They had a problem. You see, Ruby wore these high top shoes and black socks, whereas Bookhout low top shoes and light socks. Of course, they were claiming that Bookhout was Ruby. So, how were they going to rationalize that? The way they did was to claim that they changed Ruby's socks and shoes. Read on. This is hilarious. These were brazen people, the kind that could sell two suits to a widow for her dead husband.

https://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2019/07/this-is-jack-rubys-property-invoice-at.html

This is Jack Ruby's property invoice at the DPD, even though at the top it says "Received of jail." His name should have gone there. Note the date in the upper right: 25 Nov 1963. But, Ruby was arrested on the 24th. And they definitely confiscated his stuff on the  24th. The record shows that the first thing they did was strip him down to his underwear. An if you look towards the bottom of the list, it even states that they took from him "1 set underwear".

Well, I don't believe that. Do you? Do you really think they took Ruby's dirty underwear to put in one of their "bins"? I hope it was the hamper.  But no, they didn't do that. They just put that down because Ruby's black socks didn't not match the socks worn by the Garage Shooter, James Bookhout. If you check the Beers photo, you'll see that the shooter's socks were light. 

So, to rationalize that discrepancy, they put down that Ruby's underwear was changed. 

This was a city jail; not a prison. So, why would they replace a man's socks? And for one night? The very next morning Ruby was transferred to the County Jail. It's just insane.  

But, getting back to the date, it shouldn't say November 25, as it does. It should say November 24. That's because they took the stuff from him on the 24th, and they certainly would have recorded it then. How do you wait a day? That's untenable. 

And then what's with the bins? Bins designated by letters and numbers? I don't know about you but when I see a bin named "N30" I presume there is an N29, N28, N27, etc. And so on for all the other letters. 

This was a city jail. They typically held prisoners until they were arraigned by a judge, and then they were set free because the charges were dismissed, or let out on bail, or remanded without bail release and sent to the County Jail. But, any which way, they weren't staying in the City Jail. And remember that your right to a speedy arraignment is guaranteed by the Constitution. So, how could the DPD be filling all those bins? 

Then we get to the pink copy.

So, we're supposed to assume that that was carbon copy? But, you know how sloppy and dirty and blurred carbon copies tend to look, and that's because they are carbon copies. It does have the same number. But notice that there is writing on this one that is not on the other. Is that because they went to different places? But, what would be the point of writing on one without writing on all of them? Wouldn't that create confusion? And let's not forget about the beige copy. 

Notice that this one, like the white one, has N-30 bin crossed out and replaced with N-15. But, the pink one doesn't. It just says N-30. But, if the carbon copies went different places, how is it that beige one got corrected but the pink one didn't? And what I really mean is  how did the beige one get corrected at all? And of course, you see that big stamp at the lower right of the beige one, which is not on either of the other two. I don't know how any of this happened because Ruby was transferred to the County Jail the very next day and permanently. That was his home for the rest of his life. And they knew that it would be. So why would they leave his property with the police department? 

Look: this is all just a bunch of fakery to whitewash the fact that Ruby wore black socks and work shoes whereas Bookhout wore light socks and a high top shoe, while Bookhout wore light socks and a low top shoe. 

You see, they had to reconcile that, and the only way they could do it was to claim that the DPD provided Ruby with other socks and other shoes. Of course, you know they had a shoe department there, right? Doesn't every police department? They couldn't have their prisoners walking around in their own shoes. They needed regulation shoes. Of course, I called the Dallas Police Department and talked to the jailer, who told me, in a rather irritated tone, that they do not provide any clothes to prisoners. Of course they don't. It's the city jail, not the State Pen. 

I was just informed that My Stretch of Texas Ground has won the Best Thriller award at the South Film and Arts Academy Festival, which is out of Chile. And I was given the award for Best Screenplay in a Feature Film.

And I am especially proud of the latter because they had other awards for other categories of films, but only one award for screenwriting, which went to me. I'm not bragging; just expressing my appreciation.

And if you haven't seen the film yet, I hope you will. It is groundbreaking. It is brazen and bold, like no film that has come before. You have never seen anything like it. And I thank my actors who brought my characters to life to the full extent of my vision.

As a postsript to what I wrote last night about what appears to be a staged scene of horror in Syria, that was blamed on Russia, I found this Russian video which describes the making of phony war images in Syria, and it even refers to the use of manikins. 

  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmsgpKWNELg

Here's a big find! You know how I've been saying that the operation of the TSBD's book business made no sense. To send those "order-fillers" out looking for titles among the floors of rows of stacks of amorphous boxes of books with no organization or cues whatsoever seems imponderble. But now, we have Oswald's clipboard. His clipboard! It's the one thing they gave him. Not a cart. Not a wagon. The books he had to carry by hand. There weren't even any ladders to access the high stacks. But, he did have a clipboard which presumably had the orders written on it. So, finally, we can see how the operation of the book business went down. Well, here it is: his clipboard. Hallelujah! Alas, it's gibberish. Big surprise.

I came across this horrific article about a Syrian family whose home was hit in an air strike, and you see the father anguishing over his two trapped children. But, why isn't he going to them? 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/harrowing-photo-shows-syrian-girl-s-attempt-save-infant-sister-n1034891?cid=sm_npd_nn_fb_ma&fbclid=IwAR3euTepjP_Z1bbABp_5e1uh9r7ngZL5Y5U3syZYW5RGNBSdkIeLT7mW1kg

I don't see him as being in motion. To me, it looks like his weight is stationary, like he is just perched there. 

It says that he is "scrambling over the rubble," but, is he? How could he be scrambling if his hand is pressed to his forehead? That's energy going the opposite direction. Plus, he'd be using his hands to facilitate his descent. He'd be holding on to things to brace himself; to stabilize; to find support. And I mean with both hands. Absolutely both hands. You use both hands to guide yourself down a treacherous, brittle, uneven slope like that. And you wouldn't waste time slapping your hand to your head. 

The article states that the family was on the 5th floor of the building, and they all fell to the 2nd floor. I quote:

"The family was on the fifth floor of the building but had fallen to the second floor after the airstrike." 

So, they all fell 3 stories? And he wasn't hurt at all? How is that possible? 

Now, let's take a look at the children.

So, above it is a 5 year old girl, and she is holding on to the t-shirt of her 7 month old sister? So, they fell 3 stories and wound up that close? And she's holding on to her t-shirt? But,  you know that fabric stretches- a lot. And, do you realize how hard it would be to hold on to the t-shirt, how easily it could slip out of your hand? Especially if you're 5 years old? 

And why is the 5 year old not looking at her sister? It seems like she would have her eyes on her. How could she grab the t-shirt without looking at her? So if she was looking at her to do that, why would she stop looking at her? And notice that she looks like a manikin. Look how dry her hair is. A doll's hair is dry because it doesn't have sebaceous glands to keep it oiled. And you have to admit that it does look like it could be a wig, and a lousy one at that. Does it look like the hair of a 5 year old girl to you? 

And how come she isn't wearing any clothes? Do you see anything but skin? Because I don't. And what's going on with her eyes?

And what is that big bulge in her arm? It isn't anatomical. It shouldn't be there. A 5 year old with an arm shaped like that? 

The article states that the two girls fell to the ground shortly after the photo was taken. "The girls fell to the ground along with debris from the building shortly after the photo was taken." 
The 5 year old died, but the 7 month old is in intensive care. "Riham  (the 5 year old) and her mother Naqouh died of their wounds shortly after the photo was taken, the report said, while Tuka (the 7 month old) and another sibling are in intensive care."

So, a 7 month old fell a total of 5 stories to the ground and lived? A 7 month old? 

Then, there's this:

Idlib, in northwest Syria, is the last pocket of resistance to Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad after eight years of civil war, and has come under renewed bombardment by RUSSIAN AND SYRIAN warplanes in recent months, rights groups say.

Oh, so they are blaming this on Assad and Putin, like the chemical weapon attacks. I see. So, I did a little fishing.

‘No sorties in the area’: Moscow says reports on deadly Idlib airstrike are ‘fake’

Published time: 22 Jul, 2019 15:01Edited time: 23 Jul, 2019 07:24

Get short URL

FILE PHOTO © REUTERS/Vadim Savitsky

• 85
• 1

Follow RT on

No Russian jet has flown a combat sortie over the Idlib district in Syria, Moscow has said. The defense ministry was responding to allegations by “UK- and US-funded White Helmets” that civilians were killed in a Russian airstrike.

The alleged attack targeted the town of Maaret al-Numan, it’s been claimed. Dubbing the information “fake,” the ministry said “the Russian Air Force hadn’t carried out any missions in this part of Syria.”

I must finish by saying that I am not making any definitive claims here. I'm telling you what it looks like to me. When I first saw this, I felt aghast. But, when I looked at it more closely, starting with his hand slapped to his head, which seemed so inappropriate, that's what caused me to start searching for answers. Again, I am not making any definitive statements except that I hope that what the Russians are saying is true, that this did not really happen to those two little girls. I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope, so help me God, I hope. 

China is still buying Iranian oil. I found several reports about it. Here's one:

https://www.ft.com/content/6b944786-9809-11e9-8cfb-30c211dcd229

So, why isn't this big news? I showed you how someone from Bloomberg called the Taliban office in Doha after Trump committed his big gaffe, and since it sounded good, they viralized it. So, why not this? Imagine how big a story it would have been on the NBC Nightly News:

"Our top story tonight: China has been secretly continuing to buy crude oil from Iran in defiance of the U.S. ban, and today, President Trump called an emergency meeting of his National Security Council to discuss U.S. options. Also, an ultimatum has been issued to China ordering them to cease and desist buying from Iran immediately or else suffer severe economic consequences."

So, how come nothing like that? For one, we can't put severe economic consequences on China without putting them on us. We would hurt ourselves more than we would hurt them. But two, there is always an implied threat of military action in U.S. threats, but in the case of China, we're powerless. We can't fight China. We couldn't fight a ground war against Iran. Seriously, we don't have the manpower for it. Shock and awe from the air is the only thing we could do to Iran, and once that got played out, there would be nothing else we could do. But, we can't even do that against China. 

Look: when Putin went into Crimea, why didn't we respond with military force? Why didn't we threaten to? We responded militarily when Saddam Hussein took over Kuwait, so why not when Putin took over Crimea? Of course, there was a big difference. The Kuwaitis didn't want to be taken over by Iraq, but the Crimeans, who are mostly Russians, and who speak Russian, and have always spoken Russian, and I know that because I was there in 2005, and Russian was all they spoke. I threw away my English/Ukrainian dictionary. And I literally mean that I threw in the trash my English/Ukrainian dictionary.  Eez-venee-tee-yeh, no-yen-ee-shoot-show. 

Of course, we didn't care about that, what the Crimeans wanted. The reason we didn't intervene or threaten to intervene is because it was Russia. When the Georgians, with urging from the CIA, went into South Ossetia during the Bejing Olympics, look what happened. Russia moved them out of there like a tsunami.  The U.S. knows its limitations. It's not going to take on the Russians militarily. We prefer to fight Third World countries, where we can prevail. Unless it's Afghanistan, the graveyard of empires.