It's just a short, pudgy guy in a fedora hat. I come from a short family, and some of them, quite a few, are pudgy. So, that could be a relative of mine. The idea that we can peg that guy as Jack Ruby from what we see there is ridiculous.
And all the images of him are like that: obscure. Why doesn't that bother people? Why doesn't it bother them that Dallas police scurried the shooter out of the garage without handcuffing him? Why doesn't it bother them that not only did the shooter disappear into the swarm and frenzy, but so did Oswald? Both of them just disappeared; vanished; until seconds later, it was just police detectives with spread arms controlling the area in what was clearly the aftermath. Bull shit. That isn't reality. It isn't real life. It was a controlled spectacle. Really, it was like a magic trick; a sleight of hand trick, that happened so fast that by the time it was over, it was like, "What happened to them? Where'd they go?"
Jack Ruby was SO mentally ill. He was deranged, and they knew he was deranged. He was so deranged that they knew they could tell him that he shot Oswald, and he would believe them. Because of his heavy drug use, his sleep deprivation, and alcohol, he was subject erratic behavior. He was used to people telling him that last night he blew his top; he lost control; but he couldn't remember. He knew he had violent tendencies. And Dallas police were talking it up to him that weekend about how great it would be if somebody whacked Oswald. And, I suspect he was agreeing with them. So, when they told him that he shot Oswald- and that is the story that they had to tell him that he did it because he didn't know why they were arresting him- he believed them. And that is the way it was depicted in Ruby and Oswald, that Ruby had to be informed that he did it, and at first, he was incredulous.
In fact, it makes me wonder why they were bold enough to depict it that way- to fly so close to the truth. And I think the answer is that nobody had ever suspected or gotten anywhere close to suspecting that the whole Ruby-shot-Oswald story was a lie, that even the most ardent opponents of the official JFK story were fully on-board with Ruby's guilt, so there was nothing whatsoever to worry about.
And even the simple thing of Leavelle being handcuffed to Oswald was never subjected to scrutiny. Leavelle, reportedly and cinematically, picked up Oswald, with another man, and carried him into the jail office. In the movie, Oswald just falls back into their arms. That's not what happened in the garage. In the garage, Oswald fell down to the ground. So, Leavelle would have had to pick him up from the ground. But, when you're handcuffed to someone, it's like your hand is tied to his hand. So, Leavelle's left hand was tied to Oswald's right hand. Therefore, how could he possible position his arm to pick him up? Wouldn't he have to remove the handcuff first? But, that's not the official story. The official story has it that Leavelle didn't remove the handcuffs until he placed him down in the floor jail office. But, he couldn't have carried him into the jail office without removing the cuffs. And if you don't believe me, try it yourself. Handcuff yourself to someone, then have that person collapse to the ground, and then, with another person, try to pick him up and carry him somewhere. You can't do it without removing the cuffs. And, you certainly can't do it the way Leavelle depicted it in the movie. So, I guarantee you that in that movie, as Leavelle was carrying the actor who was playing Oswald, that he was not handcuffed to him.
That is Detective James Leavelle there, playing himself. Try to imagine where his left hand is. It's under Oswald's shoulder, right? It's got to be, doesn't it? But, where is Oswald's right hand? If they're handcuffed, then Leavelle's left hand and Oswald's right hand had to be very close together. But, how is that possible when Oswald's right hand is by his side? So, Leavelle couldn't do the impossible in the movie, yet we are supposed to believe he did on 11/24/63?
The whole official story of the Oswald shooting is a lie. It is just as big a lie as the whole official story of the JFK shooting. And it's the same people lying. The same people killing, and the same people lying.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.