Shipping Included.MANY THANKS!

DAVID FERRIE: MAFIA PILOT The premiere book about the Kennedy assassination suspect


Monday, November 28, 2011

Conquering Cancer and Its Connection to the Kennedy Assassination:Interview with Judyth Vary Baker

This interview, part Two,was conducted during our November remembrances for President Kennedy. Hear Kennedy's speech,below, as it opens this 2nd part of my interview with Carolyn Rose Goyda...Lee Harvey Oswald, an innocent man,spied on the biological weapon development against Castro being conducted while acting as my bodyguard and a courier for The Project. Read ME & LEE for more information.

The interview is badly recorded due to interference--sometimes significant--that made it difficult for us to communicate. Other interviews made during this period of Nov. 22-23-24 were totally blocked. Thanks to Carolyn for managing--somehow--to get this interview recorded!

Sunday, November 20, 2011

OSWALD-DID-IT MYTHS EXPOSED: Kennedy did NOT Order Bubble Top Off Car --and Oswald Didn't Shoot Before Zapruder Film Began!

Oswald Did Not Kill Kennedy!

Vincent Palamara, admittedly the nation's expert on the Secret Service, has a lot to say about the Kennedy detail--those agents assigned to protect the President at all costs. Only, on November 22,1963,
Kennedy's Secret Service agents failed to do just that.

In addition, they want to blame KENNEDY for his own death, falsely claiming he ordered the Bubble-Top off -- and ALSO ordered Secret Service agents OFF his then-unprotected car. Many of us have seen the YouTube film showing how agents who WANTED to climb onto the back of Kennedy's car for his protection were ordered off:

So --did KENNEDY order the agents off his car? Look at this:
and this...
You can see Palamara's full investigation proving Kennedy was betrayed by treasonous secret service agents HERE.
SEE ALSO Vince Palamara: called a Secret Service expert by The History Channel, C-SPAN's Brian Lamb, Vince Bugliosi, The Assassination Records Review Board, and many countless authors and researchers. As former JFK Secret Service agent Joe Paolella proclaimed: "You seem to know a lot about the Secret Service, maybe even more than I do!" Unlike The Kennedy Detail, I don't profit from the death of the man I was sworn to protect. JFK NEVER ORDERED THE AGENTS OFF HIS LIMOUSINE, AS MANY FORMER AGENTS & WHITE HOUSE AIDES ADAMANTLY TOLD ME! Don't believe the 47-year-old lies told by those seeking to profit from the man they failed to protect. For his part, Blaine seems to be afraid of me and worried about my major influence over countless people around the world via my online writings and so forth-he
talks about me falsely in his book but doesn't dare name me (page 360), had his attorney send me a threatening letter, and then had the temerity to state on television that I'm, quote, "not credible." I, myself, believe Blaine to be very credible, but ONLY regarding the statements he made to myself in 2004-2005, NOT the new, revised ones he is now espousing in his book.
Remember: Blaine's colleagues did nothing to prevent JFK from getting killed and, by his own admission, Blaine himself damn near killed yet ANOTHER president, ole LBJ. LBJ himself said it best: "I’ll get Hoover to send me over a couple of twenty-one-year-old accountants and they’ll probably do as good a job!" Amen. God Bless the modern Secret Service: a million times better than The Kennedy Detail. Don't let their crocodile tears fool you: many despised JFK (for his morals) AND LBJ (for his manners) and some are reaping huge financial rewards over his death. My deep respect and admiration for the late, great President John F. Kennedy moves me to defend and protect him in The Kennedy Detail miserably failed to do so regarding his life.

A "postscript": Blaine makes much of President Kennedy allegedly calling him and his colleagues"charlatans." This is quite an embarassing "admission
" on Blaine's part---here is the definition of a charlatan: "A charlatan (also called swindler or mountebank) is a person practicing quackery or some similar confidence trick in order to obtain money, fame or other advantages via some form of pretense or deception." Ouch.


Every November, the usual suspects trot out their enhanced (and corrupted) photos, computer studies and new ideas to try to convince th
e people that Lee Oswald killed Kennedy,when ample evidence exists that Kennedy was killed with the help of of the government.
This year, longtime CIA writer and CIA award-winner and asset Max Holland has announced that enhanced films show Lee in the TSBD window,when actually, only a figure can be seen in the window and Holland presumes to tell readers that it is Oswald.

Further,he and his co-author, Johann Rush, add FIVE SECONDS to the total time Lee Oswald was supposed to have to shoot the President--this latest desperate promotion of their discredited theory perhaps prompted by the fact that even former Navy Seal Jesse Ventura couldn't fire the miserable weapon --an Italian-made Carcano=--in the time shown on the Zapruder film.
The way Holland and Rush get around this problem is to tell everybody that after 48 years nobody thought that maybe Lee Oswald started shooting BEFORE the Zapruder film began in its 'second' section (a portion has been removed from the film--some say Zapruder stopped the film for a few seconds).
Holland and Rush want us to believe that now we know the theory, we can believe that Lee Oswald had plenty of time to shoot. However, they forgot one small detail-- they ignore witnesses who do not agree with them.
And they are important witnesses.

The claim made by Max Holland and Johan Rush that Lee Oswald made a shot --and missed--five seconds before the Zapruder film began -- is being treated as a 'new' discovery as of November, 2011, but even Oswald-did-it aficionados posted objections due to conflicting evidence, as early as 2007:while Dale Myers firmly believes Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy, he and co-author Todd Vaughan don't accept Holland and Rush's theory (which Holland and Rush are proclaiming, this November, 2011, is the FINAL NAIL in Oswald's coffin):


Holland Déjà Vu


"... if the first shot occurred...before Zapruder began filming, as Holland and Rush theorize, then the Secret Service Follow-up Car would still have been in the process of rounding the corner from Houston onto Elm. We known this for a fact because five lesser-known amateur films of the Kennedy motorcade capture the period of time immediately before Zapruder began filming. And from these films we can see that the Secret Service Follow-up Car hadn’t begun to travel down Elm Street at the time of Holland and Rush’s theorized first shot. How then can Holland and Rush claim the testimony of the three agents as supportive?"
Part of the article mentions eyewitness testimony:
"According to Holland and Rush, their theory is supported by eye and ear-witnesses to the shooting (including Amos L. Euins, the only one named in the New York Times article) and explains why Oswald missed his first and closest shot."
But Myers and Vaughan disagree:
"Nowhere in their November Times Op-Ed piece (or in their companion article, "11 Seconds in Dallas; Not Six", now posted on Holland’s ‘’ website) do Holland and Rush address or respond to the multitude of factual inaccuracies pointed out about their early-shot thesis back in June...In order to convince readers of their New York Times Op-Ed piece that Euins’ testimony supported their theory, Holland and Rush were very selective in their citation. For instance, Holland and Rush didn’t mention that Euins said he ‘watched the car [go] on down the street’ before the car neared the black and white sign and he heard a shot. Nor do Holland and Rush mention that Euins was standing across the street from the Book Depository front entrance – directly across from the traffic light pole that supposedly intercepted Oswald’s first shot.
Of course, those two crucial pieces of information completely alter what Euins is saying – namely that the presidential car was not in front of him at the time of the first shot, as Holland and Rush imagine, but had proceeded down the street some unknown distance before the first shot was fired. Holland and Rush’s complicity in this obvious deception is no better illustrated than in their use of a 1963 Secret Service re-enactment photograph [Figure 1] which they said shows “...the president’s limousine would have passed a black and white sign before Zapruder restarted his camera...” just as young Amos Euins described. [emphasis added]..."

To be more accurate, Holland and Rush should have said that the limousine would have passed a cluster of small highway signs – not a singular black and white sign, as Euins suggested. This fact might have taken on much more significance had Holland and Rush revealed that there was more than one cluster of small black and white highway signs along Elm Street – or better yet, that there was a singular highway sign further down Elm Street.

In fact, the very next highway sign, which appears to have been black and white, was the R.L. Thornton Freeway sign located 100 feet further west on Elm Street – the same R.L Thornton Freeway sign that T.E. Moore referred to as the approximate location of the president’s car at the time of the first shot. [Figure 2] The R. L. Thornton Freeway sign also had several smaller highway markers attached to it, the same kind of markers referenced in the photograph that Holland and Rush mention....
But, how in the world would anyone know any of this from reading the Holland and Rush article?"

These Oswald-did-it writers have much more to say:

"Holland and Rush urge their readers to discard the assumed “illusion” that the Zapruder film depicted the assassination in full and embrace their theory that Oswald fired a shot much earlier than anyone ever thought before. But, their theory is the illusion – concocted from a half-dozen cherry-picked, eyewitness accounts that don’t hold up under even the most basic examination."

Their article displays how dishonestly Holland and Rush were proceeding in 2007. In 2011,the two continued to trumpet the same theory,still dishonestly contending that their eyewitnesses support their theory.

The truth does not require year after year of half-baked theories presented to prove beyond all doubt that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy. The American people now realize that lying to cover up evil doings by government-sponsored 'experts' is unfortunately a common fact of life. The same government experts who tell us that waterboarding is not torture and is legal, the same media who refuse to acknowledge new witnesses and new evidence in the case, are not going to deliver the truth to you on a golden platter. Truth will come humbly,but her power persists. The people there is more to the story than that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy. And if their IQ is more than double-digit, they'll know that the government was behind it and framed an innocent man.

I, Judyth Vary Baker, am a living witness to that fact. Please read the following books to get the truth, rather than propaganda: JFK AND THE UNSPEAKABLE, ME & LEE, CROSSFIRE, LBJ MASTERMIND, INSIDE THE ARRB, and THE GIRL ON THE STAIRS. Thank you.