OSWALD IN THE DOORWAY- the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign by Ralph Cinque
www.oswald-innocent.com
Take a look at these people standing on the steps to see what a normal photograph of such a thing looks like.
Take a look at these people standing on the steps to see what a normal photograph of such a thing looks like.
I did some work this weekend involving 40 pound bags of soil, and hauling them around, I kept thinking about the mother and boy in the Altgens photo. They're watching the motorcade. He's high up. He could not have been standing on anything, so she must be holding him. But, how could she? Objects feel heavier as you continue to hold them. Do an experiment: just hold your arms out. See how long you can do that, hold them up. See how heavy they start feeling. See how long before it gets painful. He is not a baby or a toddler. He is a little boy, who just happens to be wearing a wool cap and pulled down over his ears on a sunny, 71 degree day. He and his mother were put in the picture, and it was to cover up the man behind them who is turned around looking at Oswald in the doorway. The President of the United States is driving by, and he's looking at Oswald. Who was he? I suspect he was FBI Agent James Bookhout who went on to impersonate Jack Ruby at the Garage Spectacle. You realize that there is no other photo in the world like this, where you've got a man who is completely headless just from visoring his eyes with his hands. Then, the man behind Oswald, who for some reason is turned 90 degrees and facing the wall; he is both in front of and behind Oswald at the same time. He is covering up Oswald's left shoulder at the same time that Oswald is covering up his right shoulder. So, who is in front of whom? And what's with the white splotch over the face of the short man who has his arms folded? This kind of photographic lunacy doesn't happen anywhere except the JFK assassination. It is the Bizarro World of the JFK assassination.
The head of NATO just announced that the war in Ukraine could last for years. It's not going to last for years, unless Ukraine and NATO make it last for years. What's going to happen is that Russia is going to continue fighting until it has whatever amount of land it wants. The most important piece for it to get was the land bridge from Russia to Crimea, so that they wouldn't be entirely dependent on that bridge they built over the Kerch Strait, which everyone said they couldn't do, calling it "Putin's folly." They surely intend to secure the whole Donbas region. And they are going to keep the Kherson region, which I have been to. It's nice. I spent quite a bit of time there. Will they try to take Kharkiv? I strongly doubt it. If anything, they would try to take Odessa.
But, whenever they're done taking what they are going to take, they are going to announce a unilateral ceasefire and tell the Ukrainians that the war can be over, but they have to stop fighting. If they make any attempt to retake captured lands, then the war will resume.
Will the Ukrainians choose to have more war in a vain effort to retake captured lands? They could never do it. If they could, they would have retaken Crimea. They are no more going to take back Kherson or Mariupol than they are going to take back Crimea.
Hopefully, we are not going to be stupid enough to urge them to keep fighting. Let the fucking war end, for Christ's sake. And the truth is that most of the people in the taken lands want to go with Russia anyway. Again, I've been there. I threw away my Ukrainian dictionary. Nobody spoke it. They all spoke Russian.
I'm saying all this, but I don't defend what Russia did. I don't think anyone has a right to start a war. If there is no war, and you start one, you've done a monstrous thing. But, this war needs to end, and the only way it's going to end is if Ukraine admits that it's lost a huge chunk of its land.
Paz Marverde Rosas: As we know, Jim Garrison, the New Orleans DA, reopened the investigation on the assassination of JFK and incriminated Clay Shaw. Garrison discovered that Shaw was a member of Centro Mondiale Commerciale, an Italian company which, in reality, was a CIA front. Thanks to the Italian historian Michele Metta, who was able to get the CMC papers, it emerges that Byrd, the owner of the Texas School Books Depository, the location where Lee Oswald was accused of having fired from on that fatal day, November 22, 1963, was connected to the CMC. In this excerpt from Metta's book, Accomplishing Jim Garrison's Investigation on the Trail of the Assassins of JFK, this connection is explained. Courtesy of Michele Metta
Ralph Cinque: Thank you for that, Paz. Now, here is the clincher: Like Centro Mondiale Commerciale, the Texas School Book Depository was also a CIA front. The book distributing was just a cover for what they were really doing, which was espionage, gun-running, and drug-running. How could they be distributing books to schools when there were no school-size orders? How could an "order-filler" with nothing but a clipboard, carry boxes of books? Do you realize how heavy a box of books is? And why would so many boxes have been open? And why would they need a "mailer" who was wrapping small orders in brown paper, the same brown paper that Oswald supposedly stole to construct his supposed bag? No one would wrap a heavy box of books in brown paper. There would be no point. Then, they had a tying machine that only worked with small parcels. So, they weren't shipping boxes of books, which means they weren't shipping to schools. At schools, you have classes, and every kid in the class needs a book. It was all a facade. The TSBD was CIA, and they were directly involved in killing Kennedy. Not everyone of course, but people like Truly, Shelly, etc.- they were directly involved in killing Kennedy and framing Oswald in a CIA operation.
I am amazed that after having invaded and waged war in Afghanistan for 20 years, that now, it's as though it never happened. All we ever hear about Afghanistan are negative stories about what the Taliban is doing, the latest being that they are requiring female newscasters to cover their faces.
Well, I agree that it's appalling, but before 2001, the Taliban didn't even allow female newscasters. They didn't allow female anything. So, at least they are not going back to that. And remember: it's based on religion. They have their religion, and we have our religions. And one of our religions is our medical religion, and it required, not just women, but everyone to cover their face - with a Covid mask. And they might go back to it. They are saying that the case numbers are rising, even among the twice vaccinated and twice boosted. So, it may become mask-time again for all of us.
Our media doesn't report anything positive about Afghanistan, but on the Taliban website, it's mostly positive news, for instance, they had an economic conference in Kabul with representatives from 60 countries attending. Obviously, the U.S. wasn't one of them, but how was that not news?
But, getting back to the Afghanistan War, George W. Bush started it, accusing the Taliban of collaborating with Osama bin laden to do 9/11. Not only did he not provide evidence that the Taliban was involved in 9/11, he didn't even provide evidence that Osama bin laden was involved. And ultimately, the only thing he ever provided was the phony Fatty bin laden tape, and that was two months after he launched the war. I'm sure the phony thing didn't even exist at the time he launched the war. So, even he could not have known about it at the time he gave the order to attack. Then, it was the Taliban's refusal to extradite OBL to us that became the trigger for the war, but we didn't have an extradition treaty with them. Our invasion of Afghanistan was just as criminal and illegal as Russia's invasion of Ukraine. But, we act as though we never invaded another country in our entire history.
But, I haven't gotten to the main point I want to make, which is: that no one has been held accountable for the disastrous and totally miscalculated war on Afghanistan. It should have started with criminal charges against Bush himself, and then moved on to others. But, no one has been charged, and no one will be. And you would think that, by now, some insider would have written an expose' about the disastrous U.S. war on Afghanistan, naming names and assigning blame. But, that hasn't happened, and if someone does write such a book, I predict that the media will ignore it, just like they ignored The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder by Vincent Bugliosi about the disastrous war on Iraq.
So, the U.S. government, the U.S. Military, and the U.S. Media have moved on from the War in Afghanistan, and the only reporting that will be done about that country will be negative reports about the Taliban. Any and all good news about progress in that country will be ignored, but they'll hone in on any bad news or anything that is derogatory about the Taliban. The 20 years of war, the trillion dollars spent, the thousands of Americans killed, and for absolutely nothing, not to mention the much larger number of Afghans killed, it's all water under the bridge now. The U.S. has moved on and will not be accounting for what it did in Afghanistan.
This past Sunday, I appeared on an internet television program to discuss the innocence of Jack Ruby. I presented images, and the first one was this one.
So, you would think that this being the only facial image of him would make it the go-to image. But, it's not. Only I and my friends and supporters show it. And that's because it's a blight on the official story since he obviously isn't Jack Ruby.
Of course, it's Jack Ruby on the right, and that's his mug shot. I'll do the point by point comparison, but first, let me point out that it is immediately obvious that they are not the same man, and that's based on our lifelong experience looking at people and understanding that each human being is one-of-a-kind genetic specimen with his or her own genetic blueprint, except for identical twins.
But, what you can see is that the man on the left had a round face, (think Charlie Brown) while Ruby had a longer, narrower face. The man on the left had a short forehead, whereas Ruby had a long forehead. The man on the left had racoon stripes instead of eyes, which was a photographic alteration, whereas Ruby had eyes. And, the man on the left had a very short neck while Ruby had a longer neck. There is absolutely no way they could be the same man.
The three men with the Shooter were Detectives Boyd, Sims, and Hall, who, ironically, were Oswald's handlers. They were the ones who led Oswald around: to lineups, to Court, to interrogations, and also to the Midnight Press Conference. So, how did they wind up being being the handlers of the Garage Shooter? Why weren't they, or two of them, allowed to lead Oswald out to the Garage for the supposed jail transfer? Why were they replaced by Leavelle and Graves?
And what were the four of them doing there? It was taken on the 3rd floor of the police department, right next to the elevator. But, what were they doing there? The weren't waiting for the elevator. They were just hovering there. And when was it? It was very soon after the Garage Spectacle: probably 2 minutes after.
Notice that the detectives are looking sharply at the photographer, and they don't look happy. They look concerned. But, they aren't the least bit concerned that they have their backs to a homicidal criminal. And that's because they know they have nothing to fear from him. And that's because they knew he was FBI Agent James Bookhout, and what they were really doing is escorting him to freedom. They were about to release him so that he could go back to being James Bookhout. So, after this, they must have taken him to wherever he had his regular clothes, so he could change into them and go back to being himself. And that was probably in the Homicide Bureau. That's where Bookhout said he was during the Oswald shooting. He said he remained there after the final interrogation. He didn't say why. He didn't say what he needed to do there. And he didn't explain why he had no interest in watching the jail transfer, even though he was interested in watching every other thing that Oswald did.
We found this image in Fred Rheinstein's 30 year retrospective of the Oswald shooting, called The Killing of Lee Harvey Oswald. Fred was the producer and director of the NBC spectacle of the shooting 30 years before.
The 30 year retrospective used to be up on Youtube, in its entirety. Now, it is nowhere to be found. Why? It's because of what we found: the image of the Garage Shooter showing that he was definitely not Jack Ruby.
How big is this? There is nothing bigger. It's bigger than Oswald in the doorway, and that's big.
