The following was sent to me by OIC senior member Dr. Thomas Halle.

Just thought I'd remind a few friends of how corrupt (and criminal) the entire JFK case (and follow-up whitewash) was (and how the Warren Report was absolutely BOGUS (and politically motivated). Here is a picture of someone cleaning up the presidential limousine at Parkland Hospital (and protected by a Dallas policeman) (thus destroying evidence, known in the trade as "Obstruction of Justice")(or, as the Brits say, "Perversion of Justice"). President Kennedy was clearly a "sitting duck" as his limo turned onto Elm St., and entered Dealey Plaza, at the same time entering the cross-fire of at least three snipers (none of whom was Lee Harvey Oswald).



Below are a witness Bill Newman and the acting Kennedy press secretary Malcolm Kilduff demonstrating the location of the location of the President's fatal head shot, totally debunking the Warren Commission's claim of a "Single Bullet Theory" and their insistence that all the shots came from the rear.

So, how much longer can the Big Lie continue? I don't know, but it definitely won't be forever. 

J. Edgar Hoover admitted in a letter that there is a gap in the WFAA footage of the Oswald shooting. The gap occurs between the garage and the jail office, and it is at least 2 minutes long. It may be 3 minutes, depending on what time you claim the shooting occurred. I've seen it reported as 11:20 and 11:21. But, in the jail office, as they are rolling Oswald out, you hear Bill Lord say, "It is now 11:24 in Dallas" and that occurs one minute after the after-shooting footage in the jail office began. Therefore, the after-shooting footage begins at 11:23, which is either 2 or 3 minutes after the shooting occurred. And again: even J. Edgar Hoover admitted it. 

So, what happened during those 2 or 3 minutes? I maintain that that is when they shot Oswald for real. They must have had a room set up in advance, with sound-proofing. Plus, they used a .38 with a silencer. Remember: we never see them bring Oswald inside. We don't get the tiniest glimpse of that. Even though two men carrying a third man amounts to a very large object in what was a very small space, all of the photographers missed it completely.  So, we can only guess what happened. I presume that Oswald contributed to his own extraction from the garage; he helped. But, once inside, they must have disabled him immediately; knocked him out. It might have been from a hypodermic needle thrust in his hip. Then, they hastily took him to whatever room was set up for it, and they shot him.  I have no idea who pulled the trigger. Then they brought him to the jail office and plopped him on the floor.

But, that's not all that had to be done. The trio of Boyd, Sims, and Hall had to be waiting in the jail office for the hand-off of James Bookhout- to scurry him out of there. And then, there is this image of Jack Ruby in the jail office. Is it really him?

   Below left is also supposed to be him, taken the same day.

On the left, he is wearing his cabana shirt, so that had to be later in the day. But, look how tight and taut his neck is, and look how loose and bulging and sloppy his neck is on the right. How can it be the same guy? And look at how strange his ear is on the left. It looks like a Vulcan ear. There are so many falsified images of Jack Ruby, it's hard to know which are real. I have no doubt that there are more altered and falsified images of him than there are real ones.  But, one thing we can know beyond the slightest shadow of a doubt is that on the right, it cannot be the shooter when they brought him in from the garage because he was wearing a coat in the garage, and they most certainly did NOT remove his coat in the jail office. It's part of the official record that they didn't. Multiple detectives said that they didn't start undressing Ruby until they got him up to the 5th floor.

Plus, that is obviously a staged arrangement on him. Since he was wearing a coat during the scuffle, how could his shirt get ripped open? And look how neat the same shirt looked a little while later, not to mention his hair.

 All his buttons look intact to me. You can see them there. I count three, all snug. So, how did his shirt get ripped open earlier?  And he looks like he's got Brylcream in his hair. So, when did this grooming of Jack Ruby take place? And who initiated it? Did Ruby complain that he looked a mess? Or did someone from the DPD say, "Come on, Jack, let's prep you for the cameras. You want to look your best." Of course, Jack Ruby would have consented to anything. 

Flim-flam. That's what the whole thing is: flim-flam. And the reason they had to resort to flim-flam is because the whole story is a lie. Jack Ruby did NOT shoot Oswald. And there is no fact pertaining to the JFK assassination that matters more than this or goes more to the heart of what really happened that weekend than the fact that Jack Ruby did not shoot Oswald. 

   

Karen Mitchell is gone now, but this is her swan song, The Summer Knows, which is the song adaptation of the musical score from the 1971 movie Summer of '42. The music was written by the great French composer Michel LeGrand. 

The movie is a coming-of-age story and a period piece of World War 2. In it, a 17 year old boy, Hermie, who is spending the summer on Nantucket Island with his family, develops a crush on an older woman, Dorothy; older meaning 25, who is played by the beautiful Jennifer O'Neill. She is married, but she lives alone; her husband is off fighting in the war. Hermie finagles a way to befriend her, and she innocently accepts his friendship. And, it's really quite innocent on his part as well because he is not trying to bed her; he just enjoys her presence; being in her space. But, then the war catches up with them, and it changes everything. 

The powerful and very moving score by Michel LeGrand plays throughout, and it really carries you into the story. It is one of the most effective uses of music in cinema- ever, and it won the Academy Award for Best Musical Score in 1972. 

The song adaptation was written by the very talented husband and wife team of Alan and Marilyn Bergman. Here is Karen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U51ypV0o2pA&t=36s

This really screams out loud that the "Ruby" image was altered. Look at the eyes of Boyd and Hall, both clear as a bell. So, why would the guy between them have black stripes for eyes?

So, on the left is Elmer Boyd, and his eyes are clear and totally photographic. On the right is Detective Hall, who is in poor lighting, but his eyes are likewise clear and formed. But then we get to so-called "Ruby" whose face is illuminated, but his eyes are not photographic; they are just black slits. That is impossible. And behind him is Sims who is a complete blur, and that's impossible too because it's all one photograph. It's not as though Sims was moving and had motion blur. He's just standing there. So, he should have come out clear. Dark perhaps but clear; not ghostlike. So, they doctored Bookhout's eyes, reducing them to mere slits, and then they blurred Sims, so that Bookhout wouldn't stand alone as photographically compromised. So, two were captured in photographic clarity, and the other two were not, and that is ridiculous. Because: it's all one photograph, and everyone should look the same in that respect. 

They all have the same clarity.

They all have the same clarity.

They all have the same clarity.

They all have the same clarity. 

They all have the same clarity. I could keep doing this forever. 

You can see that the above image is from LIFE magazine. You certainly get the impression that Jack Ruby had a lot of hair on top.

And look at the length of those strands. It was like the hair was 6 inches long. But then, there is this:

This is really a scary thing. There is so much photographic fraud about Jack Ruby's hair that it leads you to think that the CIA had its people in every newspaper and media organization in the country. And after a while, it must have become commonplace to doctor his hair. And it was easy enough to do. Today, it would be done digitally, but back then, they used paint. And if you look closely, you can see the paint. 

Why WHY WHY did they do it? They did it because the impression we get of the Garage Shooter is that he had thick hair, a real mop on top. And that's what it was: a toupee'. 

That would have been extremely long hair for 1963. It's long hair for today. But, with hair that length and thickness, you wouldn't expect the guy to be bald on top. Hence, they gave Jack Ruby hair. 

This collage shows the long and un-round face of Jack Ruby on the right compared to the round face of James Bookhout on the left.

These are obviously not the same face. And, it is a matter of common sense and common occurrence that we distinguish between faces as these. Look at that very long forehead on the right. That is the forehead of the Jack Ruby, the real Jack Ruby. The guy on the left was FBI Agent James Bookhout. He masqueraded as Jack Ruby, but he did not shoot Oswald. There was no shooting in the garage. It was all a ruse. They shot Oswald later, and by they, I mean the Dallas Police. Who pulled the trigger on Oswald, I do not know.