I am pleased to announce that my e-novel:

My Stretch of Texas Ground

is now available on Kindle. Here is the description:

Al Qaeda decides to strike America by assassinating a Texas Senator, and they target him while he is vacationing at a lake in the scenic Texas Hill Country.  It falls upon the small town sheriff there to stop them.  Al Qaeda meets Texas justice. 

And here is the link:


http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00RT37QWG

This is rip-roaring tale that is fast moving and easy reading. You can read the beginning of it at the above link. Just click on: Look Inside.

But, it is not a conventional story. It does not unfold the way most people would expect. And, it contains a lot of food for thought. But, you won't have to get very far into it before you're hooked, and then you won't be able to put it down. 

It is being offered for $2.99, which is the lowest price on Kindle. Please order it and read it, and I would appreciate it if you would tell others about it. And if you were to submit a positive review of it, I would be eternally grateful. I'm sure you'll enjoy it. You'll enjoy it for the action and for the thought-provoking questions that it raises, but without being dogmatic. But mostly, it's a driving and gripping story.  

 So, treat yourself to a very entertaining thrill ride by reading: 

My Stretch of Texas Ground

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00RT37QWG


And please, tell others. 

Where did the idea come from that Oswald said he was in the lunch room during the shooting? He never said that. He said he was "out with Bill Shelley in front." So, where did the other come from? 

It came from FBI agents who heard him say that he was out with Bill Shelley in front but did not want to repeat it. Oswald said that he ate lunch in the downstairs lunch room BEFORE the assassination and that he went to the upstairs lunch room AFTER the assassination where he had his encounter with Truly and Baker. So, they just scrambled it into Oswald saying that he was in the lunch room DURING the assassination. Why? It's because they didn't want to admit that he said that he was out with Bill Shelley in front, which Fritz wrote down. 

How could Oswald know that Bill Shelley was out front unless he saw him there? And how could he see him there without being there himself? 

And why would Oswald get off work at 11:45, which was 45 minutes BEFORE the motorcade, and put off eating his lunch until 12:30, thereby missing the motorcade? Why would he do that? Why would anyone do it?  He had 45 minutes to eat his lunch, which was plenty of time to get it out of the way. And like everyone else, that is what he did. Name one other person who claimed to be eating at 12:30.  

These notes were written by Will Fritz for his own use, although he never admitted to having them.  And they are the sole direct evidence we have of where Oswald claimed to be during the shooting.

My point, Backes, is that Doorman definitely had an arm, and it should be there. It should be right where we see the arm that's there.  So, if that's not Doorman's arm, where is his arm? 

And if that's a black man's arm who has his sleeve rolled up, then how come the tone of his skin is exactly the same as the tone of the fabric? There is no difference whatsoever. What is the likelihood of that human skin would reproduce exactly the same "color" as a shirt? And why would black skin show all the black and white contrast that we see there? Look how different it is from the black skin of Roy Lewis's face. 

You are out of your mind. That is, obviously, one mass of fabric. It is the same medium. It is not a black man's exposed skin. He was not wearing a shirt the same color as his skin, with the same reflective properties, etc.  You're such an idiot, Backes. 

10 people have given this a Like so far on Facebook. It's where I explained that the debunking of the pixelation study means nada. And be sure to read my response to James Morgan. 

It really is naive and stupid to think that this one time, in the entire history of photography, one man's arm overlaid another man's arm in perfect alignment, and it's just as ridiculous to think that his rolled-up sleeve would look in every way like a cuff.

That is Doorman's arm and cuff, which is coming down. He is clasping his hands, just as Oswald like to do. It was a habit. 

The notion that another African-American just happened to be there obscuring not just Doorman's arm but that of Roy Lewis as well, and that it happened to be that only his arm got captured and no other part of him, and that he didn't show up at all in any other photo or film is insane.  The problem is that people have looked at this, trying to analyze it, without even considering that the photo was altered, and I mean criminally altered. Even Harold Weisberg dropped the ball on that one, and I attribute it to having too much faith in America, that we would never do a thing like that here. Well, we would and we have. The JFK assassination is probably the most photographically altered event there ever was.    

It is not a problem to me that anyone should trash the pixelation study. I have never used it. I have never relied on it.

And, the identification of Doorman as Oswald does not depend on it.  That identification comes from the matching of the gross (that is, large) physical elements of the man and the clothing. 

And that process is not weakened in any way by the debunking of the pixelation study. 

So, it is a totally pointless point, really, that the Idiot Backes is celebrating. 

Doorman was Oswald. He's Oswald's size. He's wearing Oswald's clothes. He has got Oswald's build. He's doing Oswald's gesture. And he's got Oswald's expression. He can't not be Oswald. And you don't need a pixelation analysis to see it. 

Something has come up that warrants a reply. I received a letter from Seamus Coogan, who is an "associate" of Jim DiEugenio at CTKA. And, his letter was a response to a letter I submitted to CTKA concerning an interview Coogan did with Rob Clark in which he said that he was a fan of bpete's work. 

For a long time, I have been pointing out that it is only natural that Oswald defenders and Oswald accusers be bitter enemies. So, when there is any fraternizing or back-patting between the two, I find it very disturbing and inexcusable. 

Anyway, here is the letter I received ostensibly from Seamus Coogan. I realize there is a lot of phony emailing going on in the JFK world. Look at all the phony emails attributed to me. But in this case, it seems to be from Coogan, although he can deny it if he wants to. 

*          *        *            *                  *                *               *         *

I actually have no idea who Bpete is I have never met him. I couldn't give a toss about his belief in Oswald either. Though he maybe incorrect in that instance. He is wholly correct in taking on your crackers organisation. Jim and I are considering actions against the "Oswald Insanity Group" you represent for a number of libelous claims. So keep on saying I am an associate of Bpete, I need the money. One of the most bizarre allegations is I live in the UK. I live in NZ, Figure out what the NZ initials mean and I will award you a big shiny star in your homework book. 

 

Jim's belief in Oswald on the stair is not the OIP groups version of reality. Moreover, like me Jim is pretty coy on being 100 percent. Sadly, if Oswald really is on the stair you guys shat over any credibility the argument ever had. Jim would agree with me.

I wish you a happy new year sincerely. Moreover, I really do hope and pray that the issues pertaining to your lack of IQ (hell more initials for you to sort out) and obvious blunt force trauma you sustained as a child are resolved. I am sure when CTKA see you in court you can use this in your defense of Diminished Capacity! 

*           *           *           *             *            *            *            * 

Coogan, I admit I got it wrong about you living in the UK, but since it isn't a crime to live in the UK, and there is no moral turpitude involved in living in the UK, I don't see what there is to sue about. In any case, I acknowledge that you live in New Zealand. Happy?  

And I never said you were an "associate" of bpete. I never used that word. You said in your interview with Rob Clark that you were a "fan of his work," and that's what I pointed out.  But, bpete advocates that Oswald "locked and loaded" on the 6th floor, so what is there to be a fan about if you claim Oswald was innocent? 

That is the term bpete used: lock and load. He said it goes back to his military days with his M16 rifle.

And for your information, there was no "stair" involved; there were steps. And Oswald wasn't even on the steps; he was on the landing; on the very top. He was right outside the door on the top landing.  

And you're right that Jim D's version of Oswald being outside is not the same as ours; he backs another horse. But, there isn't one physical feature of that man or his clothing that is a match to Oswald. There is complete utter total disparity and divergence between the two. It is insane to say that "A" is "Z", and that is what is involved in claiming that Prayer Man was Oswald.

But, between Oswald and Doorman there is a convergence of features of both the man and the clothing which the rationally-minded find compelling. The attached collage pretty much says it all. Who matches Oswald better, Doorman or Prayer Man? Go by what your eyes tell you and nothing else. 

And, by publishing your letter, I mean to make you famous, Seamus. I want the world to see how you write, although I can't say it speaks well for the New Zealand school system. Uh-oh. Was that libelous? Well, I'm pretty sure that when I receive an email letter that it becomes my property, and I can do whatever I want with it. And let the record show that I haven't changed a single word in your letter, Coogan. It's all you.

But, it occurs to me that being a "researcher" would seem to imply at least a minimal ability to write coherently in the English language- if you are from New Zealand. But hey, that's just me. But, let the record show that I am not accusing Seamus Coogan of being a researcher. Ralph Cinque