Do you still doubt that there were two Oswalds? Well, the Lee Harvey Oswald of fame did not drink. He was teetotaler. His own wife Marina said so. In fact, they had arguments about it because not only did he not drink, but he didn't want her to drink. But, the other Oswald drank. At Atsugi, he got arrested for drunkenness at one point. I think he may have been drunk when he accidentally shot himself. A woman who worked at the Carousel Club said that she served drinks to a Lee Harvey Oswald. You want her name? Frances Irene Hiss. And this is from John Armstrong's website:

"Around 8:30 AM, while HARVEY was working at the TSBD, LEE Oswald entered the Jiffy store at 310 S. Industrial and took two bottles of beer to the counter. Fred Moore, the store clerk, asked Oswald for identification. FBI Special Agent (SA) David Barry interviewed Moore on 12/02/1963. Barry wrote, "identification of this individual arose when he asked him for identification as to proof of age for purchase of two bottles of beer. Moore said he figured the man was over 21 but the store frequently requires proof by reason of past difficulties with local authorities for serving beer to minors. This customer said, 'sure I got ID' and pulled a Texas drivers license from his billfold. Moore said that he noted the name appeared as Lee Oswald or possibly as H. Lee Oswald. As Moore recalled, the birth date on the license was 1939 and he thought it to have been the 10th month."

So, how could Oswald both be a drinker and a non-drinker? How could he have a driver's license and not have a driver's license? There were two Oswalds, and I mean two young men who were living their lives as Lee Harvey Oswald.

The idea that Jack Ruby was forced to kill Oswald- by the JFK conspirators or by the Mafia- is a popular idea, but it makes no sense. 

Is there any threat that would cause YOU to kill someone? If not, then why do you think it was any different for Jack Ruby?

The thing I usually hear is that they threatened to kill his sister or other family member if he didn't do it. 

Well, what about you? If someone threatened to kill your sister if you didn't kill somebody, would you oblige? I'm thinking no. So, what would you do? Wouldn't you call the police and tell them of the threat? It's a crime to make such a threat. Wouldn't you tell your sister and help her get to a place that was safe and secure? And if it was a famous person who made the threat, you might even go to the newspapers and ask them to publicize it- for the sake of your sister and yourself. But, you certainly wouldn't perform the murder.

Keep in mind that you wouldn't do it, perform the murder, even if you were guaranteed escape and no consequences. And that's because you're not a murderer. Right? But, in this case, it meant absolute certain capture and prosecution and the complete end of the life he knew with nothing but a nightmare life to replace it.  It was truly a fate worse than death. When I look at the quality of Ruby's life from 11/24 to the end, I think it would have been better for him if he had just died on 11/24.  So, what they were demanding (if there was someone demanding) was that Ruby forfeit everything: his whole life. 

How could you possibly agree to forfeit your whole life just because of a threat? 

The whole idea that Ruby was ordered to kill Oswald is ridiculous. Maybe if it involved shooting Oswald and getting away with it, but in this case it meant certain capture, conviction, and even a death sentence.     

Moreover, if Ruby was forced to do it by someone who was threatening him, why didn't he use it as his defense? Why didn't he tell his lawyers? Why didn't he tell the Warren Commissioners? Why didn't he tell the Dallas Police? 

The whole idea is preposterous. Jack Ruby was not forced to kill Oswald. And he had NO MOTIVE to kill Oswald. The idea that he did it to save Jackie Kennedy from returning to Texas for Oswald's trial is absurd. Why would Jackie Kennedy have to appear at Oswald's trial? She had nothing to offer in the case against Oswald. What would the prosecutor have needed her for? "Does this look like the guy who killed your husband?" What could she have said that would have made the case against Oswald? There's nothing. So, Jackie wasn't going to have to come back to Dallas regardless. And the whole idea that Jack Ruby said he did it for Jackie is a lie. It was his lawyer who came up with that and told him to say it. And it certainly wasn't on 11/24. IT IS A BOLD-FACED LIE THAT RUBY TOLD DALLAS POLICE ON 11/24 THAT HE SHOT OSWALD TO SPARE JACKIE. It is part of the folklore now, but it is a lie.

Jack Ruby showed up at the garage earlier than 11:15, much earlier. It was before people like Robert Jackson were there. He was wrestled to the ground by Dallas Police who knew that he was mentally deranged. They convinced him that he had shot Oswald, and he believed them because he had great respect for the police, and he couldn't imagine that they would lie to him. They hustled him up to the 5th floor, and that's where he was when the televised spectacle took place, with FBI Agent James Bookhout playing the role of Jack Ruby. 

What reason do you have to believe that these two are the same man? It's not based on what you're seeing. How could that short pudgy guy on the left, with the stubby legs, be Jack Ruby?

Then, there's another guy in the footage that is claimed to be Ruby, but he's not Ruby either. 

How could that guy on the right with the scraggly face (like a catcher's mitt) be Jack Ruby? He's obviously not Ruby, and he's not the Garage Shooter, either. 

It's bogus image upon bogus image. What is wrong with the American people that they ever believed this shit? 

Ron Schuster Ruby WAS NOT late. Oswald's transfer was delayed until Ruby got there to do the job he was forced to do. It is unknown what details were spoken to which cop by who, but the cops held Oswald upstairs until Ruby was in place.

Like · Reply · Message · 16 mins

Oswald Innocence Campaign Ron, Ruby wasn't forced to do anything. How could they force him to kill Oswald? It's ridiculous. Ruby got there earlier. It was before the televised spectacle. They jumped him and took him away, and he hadn't done anything. Then, they did it all over again for cameras with FBI Agent James Bookhout playing the role of Jack Ruby. Look closely at the images of the shooter, Ron. He is NOT Jack Ruby. How could they get away with it? Jack Ruby was not right in his head, and they knew he wasn't right in his head. 

Imagine if Jack Ruby's lawyers had these images in court to show the jury. Here, for instance, is Detective McMillon giving a nod that clearly was a signal prior to the shooting. 

And here is Detective Miller placing a bag or something over the shooter's head during the so-called scuffle.

And here is a freeze-frame from it.

That is Miller talking in the caption. He was very afraid that he was going to be prosecuted. It took a lot of reassurance from his WC interrogator that they were not going after him. Of course, a lot of the Dallas cops and detectives showed up with lawyers, including Blackie Harrison. 

And here we have a picture of the culprits as they were waiting. These cops were all guilty. And notice that amongst them was NBC reporter Tom Petit. So, what did he know?

I suppose it's possible that he didn't know a thing, even though there he is, surrounded by wolves. But regardless, one thing can be certain: he was carefully chosen as someone who would definitely support the story, no matter how preposterous. 

Why didn't Ruby's attorneys study the images critically? Why didn't they ask themselves whether the shooter was really their client? And here's what else they could have done, and it was feasible to do it: They could have taken Ruby back to the garage and photographed him there and filmed him and compared the results to the Garage Shooter in the official photos and footages. If they had done that, they would have discovered the impossibility of him being the Garage Shooter, that they couldn't get Ruby to look like that guy. How smart do you have to be to realize that the guy in the images is just a short guy in a fedora hat? 

So, why didn't they think that way? It's because of the myth of America: the idea that it couldn't happen here for government and media to be involved in such a frame-up. It could happen in Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia or Communist China, but it couldn't happen here. Wrong. Here.   

Do you remember Bagman, who put a bag, or something, over Bookhout's head after his hat came off? 

We know who he is: Detective Louis D. Miller. And he testified to the Warren Commission. But, do you know how when Mafia figures have to testify in court they are always evasive? Well, that's nothing compared to this guy. The Wizard found his testimony, and I am going to post it here. To my ears, it is dripping with guilt. I am telling you, people, that the Dallas Police did this: they killed Oswald; they framed Ruby; and they were all in on it. All those cops in the garage were in on it. All the highlighting and notations below are by the Wizard. 

This might be a good moment to compare what we know about the occurrences in the basement with police testimony, with a focus on the officers who laid hands on “Ruby” in the “struggle”.

Some authors, including Anthony Summers, have reported the well-known clash between Griffin and Sgt Patrick Dean and the stories of Harrison taking sedatives before his polygraph, etc., but there is rarely an analysis of the physical actions of each person.

Some of the officers were nervous and guilty-sounding when they testified before the WC.

Miller, for example (the “Bagman”, who put a bag or some other covering over the shooter’s head, with help from Harrison to adjust it). In Summers' book: 'The Kennedy Conspiracy', he says that: "Miller behaved more like a suspect than a policeman".

Testimony of Louis D. Miller

Mr. MILLER. Before we do that, what are we doing here?

Mr. GRIFFIN. We are taking your deposition.

Mr. MILLER. I’d like to understand what we are doing here first.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Well, all right. I’ll be happy to explain it to you….

….If you would like to have the written notice and would like to have a copy of the

authorizing resolution, or would like to have an attorney present during this

deposition we would be happy-

Mr. Miller No; I just want to understand what is going on.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Well, do you have any question that you want to ask me about

it? I have given you a general statement here.

Mr. MILLER. What will this deposition be used for?

Mr. MILLER. Well, there is nothing that I know that possibly a hundred other

people don’t know, so, that part don’t bother me, but I don’t understand coming

down and giving a statement, that I am supposed to stand, and swearing, and

all that part of it.

(GRIFFIN) I do have the feeling in talking to you that maybe you would like to do this under some other circumstances, and I would be happy to explore this.

Mr. MILLER. I understand that you want a statement from me.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Well, I am going to examine you.

Mr. MILLER. And I’ll be more than glad to tell anything I know about it,

but I don’t understand swearing in. This is not a court.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Not a court in the sense that anybody is on trial….

Mr. MILLER. I still don’t understand the reason of it. Are you going to use

this thing to try to prosecute me?

Mr. GRIFFIN. No.

Mr. MILLER. What are you going to use it for?

Mr. MILLER. We have no authority to prosecute anyone except for perjury

before the Commission.

(Miller constantly played the poor memory card during the questioning.)

GRIFFIN. Did there come a time when you were requested to go down into

the basement?

Mr. MILLER. Yes.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Now, what is your best estimate of when that was?

Mr. MILLER. I wouldn’t have any idea.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Before you got this request, had you been down in the basement

that day?

Mr. MILLER. It is possible that I had, but I don’t recall…….

Mr. MILLER. I don’t remember what day it was. I don’t believe it was on

that Sunday.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you remember what you were told to do when you were

asked to make out the report?

Mr. MILLER. No; I don’t.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Who instructed you to make out the report?

Mr. MILLER. I don’t recall who that was.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Well, was it just a general announcement that was made by one

of the chiefs or did somebody in particular approach you?

Mr. MILLER. It was probably someone in particular, but I don’t recall who it

was.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you discuss this report with anybody before you made it?

Mr. NILLRR. It is possible that I did, but I don’t recall it if I did.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Who was it on the 24th that asked you to go down into the

basement?

Mr. MILLER. The best I recall, it was kind of a general announcement. Who

came up and requested or ordered, or however you wanted to put it, all of

the men to go to the basement, I don’t know who that was. As I say, I was working the papers, typing…….

Mr. MILLER. The best I recall. the elevator was full. As far as remembering

any one particular person that was on the elevator, I couldn’t say.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you walk out of the juvenile bureau with anybody?

Mr. MILLER. I am sure I did. but I don’t recall any particular person that I

walked out with.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Do you recall how many people you walked out with?

Mr. MILLER. I sure don’t.

Mr. GRIFFIN. When Officer McLine, Policewoman McLine, told you that you

were supposed to go to the basement, what did she say?

Mr. MILLER. I don’t recall her specific words.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did she tell you Why you were supposed to go down?

Mr. MILLER. No.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you have any idea of why you were to go down?

Mr. MILLER. No. I can’t say that I actually did.

Mr. GRIFFIN. As you walked down to the basement, did you look into the

homicide bureau?

Mr. MILLER. I don’t recall looking in there : no, sir.

Mr. GRIFFIN. When you got down to the basement, where did you go?

Mr. MILLER. The best I recall, I was standing outside of the windows there

in the hallway.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Did you receive any instructions from anybody before you went

to this particular station that you mentioned?

Mr. MILLEB. No.

Mr. GRIFFIN. How did you know to walk over there?

Mr. MILLER. I didn’t.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Why did you happen to walk there?

Mr MILLER. There was no particular reason.

Mr. GRIFFIN. About how long was this before Lee Harvey Oswald came down?

Mr. MILLER. I don’t recall how long. It would be hard to estimate it. It

could have been 10 minutes or it could have been longer.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I have got another witness out here, Mr. Ward, and I think

maybe it might be well to take a break here a second. I want to talk to this

man.

(Discussion off of the record.)

Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. Miller and I have been talking here for a few minutes off

of the record about some of the events prior to his going down into the basement.

Now, as I understand it, Mr. Miller. shortly after you got into the office on

Sunday morning. you went some place for some coffee?

Mr. MILLER. I went to the Deluxe Diner on Commerce Street and had breakfast.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Now who did you go over there with?

Mr. MILLER. Officer Harrison.

Mr. GRIFFIN. And what time of the morning was that?

Mr. MILLER. I don’t remember

(Miller has to be prompted to inform Counsel that he and Harrison left for breakfast at a diner – and that Harrison took a call there.)

(at the moment of the shot)

Mr. MILLER. The best I remember, someone, seemed like, hit Ruby from behind

and pushed him forward, Like I said, I was trying to move that way when this

happened, so I grabbed a hold of Ruby and helped take him into the jail

office.

(Now this is not quite right: the photos and footage show Miller take up position to the left of the swinging single door in the wall (left - as viewed from the wall), with McMillon to his left (or to the right from the viewer's perspective). When Oswald and his escort breeze past them, McMillion nods to Miller and they move after the Oswald escort. After the shot, Miller hesitates, looks carefully at the scene, of Leavelle and Graves holding the shooter, and then moves forward swiftly and covers the shooter’s head with some material. He claimed that he got the shooter “by the throat” (as did Montgomery, who claimed to have “Ruby” in a throat/head lock), but both his hands are seen to move smoothly and openly over the shooter’s head to fit the covering. He also claimed, according to the FBI report, that "Ruby" was “propelled” toward him, but this is clearly not true: the shooter was stuck in the small crowd of policemen, and his feet can be seen: they barely move until the cops shuffle him over to the right to let Oswald and Leavelle pass.)

From the FBI report:

(At the same time several officers converged upon that spot and someone must

have hit RUBY, since RUBY was propelled in his (Miller’s) direction .

MILLER was also moving toward the spot of the - shooting . He

grabbed RUBY by the neck and believes some other officer had a

hold of RUBY's arm and was trying to get a pistol away from him)

Mr. GRIFFIN. How about Officer McMillon?

Mr. MILLER. I didn’t-I don’t remember seeing Officer McMillon in the basement.

(Not true: they talked before Oswald arrived, and McMillon clearly signaled to Miller to move.)

In summary, Miller was clearly nervous about having to swear an oath in a court-like-manner. He was vague and claimed memory loss about the general order for all male officers to go to the basement and the order to set up two lines down each wall. He brushes off his actions after the shot as an instinctive move to grab Ruby but omits the fact that he swoops on the shooter as soon as the latter starts to rise up. At this point Miller swiftly puts something over the shooter’s head. After this he remains in the struggle, on the side facing the jail office, and participates in helping to cover the shooter’s face and hustle him out of sight back into the office. Afterwards, he reappears and assists in the farce of the ambulance security.

This is an interview of Bob Jackson, and it is very telling. At the beginning, he says:  "Police said they were going to bring him down, and you've got about 5 minutes to get in position. So, I picked my spot..." 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9J9LK430ng

But wait. The jail transfer was scheduled for 10 AM. So, wasn't Bob Jackson there then and in position? Apparently not. Apparently, he and the other photographers and reporters didn't start filling the basement area until shortly before the televised Oswald shooting. 

Therefore they weren't there at 10:15 when the real Jack Ruby arrived and had his own little scuffle with police. 

What an incredibly dumb man Robert Jackson is if he hasn't figured out yet that he was had; that he was played like a friggin' instrument. And that photo of his was turned into a monstrosity. It is altered; it is falsified; it is grotesque. Hey Robert. Why don't you look at it closely? See if you can explain all the weird stuff in it. Look at the gigantic thumb of Oswald and then compare it to other images of him. It's not his thumb. The whole "hand in the pants" thing is a fraud, and you know very well that Leavelle wasn't manhandling Oswald like that. The handcuffs were just thin metal handcuffs; the standard police handcuffs; so why do they look so thick and porcelain in your photo? What about that ridiculous arm of the detective who is reaching for the shooter but continuing to suck on a cigar like he was Groucho Marx?

It is ridiculous, Robert! The "story" of your photo is ridiculous. Oswald wasn't even shot from that position. He was shot in the side from the side. "Ruby" was not in front of him. He came at him from the side. And Leavelle wasn't looking at Ruby; he was looking the other way. And look at those cops along the wall, still clasping their hands like they were Jehovah's Witnesses standing at the door. Wouldn't a gunshot going off in the confined space have startled them and disturbed that stance? Look at it: Lowery is still standing there clasping his hands AFTER the gun went off. I guess nothing bothered him.

Robert, it's all bull shit. You were witness to a ruse, and you were used and abused like a mule. Are you going to do something about it before you die or not?  

It is a well known fact that shooting a gun in a confined space produces a much louder noise as the sound bounces off the walls. You can read a discussion of it here.

https://www.quora.com/Does-shooting-a-gun-in-a-confined-space-without-any-ear-protection-pop-your-eardrums

Well, look at how confined this space is: it was in this cubby-hole that the shot was taken. 

So, the sound of the blast should have been startling and perhaps even painful. Remember that even in the great outdoors, people wear ear protection when they shoot guns. Here is an article which states that the Colt Detective Special "sure is loud."

https://gunsmagazine.com/just-enough-barrel/

But, nobody in the footage of the Oswald shooting shows any reaction to the sound of the blast. Nobody jumps or acts startled. 

And, I know that the reason the Jackson photo was given the look that it has is because a contact shot would cause so much damage, including from the muzzle flash which is burning hot gases, that they had to cover up the whole area to explain why we don't see any damage at all- to Oswald or his clothing.

With arms akimbo, they conveniently got everything covered up so that no damage had to be shown. But in reality, there was no damage. Oswald was NOT shot in that garage. The garage shooting was a ruse. And, the guy pretending to shoot Lee Oswald was NOT Jack Ruby. Hey, it's hard enough to explain why Jack Ruby would shoot Oswald at all, but it is an impossible task to explain why he would PRETEND to shoot him.  

I don't know who made this, and I don't know how accurate the numbers are. But, it doesn't matter because we know, for certain, that a lot of people have been killed by the U.S government, including a lot of innocent people. And that is an unspeakable crime, unspeakable in the sense that there are no words that can adequately describe the monstrousness of it.

It was quite recently that I found out about Detective Blackie Harrison in the Jackson photo. Before that, I presumed that that was a journalist holding a microphone trying to catch something that Oswald was saying. But no, that is supposed to be Blackie extending his arm to interfere with what "Ruby" was doing. So, he was reaching out to subdue a shooter there. But, who would do that while continuing to smoke?

 "You cut that out now, Jack. You're putting me off this fine cigar."

Is that the caption for this photo? It might as well be. 

Again: who would do that? Nobody would. And least of all a detective. He certainly doesn't look like someone engaged in a life-or-death struggle.

This was shortly before the Oswald shooting. WBAP was the NBC affiliate in Dallas. 

So, that's Blackie Harrison on the right, the big guy. And further to the right, in the corner, is McMillon. On the other side is Lowery and the "Special Services" guys. You really think this was all in anticipation of Oswald being put into a car and driven away?

Then there is this shot of Oswald and his escorts, with Fritz leading the way, as they are getting out of the elevator. 

Notice that they're all in dark clothes except Leavelle, who is in his Easter suit. Now, do you really think that he just woke up that morning and decided to put that on? For no particular reason? Why on Earth would he do that? The President of the United States had just been slaughtered in the street, and so had his friend and colleague, JD Tippit. So, what would become him to wear such a festive suit? No, this was a matter of creating visual contrast. And what are those other two guys doing there? This was supposed to be just Oswald being placed in a car and driven away.  Why all the fanfare? I've been to weddings with less pomp and circumstance than this. 

Then, notice that the shooter really was short.

Jack Ruby was NOT that short. Neither did he have such a short neck, and neither did he have such a fat face. 

  Look at the length of Ruby's neck:

Compare it to this guy:

It can't possibly be the same neck.

Now, the question is, was Bookhout wearing a wig? Or was this a photographic trick in which they enhanced his hair? But, one thing is for absolute sure: men did not wear hair this long in 1963. 

That is ridiculous. NOBODY wore hair that long in 1963. You hear me? I said nobody. And that includes Jack Ruby. 

Here is another video: The Shooting of Lee Harvey Oswald was 100% Fake:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SJJyMtFNV0

One of the things he does is compare this image of Blackie Harrison:

with Blackie in the Jackson photo:

Blackie doesn't even look like himself. On the right below is Blackie Harrison.

Is it even the same guy? On the right, we see a distinct part in his hair. It should be visible on the left? How come we don't see it? It seems like he is wearing a sweater on the left and a jacket on the right. And the sweater is more closed off with little shirt showing. 

So, what was the Jackson photo?

There is no image like that in any of the films, and I mean even when you consider angular differences there is no image like it.

Here is another video about the fake shooting of Lee Harvey Oswald.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kObq-RLQCw

 Here's another which refers to it as a "Hollywood production" and Oswald and Ruby as "crisis actors."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmU8jhl64Bs

The maker of that video probably didn't realize that the crisis actor was James Bookhout not Jack Ruby.

Here's another one which says that Oswald was never shot; no blood; no bullet. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bynUK5Qy4C4

But obviously, Oswald was shot afterwards. He was definitely shot. Some think it happened in the ambulance, but I think it happened in the police station. They would never have taken a chance on getting an accurate shot off in the ambulance. They needed a very precise, accurate shot.