The Watering Hole; Friday November 22, 1963 Plus Fifty Years

35th President of the United States
b. May 29 1917, Brookline MA
d. November 22 1963, Dallas TX

Bill Mauldin's November 1963 Post-Assassination Tribute to JFK

Bill Mauldin’s November 1963 Post-Assassination Tribute to JFK

I’ll admit it: I find it difficult to watch the fury of JFK assassination-focused “news” reports and reflections on this, the fiftieth anniversary of that horrific event — a coup d’etat, in the words of former New Orleans DA Jim Garrison. I’ve also found it equally difficult to read the nonsense most portray as fact. Oswald did it, dontcha know. He was a commie. He acted alone. Conspiracy? Coup? Crazy talk. Here’s good example of the nonsense, courtesy of CNN’s Larry Sabato:

“After Oswald’s first bullet missed the car entirely, the so-called ‘magic bullet’ that struck JFK in the back was perfectly aligned to do substantial damage to Connally’s body. And the final bullet that hit JFK in the head came from up and behind him, not the front. There is a reasonable physiological explanation for the actions of the president’s body in the car once his skull was blown apart.” (underline added)

Sabato repeated a pair of myths that are intrinsic to the assassination coverup when he mentioned the “magic bullet” and the thesis that the fatal head shot came from above and behind — both, as will be shown below, verifiable nonsense.

On the brighter side, however, I’ve found that even within the never ending melange of faux-journalism it’s still occasionally possible to stumble upon a different voice, a reasoned voice that speaks of fact and does not simply regurgitate the old misleading and biased opinions. It was just a week ago, in fact, that I happened to run across an article by Mark Groubert on Crooks and Liars entitled Book Reviews: ‘Destiny Betrayed’ and ‘Reclaiming Parkland’. Groubert’s review of Destiny Betrayed: JFK, Cuba, and the Garrison Case (Second Edition) by James DiEugenio captured my attention to the point where I immediately ordered a copy; it arrived a day or two ago and as of right now I’ve only been able to give it a cursory skim, but so far so good. That same C&L page also offered a link to DiEugenio’s web site, one named Citizens for Truth about the Kennedy Assassination. Once there I explored a link to one of DiEugenio’s refutations of what he considers to be errant opinion in re the Kennedy assassination. In it, he wrote his summation:

The idea that JFK was killed as a result of a high level plot is not a theory. It is a provable fact. End of story. It was the Warren Commission that was one giant theory. And it was made up for political expediency by men who were well versed in subterfuge i.e. Allen Dulles, John McCloy, Gerald Ford and J. Edgar Hoover. And when one examines today what these men did, it seems even worse now than it did then.”

On November 19, another article by DiEugenio was posted on Consortium entitled Where New JFK Evidence Points. It is here that DiEugenio points out that

“many influential people – from officials involved in the original investigation defending their judgments to a later generation of authors burnishing their reputations for probity – have fought fiercely to defend the Oswald-acted-alone narrative. They have done so despite nagging evidentiary problems, such as the “magic bullet theory,” which attributed the multiple wounds to Kennedy’s neck and Texas Gov. John Connally’s chest, wrist and thigh to a single bullet found almost unscathed on a gurney at Parkland Hospital, and those troubling images from the Zapruder film showing Kennedy’s head being knocked backward by the fatal shot, although Oswald was behind him at the Texas Bookstore Depository.”

In re the so-called “magic bullet” DiEugenio writes, in a segment titled “The Autopsy Mystery”

“one of the myths circulated by the Warren Commission was that they did not have the actual autopsy exhibits . . . a pretense exposed by the declassification of the Commission’s Jan. 21, 1964 executive session hearing. In that transcript, Commissioner John McCloy asked Chief Counsel Lee Rankin if they had the raw materials of the autopsy, and Rankin replied that they did.

“In a transcript from the next session on Jan. 27, Rankin talked about actually seeing an autopsy picture and wondering how the bullet could exit Kennedy’s throat from an entrance point that low in the back. Rankin’s puzzlement about the back wound segues neatly into one piece of information that the ARRB [Assassination Records Review Board] did manage to get into the mainstream U.S. media, namely that Commissioner Gerald Ford changed the draft of the Warren Report to move the location of this back wound that so puzzled Rankin up into Kennedy’s neck.” (underline added)

So much for the “magic bullet” theory. One can only wonder why Gerald Ford wasn’t severely reprimanded by the Warren Commission for tampering with the evidence. Or maybe, since Ford’s modification of the entry wound made it at least possible to blame the shot on Oswald the Commission went along?

Finally, there’s the fatal head shot. DiEugenio notes that further ‘nagging evidenciary problems’ are

“those troubling images from the Zapruder film showing Kennedy’s head being knocked backward by the fatal shot, although Oswald was behind him at the Texas Bookstore Depository.”


Below is another photograph, a Polaroid snapped by civilian bystander Mary Ann Moorman at the exact moment of the fatal head shot. Moorman was on the opposite side of the road from Abraham Zapruder when the limousine passed her, so in the background is the ‘grassy knoll’. The Texas School Book Depository is to the rear of the car, to her right; the bullet entered Kennedy’s right forehead, then blew out the back of his head. As Moorman notes, “I saw his hair jump. But it wasn’t just his hair, it was part of his head.”

JFK fatal shot, Polaroid by Mary Ann MoormanSo: Why the steady dismissal of the obvious in favor of a thesis that fails on multiple fronts?

Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty (1917-2001) — Chief of Special Operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff under President John F. Kennedy — spoke of large numbers of incriminating inconsistencies including “FBI skullduggery” in his book JFK: The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy. He noted that J. Edgar Hoover, in a memorandum dated November 29, 1963 wrote of a discussion he’d had on that date with President Lyndon Johnson. Included was this:

“The President . . . indicated our conclusions are:

1. He [Oswald] is the one who did it;
2. After the President was hit, Governor Connally was hit;
3. The President would have been hit three times except for the fact that Governor Connally turned after the first shot and was hit by the second. . . .”

Prouty notes that the content of that memorandum, written just one week following the assassination, essentially “throws out the validity of the Warren Report” He adds that “ample evidence proves beyond the slightest doubt that neither the Warren Report nor even this Hoover memorandum was correct. The stories are equally invalid. Both were contrived.”

Prouty also points out that he was in Christchurch New Zealand on the day that Kennedy was shot. He notes that on New Zealand time, “the Kennedy assassination took place at seven-thirty on the morning of Saturday, November 23, 1963.” The news of the assassination soon appeared in an Extra edition of the Christchurch Star which hit the newstands before noon on the 23rd. Prouty notes that

“almost one-quarter of that front page in Christchurch was taken up with detailed news items about Lee Harvey Oswald. [The article also included] an excellent photograph of Oswald in a business suit and tie . . . on page 3. This odd photograph appeared in no other files.

“At the time this edition of the Star went to press, the police of Dallas had just taken a young man into custody and had charged him with the death of . . . J.D. Tippit. They had not accused Oswald of the murder of the President and did not charge him with that crime until early the next morning. . . .

“By what process could the wire services have acquired, collated, evaluated, written, and then transmitted all that material about an unknown young man . . . even before the police had charged him? . . .

“There can be but one answer: those in charge of the murder had prepared the patsy and all of that intimate information beforehand.”

Yet to this day the popular attitude persists that the Warren Report was accurate, that Lee Harvey Oswald was the sole shooter, and there was no conspiracy, no subterfuge of any kind involved. So now, fifty years have passed and the truth is still buried. Somewhere. Will it ever become known exactly who was really behind the assassination, who carried it out, and WHY? I’m not prepared to hold my breath in anticipation, but one can always hope, I guess.

Frame 320 of the Zapruder film, approximately 1/3 of a second after the fatal shot entered JFK's forehead.

Frame 320 of the Zapruder film, approximately 1/3 of a second after the fatal shot entered JFK’s forehead.


70 thoughts on “The Watering Hole; Friday November 22, 1963 Plus Fifty Years

  1. Check out this page about the book, Legacy of Secrecy, by Thom Hartmann and Lamar Waldron.

    Bombshells in the new trade paperback are featured in a new Discovery Channel special, “Did the Mob kill JFK?” produced by NBC. It premiered November 22, 2009, on the Discovery Channel (US), and was produced by NBC. Authors Lamar Waldron and Thom Hartmann are extensively interviewed in the documentary, which will continue to air on Discovery.

    I saw this on Discovery Channel four years ago, and I still think its premise is the most plausible.

  2. Oswald killed Kennedy.

    Fred Kaplan, a former believer in JFK conspiracy theories, debunks some of the most popular ones:

    “For many years, long after I’d rejected most of the conspiracy buffs’ claims, the “magic bullet”—as critics called it—remained the one piece of the Dealey Plaza puzzle that I couldn’t fit into the picture; it was the one dissonant chord that, in certain moods, made me think there might have been two gunmen after all.

    Then, in November 2003, on the murder’s 40th anniversary, I watched an ABC News documentary called The Kennedy Assassination: Beyond Conspiracy. In one segment, the producers showed the actual car in which the president and the others had been riding that day. One feature of the car, which I’d never heard or read about before, made my jaw literally drop. The back seat, where JFK rode, was three inches higher than the front seat, where Connally rode. Once that adjustment was made, the line from Oswald’s rifle to Kennedy’s upper back to Connally’s ribcage and wrist appeared absolutely straight. There was no need for a magic bullet.”

  3. Benjamin Wallace-Wells runs through the past 50 years of conspiracy theories:

    “The seduction of conspiracy is the way it orders chaos. In the summer of 1964, the English philosopher and logician Bertrand Russell—past 90 years old then and possibly the most famously rational person on the planet—read the early accounts of the Warren Commission Report with mounting alarm. None of the important questions, he thought, were being answered. There was the matter of the parade route being changed without explanation at the last minute, so that the motorcade passed Lee Harvey Oswald’s workplace; the geometrically confounding arrangement of entry and exit wounds; the curious fact that an alibi witness who helped get an alternate suspect released from custody turned out to be a stripper at Jack Ruby’s club.

    The logician went to work. Meticulously, Russell documented the discrepancies between each first-person account and the divergences between each report in the media. He gave his document a modest, scientific-sounding title (“16 Questions on the Assassination”) and a just-the-facts tone. This strange hybrid method, through which a literary genre convinces itself it is a science, has become not just a template for ornate conspiracies but a defining way in which American stories are told. In the English tradition of mysteries, the screen­writing guru Robert McKee explained a few years ago, “a murder is committed and the investigation drives inward: You know, you’ve got six possible murderers. In the American tradition, a murder is committed, we start to investigate, and it turns out to encompass all of society.”


    William Saletan reviews a variety of polls regarding belief in conspiracies. Among them:

    “In 1996, near the 50th anniversary of the supposed UFO crash in Roswell, N.M., Gallup asked Americans whether UFOs had “ever visited earth in some form.” Forty-five percent said yes. But when Gallup asked, in the same questionnaire, “Does the US government know more about UFOs than they are telling us,” 71 percent said yes. Surveys of registered voters by Fox News found a similar gap between belief in the legend and general distrust of the feds.

    His takeaway:

    [C]onspiracists aren’t completely isolated. They’re surrounded by a substantial number of deep skeptics—people who aren’t drinking the Kool-Aid but don’t trust the government to tell the whole story. On average, these people seem to represent about a quarter of the population. In many cases, when combined with the conspiracy believers, they add up to a majority. We need to understand more about these skeptics. We need to keep them from falling into the arms of the conspiracy-theory peddlers. If they’re suspicious by nature, earning their trust may be difficult. But the best way to win them over is simple. Tell the truth.”

    • I agree with Saletan: “. . . the best way to win them over is simple. Tell the truth.”

      I’m still waiting. Maybe someday some will, finally, “tell the truth” and clear the air. Not holding my breath though.

      • I think people want to believe conspiracy theories surrounding JFK because they can’t or don’t want to accept that such a small, insignificant person could have such a profound effect and impact on millions of lives and alter the arc of history (if you believe in such a concept.)

        An act so dramatic that affects so many people would just have to be carried out by a sinister, vast conspiratorial network — not one guy with a gun.

        • It concerns me that the ‘small, insignificant . . . guy with a gun’ was able to, from behind and six floors up, shoot someone in the forehead, the bullet on a pretty much horizontal path based on the huge exit damage on the back-left of the skull. Suggests, at least, a second shooter. And that pretty much points to a conspiracy of one sort or another.

            • Yes, I’m familiar with the suggestion that the fatal shot came from behind and “nerve explosions” inside the skull were really what blew out the back of his head and scattered brain matter on the trunk of the limo. One has to wonder, though, about the apparently near-horizontal trajectory, and also the fact that the hole in the forehead was ‘normal’ in size (implying entry, not exit), unlike the damage to the rear of the skull. From a strictly practical viewpoint, it’s not all that tricky to conclude that the “nerve explosion” thesis, while admittedly somewhat legitimate in laboratory settings, stumbles significantly in this case — based on trajectory and on resultant front and rear wounds. The second shooter thesis makes far more sense overall, based on official autopsy reports, etc.

    • I simply don’t think highly enough of the intellectual capacity of human beings to believe that any conspiracy involving more than 2 or 3 people can remain secret for very long. The government can’t really even keep the secrets secret.

      • Secrets remain secrets after the secret keepers are dead, however, and most of the government level “suspects” are, indeed, no longer with us — and haven’t been for quite awhile now — including J. Edgar Hoover, Allen Dulles, Gerald Ford, Earl Warren, Lyndon Johnson, . . . the list goes on and on. The most troubling aspect of the whole thing is, to me at least, the fact that so much of the data doesn’t either fit the conclusion, or was modified to make it at least appear to fit the conclusion — a very ‘unscientific’ methodology that invariably suggests ulterior motivation.

        • I call it the Oz Effect and find it telling that so much effort has been expended by various powers that be to explain that conspiracies by the powerful elite are impossible. To me, the very nature of the obscenely rich and powerful is built on the ability to do what they want in such a manner as to suffer no bad consequences and they have the money and influence to do it.

          • Yep, I agree. The effort to indict Oswald as the sole shooter probably began, one might suspect, well before the event. I’ve long thought it was very telling that the New Zealand Star ran a story on Oswald, including a photo of him in a suit and tie, BEFORE the Dallas police had actually charged him. That was probably a major “oops”, a slip up wherein someone released the packet a few hours before it was supposed to be released. Oswald was, after all and until the day after the assassination, a complete unknown to the world at large. Except in New Zealand, apparently, thanks to the story in the local Christchurch newspaper.

        • I’m not a conspiracy kind of person however, I don’t fully trust the government because all governments lie. That is how they maintain control. As for the Kennedy assassination. It’s hard to find the truth. I can’t believe the Warren Report because there is too much about that day that doesn’t make sense. Two of my questions are, who let Jack Ruby into the police station? Where was security? Ruby’s killing of Oswald always seemed suspicious to me. I remember watching it happen on live TV. Jack Ruby was the man with the story.

  4. I had just turned 9 when Kennedy was assasinated. A short while later the Warren Commission Report ordered certain things sealed for 50 years. I intuitively knew that meant that the people involved would be dead before the truth came out.

    I know this: it is easier to accept that a lone nut would kill a popular President than to believe a faction in our own government would do such a thing. It is easier to buy a comforting lie than to accept a disturbing truth.

      • Call me a pessimist, but I’ve long figured that if everyone in the country who was interested in learning the truth of the matter were to hold their breath in anticipation, the population of the US would drop by a substantial percentage in rather short order, and LONG before any definitive truth is revealed.

  5. One of the more curious aspects of the single shooter theory is why did one round pass through two human bodies, virtually intact and the other pretty much disintegrated after impacting one skull bone?

      • I first became interested in the JFK assassination when I was a senior in HS. One of my first impressions was the amount of effort but into explaining how things could have happened the way they did when even the evidence they published didn’t really jibe with their explanations. Since then I have checked in and as things have progressed, the shakier the Warren Report becomes.

        But it has been fun listening to people defend the thing. All that is missing is UFOs.

        • I ran across something recently where someone was discussing the intense interest by major media in virtually all conspiracy theses save one: JFK. As the fellow put it,

          Just imagine if the blood, hair and brain tissue splattered and still preserved on Jackie’s pink dress elicited the same scrutiny and attention as did that tiresome little semen stain left on Monica’s blue dress. Perhaps then the New York Times would ask why, if Oswald shot JFK from the rear with a non-exploding bullet, the woman sitting to the left of him was so thoroughly sprayed by the fatal shot.


          • JFK’s assassination was examined with the same diligence as the events of 9/11. The started with the conclusion and then fit the evidence to match it. It’s easy when you have a country full of people too self-interested to be bothered with facts.
            How different would this country be now if JFK had lived? And if RFK had become preisdent. We wouldn’t have had 40 years of destruction of the middle class thanks to Nixon, Reagan, Bush & Bush. A Clinton administration might not have been continually persecuted. But they’d still be harrassing President Obama because, heck, he’s black.

            • I’ve long been bothered by the fact that the other two “Nemeses” to the Greed and Power folks — MLK and RFK were — within five years of JFK — each assassinated by “lone” shooters James Earl Ray and Sirhan Sirhan, resp., both of whom denied any knowledge of the crime for which they were accused. Ray died in prison after he’d requested a trial. Sirhan has no recollection of the event, period. MKULTRA? Wouldn’t be much of a surprise.

  6. I know I’m obsessive but I still thing GHW Bush has the answers to this and probably every subversive event through 9/11. When he’s gone we still won’t know because his son has blocked all information on him.

    • Yep. GHW “Poppy” Bush was deeply embedded in the moment, both as a corporate interest in Cuba in the late fifties, then linked to the CIA in the early sixties, all before he became a Congressman. I also have zero doubt, period, that if ever any written or other documentation ever existed that might tie him to anything, it’s long gone. Including the “brainpower” of Dumbya, obviously and of course.

      • Could be why W had to be elected. Had to cover up all the shit poppy was involved in. How they got away with Iran/Contra is a mystery enough.

          • First time the VP ever really ‘ran the show’, too, at least in my recollection. Cheney seemed to always act as though he was ‘in charge’ — probably because, in reality, he was?

            Jim Garrison, way back when, called the Kennedy assassination a “coup d’etat” — a premise which is, today, tough to argue against, given the ascension of the Greed/Power element over the last fifty years, plus the descension of ‘we the people’ in that same time frame.

            As the “news” station in the Bay Area recently reported, “Sum Ting Wong.”

  7. As an aside to this whole issue — I was 21 on this date fifty years ago, a college kid, one who had just gotten into his car following Biochemistry class. Heard the news on the way home, then rented a TV in order to watch the aftermath. Etc.

    Near as I can recall, the first ‘hint’ of any conspiracy came a couple of weeks later when that ‘joke’ made the rounds on campus. It went: “Ever wonder why LBJ didn’t go deer hunting this year? ‘Cause Oswald never brought his rifle back.” It was told over and over again, though I’m not all that certain anyone actually believed LBJ was involved . . . in a conspiracy . . .

    There’s that word again.

    BTW, speaking of ‘conspiracies,’ here today in Colorado we have once again DISPROVEN!!!!! that stupid Global Warming leftist conspiracy. It’s snowing, and colder than hell outside.

    Wait: “colder than hell”?? I thought hell was . . . never mind. 😯

  8. The assassination of JFK proved to a generation that we elect mortals as our presidents. Nixon’s resignation proved that we elect criminals. Bushco proved that we elect idiots.

    The reflections of the day are somewhat confused by the rightwhiners doing what they do best in light of the “nuclear option”: baseless fear, senseless hate, and impotent rage.

  9. I may be wrong but I think the reason Barack Obama is still alive is the power machine learned to manipulate the media and discredit rather than create a political martyr. Assassinating the first black President would be much more damaging than the first Catholic one.

    • The Rude One says it well:

      Days like this are always ripe for wondering “What if?” It is natural, of course, in the scheme of things, to imagine that, but for a particular event, the world would be a much different place. That kind of magical thinking excludes all kinds of other exigencies if circumstances had been different. Butterfly effect and all that, you know. Dead baby Hitler might have led to nuclear apocalypse. No one knows. But still, but still, we dream our what-ifs and extrapolate vaguely meaningful things out of them.

      The Rude Pundit isn’t talking about the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the 50th anniversary of which is today, pretty much right now, actually. Perhaps a better way to put it is that he’s not directly talking about it.

      No, what the Rude Pundit has been pondering in the run-up to today is the inauguration of Barack Obama back in 2009. The what-if is more prosaic than what would have been had JFK avoided Dallas or if Lee Harvey Oswald was a worse shot. It’s only a bit more useful than that fantasy. See, the Rude Pundit wonders what would have happened if, after the inauguration of President Obama, his opposition had reached out to work with him, hadn’t immediately attempted to shiv him, had heeded the vote of the nation, aching for transformation, aching for change.

      What if instead of immediately seeking to discredit the new president, his opponents, in both parties, had harnessed the energy that existed in the nation then and forged a path that led definitively away from the destructiveness of the Bush administration?

      Nearly every day, on his way to work, the Rude Pundit ends up driving behind a particular truck that has several bumper stickers of the usual nonsense: “Don’t trust the liberal media,” “NObama,” and the like. Only one has made him think anything more than “Numbnuts.” It reads, “How’s that hope and change working out for you?” What galls him is not the playground mocking. What gets him is the idea that you would point at someone and laugh at them for having hope, especially when you’re part of a group that has done everything possible to crush that hope.

      The people we invest with nebulous ideas like “hope” are only human. A JFK, a Barack Obama, they never can live up to the concept. But it’s so touchingly human that we do want someone to embody hope. And it’s tragically human that someone will always be there to gun hope down.

      What has happened to Barack Obama, an imperfect vessel for the hopes of a large part of the nation, and his presidency has not been done with an assassin’s bullet. But just as those who hated Kennedy with passionate irrationality laid the groundwork for his death, so do the very same type of people murder hope, gleefully, slowly this time, by paper cuts instead of hot metal. Like the driver of the pickup, they want hope to disappear. For hope means the possibility of change. And political and social change wrought from hope is something that ultimately ends up in assuring that those who have power must give some up to those without it.

      When he’s read remembrances today, when he’s heard from those who were around then, the most striking thing for the Rude Pundit is how everyone talks about the end of Camelot, the end of a period when hope was possible, before we descended into the necessary anarchy of the rest of the 1960s, which some dare believe Kennedy would have been able to prevent (he wouldn’t have). The Rude Pundit figures one day he’ll be an old man telling children what it was like to feel great about the nation electing the first black president and what it felt like for the same nation to let hope dribble away like a fistful of sand. Open your hand after a moment. Some grains remain, but it’s so little compared to what you thought you had.

      Yes, Obama bears some blame. But, in its way, that’s like saying that Kennedy shouldn’t have gone to Dallas, shouldn’t have had the top down on the car.

      The bastards murdered hope. It’s what they do. The bastards will do it every time.

      • Yes. Makes me think that maybe we should all be thankful for human-caused global warming along with the final extinction of our species that may well prove to be THE consequence . . . of greed, of the endless quest for power, etc.

        OTOH, the whole thing still pisses me off. How can any ‘god-created god-image’ be so freakin’ STUPID as is Homo sapiens sapiens?

        Ah, never mind. I know the answer. It’s obvious. As Mark Twain put it, ““Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it.”

        Amen. Touche. Etc.

        • I figure it’s probably time to let the cockroaches have their chance at ruling the world. They’ve been living in our shit long enough to consider their dues paid in full. Sigh…

          Sometimes I really and truly wish that mammalian evolution had ended with the “big cats”. Let the insects worry about building cities and fighting wars and taking slaves while we warm and soft critters can reduce every argument to “eat it or avoid it”.

    • I agree. Times have changed. The “lone [obviously ‘weirdo’] assassin” is passe. But the undercurrent agenda is not, and never will become ‘passe’ — not in this world.

      Also never-to-become-‘passe’ is the HATRED of far too many of ‘alla those what ain’t white like me!’. See: House and Senate Republicans.

    • That’s part of it. The other part is that the potential assassins of today can’t resist emailing in their death threats and posting them on Facebook. And the other, other, part is that the Secret Service knew from the start that they would have to step up their game.

  10. This Day in Death:

    Aldous Huxley died of cancer at 5:20pm, London time, on November 22, 1963. About ten minutes later, CS Lewis died of renal failure. Just under an hour after that, JFK was shot and killed in Dallas. There may never have been a deadlier 70 minutes for celebrity.

  11. Melissa Harris-Perry just said the word ‘nuclear’, as ‘nukular’, just like Bush always did. I know she has a slight lisp when she speaks, but any good Democrat/Progressive should never slip up and say ‘nukular’.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s