It has occurred to me that Trump could not have been talking about nuking Afghanistan. How could he nuke it when there are 14,000 American troops there, and according to this report, over 2 and 1/2 times as many private military contractors.

https://www.businessinsider.com/this-is-how-many-private-contractors-and-us-troops-are-in-afghanistan-2017-8

 Then, there are the troops of other NATO countries who are still there, and there are the Afghans who are working with us. The radiation from nuclear bombs would affect everybody. 

There are the so-called tactical nuclear weapons to be used in battle, but Trump spoke of killing 10 million Afghans in a week. So, what was he referring to? Was it the "mother of all bombs" which has been used once in Afghanistan? That must be what he meant.

But, it's interesting that damage control has set in since Trump made his incendiary remarks. That was on Monday, and on Thursday, Bloomberg published an article which has gone viral. It's been picked up by everybody. It claims the Taliban says that a peace deal with the U.S. is now near.  It's based entirely on a phone call with Mohammad Suhail Shaheen who works at the Taliban office on Doha, Qatar. But, there is nothing about it on the Taliban website. There, it's all about the ongoing fighting and the number of people they have killed in various battles and engagements. 

It's just incredible to me how homogenized and in lock-step the US and Western media are. Somebody from Bloomberg calls the Taliban office in Quatar and gets some guy to make a positive statement,  and then it disseminates everywhere. It was just a guy on the phone speaking extemporaneously. 

https://www.wenatcheeworld.com/taliban-says-deal-on-us-troop-pullout-from-afghanistan-is/article_74e5192f-e30d-5471-8891-3ddd45933d71.html

The point is that they went fishing for that. They wanted to reassure the world that Trump's highly bombastic and terribly ill-advised remarks haven't torpedoed the peace process. So, they got this guy to say something hopeful over the phone. 

 But, the point is that the Taliban's response to Trump on their website and on Twitter has been defiant, and they continue to report fierce fighting, and there really isn't anything behind this. It's just a little lip-flapping by one guy. It's nothing bankable. 

Then, Pompeo and Afghan President Ghani made a joint statement that "now is the time to accelerate efforts to reach a negotiated settlement to the war." But, the Taliban doesn't negotiate with Ghani. So, what's the point of the statement? The point is: damage control because the Idiot in the White House is a blabbermouth. He can't control his utterances. I really think Trump has got some dementia going on, and it is only going to get worse. 



                                                                                                                       

The Taliban has put up a spokesperson to issue a response to President Trump's incendiary statement about being able to win the Afghanistan War in a week if he was willing to kill 10 million Afghans, and that spokesperson is she:

She spoke in slightly broken and heavily accented English, but it wasn't bad, and I think it's amazing that she could speak it so well. And, it certainly sounded like she understood what she was saying. This is what she said:

"Mr. Trump: don't mess with us. You better know that Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires. It is good that you are (caught in) lies.  You are not fighting with a group, but with a nation, a nation which is not defeated throughout the history." 

And this is what she did when she said "the history."

Donald, you're not going to kill her, are you? You've already killed a lot of little girls like her, and so did both your predecessors, Obama and Bush. You've all got a river of the blood of children on your hands, the three of you.  But, you're not going to kill her now, are you? It's not going to make America safe. It's not going to make America great again. It's not going to stop terrorists. If you want to stop terrorists, stop being one.  You've admitted that the Iraq  War was a "mistake," and it 's an odd way to describe the killing of a million Iraqis. But now, you need to admit that that the Afghanistan War was equally a mistake. Both wars were crimes against humanity. You need to get out of there. And stop thinking you are going to leave behind a large intelligence force. This little girl is telling you no.  

You can watch and hear her here:

https://twitter.com/khalidzadran15

This is a letter that Jack Ruby wrote to someone that refers to the book he read and which got him all riled up about LBJ: A Texan Looks At Lyndon by J. Evetts Haley.

It reads: "you must believe me that I know what is taking place, so please with all my heart, you must believe me, because I am counting on you to save this country a lot of blood-shed. As soon as you get out you must read Texan looks at Lyndon (A Texan Looks at Lyndon by J. Evetts Haley) , and it may open your eyes to a lot of things. This man is a Nazi in the worst order."

That was the entirety of the connection between Ruby and LBJ, which is to say: there was no connection. Ruby just read that book. And I have read it myself, and what it claims is that the official story of a lone gunman (Oswald) is true, but Johnson put Oswald up to it. And that's ridiculous.

Further on in the letter Ruby writes: " ... isn't it strange that Oswald who hasn't worked a lick most of his life, should be fortunate enough to get a job at the Book Building two weeks before the president himself didn't know as to when he was to visit Dallas, now where would a jerk like Oswald get the information that the president was coming to Dallas?"

To me, that just shows how mentally incompetent Ruby was. Was one really fortunate to get a $1.11/hr job as an order-filler at the TSBD? A real stroke of luck. And the idea that Oswald had advance knowledge that Kennedy was coming is comical. Oswald didn't even know on November 22 that Kennedy was coming. He asked James Jarman why people were gathering on the sidewalk because he didn't know. And Jarman told him. That was about 9:30 on Friday morning.

That Ruby could have thought that Oswald had advance knowledge of the assassination plot because he was working with Lyndon Johnson is screaming out loud funny. And he went on:

"Only one person could have had that information, and that man was Johnson who knew weeks in advance as to what was going to happen, because he is the one who was going to arrange the trip for the president, this had been planned long before the president himself knew about, so you can figure that one out. The only one who gained by the shooting of the president was Johnson, and he was in a car in the rear and safe when the shooting took place. What would the Russians, Castro or anyone else have to gain by eliminating the president? If Johnson was so heartbroken over Kennedy, why didn't he do something for Robert Kennedy? All he did was snub him."

He's actually got some decent points in there. And I fully accept that Johnson was a top player in the assassination. But, the idea that Johnson gave the information to Oswald so that Oswald could shoot Kennedy with his defective Carcano rifle is absurd. It's absurd that Johnson would have sought Oswald to do it, who practically flunked his last shooting test in the Marines, and whose Russian friends said that he couldn't hit a rabbit with a shotgun, and it is ridiculous that he wouldn't have gotten his assassin a better rifle.

Oswald had nothing to do with it. I repeat what I wrote above: Oswald didn't even know that Kennedy was going to be passing the building. So, how could he have had anything to do with the assassination? He had absolutely NOTHING to do with it. No one told him anything about it.

But, the idea that Jack Ruby had any connection with LBJ is disproven by the very fact that Ruby lived for 3 years. They would have had to kill him immediately if he was holding on to a secret such as that. Dead men tell no tales; live men do; and they knew that.

There is something else that should convince you that Ruby really didn't do it. It was reported by Ruby and the cops who subdued him that when the melee broke out, Ruby spoke. He said: "What are you doing? I'm Jack Ruby, not some criminal. You know me." That 's how Ruby put it, but the cops said something similar. 

But, how could Ruby say that if he had just shot Oswald? Wouldn't he know what they're doing it and why they're doing it? Didn't he know that cops don't like it when you shoot a prisoner that they are escorting? 

That statement proves that Ruby was not aware of having done anything. So, what are you going to believe? That he did it unconsciously, and quickly came to? That it was a 3 second sleep-walk? But, what reason is there to believe that? What would be the medical basis for believing it? 

No. Occam would tell you that if he was unaware of doing it, the most likely thing is that he didn't do it.

But, there's more. Reporters who were in the garage were asked if the shooter said anything, and they said  that he didn't say a word. Furthermore, we can watch the films, which come with sound, and we can see for ourselves that the shooter never spoke. That is, we don't hear him say anything, and we never see him in the act of speaking. We never see him talking. 

So, the shooter at the televised spectacle did not speak, but Ruby reportedly did, and that means that they were two separate events. Ruby got there early. And it makes sense that he did because he said he got up early, and all he did was get dressed and eat breakfast before going to Western Union. Are you aware that he only lived 2  1/2  miles away? It was probably a 5 minute drive back then. So, it makes sense that he would have been there an hour earlier at 10:15.

Then, there is the fact that Ruby described a different situation at the top of the ramp when he arrived there than existed at 11:15. Ruby only saw Lt. Pierce and no one else in the squad car. But, at 11:15, Pierce had two other cops with him in the car: Sergeant Maxie and Officer Putnam.  

There is also the fact that Ruby said he didn't know the uniformed officer who was talking to Pierce from the driver side as Ruby approached from the passenger side.  But, Ruby did know Roy Vaughan. They had met several times, and once, Vaughan forgave a traffic violation that Ruby committed for which Vaughan pulled him over. He forgave him "because he was a friend of the Department."  Do you think Ruby could have forgotten Vaughan after he did that for him?  No way. They were two different situations and at two different times. 

Jack Ruby was innocent. He got to the garage early, where he immediately got jumped and was hustled up to the 5th floor; and that is where he was when the televised spectacle took place, which was pure theater, with FBI Agent James Bookhout starring as Jack Ruby.  And to make sure Ruby didn't go anywhere, they stripped him down to his underwear and kept him like that on the 5th floor until it was time for him to go down to the 3rd floor to be interviewed by Will Fritz who had returned from Parkland Hospital after Oswald died. And it was there on the 3rd floor, around 3 pm, that Ruby got woven into the story for the first time. That's where they did the switch in the bait and switch. But, his eyes were still glassy and dilated and with a transfixed stare from the drugs he was given that morning. It's a pretty freaky look for him to have at a time like that. 

  

Authorities were in a fix. Oswald had them by the balls. He denied that he owned or ordered a rifle. He denied that he posed for a photo with one, and he said the photo was fake. He denied going to Mexico City. He said he was out with Bill Shelley in front during the shooting. He never even admitted that he rented a P.O. Box. What, were they were afraid to ask him? 

At trial, he and his lawyer would have demolished them. Never could they let it go to trial. But, the case against Oswald was so weak, so bad, and so obviously corrupt that they couldn't even let him speak to a lawyer, not even once. 

Do you realize what would have come of that?

Lawyer: Did you shoot the President? 
Oswald: No.
Lawyer: Where were you at the time?
Oswald: I was standing in front watching the motorcade with Bill Shelley and others, at the entrance. 
Lawyer: Did you shoot Tippit?
Oswald: No. I was never at 10th and Patton, or anywhere near it. What for?
Lawyer: Is it your rifle that they're talking about?
Oswald: No. I don't own a rifle, and I never ordered one. 
Lawyer: They've got paperwork, and they claim it's your writing.
Oswald: It's not. I'm telling you; it's phony: I never ordered a rifle.
Lawyer; So, I take it you never posed with one either?
Oswald: Of course not. That is a phony photo; it is phony evidence. This whole case against me is phony. I am being framed. I had no reason to kill the President-and no desire to. 

What would have come from it is the lawyer realizing, not only, that Oswald was innocent, that he was being wrongly accused and charged, but that it was no mistake; that a planned systematic framing of Oswald was underway and that it went to the top.  

He would have known all that from one meeting with Oswald, and then, there was nothing barring him from rattling it off to the press, which is to say, the whole world. 

Do you see now why they could not let Oswald have an attorney?

And remember: Oswald NEVER met with H. Louis Nichols. That was an Oswald double. And they did it to neutralize all the appeals that Oswald had made- to the world- for legal representation. It was damage control. 

It is very clear that just 17 hours before, Oswald had made a very impassioned request for A lawyer, and that was after having made similar appeals all afternoon.  It is preposterous to think that he would have turned it down. And note that although we have a lot of statements by Oswald, there is none pertaining to why he turned down legal help when it was offered. 

But, regardless of that, authorities couldn't hold off getting him a lawyer much longer. He had already been through two arraignments without one, and usually a public defender or private counsel is present at an arraignment. 

And again, one meeting with a lawyer was all it would have taken to blow the case wide open, and that lawyer could have gone to the press. 

So, then what happened? Did the State just get lucky the Jack Ruby came along and saved their asses? Luck had nothing to do with it. The killing of Oswald was just as planned and orchestrated as the killing of Kennedy. 

Authorities knew on Saturday that Oswald was going to die on Sunday, and here's the evidence: they took his wife into custody on Saturday without telling him. When has that ever happened before or since? Stop and think about how incensed he would have been had he known. RECALL HOW HE REACTED WHEN HE FOUND OUT THE FBI WENT TO TALK TO HIS WIFE WITHOUT HIS KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT. IF THAT INCENSED HIM, IMAGINE HOW HE WOULD HAVE REACTED UPON LEARNING THAT THEY CONFISCATED HER. 

So, how could they do that on Saturday when he was alive? The only way they could do it was if they knew he'd be dead by Sunday. 

So, does it mean that Jack Ruby was working with the Dallas Police? No, that's impossible. They arrested him. They charged him. They testified against him. They were part of a prosecution team that was trying to put him to death.  

So, there could have been no collaboration between Ruby and the Dallas Police. And they didn't just get lucky that he came along. Luck has nothing to do with anything in the JFK assassination.  

Ruby was just another patsy, and because he was not of right mind, they could convince him that he shot Oswald. It wasn't him in the garage. That was pure theater, a spectacle for television, with FBI Agent James Bookhout filling in for Jack Ruby, who was already squirreled away up on the 5th floor, having reached the garage much earlier than reported.  

Cui bono? Who benefited from Oswald's sudden murder while in police custody? Kennedy's real killers did, and they are the ones who killed Oswald. They are the ones who needed him dead, and they are the ones who got him dead. Jack Ruby was just putty in their hands. He was MK-ULTRA. He was as innocent as Sirhan Sirhan, James Earl Ray, Mark David Chapman, etc. Ruby never reached for his gun. He wasn't even in the garage at 11:20. He was just so mentally disabled from the drugs and the mind control he was subjected to that he had no power to stand up for himself.  He  accepted that he shot Oswald solely because Dallas Police told him that he did, even though he had no memory of doing it, no intention of doing it, no will to do it, and no perception or understanding of himself as being a person capable of doing it. So submissive to authority was he that he accepted being a killer solely on the basis of being told so. It's sad; very sad; and Jack Ruby is no doubt one of the most abused persons who ever lived. Oswald could fight back, but not Jack Ruby. He was helpless. 

But, this is 2019, and the facts are known. Please: become a defender of Jack Ruby. Deny his guilt. Take a stand. And be bold about it. You have grounds to be.      
  



  

On the lighter side, the Fred Astaire people really liked the last song Paul and I did, Dancing in the Dark. 

And here is Fred Astaire and Cyd Charisse dancing to Dancing in the Dark. What class.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FoBdwjh__s

Trump is demented, and this is Dr. Cinque telling you that. 

How smart do you have to be to know that remarks you make to world media are going to reach the Taliban? They, the Taliban, published this image of Trump when he made his incredibly stupid remark about being able to win the war in Afghanistan if only he were to kill 10 million Afghans. 

  
And they wrote this:

Let it be known to the idol of this age and to the so called super power America and its President that this proud people will resist and fight till the last Afghan. Afghans are determined to fight the American invaders and their local and foreign allies till they are expelled from Afghanistan, even if it takes another 18 years because Afghans can never compromise on Islam or their sovereignty.

Afghans as a nation have never bowed down to the bullying of foreigners nor will they bow to the bullying of a mad President like Donald Trump. The American President should read the history of the Presidents before him who failed to succeed in Afghanistan. From Bill Clinton, George Bush to Barack Obama, every American President failed to succeed in their nefarious and evil plans in Afghanistan.

Let it be known to the American President who thinks he can wipe out Afghanistan that the Afghans haven’t forgotten their forefathers and leaders who gave them guidance and freedom by blessing them with the light of Islam. The voice of the leader of the believers Mullah Muhammad Umar Mujahid (may Allah have his mercy on him) still resonates in the ears of every Mujahid of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan when he said:

“I am ready to sacrifice everything in completing the unfinished agenda of our noble Jihad – until there is no bloodshed in Afghanistan and Islam becomes a way of life for our people”.

What was said 19 years ago by the great leader of Afghanistan is the policy and the way forward for all the people in Afghanistan, each standing shoulder to shoulder with the Mujahideen holding firmly onto their Islamic beliefs in front of the American invaders and their slaves.

To summarize, the Americans must understand that the escalation of war will solely result in more losses and no particular successful end in the foreseeable future. The American occupation will remain ineffective and costly for the Americans and will remain an open wound that will ultimately result in their complete collapse and withdrawal from Afghanistan.

The longest war in the history of America will end as a defeat for the Americans and the 21st century which is known as the century of American domination shall forever be remembered as the century in which America as a super power was laid to rest in the Graveyard of Empires.

Any small progress that may have been made over months of negotiations have now vanished. And now, I expect damage control will set in, and I'm sure that "special envoy" Khalilzad will apologize profusely to the Taliban. Hey, Zalmay: Just tell them that your boss lives on Big Macs.