Bob Ness

Must be one of the rank and file who kept his head down. I can't find anything on him either. I'm surprised you found anything.

Uh, no. Google does not review every site on the internet. They index links (or page addresses through the use of human developed algorithms) to relevant content determined by the bot's algorithms after your site has been scanned for its content (by the bots). For instance, [www2 - JAHS Chapter 19] ranks #1 on Google because it was included in an h1 title to your site. The term [www2 - From Obama Nation to Abomination] ranks #2. [www2 Pat Speer] brings you up at #50 or thereabouts. The title tag to your home page is www2. Nothing else. If you changed the title to [ Pat Speer | Kennedy Assassination | Facts ] Google would know what the site is about and you would rise in the rankings even though they are competitive keywords. The reason why is your site has tons of content - like massive amounts - and Google loves that. Some of your sections have tens of thousands of words relevant to the JFKA. I can type those nonsense terms in and they've been indexed for them because Google has something to refer to that is in ascii format and readable by the bots. Those links are returned when the page has been determined to provide valuable content relating to the keyphrase entered into the search box (like www2 - JAHS Chapter 19). The terms from your titles preceded by the www2 are useless for indexing and search. Your site has no map for the bots to follow and does not include a description for any page I can find. The hierarchical structure isn't of much help either although probably nothing needs to be done there if everything else is addressed. Here is what Google needs to read the site: 1. Title Tags: Title tags are the HTML elements used to indicate the title of a web page. The title tag should contain the main keyword that you are trying to rank for, and should be unique for each page. (ie The Kennedy Assassination | Unraveling Lyndon Johnson and the Warren Commission | Pat Speer ) 2. Meta Descriptions: Meta descriptions are HTML elements used to provide a brief summary of a web page. The meta description should contain the main keyword that you are trying to rank for, and should be concise yet descriptive. (eg for page www2 - Chapter 1: The Aftermath (patspeer.com) Explore the evidence that suggests President Lyndon Johnson had an interest in preventing the Warren Commission from finding a domestic conspiracy or anything that could point back to him in the days following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Learn how the FBI, the news media, and the Warren Commission were influenced by Johnson's desires.) None of your pages have meta descriptions. 3. Headers (h1, h2, h3, h4 etc.): Headers are HTML elements used to provide structure and hierarchy to web page content. Headings should be used to break up content into sections and subsections and should contain the main keyword that you are trying to rank for. ( eg <h1>The Delivery Men: Lyndon Johnson, the Warren Commission, and the Search for the Truth</h1> <h2>Exploring the Evidence of Johnson's Interest in the Warren Commission's Investigation</h2> ) 4. Content: Content is the most important factor for search engine optimization, as it is what search engines use to index and rank web pages. Content should be informative, relevant and unique, and should contain the main keyword that you are trying to rank for. (You got this in spades!! Include the main keywords in the beginning and at the end). I might also add that your content is ranked as easy, very easy, or fairly easy which is good. I don't know why it does but that's what I got. Difficult tends to lower rankings. The problem here seems to be that the bots never make it to the content. 5. Image Optimization: Images should be optimized for search engines by using descriptive filenames and alt text. The alt text should contain the main keyword that you are trying to rank for. ICM454662.jpg will return all kinds of response if you type in that all-encompassing keyword "ICM4544662". The name of the file on your home page is "1ocmy11iaRoxgjQ3-g1NT5ziGu7wpE5Bw.jpg" and I absolutely guarantee you you'd get better images searches from "jfk-researcher-pat-speer.jpg" and added an alt text tag of "long time-JFK-assassination-researcher-pat-speer" so blind people - and get this - SEARCH BOTS THAT CAN'T SEE - will know what the images are. Notice I'm using search terms in both names. The image title will be truncated so it remains short. The dashes are for Unix systems that don't like spaces - that's not as big a problem these days. It's best for page load to keep images smallish. 6. Internal Links: Internal links are links from one page on your website to another page on your website. Internal links should be used to create a logical hierarchy of pages and to help search engines crawl your website. When appropriate, link to additional information on your site that relates to the anchor text you are linking from. This is anchor text Pat's site which links outbound to your site. 7. External Links: External links are links from one page on your website to a page on a different website. External links should be used to provide additional information to users and to help search engines crawl your website. This is a lengthy subject but your backlink profile is good and bad. There are dicey links but also some pretty good ones. It's possible you're getting penalized though. I'd have to look at that closer. 8. Add a robots.txt file and a site map to help the bots navigate the site to places where you want them to go. Bots will usually go to the robots.txt file and sitemap first. The robots.txt file is used to indicate to bots which pages and directories should not be crawled, while the sitemap is used to provide a complete and up-to-date list of all pages on a website. This helps bots quickly and efficiently index a website. Added: Use relevant keyterms and word in your urls to help promote understanding of your site by the bots. They don't do mysteries very well and that information can be useful for them. Outbound links should be used with follow attributes (as long as they're not paid adverts or something). Google will understand if you're linking to a Dallas County survey of Dealy Plaza in 1963 for example and even though that's an oblique reference it will eventually find the relevancy and deem that as helpful to the user. Useful Links: WebbIE Web Browser - browse the web using only text Webbie will help you identify what a search bot sees on a site. I haven't used it for ten or fifteen years. Screaming Frog SEO Spider A must have, free for 500 pages, program to audit sites that will show you what I have been talking about and lots more. I hope that helps.

That's hysterical!

It's definitely hit and miss and everything has to be checked. It's a useful tool for many things though but it's citations always have to be checked and many times aren't available. I don't know why that is except maybe it has a database or even a repository it can access that is no longer available publicly. Old websites that have been updated for instance. Dunno.

Your site has between 6,000 and 12,000 backlinks to it many of which are suspicious or Chinese or whatever. You can check it for free at AHREF's backlink checker if you're interested. I don't think it has a site map either and many other tags and whatnot are missing. Google and the other search engines use that stuff to determine what your site is about and what keyword phrases that a user types in should return a page from your site. Your autopsy page I assume is Chapter 10: Examining the Examinations, which the Bots assume is about college testing or some such thing because you haven't given it an appropriate h1 title tag, url slugs or anchor text that includes relevant keywords nor have you provided a description tag for the page. The search engines use these tags to discourage "keyword stuffing" of content (and the old keyword tag) and rely heavily on relevant words and terms in these other tags to sort through the kajillions of pages they have to index for their users. The length and detail of your content is stellar, no doubt, but you're not presenting your ID to the search engines so they can call your name. In the old days the search engines would list sites for keywords like "Kennedy Assassination" because the content of the site had the term "Kennedy Assassination" on the page a thousand times out of two thousand words. Not so anymore. Keyword stuffing is as likely to get you penalized or in some cases delisted as with thousands of bogus links with no authority linked to your domain. Even those links that may have been piled up and forgotten years ago. Or purchased by the previous owner of the domain (before purchasing domains you have to check for bogus backlinks). That said, your site is indeed informative and detailed, and I enjoy it very much when I'm parsing through different topics. Your efforts are appreciated!

Joe Can you post the original section of the document? I'm having a hard time finding anyone in the world with that name. Maybe you have it wrong?

Exactly. Its all in the prompt. The search I did for Joe returned a believable and detailed response, but I wasn't able to confirm it - and I spent quite a bit of time on it. I still don't know whether it is accurate or not but it's well worth a quick look. Google anymore only returns ads.

No. Google changes its algorithm constantly and has to parse through "Black Hat" and "White Hat" search engine optimization strategies to eliminate scammers and spammers gaming the system. What you were doing is called comment spamming and although yours was innocent enough, Google had to crack down on it like it did link farms and various other techniques to boost relevancy scores for organic searches. Unfortunately, many sites get harmed in the process but it's because SEO pros have figured out the weakness and Google responds when sites like yours are displacing other sites that should rank higher. That's not to say your site isn't legitimate or features bad information but Google's factors for search engine returns and indexing grade comment links lower than say direct links from an authoritative site like the DoJ or Harvard University (FYI backlinks from authoritative sites are probably the most valuable search factor and Google rates them very high). Years ago, SEO's could buy thousands of links for $10 from bogus but real domains and rank sites high due to the amount of backlinks. When Penguin came out thousands of sites dependent on internet income were delisted because they had those links and it was impossible to have them removed. Try emailing 10,000 bogus domains asking to remove the backlinks. Impossible to do it. Many went bankrupt. Lecture over hahaha

Are you joking, Joe? Calling my identity into question? Maybe you should do your own research on who I am. If you can't figure that out, I do suggest you buy a clue somewhere. I try to do you a favor at my own expense and time, post a warning that the info is not confirmed, and you come back and insult me?

You're complaining hahaha?!!

ChatGPT but I don't think it's correct. I'm still checking...

deleted. Not enough info.

OP-921 is the Director of Naval Intelligence or his office. @David Josephs I don't know if you've seen these at the Weisberg Collection. ONI_Enclosures C.pdf (hood.edu)

Likewise. I think the problem is that as was the MFF hooking their wagon to Carlson, Stone hitching his to Putin brings unnecessary infamy to the cause. The JFKA should maintain an autonomy free from association with potentially negative topics. I'm not certain that's what happened though. Perhaps a third party is guilty of that without OS's intent.

Yeah, I'm out. I kind of know where I stand on this subject and don't need to go over it again here.

They're only vague to people who want to change the rules mid-game, Jeff. Which is convenient if you want to take a clear, cut and dried aggressive action toward a sovereign state and turn it "a defense" of their nation. This began as clear and obvious disruption in the workings of a neighbor country and devolved into an outright slaughter of innocents and you continue defend the action. This is not the first or last time the RF has destabilized regions for the purpose of reclaiming influence. As I've said before it's standard practice. Your position is absolutely unconscionable in its defense of murder on a grand scale. I don't think that's your intention but that's exactly what it is.

Who decided on that breech, Jeff? The RF? Your sentence sums it up. The Ukraine Legal Authority. Not the RF. The Ukraine is its own legal authority regardless of how you like to peddle it and their borders are legally established by international law. You keep saying that it is up to Russia to determine the outcome of people's lives in the Ukraine which I find offensive and ignorant. Get a grasp on what you're preposing.

Agreed. The RF has nothing to do other than stop shooting. That's it. Or at least was. I suspect it's too late for that now.

Yes. That's why the RF invasion of Crimea and Eastern Ukraine is absolutely untenable. That's what many of us have been saying. Not that the US or NATO are a Lilly White Roses.

Paul. We CAN'T sign agreements or make "verbal" ones for other countries. Treaties and diplomatic agreements have to be signed, yes. Otherwise we'd just agree to have the Russian Federation leave Ukraine. NATO is an alliance, not a stoolie of the US. And please don't say they just do whatever we tell em.

Thank you. Wanted clarification on that. There was no signed agreement then. You realize that in order for NATO to come to any agreement it requires approval by the NATO membership, which at that time were 16 members; these countries were Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States. A DISCUSSION between Clinton or Bush, verbal or not, is NOT an agreement. The Russian Federation well knows that this is NOT an agreement and not does not have any internationally recognized legal authority. It represents a position by both parties to form a diplomatic resolution to differences related to the region which have dated back generations. Further, the RF also knows that due to our institutions there are no fixed continuity policy discussions UNLESS there are SIGNED STIPULATIONS that carry forward the interval agreements in negotiations. That is dipolmacy 101 which of course most people, Oliver Stone included, won't know. The continuation of RF talking points about the "agreement" or "treaty" that never existed ignores the ABSOLUTE legal authority of the CONTINUOUSLY RECOGNIZED borders of Ukraine which includes Crimea. These borders have been recognized by the USSR and subsequently by the Russian Federation and was legally agreed to by the Russian Federation Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, agreeing to respect the independence and sovereignty of Ukraine, refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine, and to return the nuclear weapons stored in Ukraine to Russia. Again: The USSR recognized the borders of Ukraine in 1990. This recognition was stipulated in the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine, which was signed by the USSR SUPREME SOVIET. This recognition was reaffirmed in the 1997 NATO-Ukraine Charter and the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, both of which Russia signed. There is a reason to agreed upon borders in the nuclear age (and before really). It gives everyone the information, regardless of position in whatever controversy, the basic definition of the line that gets crossed that becomes aggression or invasion, take your pick. Just in case you weren't aware: the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic was a sovereign state within the Soviet Union since about 1922. It had its own constitution and government, and was responsible for its own internal affairs and foreign policy. So it has been legally recognized by the USSR AND RF for 100 years and that includes the disputed areas. And there ya go.

Which agreement did NATO sign that you're refering to? The only agreement related to the Donbass region that NATO has signed is the NATO-Ukraine Charter of 1997, which established a political dialogue and cooperation between Ukraine and the Alliance. So, you're just making this stuff up? Or maybe I'm wrong and have missed something?

@davidjosephs Abdominal wounds require more specialized treatment to repair the damage and treat any infections or other complications. They're often times the way to go if you want to insure a fatal outcome. When I look at the shooting of Oswald, I automatically think that guy knows what he's doing. That is, he kills his target yet doesn't risk anyone else being wounded. Best to do it at an oblique angle rather than straight on. It's a pro job.

A real bummer Cliff. Sorry to hear about this.

I think Murphy was under him and Denisylea tasked Murphy with interrogating Nosenko. Won't swear to it - going mostly off memory.