Wes Stover Yes! Finally someone with some sense! I agree, it clearly shows Oswald was in the Doorway. However, supposedly a newspaper depicting this photo on its front page was printed and circulated that very same afternoon. Can someone please explain that or debunk it please. Otherwise, they would have had to been extremely quick to alter the photo immediately after the assassination???

• Like
•  · Reply
•  · 7m

• 

  Ralph Cinque The first public showing of the altered Altgens photo was on national television by Walter Cronkite at 6:30 PM Eastern, 5:30 PM Central, so 5 hours after the shooting. That was plenty of time for their crack team to alter the photo.

Ralph Cinque When you look at the degree of distortion in the Wiegman film, it is insane. Wiegman was shooting for NBC, which means that he had the best equipment in the world. So, why would his camera produce this ugly mess? It's because they deliberately blurred it and distorted it so that Oswald would be blurred and distorted. The evil of it all is staggering. And don't anybody make excuses for it. YOU are killing Kennedy if you make excuses for this shit. 

I was recently asked about Oswald in the Wiegman film; is he in it? Yes, he is. He is standing in the top of the doorway in the center just as the press car, in which Dave Wiegman was riding, rounded the turn from Houston to Elm. It's right at the beginning.

It is extremely blurry and distorted, which they did to it, in order to obscure Oswald. But, after passing the doorway, Wiegman did a second pan, in which he rotated his body around to the right to capture the doorway again. Why did he do that? It must be because he detected a commotion in the doorway. He either heard something or he saw something out of the corner of his eye. And so he swung around. And by the time he got to it, there was no Doorman there. So, they put one in, a cut-out, a still-image that was put into the film. 

 That circled image on the far right is not Oswald; not Lovelady; and not there. And note that it would be impossible for you or I to create this image from the film because it happens so fast, it's all a blur. The glimpse that you get of that guy in the film lasts for a tiny, infinitesmal fraction of a second. 

What I believe happened is that between the first and second capture of the Wiegman Doorman, Oswald left the doorway. He left for the 2nd floor lunch room. But, since they needed a Doorman to still be there, they put that still-image in. 

Here is a toggle of the two Wiegman Doormen, one real and the other not. You'll notice the pronounced qualitative difference in the frames. Now, why would that happen within Wiegman's camera? It wouldn't. It couldn't. It didn't. They did it. It's all them. 

The JFK limo was already down the hill as Oswald looks in that direction, west. It corresponds quite closely in time to the Altgens photo. The second image occurs about 4 seconds later in the Wiegman film, but remember, it's highly edited. So, you can't go by that, no more than you go by what the Zapruder film shows. But, why would Doorman go from being turned and looking down Elm at the President to facing squarely out the doorway looking straight ahead, as stiff and stolid as a Cigar Store Indian?  It makes no sense behaviorally, in addition to everything else.

So, that is Oswald in the Wiegman film, and that's how they dealt with it. No doubt there were other captures of Oswald in the doorway that were dealt with in different ways. Oh, what a hassle Oswald created for them when he stepped out into the sunlight. 

I am pleased to announce that the sequel to My Stretch of Texas Ground, to be called His Stretch of Texas Ground, is going to be produced.  I have signed a contract with Spork Productions, which is the production company of Geoff Ryan.  Geoff will be directing, and helping him produce and doing the line-producing will be his longtime associate Robert DeSanti.   

Geoff Ryan is an accomplished filmmaker. He wrote and directed the award-winning film Fray, which is about an Iraq War veteran who is struggling with PTSD. Geoff's most recent film is Blood from Stone, "a genre-defying vampire film" which came out in June.

Geoff is also the one who fixed the editing of My Stretch of Texas Ground. We were having problems with lighting, visual effects, and other things that were very challenging, but Geoff fixed them all. He was never credited because the Closing Credits had already been drawn up. But, I'm sure we never would have won so many film festival awards without Geoff. 

Here is an interview of Geoff about filmmaking from VoyageLA:

http://voyagela.com/interview/meet-geoff-ryan-spork-productions-west-hollywood/

Reprising his role as Sheriff Joe Haladin will be Jeff Weber, and this was an absolute must because I would not have considered re-casting Sheriff Joe. Jeff is the one who makes Sheriff Joe Haladin the iconic lawman that he is. And this time, Jeff is also going to lend his singing voice to the film.  If you haven't heard Jeff sing, then listen to this recent song of his because it is one swingin', catchy tune. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq0101n9CFg&t=2s

Another great development is that Mike Gassaway has agreed to play Sheriff Joe's father, retired Sheriff Clint Haladin, a rugged and straight-talking old lawman with a dynamic role in the story. 

The screenplay, which I wrote, is finished, and I like it very much. I doubt there are many screenplays that were toiled over more than this one. It is a crime drama in which an ex-con returns to Arlettsville and does something so vile, some will say we crossed the line putting it into the film. But, evil knows no bounds. 

Indie Rights Corporation, the largest distributor of independent "films, has sent me a "letter of intent to distribute" His Stretch of Texas Ground. So, this film has found distribution before it's even made. 

Filming is scheduled to take place in Austin in October, followed by post-production by Geoff, with an expected completion date of  January 15, 2021.

Sheriff Joe Haladin, that very independent Texas lawman who can take on all comers is coming back. I am thrilled to be working with this production team, with these actors, to tell this riveting story. Watch: it is going to sizzle. 

Wan Rahman Definitely two different people

• Like
•  · Reply
•  · 31m

• 

  Ralph Cinque Thank you, Wan Rahman.

Let's do a physical comparison between Jack Ruby and James Bookhout. Ruby was taller 5'9"; Bookhout was shorter 5'6". Ruby was relatively slender at the time, while Bookhout was pudgy. Ruby's face was relatively gaunt while Bookhout's was round and full. Their hair was very different, but Bookhout wore a rug at the Garage Spectacle. That isn't his real hair on the right. Bookhout wore light socks that day whereas Ruby wore black socks, as we can see in his mug shot. And that was one of those "fall through the cracks" things. You plan a ruse like this, and you just can't address everything. You slip-up. Now, these two are most certainly NOT the same man. It is insane to say they are.

• 
  Hoyt Kelley Ralph Cinque you produce pictures ... and narrate the story as you go.
  
  You explain that poor innocent Jacob Rubinstein was just at the police station ... to offer the nice policemen a roast beef on rye. Hahahaha.
  
  You show 2 pictures that are supposed to be Rubinstein ... and neither one look like him.
  
  Everyone knows that you can produce pictures that "you" manipulated ... just to get your desired opinion.
  
  At what time did Jacob Rubinstein "deny" that he cold bloodily murdered Lee Harvey Oswald? Never ... hahahaha.

  • Like
  •  · Reply
  •  · 3h
• 

  Ralph Cinque Hoyt Kelley You think your points pose any challenge to me? It's established beyond doubt that Ruby went to a delicatessen and ordered roast beef sandwiches for the detectives. Then, he got Detective Sims on the phone, and Sims told him that they were being provided with plenty of food. And so Ruby decided to give the sandwiches to the news crew. That's all well established, and just because you are ignorant of it doesn't matter. The two pictures weren't produced by me. They are from the official record. And you don't think they look like Ruby? The one on the right is definitely Ruby, and the reason you don't recognize him is because he was thinner than the Garage Shooter, and that's because he wasn't the Garage Shooter. The short pudgy guy on the right was definitely not Jack Ruby. And Jack Ruby didn't deny shooting Oswald, but that was because the Dallas Police told him he did it, and he believed everything the Dallas Police told him. They were his heroes. But, he also said that he had no memory of shooting Oswald, no thought to shoot him, and no desire or intention to shoot him. When asked to recount what exactly happened, he couldn't. He said it was all a blur. He said that all he could remember was going to the garage and then police were pouncing on him, and nothing in-between. That's because there was nothing in-between. And when the police jumped him (which was at the time that he was there, which was not the time that we saw) he started saying, in the midst of the scuffle, "Hey, what are you doing? You know me. I'm Jack Ruby." He didn't know why they were jumping on him. As far as he knew, he didn't do anything- not a damn thing. And he hadn't. Ruby was innocent. Completely and totally innocent. And he was mentally impaired. He did not have the wherewithal to defend himself. And he was a very decent man, a good man. The picture of his character that goes along with the official story is complete fiction, and most of the citings and doings of Ruby are fiction too. He was not a Mafioso. He was not a hit man or a pimp. He was not a gun runner. Those are all lies fabricated by the real killers.
•