck him in the back. Don’t you know? WHEN YOU LOSE THE SINGLE BULLET THEORY, YOU LOSE THE METAL BULLET.

So, JFK had to have been hit with something other than a metal bullet. But, besides the back wound being very shallow, it was also empty. There was no bullet in it. Now, the notion that it fell out is just plain stupid.  Falling is a function of gravity, and there was no gravitational force pushing on it. Furthermore, the bullet went in through three layers of clothing, and the holes in the clothing would have had to remain aligned for the bullet to go back out through them. That is a ridiculous. It is as unlikely as a planetary alignment.

There are two different versions of the “bullet fell out” claim, both equally stupid. One was by Paul Landis, the SS agent, and the other was by a neighbor of Sam Kinney, the agent who drove the Queen Mary. You need to brush them both off the same way you would scrape dog crap off the sole of your shoe.

 The impact of the ice dart on JFK was very minor. The CIA heart attack gun was designed so that the victim would not know that they were shot. CIA Director William Colby said that it felt like nothing more than a mosquito bite. But, very quickly, JFK started feeling bad, and I mean sick. It included headache, chest tightness, blurred vision, nausea, confusion, other-worldliness, as well as fear and panic.

 Right away, Jackie quit politicking and turned her gaze and attention to her husband, and she stayed looking at him for the duration. In the early 180s of the Z-film, she starts making the turn, and by 188, she is fully turned and has her eyes on him,  never to take her eyes off of him again.  

 Neither of them ever wave again, and as they approach the bogus freeway sign, she is turned looking at him, and he is facing straight ahead with a glob over his face.  You can see it 195, and it stays like that for the rest of Part 1 of the Zapruder film.  

 Also, In the Crofts, Betzner, and Willis photos, neither JFK nor Jackie are waving or engaging with the spectators in any way. So, there’s your confirmation. He was absorbed in what was happening to him, and she was absorbed with him.

 Next came the throat shot.  No doubt it was visible in the film, but they used the phony sign to cover it up. So, what do we know about the throat shot? We know that that tiny little spot at the bottom of his throat was the target. They weren’t trying to shoot him in the face or in the chest. If they had done that, the lone gunman from the rear theory would have died. So, how did they expect to get away with shooting him in the throat? Simple. They planned all along to say that it was an exit wound.

 They knew that a back wound was going to be found with no bullet in it. So, if they created a throat wound that also had no bullet, they could say that the back bullet traversed him. Bingo. The two empty holes would be explained. So, the Single Bullet Theory was planned in advance except that it didn’t include Connally.

 And within a few short minutes, JFK was in the hands of Dr. Malcolm Perry, who was an INDEPENDENT doctor. NOT A GOVERNMENT BUT AN INDEPENDENT DOCTOR.  And Dr. Perry said that JFK had a small entrance wound in his throat, but that there was no bullet inside him, and no exit wound for that shot either.

 And don’t tell me it was dug-out at the pre-autopsy because Perry got to JFK before the pre-autopsy.  

 So, there was no bullet in Kennedy’s throat, which means that that shot did not involve a metal bullet either. And because the target area was very small - no bigger than a quarter- that shot had to be taken from up close. And it was definitely taken from the north side of Elm. So, who was close to Kennedy on the north side of Elm? Umbrella Man was. He was just a few feet away from him at the time of the shot.

 I know I posted the link to the testimony of Charles Senseney before, but now, for the first time, I am going to give you the essentials from it. He was employed as a civilian contractor at Fort Detrick in Maryland, which was the center of the U.S. biological warfare program.  And Senseney gave the year. It was 1953, so 10 years before the JFK assassination. He said he was in the hardware department, not the agent department. And by “agent,” he meant the biological agent that would be delivered with the hardware he developed. He said the CIA was also involved in the project, but they didn’t call themselves that. They called themselves the Staff Support Group.

 Senseney said he was involved in the making of the heart attack gun which delivered what he called “muscle poison.” And muscle poisoning is exactly what we see on JFK, which is why he maintained that freaky pose with his arms raised, stiff and frozen, in the Z-film. Senseney said that by 1970, a decision was made to destroy all the biological agents except one, the shellfish toxin, which is a nerve agent.

 He said that the development of exotic weapons was being done for Special Ops and the CIA. Senseney said he made an M1 weapon (that could deliver a nerve agent) that was shot from a walking cane, and also an umbrella. He said that it required a hand-held object that shot a dart to deliver the nerve agent.

 Now, returning to Elm Street, the throat shot must have been taken from up-close from the north side of Elm, and the only one standing there with an object that Senseney mentioned was Umbrella Man. You can’t go by any of the imagery because they doctored and falsified all the images of Umbrella Man. Eventually, they did a reenactment that displayed UM’s bare face, which was done after the Stemmons Freeway sign was removed, which is why the phony sign in the image is so weird and wacky, being square instead of oblong, and placed too far east to be the real sign.

 I am sure that Umbrella Man took the throat shot because he was the only one who was in position to take it, and he used one of the weapons that Charles Senseney developed.

 So, JFK was shot in the throat with a dart by Umbrella Man, and it had the immediate effect to obstructing JFK’s breathing. He panicked and raised his hands up. With his left hand, he pulled on his tie. And with his right hand, he put it over his mouth and coughed. And that worked. In one cough, he resolved the obstruction. Dr. David Mantik thinks it was probably just a bolus of blood, and that makes sense because if he were choking on a bullet, he probably couldn’t dislodge it in one cough. But, he did resolve that whole issue in one cough. BUT THEN, HE COULDN’T PUT HIS ARMS DOWN. They were frozen, which was the effect of the nerve agent.  That was followed by a long stretch in which Connally got shot, and Jackie tried to coax JFK’s arm down by pressing on it. She got it down a little, but she mostly just tipped him towards her.

 And then at 313, he was hit in the right temple with a frangible bullet, which was designed to explode. They used that kind of bullet because a FMJ would very likely have traversed his head and could have hit Jackie.

 Some researchers, with whom I engage, including Dr. Mantik, think that JFK was shot in the back of the head a tiny fraction of a second before the fatal head shot. I don’t see any evidence of that in the Z-film, but the plotters may have removed it. Dr. Mantik doesn’t claim it based on the Z-film; he claims it based on the x-rays. Of course, since the Z-film was altered, the x-rays were probably altered too. So, I am open to it, but I am not as sure about it as he is. It’s not like money in the bank.

 But, what is like money in the bank is that JFK was shot in the back with the nerve agent high on the hill, no more than 30 yards from the intersection, and maybe just 25 yards. Then, when he was across from the pergola, he was shot in the throat with a dissolving dart that was shot by Umbrella Man with his umbrella. And then he took the fatal head shot from someone who shot a frangible bullet from behind the fence.

 Obviously, there were other shots because Connally got shot, and there were missed shots, and I mentioned the possibility of a preceding head shot. But, the three shots I have laid out here are the essence of how they killed Kennedy.  Please share this.

  Read this testimony of Louie Steven Witt.  

Mr. GENZMAN. What happened next? I believe you testified that you were moving forward opening your umbrella as the motorcade was approaching? 

Mr. WITT. Yes. As I moved toward the street, still walking on the grass, I heard the shots that I eventually learned were shots. At the time somehow it didn't register as shots because they were so close together, and it was like hearing a string of firecrackers, or something like that. It didn't at that moment register on me as being shots. 

Mr. GENZMAN. Did you react in any way? 

Mr. WITT. No. I continued to move forward and finally got this umbrella up in the air. I think by the time I got the thing up in the air I was over and possibly standing on the retaining wall. 

Mr. GENZMAN. What do you next recall happening? 

Mr. WITT. Let me go back a minute. As I was moving forward, I apparently had this umbrella in front of me for some few steps. Whereas other people I understand saw the President shot and his movements; I did not see this because of this thing in front of me. By the time I could see, one car ran upon the President's car and a man jumped off and jumped on the back. That is what unfolded when I reached the point where I could see. 

*       *        *         *         *           *           *           *

But, in the Zapruder film, we see UM's umbrella, and it isn't in front of him. It is over his head. This is frame 219. 

And remember that Umbrella Man is in front of the sign there. So, he must have seen everything. He saw the shot to the throat. He saw the fatal head shot. What Louis Steven Witt said can't possibly be true. He lied. He lied about everything. He was NOT Umbrella Man.