The televised assassination of Oswald was so preposterous and outlandish that it's amazing anybody believed it, never mind everybody. But, the reason they believed it is because they were still in shock from the assassination of JFK. They were pummeled; they were beat up, and they were too beat up to critically analyze what happened to Oswald. An extremely unlikely thing had already happened, so when another extremely unlikely thing happened just two days later (where a prisoner engulfed by police, who were supposedly prepared to the max to protect him, was summarily gunned down) But, the point is that when one incredible thing happens, you become more amenable to another incredible thing happening.
But still, people should have known better. They should have been cued by the theatrical nature of it all, the pomp and circumstance, the bloodlessness of it, and the bizarre aftermath in which the garage was cleared some hectic seconds in which all things pertinent became instantly invisible. Before we knew it, it was just cops holding their arms out to block people from entering the jail office, and Oswald and "Ruby" had just disappeared. It really did have the air of a magic show in which, presto!, Oswald and Ruby were both gone, evaporated, vanished in thin air as in, "Wait a second; what just happened?; where'd they go?" It is no exaggeration to call it a sleight of hand trick.
But, what about today? The shock of JFK's murder is long gone. We're still affected by it, but the shock of it is long gone. We still have the footage of Oswald's murder, so why doesn't looking at it with cooler heads in the light of day today wake people up?
Well, people are waking up. Plenty of people have been receptive to my work on this, and I mean people from all over the world. But, far too many people, including people who should know better, are still wrapped up in the cocoon of the official story of the Oswald killing. And, there are several things, mental things, that hold them back; that hold them captive. Certain thought processes keep them locked up. I want to address those things to show you that the facts are not the problem; it's the way of thinking that is the problem.
1. People are hung up on the idea that Ruby admitted doing it or at least didn't deny doing it. Only the latter is true, that Ruby didn't deny doing it. He claimed to have no memory of doing it. That is equivalent to him saying, "I don't remember doing it, and I certainly didn't have a plan to do it. For goodness sake, I brought my dog along. But, they tell me that I did it, and I, being respectful and trusting of the Dallas Police, assume that I did just because they tell me so." Now, that is a far cry from him admitting doing it. The fact is that he had no knowledge of doing it and no memory of doing it. He was just going along with what they told him- not what he recalled. Ruby got tricked along with everyone else.
2. People get hung up on the idea that many witnesses ID'd Ruby. Well, most of those witnesses were outright liars. I am talking about cops like Leavelle and Graves and Harrison, etc. They were in on it, and some of them, like Jim Leavelle, are still alive. And, it's important to recognize that Jim Leavelle lied from the getgo. He lied on the very day it happened. He said he saw "Ruby" coming and recognized him and saw the gun and reacted to it by jerking Oswald behind him and shoving on "Ruby's" shoulder, and none of that happened. We have the video from several different angles, and he did none of those things. And he told those lies on 11/24/63, just a few hours after the debacle. He lied from the start. Now, how are you going to trust a witness like him?
3. The alterations, manipulations, and falsifications of the images (photos and films) of the Oswald shooting are legion, and the poster boy of that has got to be the grotesque Jackson photo.
That is not how it was when "Ruby" shot Oswald. The shooter came at him from the side; he wasn't in front of him. This is supposedly .3 second after the shot, but this much rearrangement was not physically possible in .3 second. .3 second? Do you know how short a period of time that is? That isn't Oswald's hand slapped to his chest. He didn't have a hand that big. He had a delicate hand, meaning: with a small thumb.
That's Oswald's hand on the left. The hand on the right is a monstrosity. Note that, on the right, there are only 3 fingers opposing the thumb when there should be 4. Hey, if there are only three knuckles, there are only three fingers, and there are only three knuckles. And the thumb we see there is a monstrosity. It isn't even a left thumb; it is actually a right thumb. And it is certainly not Oswald's thumb.
So, with phony images abound, how could the event be real? They only try to sell you with phony images when something isn't real. If it's real, then they'd have real images and no need to alter anything.
4. There are so many other lies connected to this story, including lies about Jack Ruby. They said he was tied to the Chicago Mafia. That is a lie. He had NO ties whatsoever with them. What John Armstrong discovered is that Ruby had extensive ties with the CIA. That's the Central Intelligence Agency. You know them? The outfit that framed Oswald? Sent him to Russia. Framed him for going to Mexico City, where he never went. John Armstrong found out that Ruby spent the whole decade of the 1950s gun-running for the CIA. Knowing, as you do, that the CIA has set up a lot of patsies and twisted them with their mind control programs, and that Ruby was treated in captivity by the CIA's "Maestro of Mind Control" Dr. Louis Joylan West, why should you reject Ruby being one of those mind control patsies?
5. And most important to me, an honest and painstaking examination of the photographic record of the Oswald shooting finds that there is no confirmation whatsoever that that was Jack Ruby in the garage. A Fedora hat on a short pudgy man does not Jack Ruby make. You may think you see Jack Ruby there, but you are NOT seeing him there; you are THINKING him there. You are letting 53 years of indoctrination and brainwashing blind you. And every single one of the images of that garage shooter is an obscure one. The idea that they show you Jack Ruby is a joke.
The plotters were fortunate to get away with the Jack Ruby con for over half a century. And they probably thought that that was long enough to forever get away with it. But, truth has landed on the beaches of Normandy, and it has made a foothold. It is never going back out to sea.
Jack Ruby was innocent. He did NOT shoot and kill Lee Harvey Oswald. The cops who said they saw him do it are the ones who really killed Oswald. That fact has made a beachhead.