Friday, September 15, 2017

The Historicity of Moses

The debate over the historicity of Moses burns on, largely because two different groups employing two different epistemologies believe that they can persuade their opponent of the truth of their position. It is a hopeless cause where both sides would do well to agree to disagree.

After visiting several forums purporting to answer questions about the Biblical Moses, I can assure you that hostility reigns on both sides with the skeptics holding a good edge over the believers in invective.

There are actually 3 groups engaged in tug of war over Moses' historicity. The traditional group accepts the divine inspiration of the Pentateuch and thus accepts the story of Moses as a fact of history, based largely on the manner in which his deeds are told. The second group are the skeptics who believe that the Bible is either pure fiction or a mishmash of vague memories of a minor figure embellished over time. A third group doesn't really care either way because it believes that the didactic value of the Bible, in this case Moses and the Exodus, trumps any concern for historical or factual substance.

The skeptic demands historical evidence for the existence of historical figures. For example, one can point to letters written and signed by George Washington attesting to his historicity. Likewise contemporary accounts affirm the deeds of the Founding Father. In fact we can even visit his home today.

The case with Moses is quite the opposite. After nearly a century of excavation all over the Levant and Egypt, there is not a single shred of archaeological or documentary evidence substantiating the existence of Moses or the Exodus. Thus through an empirical epistemology, one has no basis for believing in the existence of Moses or the Exodus.

This point is lost on the believer who insists that the book of Exodus is of divine inspiration, and thus may be trusted as an historical document. However, if pressed to demonstrate that the Pentateuch is of divine origin, the believer is at rope's end to substantiate the claim.

Some believers err by stating that certain archaeological evidence corroborates certain events in the Bible, but this conflates causality with colinearity. Simply because an artifact is found at a certain Tel which conforms with a Biblical narrative does not substantiate that an event occurred or that a person existed. It could be intriguing and the basis for additional excavation, but it is simply a coincidence.

For example, Charles Dickens wrote the Tale of Two Cities which occurs in Paris and London. Paris and London indeed exist, but just because they exist does not mean that Dickens' story is historical. We can only say that it is historical fiction.

Finally, we would be remiss if we did not note that it is entirely possible that historical evidence for Moses and the Exodus could materialize. After all, the most famous rejoinder to skepticism is the discovery of the city of Troy after centuries of scholarly denial. Yet belief in the existence of Moses and the Exodus is an exercise of faith.

Now why are we discussing this point on a blog devoted to American history? The reason is that the debate closely parallels the case of Lee Oswald who was framed by the criminal Warren Commission led by murderers Allan Dulles, John J McCloy, and Gerald Ford. There isn't a shred of evidence substantiating the allegation that Oswald murdered the president let alone fired a shot at him. In fact we have his alibi, of which neither it nor the allegations were tried in a court of law. As such, those who cling to the Warren Commission Report and its findings are the Bible believers who affirm the existence of Moses based upon Holy Writ.

Thus not only will the debate over Moses continue through the ages, but so will that of the innocence of Lee Oswald whose reputation was destroyed by the very murderers who murdered the president of the United States. The great irony is that in both cases Jews were behind the story of Moses and that of the Warren Commission - in one case a blood thirsty priesthood; in another case a cabal of Jews hiding behind the mask of Permindex.

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Wednesday, September 6, 2017

Did Japan Really Bomb Pearl Harbor?

Some skeptics have questioned the standard history that Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. Instead they attribute the attacks to American traitors acting on orders from Franklin Roosevelt. We believe that there are enough unanswered questions about the events of December 7, 1941 to warrant further examination of this idea.

Indeed at least 5 official inquiries by both Congress and executive branch departments investigated the attack on Pearl Harbor because of its enormity and inexplicable anomalies.

The claimants, at least in our case, argue that real attacks occurred, but that they were executed under American command using Japanese Americans and German planes painted in Japanese colors. Given that many documents from World War 2 remain highly classified, one would be remiss in not considering the possibility of a fifth column attacking the United States as an act of treason to further the aims of the Jewish New World Order.

So many strange anomalies accompanied and surrounded the attacks on Pearl Harbor that only an imbecile could trump them up to coincidence. For example, only certain parts of the military base were attacked when reports circulated widely of Japanese spies on the island plotting in grid form the location of every plane, ship, and militarily significant target around the military base.

As examples, the military intelligence buildings were untouched, as were the repair depots, large fuel tanks, and torpedo magazines. These are just a hand full of the important and ripe targets which were studiously avoided by attackers who were said to have highly detailed layouts of the military base.

American shipping was diverted away from the alleged path of the Japanese armada headed toward Hawaii. Long range patrols from the Aleutian islands were also grounded. This latter act is often interpreted as the means for providing security for the Japanese fleet, but another interpretation is that Roosevelt and Chief of Staff George Marshall did not want any witnesses who could claim that there were no Japanese ships in convoy toward Pearl Harbor.

Yet it is also possible that the grounding of air reconnaissance was to provide cloaking for the American carrier groups which carried out the attacks.

Admiral Kimmel and General Short were assured that Pearl Harbor faced no threat from the Japanese navy. In fact Admiral Stark in Washington ordered Kimmel to return all ships to port in Hawaii when the latter took the time honored precaution of sending its fleets to sea when diplomatic relations with a foreign power were in jeopardy. The only warning Kimmel received was that of sabotage, the approved precaution against which was to huddle planes together, thus making them an easy target for bombing attacks. Surely Marshall and his lieutenants knew this and chose artfully sabotage as the key threat.

So what about the 3 American aircraft carriers, Enterprise, Lexington, and Saratoga? It is reported that they were miraculously at sea to be saved by an act of deus ex machina. Since no one knows exactly where they were, it is best supposed that they were carrying a total of 50 planes - a fact not questioned, perhaps German Fokke Wulfes or American AT-6s, painted as Japanese Zero bombers and other planes which then attacked Pearl Harbor. A naval task force of  aircraft carriers is always accompanied by other ships such as battleships, destroyers, and submarines. Thus the best of the American fleet was used to attack the United States while the aging iron was left for destruction. How convenient.

How is it that the American carriers, along with their escorts, did not come to the aid of their countrymen or pursue the Japanese? The Enterprise was allegedly only 215 miles west of Pearl Harbor - and yet it could not help? The Japanese navy was said to be 275 miles west of Pearl Harbor.

The counter arguments to this theory are not trivial. There are many intercepts of Japanese transmissions which would seem to prove that Japanese attack formations indeed headed toward Hawaii. But could these transmissions be fabricated? On the other hand, no one saw any of the Japanese ships. How could this be for the size force needed to attack a large military installation such as Pearl Harbor?

Other contemporary reports state that there were no Japanese airplanes seen in flight although one said that he saw a crashed Zero - possibly a Japanese painted AT-6?

Another argument against a Japanese fleet in Hawaiian waters is the logistical difficulties of such an operation at least 3700 miles away from home base. That was one of the arguments which Roosevelt's staff used to claim that Hawaii faced no credible threat from the Japanese.

False flags are part of the warp and weft of American history. They have been used time and again to drag the United States into Jewish wars. Pearl Harbor has the odor of such a false flag attack, but requires additional evidence to clinch the case.

blocula, Americans Bombed Pearl Harbor With Airplanes Designed To Look Japanese,, April 8, 2012, accessed 9/6/2017

James Perloff, Pearl Harbor: Hawaii Was Surprised; FDR Was Not, New American, December 7, 2016, accessed 9/6/2017

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Monday, September 4, 2017

Did The Cubans Kill Kennedy?

CIA hacks propagate many theories about the power behind the murder of President John F Kennedy on November 22, 1963 in Dallas' Dealey Plaza, the latest of which we address is the Cuban theory. Although it has a grain of truth, like all CIA murmurings, it is ultimately a fraud to fix primary culpability on the anti-Castro Cubans who were indeed a vital part of the matrix.

Recently an anonymous poster posited that Cubans betrayed in the Bay of Pigs fiasco formed the nucleus of the conspiracy to kill Kennedy. The interesting aspect of the theory is that it was a concession that there was a conspiracy at all. But like the mob theory of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, it falls far short of the mark and only serves to obfuscate the real murderers.

The important point about the Cuban involvement in the murder of Kennedy is that they were only one of numerous elements who had an axe to grind with the President. They simply lacked the means, on their own, to murder a president of the United States.

McGeorge Bundy, Richard Bissell of the CIA, and Secretary of State Dean Rusk colluded to ground the air support of the CIA operation after Kennedy had reluctantly authorized it earlier in the day on Sunday of the week of the Bay of Pigs invasion.

Thus the foolish Cubans were led to believe that Kennedy grounded the planes when it was actually traitors in his administration who did so. Without air support, Operation Zapata, ie Bay of Pigs, had no chance of success. This subterfuge was intentional for recruiting anti-Castro Cubans for the murder of the president. It also created yet one more rabbit hole down which researchers would fall, never to return, in attempting to trace the real blame for the murder of Kennedy.

As we have stated many times before, not even the CIA was the ultimate power which killed Kennedy. It answered to the Jewish Permindex which had targeted Kennedy for assassination before he entered office.

Murders of presidents typically take a village, which in this case included a bevy of heavy and lightweight assassins of which the Cubans are only one piece of the puzzle.

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Tuesday, July 4, 2017

Was Barbara Bush the Babushka Lady?

George and Barbara Bush may be the Bonnie and Clyde of the modern clandestine era. It has crossed our mind that Barbara Bush may be the mysterious Babushka lady in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963 when the Jewish Permindex corporation saw its murder plans of President Kennedy unfold.

According to our interpretation of Russ Baker's research, Barbara Bush is definitely a company woman who has helped George with alibis and plausible deniability, one such occasion being her contrived letter implying that she and George were in Tyler, TX giving a speech when the President was murdered. The letter was a fraud and a hoax like most things Bush.

George Bush was in the Dal-Tex building where he led a team of Operation 40 assassins in the ambush on the President. Barbara's true whereabouts are unknown - which leads us to the famed Babushka lady.

No one has ever found her, and there are no clear pictures of this mysterious woman. Clearly she was in disguise doing work for the assassins. No more reliable agent could be found than Barbara who has worked hand in hand with her husband's covert operations over the years.

The Babushka Lady was seen in Dealey Plaza near the motorcade at the time of the President's assassination. George Bush is known for naming his ships after his wife; perhaps the Babushka lady is another such paranomasia.

Babushka is a well known Russian word for a type of scarf or head covering, but Babs is sometimes short for Barbara as in the case of Babs Streisand. Bush would be the family name of one of the president's murderers. Stretch it out a little and you have Babushka Lady.

It's a wild stretch we know, but we like to explore all paths in our quest for truth.

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

The Corporate Cow and the Government's War Against Good Food

Everyone knows that raw milk is bad for you, and that in order to be healthy, it must be pasteurized. These are the typical lies which flow from the sewers of the Food and Drug Administration and Center for Disease Control.

Raw milk has received a bad rap because of historical problems brought on by the industrial and urbanization revolutions of the late 19th and early 20th centuries when the filth and disease of urban centers caused many health problems for its inhabitants. Most Americans are familiar with Upton Sinclair's chronicles of these conditions in such classics as the The Jungle.

In a bad case of conflating ontology with unsanitary influences, the government determined that the only way to make milk safe for public consumption was to demand that it be pasteurized during which process it is heated to a certain temperature - typically above 151 F - in order kill bacteria.

The problem with pasteurization is that it kills good bacteria and probiotics which in turn kill the bad bacteria. Pasteurization also significantly reduces - contrary to deceptive claims by some authors - the nutritional value of milk which is considered one of the most complete foods in its raw state.

There is no doubt that the dirty practices - whether through ignorance or greed - of the past century cultivated unhealthy food production, but there is certainly nothing inherently dangerous about consuming raw, unpasteurized milk provided it is produced under clean sanitary conditions. Fostering healthy production and distribution methods is the course of action which the government should have taken.

On the contrary, honest researcher have discovered that pasteurized milk has been associated with far more illnesses and diseases than raw milk, a fact which the corporate owned CDC refuses to acknowledge. The CDC makes up "facts" about raw milk in order to infuse the public with a "healthy" sense of fear.

When Sally Fallon and Thomas Bartlett attempted to find the raw data which the CDC used to claim that raw milk was responsible for 45 cases of food-borne illnesses, they discovered that it could not be found. Neither could the CDC find it because the data was made up - a total fabrication.

Most allegations that raw milk was the culprit for food-borne illnesses turned out to be false because the alleged bacteria could not be found in the food alleged to be the cause of the illness.

Today's corporate cow is infested with so many drug, hormones, and diseases to produce the most possible milk for the least possible cost that it is no longer a safe bet. Consumers will be saddled for years overcoming the detriments of modern pasteurized milk as it takes its tolls on their healths.

The benefits of raw milk are numerous; the dangers of pasteurized milk are manifold. Americans need to demand that the government allow the production and distribution of raw milk in all 50 states. Why do we have a government which encourages the distribution of condoms so that high school kids can have sex, but prevents the production and sale of raw milk which is health giving?

Josh Axe, Raw Milk Myths: Are We Prisoners of Pasteurization? Part 1 of 3,, nd, accessed 7/4/2017

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Sunday, April 9, 2017

The Dinosaur Hoax

Proving yet again that education provides no immunity from stupidity, academia has successfully pawned off one of the great "scientific" hoaxes of the past 2 centuries with its theory of dinosaurs - a wholly mythical creature without foundation in fact.

The dinosaur industry started in the mid 19th C. at about the same time that Charles Darwin's crackpot theory of evolution began to take the world by storm. Richard Owen, Superintendent of the British Museum Natural History Department postulated the existence of dinosaurs in 1842 which after 12 short years resulted in the discovery dinosaur bones near the upper Missouri River when Ferdinand Hayden found a few unidentified teeth which had to be those of dinosaurs.

As Erasmus (1466-1536) once quipped, speaking of the massive quantities of relics of the true cross, there were enough of them to build Noah's ark. And so it is with the alleged dinosaur teeth and bones - it only takes a couple of odd teeth, a chip of an elephant tusk, and a few chicken bones to contrive a dinosaur display for a prestigious museum.

As Eric Dubay noted in our reference article, the public is entirely unaware that dinosaur displays are fabrications of random bones and teeth supplemented by large quantities of fabricated pieces made of plaster, epoxies, and plastics. No one has ever discovered a dinosaur in situ. The majority of the ones placed in museums are complete hoaxes. For example Edward Drinker Cope and Othniel Marsh, 2 leading 19th C. paleontologists, "discovered" 136 dinosaurs of which over 75% have been rejected as invalid.

Nearly all dinosaur "discoveries" have been made by paleontologists and related "scientists" who have a vested interested in promoting the dinosaur hoax. Billions of dollars are at stake and in play when one considers the academic and entertainment industries which have profited handsomely by the belief, the movie Jurassic Park being a prime example.

The majority of discoveries have come from concentrated areas which defies the laws of probabilities, so much so that a fabrication plant in China supplies fake bones and displays to this nation's premier museums. So-called real bones can sell for millions of dollars, so augmenting them with fake bones from China made by Zigong Dino Ocean Art Company, which supplies nearly 3/4 of the fake bones shown by American and European museums, makes economic sense.

Professors and museum curators hire artists to help create the mythological creatures which have no precedence in the annals of science prior to the 19th C. Unfortunately the artists do not have a good sense of physics, biomechanics, or biology as the centers of gravity and other structural characteristics of the fantasy animals make them physical impossibilities. Only in a child's fiction book or Disney Studios can dinosaurs come to life.

The alleged real bones said to be those of dinosaurs are held under lock and key with absolutely no access by the public, the main reason being that exposure of cat and chicken bones as dinosaurs could cause considerable embarrassment to the hoaxsters. Thus the keepers of the hoax have completely sabotaged the Scientific Method which requires that scientific discoveries be independently reproduced before acceptance.

So-called prestigious journals such as Nature and National Geographic have been outed so many times for the fraudulent "discoveries" that hysterical laughter should ensue from the mention of either of these names. Dubay writes:
In the 1990s many fossils with feathers were supposedly discovered in China (suspiciously close to the Zigong Dino Ocean Art Company), but when examined Dr. Timothy Rowe found the so-called “Confuciusornis” was an elaborate hoax.  He also found the “Archeoraptor” supposedly discovered in the 90s was composed of bones from 5 different animals!  When Dr. Rowe presented his findings to National Geographic the head scientist reportedly remarked “well all of these have been fiddled with!  National Geographic then proceeded with their news conferences and media stories about the Archeoraptor fossils being genuine and having found the missing link in evolution.  
Many fall back to the redoubt of radiometric dating to buttress their claims about the antiquity of dinosaur bones, yet this method has come under great suspicion as scientists realized that it is susceptible to faulty readings for so many reasons. One of the bigger problems is that radiometric methods are applied to the rocks near the bones rather than to the bones themselves.

But why all of the fraud? The main reason is the need to fill in the gaps in the theory of evolution which has more holes in it than a colander made of Swiss cheese. The Jewish and Free Mason press need a method to undermine Christianity and the Bible, so quack paleontologists and editors of National Geographic are impressed into service with their shimmering atheistic voodoo science.

Some Biblicists point to the term leviathan and similar vocabulary in Job to sustain the idea that dinosaurs existed, but the language is too loose to make any such conclusion.

Given the relative novelty of dinosaur theories and evolution, it is very doubtful that an authentic dinosaur will ever be found - dinosaurs were a need invented by the fakers of another theory about human origins. The ones to date have certainly been the product of fertile imaginations where academia and the entertainment industries have combined to defraud the public on a grand scale.

Eric Dubay, Dinosaur Hoax - Dinosaurs Never Existed!,, September 9, 2015, accessed 4/9/2017

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Sunday, April 2, 2017

Karen Silkwood and the USS Liberty

Connecting Karen Silkwood to the sinking of the USS Liberty may seem like a stretch, notwithstanding the chronological difficulties, but new information has come to our attention implicating Israel and Mossad in the murder of Silkwood, and the sinking of the US communications ship.

An article in the January/February 2017 Barnes Review surfaces new evidence connecting the famous whistleblower to Jewish espionage against America's nuclear assets.

Silkwood gained fame as the undercover employee of the criminal Kerr-McGee plutonium processing plant near Crescent, Oklahoma which produced highly defective fuel rods destined for the Hanford plutonium processing facility in Washington state. Silkwood documented many other safety violations which she uncovered while working as a quality control specialist.

Kerr-McGee and intelligence agents, whom we believe were from Mossad and CIA, retaliated against Silkwood by contaminating her apartment with plutonium at 150 times its "safe" levels. When that murder attempt failed, Kerr-McGee sent Mossad agents working with law enforcement agencies to run her off the road in a staged accident.

Enroute to a meeting with a New York Times reporter in Oklahoma City on April 13, 1974, Silkwood was run off the road by a driver of a black painted Chevrolet. The setup was problematic in the first place because the Jewish owned New York Times was most likely involved in luring Silkwood to Oklahoma City. Why didn't its reporter meet her locally? ( We know all of the plausible deniability reasons.)

Government officials attempted to blame the accident on faint traces of alcohol or tranquilizers, but those quantities do not impair driving. The fact that Silkwood was braced against the driving wheel indicates that she was attempting to protect herself as best as she could from her attacker and an imminent crash. The documents Silkwood carried with her to her appointment were stolen by her attacker(s).

The safety violations were only the tip of the iceberg. Silkwood also discovered that at least 40 pounds of plutonium were missing from the Kerr-McGee plant. An FBI source revealed in 1975 that the number was at least 140 pounds which a CIA source confirmed was destined for 2 "friendly" countries. That information was doublespeak for Israel and South Africa - though some contend India was involved.

This story dovetails perfectly with our previous Chronicle relating how numerous nuclear warheads were smuggled out of this country through Pantex in Galveston, Texas, headed for Africa, then South Africa, then to Israel and New York City where Jews used them to attempt to blow up the World Trade Center, the first attempt being in 1993.

Israel created in 1957 the Bureau of Scientific Relations, aka LAKAM, as a front organization to steal plutonium through its intelligence front NUMEC near Pittsburgh by obtaining nuclear processing contracts with the US government. Mossad agent Raphael Eitan who headed the operation was also the handler of American traitor Jonathan Pollard.

Jewish espionage against America's nuclear capabilities goes back to at least the Rosenbergs, but it continued full swing even after the well deserved execution of the husband and wife traitors. In the 1960s, the Jewish Lyndon Johnson gave full sanction to Jewish espionage and treason contrary to specific US nuclear non-proliferation laws governing otherwise. The Vietnam president personally intervened to keep Israel's nuclear program a secret. Kennedy, on the other hand, attempted to derail it, citing concerns about the terrorist state's proclivity for violence. This intervention against Israel cost Kennedy his life.

In another Chronicle on the attack of the USS Liberty which Johnson ordered, we noted that one motive for sinking the Liberty was to destroy evidence that the communications ship had gathered that Jews were wantonly slaughtering unarmed Egyptians in the Sinai Desert. In a follow-up, we noted that Johnson was attempting to create a casus belli for dropping a hydrogen bomb on Cairo. While both motives for sinking the Liberty are true, there is yet another one equally powerful.

According to a retired CIA official, a French freighter carrying stolen uranium was headed toward Israel, whose contents would have surely been identified by the Liberty. Thus it was necessary for the Jews to sink the ship, and which was most likely the reason for Johnson's vehement demand to "send it to the bottom of the sea, now!". For had the cargo been identified, Sixth Fleet interdiction would have surely followed, leading to numerous international diplomatic troubles and setbacks to the Jewish nuclear program.

The Karen Silkwood case was just the tip of the iceberg of treason against the United States by its citizens and the Rothschild colony of Israel. When a lawyer for the Silkwood parents attempted to obtain documents on their daughter's case from the government, one official warned him that both of his clients would be dead if he did not desist from his demands, adding that not a damned thing would be done about their deaths. Only Jews have that kind of power.


Philip Rife, Karen Silkwood: The Woman Who Knew Too Much, The Barnes Review, January/February 2017, Volume XXIII, Number 1, pp 24-27

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Thursday, March 23, 2017

The Oswald Defection

In our most important article to date on the defection of Lee Harvey Oswald to the Soviet Union in 1959, we provide a more cogent explanation of the event which has been offered on this controversial subject. We believe that the Oswald defection is another hoax on the American people.

You may read it on our new website at this link

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Saturday, March 18, 2017

Black History Month Fraud

Every February Black History Month rolls around to spread more lies about black achievements, but this year the editors at the Barnes Review took the time to dispel the many myths magnifying black accomplishments, which in too many cases are gross misrepresentations of the facts.

It is very telling that Black History Month is needed at all, whose very existence must surely be an embarrassment to any thinking person. It is indeed the ultimate pity screw if you will pardon the coarse gesture - but that is the legacy of affirmative action. No one celebrates White History Month - and why should he?

The article mentioned dismantles the persistent myth that blacks were the core of ancient Egyptian civilization. For centuries no one questioned the largely European composition of Egypt - especially during its founding and greatest splendor. Whites from Europe and descendants from Enoch and Shem were among it earliest settlers.

During the 1970s, Whites determined that the Blacks needed a boost to their fragile self esteems, so they invented Black History Month, along with a string of myths and falsehoods to boost their egos, not the least of which is the lie that Egypt and its empire were created by blacks. The overwhelming forensic evidence, such as mummies and art, should have made such a myth laughable in the extreme.

Over time, miscegenation by Egyptians with their conquered peoples produced a mixed multitude to the point where it assumed its present racial composition about the 8th C. BC when the black Nubians finally conquered part of  the country. Thus the ascendance of Blacks, as the Barnes Review noted, coincided with the collapse of the Egyptian dynasties and empire - its best days were long behind it. From that time forward, with a couple of exceptions, Egypt was a vassal state of the great powers - Assyria, Chaldea, Persia, Alexander, the Ptolemies, Rome and others. Today it is an overrun third world basket case.

The article then enumerates a number of inventions alleged to be of black origin - kind of like Al Gore claiming to invent the internet. The author shows that blacks did not invent the light bulb filament, the pace maker, laser cataract surgery, the traffic signal, the blood bank, the air brake, air conditioner, and a few other items we left out to keep from boring our dear reader.

While one cannot deny black achievement in sports and entertainment, equally one cannot ascribe to them what is not rightfully theirs. It is a fraud on the true inventors, and just too bad if black people have their feelings hurt by not having invented so many things attributed to them. We are waiting for their White handlers to attribute the invention of the internet to them.

-, Black History Month Myths, The Barnes Review (website), nd, accessed 3/18/2017

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Sunday, March 12, 2017

The Vile Ruth Hyde Paine and Her Vile Lies

The vile Ruth Hyde Paine pretended to be a friend of the Oswalds, but the truth of the matter is that she was assigned by the CIA to help manipulate Lee HARVEY Oswald and frame him for the CIA's murder of President John F Kennedy in Dallas' Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.

Paine committed at least 3 signal acts to help frame Oswald for the murder. She got him a job at the CIA's Texas School Book Depository which, rather than being a school book supplier, was one of the CIA's nerve centers in managing the ambush on the president. The purpose for placing HARVEY in the TSBD was to provide the story about him being the lone 6th floor assassin.

The second act of participation in the murder of Oswald was that of Paine ordering the rifle with which Oswald allegedly shot the president. We have spent considerable space deriding the idiocy of using such a weapon for an assassination, but suffice it to say that when a large group of Italian military professionals was informed that the Mannlicher-Carcano was the murder weapon, the entire auditorium broke out in laughter.

Paine was the supplier of the rifle. Whether or not she ordered it from Kleins in Chicago, or was provided it locally, she was the one who wrapped the Carcano in a blanket in her garage. John Armstrong has proven that the alleged money order used to purchase the weapon was a fraud, so we know that Oswald did not acquire the rifle.

We do know that Paine, a CIA operative, did the dirty deed. She annotated her calendar on October 23 as saying Oswald ordered the rifle. Why would Paine record such a detail? Marina claimed she knew nothing about it. If Oswald were this dangerous lone nut, shouldn't she have alerted authorities that a mad man just ordered a rifle - all the more so with the false allegations that Oswald tried to assassinate General Walker. It was all a hoax, with Paine planting evidence on her occasional house guest.

Another act of treachery by the so-called Quaker Ruth Paine was forging a farewell note attributed to HARVEY. Having read it, we realized that only someone with an intellect of a pre-adolescent would accept it at face value. The note was supposedly written in Russian, translated into English, and then translated back into Russian. Such a bizarre stunt could have come only from the psychopathic imagination of the CIA of which Ruth Paine was a part.

Some of the nonsense in the letter was that Oswald had paid the last month's water and gas bill and house payment even though he was allegedly living in a rooming house and his wife was living with Paine. Paine knew Russian very well and was the author of the note which miraculously showed up some time after the assassination of the president.

We know conclusively from photographic evidence that HARVEY did not shoot the president because he was in the doorway of the TSBD precisely at the moment CIA ambushed the president. Therefore there was no need for him to concoct such a brain-dead note.

Finally, when HARVEY tried to reach Paine to get legal assistance on Saturday, she refused. What kind of friend was Paine? She was not a friend at all, but a vicious piranha seeking innocent blood.

It is unfortunate that the vile Ruth Paine is still alive, but soon enough the world will be rid of her. In the meantime we must all endure her insufferable lies and continuation of the murder operation of President Kennedy and Lee HARVEY Oswald.

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Saturday, March 11, 2017

Did Marina Oswald Speak English?

The news media and Warren Commission fostered the unquestioned presumption that Marina Oswald did not speak English at the time of her interrogations immediately following the murder of John Kennedy by the CIA in Dallas' Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963. The evidence points to her mastery of English, a fact she hid to play the helpless damsel in distress.

John Armstrong has made a convincing case that Marina Oswald, the wife of Lee HARVEY Oswald, spoke English very well. He draws upon photographs annotated in her hand, and her handling of contract negotiations in English. We would like to present a few more pieces of evidence that she spoke and wrote English well.

The government-news media story was that Marina barely knew any English, in part because the brute Lee HARVEY Oswald wanted to keep his wife barefoot, dumb, and pregnant.

In the early days of the fake investigation conducted by the FBI of Kennedy's murder, a translator was always brought to the interviews of Marina. By February the investigation notes explicitly state the interviews were conducted in English, begging us to conclude that within 2 months of the murder, Marina suddenly developed enough competency in English to forgo the translators. The reality is that she knew English long before suddenly speaking in English tongues in February.

One of the evidences for Marina's proficiency is a letter by Robert Oswald, HARVEY's alleged brother, in which he described a number of interactions between Marina and other people who did not speak Russian. For example he documents an affair between her and John Martin, the assistant manger of the Inn of Six Flags, which would not have been possible without the 2 people being able to speak English. Armstrong in fact reports Martin as stating that Marina spoke English very well.

At the end of the affair in February, Robert walked into his house, where Marina was staying, at the tail end of a telephone conversation between her, John, and his wife in which Marina, under Robert's direction, ended the affair. According to Robert, the affair occurred from November 1963 to February 1964. It is inconceivable that the telephone conversation could occur without all parties being able to speak English, a fact Martin has already confirmed.

Another interview session of Marina by the FBI covered the allegations that HARVEY was in Mexico City, something which Marina said she knew about from watching television, another indicator that her English was quite good.

A final bit of evidence we offer is her association with Robert Webster, a Rand Corporation plastics specialist who fake-defected to the Soviet Union 2 weeks before Oswald, and who re-entered the US 2 weeks before Oswald. Webster stated that he knew Marina although the latter denied it. Unfortunately she made a Freudian slip of sorts when she told a Russian friend that her husband was in the USSR for a trade show, precisely the circumstances under which Webster was in the USSR. It is well known that HARVEY was not on a trade show mission, and therefore that Marina knew Webster.

Since Webster did not speak Russian, and evidence exists that Marina met with Webster in the USSR in Leningrad and in Moscow, it was necessary for Marina to have good English skills to communicate with Webster in what A J Weberman called an espionage ring operated by the CIA.

Many other small details of the story fabricated by the US insurgents who took over the government in 1963 give convincing proofs that Marina Oswald knew and spoke English, and quite well at that.

The significance of this revelation - though by no means new - is that Marina and the government were deceiving us when they pretended that she knew no English. It also confirms the probability that Marina was a spy, but for whose side was she working? We will address that subject soon enough.

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Sunday, March 5, 2017

The Strange Case of Edwin A Ekdahl

Edwin Albert Ekdahl is a cameo player in the saga of the Oswald Project, but one worth documenting. His ingress and egress into the life of Marguerite Claverie Oswald is a bit murky, but we will chronicle what we know.

Ekdahl was married twice, once to Rasmine and to the aforementioned Marguerite on May 5, 1945. He had one son Dewey (1931-1997) by Rasmine, and no children with Marguerite. He worked for EBASCO Services, Inc at the time of his death on January 26, 1953.

EBASCO is a descendant of a firm founded in 1905 by General Electric, and was engaged in engineering and consulting to the electrical energy industry. It was involved in a highly publicized safety case in the 1980s when Ronald Goldstein exposed numerous safety violations by EBASCO in a nuclear plant project. EBASCO retaliated by firing Goldstein.

All that can be ascertained about the dissolution of his first marriage is that he "separated" from Rasmine around 1941-1942. The FBI specifically sought to find a divorce decree in the Boston area for Ekdahl, presumably from Rasmine, but found none.

Considerably more information is available concerning his second marriage. Ekdahl sued Marguerite for divorce in Texas in 1948 after they had ceased living together on January 10, 1948. His suit claimed physical and mental abuse, and excess cruelties, with the added predicate that his heart condition prevented him from continuing to live with Marguerite.

The 12 man jury ruled in favor of the plaintiff on June 24, 1948, but awarded Marguerite 250 USD in attorney fees, and 1500 USD additional compensation. Oswald was granted her previous name, and ordered to pay court costs.

It is not clear what caused Marguerite to behave so violently, but Ekdahl's diary for 1944, which Marguerite stole, may have been the spark. Ekdahl specifically mentioned it in his lawsuit by requesting its return. Marguerite made numerous allegations of adultery and infidelity on the part of Ekdahl, something which she may have learned from the diary.

It is quite strange that a man with Ekdahl's high powered education and cosmopolitan background would marry the much simpler Marguerite. Perhaps his diary made demeaning descriptions along that line. The marriage is even stranger still given that he had a heart attack, and probably was not in the best shape to keep up with the younger Marguerite.

Ekdahl was 12 years older than Marguerite, born September 26, 1895; he died January 26, 1953 according to, and FBI investigations in 1964. He was still in the employment of EBASCO at the time of his death. His sister Elvira Elizabeth Larson was listed as closest next of kin and beneficiary of his insurance policy, living at 1095 Commonwealth Ave. in Boston, Massachusetts.

There is discrepancy in Ekdahl's date of birth, with Armstrong giving it as 1887.

Ekdahl graduated from Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1916, and possibly served in World War 1, but was certainly a US Navy veteran of that era. He lived several years in China, presumably working for EBASCO, but it could easily have been for Navy intelligence.

EBASCO informed the FBI that it had no records on Ekdahl from 1943-53, but gave his social security number as 001-09-9471.

According to Dewey, Ekdahl had no further contact with Marguerite or her sons after the separation. However, Greg Parker's source states that Ekdahl was in New York City at the time Marguerite was there. Still to be determined is which Marguerite - Claverie or the short dumpy imposter?

Marguerite's sister Lillian Murret told the FBI that Ekdahl made a "fabulous" sum of money at 1000 USD per month which was about 5 times the median household income of the time. Yet the Ekdahls were reported as living in an apartment circa 1946. This living arrangement may not be so unusual given the post-war housing shortage.

Marguerite met Edwin in 1942, perhaps after his heart attack. Elvira came down to New Orleans to help care for his convalescence, and met Marguerite. One source reports Ekdahl taking the Oswalds to New York in July 1945 to meet the family.

Further research is needed to determine if Ekdahl was one of the New York connections which Marguerite had in moving there.

Linda Minor raised interesting questions about Ekdahl and possible associations with the Roosevelts in Texas, but that topic warrants a separate chronicle.


John Armstrong, Poage Library - JFK - John Armstrong Collection, 15poage-arm-09-04c-07_Ekdahl,
Box 9, notebook 4, page 11

Greg Parker, Edwin A. Ekdahl, [forum], July 24, 2011, accessed 3/5/2017

Linda Minor, Colossal Failure to Research Ekdahl, Quixotic Joust [website], May 12, 2012, accessed 3/5/2017

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Some Notes on the Oswald Puzzle

Investigating the history of the family of Lee Harvey Oswald requires diving down a rabbit hole with limited light. We offer a few notes to help clarify the relations among the Oswalds - both real and fake.

John Armstrong made the most important advance in Oswald biography by discovering that 2 men sharing the identity of Lee Harvey Oswald were operated by the Central Intelligence Agency in its murder of President Kennedy on November 22, 1963 in Dallas' Dealey Plaza. To complicate matters further, there were at least 2 Marguerite Oswalds with a bonus Margaret thrown in for good measure.

To distinguish the 2 Oswalds, we follow Armstrong's convention designating HARVEY as the one who was framed as the murderer of President Kennedy and J D Tippit. LEE was the man who most likely murdered Tippit and was seen in the Texas School Book Depository by several witnesses.

Photographic evidence and facial measures, such as the eye-tooth ratio, confirm that 2 women used the name of Marguerite Oswald. Before proceeding, we need to backup to consider the father of LEE, Robert Edward Lee Oswald, about whom the CIA controlled Wikipedia has no entry. As soon as one is contrived, it will be from the usual sluice of CIA lies.

To date, we have uncovered very little information concerning Robert, Sr. who, according to his sister-in-law Lillian Murret, was known as Lee, and according to the best information we have, he was born March 4, 1896 in Louisiana; served in World War 1 in the army after which he was discharged with the rank of sergeant; and married Margaret Emma Keating on November 1, 1920, contrary to the marriage certificate's date of November 5. They were married until January 10, 1933, the date on which the final divorce decree was signed, although Keating filed for divorce on October 1, 1930.

Margaret died August 6, 1972, having reverted to the use of her maiden name - apparently she never remarried. She was born April 28, 1892 in New Orleans. Our impression is that Margaret came from a well-to-do family, having attended St Joseph's Academy boarding school in Mississippi for 8 years, and whose families were buried in substantial tombs.

Robert married Marguerite Frances Claverie July 20, 1933, barely 6 months after his divorce from his first wife Margaret, a marriage which would last until his death on August 19, 1939. Some reports say that he died of a heart attack at age 43, while other reports indicate a dying period in which he called for his first wife for reasons unknown. Based upon the grave stone, it seems that he was a man of modest means.

School records for Robert, Jr, and testimony of Lillian Murret indicate that his father was an insurance agent for Metropolitan Insurance.

We were surprised to learn that Wikipedia's fallacious biography of Lee Harvey Oswald failed to cite the dates of Marguerite's marriage to any of her husbands, but especially to LEE's father Robert.

Robert, Jr was born April 7, 1934, and baptized by the Lutheran church April 29.

When Robert, Sr died in 1939, it was the second husband, according to FBI records, who died while married to Marguerite, Edward John Pic having been the first. Special Agent Donald C Steinmeyer reported that Reverend Scherer stated that Pic had died and that he had not buried either him or Robert Oswald, Sr. A subsequent report of a church related charity corrects the error concerning Pic's death.

A report of the Evangelical Lutheran Bethlehem Orphan Asylum annotated with a date of December 9, 1941 reported that Edward John Pic had died, and that Marguerite was seeking to have her 2 year old son LEE committed on grounds of financial hardship. However, the report notes that she still had some insurance money, but found it necessary to obtain employment. The Asylum refused to take LEE apparently on grounds that he was too young.

A subsequent report from October 13, 1942 noted that LEE had reached the required age, apparently 3 years, for acceptance into the home, but was not admitted until 12/26/1943 where he remained until 1/29/1944.

Interestingly Pic voluntarily appeared before the Warren Commission in 1964. He was born August 21, 1907, and died January 22, 2002 in Mississippi. He was still working for his life long employer T Smith & Son in New Orleans for whom he was working when he married Marguerite.

According to his testimony to the Warren Commission, he married Marguerite in 1929. More precisely, and separately verified by the marriage license, he married her August 1, 1929 in Harrison County, Mississippi. They lived together for over 1 year, after which they separated sometime in 1931 when Marguerite was pregnant with John Edward Pic who was born January 17, 1932 according to his tombstone. Pic told the commission that he and Marguerite divorced 18 months after the birth of John whom his wife named rather than Edward John. If that statement is correct, they were divorced around July 1933 - a reasonably close approximation as we shall soon see.

According to Pic, he sent Marguerite 40 dollars month as child support until 1950, about the time John turned 18. The Warren Commission attorney Albert Jenner questioned him at length about where he sent payment since the Commission claimed that Marguerite moved around quite a bit. Pic stated that he managed to send payments, but could not recall several of the addresses Jenner mentioned. This lack of recall confirms Armstrong's thesis that there were 2 Marguerites which is why Pic did not recognize many of "her" addresses.

Another strange aspect of Pic's testimony is that he never saw his son after the age of 1 year other than in a picture sent to him by Marguerite when John was in the Coast Guard around age 18. What kind of father would completely forsake his son, especially if living in the same city, and providing child support?

That question may well be answered by Marguerite's sister Lillian (Murret) whose testimony to FBI agent Ernest C Wall, Jr states that Edward did not want a child, and consequently abandoned her and his unborn son, never providing a dime of support. This might be construed to explain his refusal to sign his testimony to the Warren Commission, and why Marguerite sued for divorce.

Another possible answer is that Edward Pic was not the father of John.

Just as strange is Jenner's leading question about how long it had been since Pic had seen Marguerite. Jenner told the witness that he had not seen his ex-wife in 37 years, which would mean that he last saw her in 1927 - 2 years before they were married - a statement with which Pic concurred. This discrepancy with facts is just one small sample of the many reasons why no thinking person trusts the Warren Commission or its fake report.

The facts prove, according to court order, that Marguerite filed for divorce against Edward John Pic, Jr, resulting in a final divorce decree dated June 28, 1933. In three weeks, Marguerite would marry Robert Edward Lee Oswald.

In yet another strange moment, Pic stated that Marguerite's second marriage broke up - something he had read about in the newspaper. Apparently he was not reading the same paper we read which stated that the beloved husband of Marguerite Oswald died at 6a on August 19, 1939.

Pic's testimony is problematic with respect to Murret's in regards to his financial support of his son. However, Murret's statements to FBI agent Wall alleging Pic's financial negligence may be constrained to the narrow period of time until the divorce was completed with stipulations for consummation that he support his son as he stated. If the IRS indeed investigated the issue of double claims of dependency for John Pic, it would lend further support to Ed Pic's testimony.

Pic waived his right to read and sign the testimony he gave. Thus we have no idea if the Warren Commission accurately reported it, or why he volunteered to appear before the Warren Commission.

At this point, we have yet to determine when the fake Marguerite Oswald entered the picture, or when the real Marguerite died. Some have stated that she changed her name to Keating, but that indicates confusion with Margaret Emma Keating, Robert, Sr's first wife.

We are perplexed about the absence of this biographical information with casual internet searches. There seems to be no reason for silence on the subject of Edward John Pic or Robert Edward Lee Oswald, Sr. Yet we suspect that we have not uncovered the rest of the story.

John McAdams, TESTIMONY OF EDWARD JOHN PlC, JR [Warren Report excerpt], nd, accessed 3/4/2017

John Armstrong, John Armstrong Collection [Baylor University], various documents, accessed 3/4/2017

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Saturday, February 18, 2017

The Murder of Vincent Foster Won't Go Away

It is astonishing how many Americans want a murderer in the White House, but that is precisely what the 2016 election results showed when millions of votes were registered for Hillary Clinton who was a perpetrator in the murder of White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster in July 1993. Evidence newly brought to our attention confirms that Foster was murdered with White House complicity.

We have covered Foster's murder before, linking it to the Inslaw software scandals,  Hillary Clinton's possession of nuclear launch codes, as well as to Whitewater financial scandals. However, recently acquired evidence points most likely to a large file which private investigator Jerry Parks had assembled on Bill Clinton's massive drug use and sex with underage girls at his brother's apartment in Little Rock. Part of  Parks' files included information on illegal assignments he had performed for the Clinton's under direction from Vincent Foster.

Parks admitted to 2 instances in which Foster paid him 1,000 USD to pick up a trunk of cash from the Mena airport, which was an important hub in the nation-wide Bush Iran-Contra cocaine drug distribution operation, which Foster received on behalf of the Clintons. Parks' files obviously contained information deeply damaging to the Clintons' crime syndicate.

Parks also surveilled Bill Clinton for Hillary in order to assess Bill's vulnerability to scandal in a presidential election. Again Foster was the intermediary for Hillary with Parks who had been working for the Clintons for 10 years when Foster pressed him for his files. On two occasions within a week before his murder, Foster attempted to obtain the files, at which points Parks reminded Foster of the agreement that the file would not be given to Hillary. In refusing Hillary's demand for the files, Parks signed his own death warrant as well as that of Foster. The Clinton Body Count grows.

We know for a fact that Clinton aides ransacked Foster's office at the White House immediately after his murder was announced in order to remove files, and that Hillary completely remodeled the office in an effort to scrub the scene of the crime of incriminating evidence. We believe that the documents taken were directly related to Parks' - probably copies of what the private investigator retained. When Parks was murdered 2 months after Foster, his apartment was also ransacked, but only his Clinton file was taken.

The new evidence convincing us that Bill and Hillary Clinton were co-murderers of Foster is Clinton's firing of FBI Director William Sessions the day before the murder, an act precipitating a leadership vacuum at a critical moment when a capital crime was committed. Leaving the murder investigation to Fort Marcy Park rangers is like sending a high school class 1A football quarterback to substitute for Tom Brady in a Super Bowl game.

Not only did the firing of Sessions leave a power vacuum of sorts, it also represented foreknowledge and premeditation to know that someone important should be fired to undermine investigations.

While there were many anomalies found at the crime scene, there are 6 which confirm conclusively that Foster was murdered and at some other location than the park.
  1. Virtual absence of blood - Witnesses, such as first responders, noted that there was a conspicuous absence of blood at the crime scene. The virtual absence of blood raised red flags for veteran homicide investigator Vincent Scalise who said that suicide, as the one alleged of Foster, would have left large quantities of blood and body tissue over the area, yet none was found. Louis Freeh's FBI - as with Hoover's - altered evidence and testimony to fit the subsequent story that such claims were never made.
  2. No evidence of suicide. The sin qua non for suicide is forensic evidence making a prima facie case that such an act indeed occurred. A confidential witness who saw and reported the dead body studied intently Foster's corpse, noticing specifically that there was no gun. The gun which was later planted on him did not belong to him, nor did it match the nature of the wounds found on Foster. Just as significantly, the bullet which allegedly killed Foster was never found. Thus there is no physical evidence to support the cover-up theory of suicide.
  3. Thugs preventing access. A man seen by Patrick Knowlton prevented park visitors from advancing near the place where the murderers planted the body. A good sketch was obtained from him but it was never investigated. However, the purpose of the guard was to prevent access to the body dumping prior to the scheduled time of discovery, and to protect the perpetrators while they staged the crime scene. The sketch of the man looked like one of George Bush's Cuban thugs involved in the murder of President Kennedy.
  4. Neck wound. Foster suffered a neck wound - possibly lethal - which the FBI covered up. Had this evidence been disclosed, Foster's death would have had to been ruled a possible homicide triggering a murder investigation.
  5. Massive carpet fibers. Large quantities of carpet fibers were found all over Foster's clothing proving that he was rolled up in a carpet and removed from some location which we will discuss momentarily. Accessories after the fact to murder claimed that the fibers came from a contaminated body bag, but clothing articles left in Foster's car, which did not go inside the body bag, had those same carpet fibers.
The evidence is overwhelming that Foster was murdered. Those who claim otherwise are accessories after the fact to murder, and participants in the cover-up of a capital crime.

The most fascinating aspect of the murder is the carpet fibers. From where was he carried? Strategic Investment reported in 1993/4 that he was murdered in Hillary Clinton's New York apartment, but this is absurd - but close. Foster was actually murdered in his office at the White House. Since Hillary was redecorating, as a prelude and postlude to the murder, it was very easy to bring in CIA or Mossad thugs to act as construction crew, roll up the dead body, and dump it in Fort Marcy Park.

Another reason for suspecting the White House as the murder scene is the missing security tapes which closely monitor ingress and egress of visitors to the White House at the time Foster was murdered. These tapes are normally highly controlled, but someone with sufficient knowledge of White House security - AND AUTHORITY - to override operating procedures, ensured that the tape was taken from the library. We believe that the tape would show certain men removing a roll of carpet.

Perhaps the most under-reported aspect of the murder was the discovery of semen on Foster's underclothing, strongly suggesting that he was in the midst of sex at the time he was murdered. Blonde hairs were also discovered. Our conclusion is that the hairs were those of Hillary Clinton who acted as the decoy while someone else murdered him.

The investigations which occurred after the murder, including those of Robert Fiske, Kenneth Star, a Republican Congressman, Fort Marcy Park rangers, FBI, and other incompetent parties and conspirators proved nothing. They systematically ignored witnesses and evidence to reach their pre-determined conclusions. Not a single one of them addressed the 6 evidences above which should have been presented to a grand jury but were not. These evidences alone were sufficient to prove murder.

As Rome was riddled with criminality and murders in the clawing for power of the empire, so too Washington. The traduction of the United States could not have occurred without the equally corrupt Bush Crime Syndicate which put the Clintons in the White House.

In the end, Vincent Foster got exactly what he deserved - he was part and parcel of the Clinton Crime Syndicate, and every bit as corrupt as his psychopathic masters.

Vincent Foster's murder Hillary Clinton, 60 minutes cover up!, YouTube,

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Monday, February 13, 2017

Marina Substantiates Two Oswalds

Marina Oswald unwittingly supported the existence of 2 Lee Harvey Oswalds in describing her husband's background.

An interesting cache of letters written by Marina Oswald from 1962-63 to her aunt Valya and uncle Ilya surfaced in 1991 which reveals how she referred to Oswald's "mother" as his aunt because that is how HARVEY represented her to them when he married Marina in the Soviet Union in spring of 1962.

HARVEY Oswald is the version of Lee Harvey Oswald whom Marina married. He told her that he was an orphan. Peter Vronsky, who translated the letters, editorialized that HARVEY had lied about being an orphan. John Armstrong, the author of Harvey and Lee, suggested that HARVEY was born in Hungary and quite possibly an orphan. The fake Marguerite who took care of him was perhaps an aunt or some other surrogate mother.

In all fairness, Vronsky wrote before a deluge of JFK assassination research shed light on the Oswald Project, and other aspects of Marina and HARVEY. Nonetheless, it is Armstrong who correctly ascertained the relationship between HARVEY and his surrogate mother - or caretaker as he often states it - fake Marguerite.

When the Oswalds returned to Fort Worth, Marina met the surrogate mother and continued to refer to her as HARVEY's aunt to her aunt and uncle. We believe that fake Marguerite was indeed HARVEY's aunt who was involved in some kind of intelligence operation with CIA and possibly Soviet intelligence.

The significance of this revelation is that it substantiates the distinction between LEE whose mother was Marguerite Claverie, and HARVEY who was an orphan raised by an unknown caretaker using the name Marguerite - as Armstrong concluded from his studies.

Peter Vronsky, FINDING MARINA'S LETTERS FROM 1962 - 1963,, c. 1991/2, accessed 2/13/2017

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Sunday, February 12, 2017

Were There More Than 2 Oswalds?

We know that there was more than one Lee Harvey Oswalds. But does photographic evidence support more than two? We present some pictures to help answer the question.

1 - HARVEY 1963
The first picture below is Lee HARVEY Oswald's mug shot taken November 23, 1963, the day he was finally charged with the murder of J D Tippit and President John Kennedy. Although the police had no credible evidence for the arrest or charge, they were in the business of framing a patsy - justice be damned. This is the man John Armstrong identifies as HARVEY, and shows him at 24 years of age.

2 - HARVEY November 1959
The next picture is purported to be of HARVEY in the USSR shortly after his fake defection in October 1959. The picture was allegedly taken at the Metropole Hotel in Moscow in November.

This picture is probably the most flattering of HARVEY when he was 20 years old. We believe that there is strong enough resemblance between the first 2 pictures to reasonably conclude that they are the same man - HARVEY Oswald.

The third picture is allegedly that of HARVEY Oswald with Alexander Romanovich Ziger, a contact or friend with whom he spent much time while in Minsk. The picture dates from around 1960/61 when HARVEY was about 21 years old. This picture does not bear to us a close likeness of HARVEY, and may thus be someone else. However, we are not adamant on the point and could accept that this is HARVEY Oswald.

3 - HARVEY (?) 1960
The 4th photograph is allegedly of HARVEY in the USSR taken with Marina, his wife in front of him, whom we have cropped away. The picture would probably be summer 1961 since they are in short sleeves, and would be after their March wedding.

4 - Allegedly HARVEY 1961
We have much stronger objections to this being HARVEY than picture 3 for 3 basic reasons. The first is that eyebrows do not match. Secondly the forehead is quite flat although some might attribute that to lighting - something with which we disagree. The 3d and most important reason we deny that this is HARVEY is the hair and hairline. HARVEY would experience a dream come true if he could grow that much hair. In all other established pictures of HARVEY, he has concave hair recession around the temples, whereas this person's hairline is quite straight if not slightly convex. In general there is a resemblance but not a distinct likeness to the other HARVEY images.

This brings us to photo 5 which shows whom we believe to be LEE Oswald circa 1956 taken while he was on a Civil Air Patrol bivouac with, among other people, David Ferrie.

The picture would have been taken when LEE was around 17 years old and shows better physical development than HARVEY had. The hair, hairline, and smile look much more like the person in photograph 4. There seems to be way too much hair for this to be HARVEY.
5 - LEE at CAP c. 1956

The implications of these pictures are rather staggering for it would suggest that either the person pictured in photograph 5 is not LEE Oswald, or that if it is LEE Oswald, then he too would have been in the USSR with Marina - if in fact that cropped picture 4 is of Marina Oswald.

The other possibility is that the picture (4) was staged in the USA somehow. An interesting fact about HARVEY Oswald is that he had an IQ of 118 - or possibly 121, an IQ typical of Chief Executive Officers. The CAP is not an outfit which typically attracts young men in that intelligence bracket, but it would be attractive to LEE Oswald whose IQ was 103.

We are still trying to make sense of the photographs and the people in them. We expect our views to evolve as we give more thought to them, and uncover new ones. For now there is sufficient evidence to reinforce the 2 Oswalds scenario, and possibly a third - which brings to remembrance the famous 1940s song - The Third Man.

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Where is Uncle Robert Oswald?

Ralph Cinque just published a fascinating snippet of information supporting the HARVEY and LEE theory which states that 2 different men using the same identity were operated by the same CIA who murdered President John F Kennedy on November 22, 1963 in Dallas' Dealey Plaza.

Cinque related a conversation he had with author John Armstrong who called Rachel Oswald years ago in order to secure an interview with Robert who was the brother of LEE Oswald. HARVEY Oswald is the man falsely accused of killing the President.

Rachel told Armstrong that neither she nor her sister June had ever heard from Robert Oswald - a very strange phenomenon considering that his alleged nieces had lost their father. Robert's complete disassociation with them is "smoking gun" proof that he was not a relative but merely another intelligence figure in the murky Oswald Project.

This episode reminded me of the surreal story Julian Lennon related about rarely seeing his father John. This was because Julian's father was the real John Lennon - not the fake who was allegedly shot by Mark David Chapman. Thus there was no reason for the fake John Lennon to have much interaction with Julian other than for publicity purposes.

This story is yet additional confirmation that HARVEY and LEE were CIA agents who were part of the Permindex-CIA against coup against the American government.

Ralph Cinque, Untitled,, February 12, 2017, accessed 2/12/2017

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Saturday, February 11, 2017

Blowing the Case Wide Open - The Murder of Dorothy Kilgallen

Mark Shaw recently appeared on The New JFK Show to discuss his latest book on Dorothy Kilgallen, the TV star who was murdered by the CIA after she uttered her memorable line, "this is going to blow the case wide open" - referring, of course, to the 2 exclusive interviews she had with Jack Ruby, the man accused of murdering Lee HARVEY Oswald.

Shaw's title, The Reporter Who Knew Too Much: The Mysterious Death of What's My Line TV Star and Media Icon Dorothy Kilgallen, sounds like a throwback to 18th century book titles which rambled on interminably as a book of their own. While most of the material discussed on the show was not new, Shaw made exceptional advances over previous coverage by identifying a person of interest - one whom we believe to be directly involved in the murder of Kilgallen.

We shall not review Kilgallen as we have done that elsewhere, but she was in the midst of an affair with a man named Ron Pataky who was a journalist from Ohio with mob connections who just so happened to become romantically involved with Kilgallen at about the time her reporting of the Ruby case started to gather steam.

She shared some of her research with him thinking that he was a like-minded reporter seeking the truth, but it is our firm opinion that he was sent by CIA to compromise Kilgallen's investigation, especially after she got some information from Ruby.

Shaw noted that Kilgallen's first stop after meeting Ruby was New Orleans where she was accompanied by her hair dresser Marc Sinclaire. What the TV personality discovered in New Orleans is anyone's guess, but this is where The New JFK Show fell into a ditch.

Jim Fetzer wanted to take Shaw to task for not recognizing that much more than organized crime was involved in the murder of the president, a point of view Shaw refuses or is reluctant to acknowledge. We had a very brief email exchange with him a few years ago when he published his book on Melvin Belli, and Shaw was riding "the mob did it" hobby horse.

On the other hand, after hearing Shaw speak, we believe that he is a sincere researcher who has performed a huge service in re-opening this case which in fact the New York district attorney has agreed to do after initially refusing to do so. Fetzer, for his part, should have tied his tongue regarding the larger subject.

The reason for the change of mind on the part of the NYC DA has nothing to do with the Kennedy case, but with the fact that the person of interest, Ron Pataky, is still alive, and thus could stand trial for the murder which we believe that he committed or to which he was an accessory.

Part of the reason for our beliefs is that Shaw reported an eye witness who saw Kilgallen and an unidentified man arguing in a corner of the Regency Hotel bar in New York City just a few hours before her murder. This most likely suspect would be her romantic interest, Ron Pataky who was 23 years younger than she. What is a 29 year old man doing with a 52 year old woman?

Pataky had one of the hotel staff make an announcement over pubic address that there was a key for her at the front desk, where she in fact kept a room. Sinclaire also felt that since Pataky was the source of the leaks about Kilgallen, that he should confront him on it. These 2 items were more than likely the reason for the agitated conversation in which Kilgallen was engaged at the Regency bar.

What cinches the case for us regarding Pataky's guilt, and this is certainly more evidence than the Warren Commission had in condemning the innocent Lee HARVEY Oswald, is a poem Pataky wrote about vodka, Vodka Routlette Seen as a Relief Possibility. Joe Tonahill, an attorney for Ruby, stated that a few days before her murder, he had dinner with her at Club 21 in New York City where he found her very sober minded, and that she had one vodka tonic. Pataky is attempting to confess with his poem.

Returning to the subject of New Orleans, one has to realize that it was a hotbed of criminal activity sponsored by the CIA. Ruby was a gun runner who operated out of New Orleans; he was there involved with David Ferrie who was a CIA operative; New Orleans was Carlos Marcello's home turf; New Orleans was the site of the cancer weapon research of the CIA's Alton Oschner; it was not far from the Lake Pontchartrain training grounds for Alpha 66 and Operation 40, both of which groups were involved in the murder of the president; and finally, it was the home of Clay Shaw and the International Trade Mart, a subsidiary of Permindex which was the Jewish organization which was the executive sponsor of the murder.

Clearly New Orleans was a seething hotbed of crime and murder, and any or all of the foregoing activities could have been the basis of Kilgallen's trip. Yet these activities are clearly ones to which Shaw was entirely oblivious except for the case of Marcello. So many angles, so few protractors.

To make matters even murkier, Gary King brought up the idea that Ruby told Kilgallen that he was not the man who shot Lee HARVEY Oswald, a point with which we concur entirely.

There is some oblique evidence that Ruby in fact told Kilgallen this information as reported in Wikipedia:
Ruby's explanation for killing Oswald would be "exposed … as a fabricated legal ploy", according to the House Select Committee on Assassinations. In a private note to one of his attorneys, Joseph Tonahill, Ruby wrote: "Joe, you should know this. My first lawyer Tom Howard told me to say that I shot Oswald so that Caroline and Mrs. Kennedy wouldn't have to come to Dallas to testify. OK?"
Ruby was saying, to borrow from Lee HARVEY Oswald, that he was just the patsy.

We were also annoyed by Shaw's singling out of Kilgallen as a fallen heroine in the quest for truth about the Kennedy murder. He thought it such a travesty of justice that a proforma ruling of suicide was made by the mob-controlled Brooklyn medical examiner which precluded any homicide investigation, yet there are hundreds of other witnesses who were murdered yet ruled to have died by suicide. Why is there no cry for justice for them?

I will tell you why. These other people were not big name stars, so their lives don't matter. Now we are not opposed to re-opening the case and getting the woman justice, but we would like to see equal concern for others who were murdered by the US government because they knew too much.

While Shaw makes only passing references to his witnesses, one in particular is of material note - Marc Sinclaire who was Kilgallen's hair dresser, and in whom she confided greatly. He stated that he found the star in a bedroom in which she never slept, very well made up - but incorrectly so - around 8:45 AM on November 8 since she had asked him to come that morning.

That episode alone is enough to disprove suicide, and Sinclaire covers other objections in an interview from c. 2000. More interestingly, Sinclaire speculates, and we believe correctly so, that Kilgallen was killed elsewhere, more than likely at the Regency Hotel. This conforms well with research we had conducted a few years ago, and noted above. The air conditioning was on during a New York November day - clearly someone's attempt to keep the body cool for as long as possible.

Why hadn't James the butler noticed the problem and turned off the air conditioning - especially since his employer often complained of being cold? When Sinclaire left the house after 9 AM, he noticed a police car with 2 officers sitting directly in front of the reporter's townhouse. Clearly the police knew about the murder, and were waiting for a cue to enter a scene of the crime. This means that the police were complicit in the murder.

Sinclaire believes that Pataky did not have the guts to kill his lover, but he believes that Pataky was in the employ of people who committed the murder. Information about Kilgallen's life and investigation was leaked to the public in an attempt to intimidate her, something which he - and we likewise - attribute to Pataky.

Shaw claims that Kilgallen had a great marriage with her husband Richard Kollmer, a statement explicitly contradicted by her hairdresser who said that the marriage was one in name only - that it had ended long ago - prior to her death.

Regardless of our quibbles with Fetzer and Shaw, both men have contributed mightily to exposing the truth about the JFK murder - even if only one puzzle piece at a time. The exposure of Pataky as a material witness in the murder is exceptional. Will the NYC DA cover-up the crime again?

Wikipedia contributors. "Jack Ruby." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 8 Feb. 2017. Web. 12 Feb. 2017.

Guests. The New JFK Show,, February 9, 2017, accessed 2/11/2017

Mark Shaw and contributors, The Dorothy Kilgallen Story,, nd, accessed 2/11/2017

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

Friday, February 10, 2017

Who Was Ed Voebel?

Even seasoned JFK Murder researchers may not know any details about Ed Voebel, but he turns out to be very important to the Oswald Project in a negative way, and whose importance was such that the CIA murdered him.

Before proceeding, we must confess to an about face regarding Oswald doubles. Previously we had spurned the idea that there were 2 concurrent Oswalds managed by the same dark forces who murdered the president. We knew that there were Oswald impersonators, and that was enough for us. However, after prodding from an article by Ralph Cinque, we decided to explore the matter further, after which we are forced to conclude that John Armstrong's thesis of Harvey and Lee is much more compelling than we originally thought.

To keep the names clear, we will follow Armstrong's practice of referring to the American born Oswald as LEE, and the Hungarian born Oswald as HARVEY. Thus it was Voebel's fate to meet both of them. HARVEY is the man accused of murdering the president and J D Tippit.

Voebel met HARVEY first in 1954 when a piano fell on HARVEY's legs at school. He survived the ordeal and the two became playmates for the spring. A few months later, Voebel befriended LEE after his rockem sockem fight with Johnny and Mike Neumeyer in the fall while in 9th grade at Beauregard Junior High School in New Orleans.

LEE lost a tooth in that fight, after which Voebel and 2 friends helped LEE clean up. Following the fight, Voebel took a picture of LEE in the class room which eventually became plastered around the nation when Life magazine published it in 1964. The picture clearly shows LEE missing a front upper tooth thanks to the fight.

In 1971, Ed Voebel became mildly ill, but went to the Oschner clinic for treatment, a mistake which would cost him his life. Someone, perhaps Oschner himself, murdered Voebel at age 31 just as he murdered Dr Mary Sherman in a most gruesome fashion in 1964.

Oschner was a long time CIA operative who was heavily involved in the conspiracy to murder President Kennedy on November 22, 1963 in Dallas' Dealey Plaza. One of Oschner's projects for the CIA was the invention of a cancer weapon which was highly lethal, and was ostensibly targeted against Fidel Castro.

The reason for murdering Voebel was that he knew too much about LEE and HARVEY Oswald, knowledge which the CIA could not afford to let propagate since it would expose Allen Dulles' lies about HARVEY and implicate the agency directly in the murder of the president.

The evidence of the missing tooth is highly important in securing the thesis of 2 Oswalds. HARVEY Oswald was exhumed and extensively photographed in 1981, and positively identified based upon his dental records. HARVEY had all of his teeth, proving that he was not LEE, and that LEE was indeed a separate and distinct person from HARVEY.

We do not know what became of LEE Oswald - he may in fact still be alive. His brother Robert, still alive as of this writing, may be the last person to know the fate of his brother. But if he values the few remaining years of his life, he will go to his grave with his secrets.

John Armstrong, Magic Tooth, Vanishing Scars,, nd, accessed 2/10/2017

Copyright 2017 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.