Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

The Dallas Police didn't conspire WITH Ruby to kill Oswald. That is ridiculous and stupid! It is Backesonian stupid. They were going to trust Ruby to keep his mouth shut and protect them as they jailed him, prosecuted him, testified against him and then what? Pulled the switch on his electric chair? You have to be sick and twisted to think that. 

No, they conspired AGAINST Ruby. They bamboozled him. They tricked him. You might even say they conned him. 

And I'll tell you honestly that what they did to him was demonic. They might as well have killed him. And perhaps they did kill him eventually. But, it would have been merciful if they had just killed him at the time. Because what did he have left? Nothing. He lost everything.  He had only misery and suffering and pain until he died. 

In a way, I can understand why they would kill Oswald- if they truly believed he killed Tippit. Of course, Oswald did NOT kill Tippit. And remember that we never did hear Oswald's alibi for the Tippit shooting. We never heard how he claimed to get from his boarding room to the Texas Theater. Oswald provided the information on how he got from Dealey Plaza to his boarding room, so why wouldn't he provide the information on how he got to the theater? Of course, he would. Of course, he did. They just haven't told us what he said because apparently, it was VERY exonerating.  

So really, there are no grounds to think that Oswald killed Tippit. There are no grounds to think he went to 8th and Patton. What reason did he have to go there, even theoretically? What reason has ever been proffered? 

But, let's just say they got caught up in the fervor of Oswald having killed Tippit. Alright, so they wanted to kill him for that. But, what reason did they have to destroy Jack Ruby's life? What had he ever done to the Dallas Police? Brought them sandwiches? Given them free drinks and lap dances at his Carousel Club? Contributed money whenever one of them died? Jack Ruby was like the head of the Dallas Police Benevolent Society. And they were willing to destroy him knowing that?

How could they live with themselves doing what they did to Jack Ruby?

I think the answer is that Jack Ruby was "collateral damage." Collateral damage. It is the ugliest and most grotesque euphemism in the history of euphemisms. It refers to slaughtering innocent people in acts of war. And it does not refer to something unforeseen. It is foreseen. And there is a willingness involved: a willingness to kill innocent people in order to accomplish military objectives. 

And in this case, both Oswald and Ruby were collateral damage in the military objective of overthrowing Kennedy, and that really is what it was: a military objective. 

And what about the idea of sentencing Ruby to death? How could they do that knowing that, presumably, the State was going to put Oswald to death? Doesn't that have a bearing on it? And how could they do it in light of the known negligence on the part of the Dallas Police? Nobody suggested there was any cunning or chicanery involved in how Ruby entered the garage. Since they were charged with protecting Oswald, how could they not be considered partly responsible circumstantially? It was a circumstance which they created, and Ruby only stumbled into it. How difficult was it for Officer Roy Vaughan to do his job of keeping people from entering that narrow ramp? I could get an 80 year old Walmart greeter to do it without a lick of trouble. In fact, when you think about it, as jobs go, it had to be the easiest in the world: you stand in the ramp, and you don't let anyone pass. How hard is it to do that? And remember that we're not talking about a situation that involved hostility. What do you think would have happened if Vaughan or Pierce had seen Ruby making his way down that ramp and told him to stop? What do you think Ruby would have done if they had yelled at him, "Hey, you can't go down there. Get out of there!" You should base it on how you saw Ruby behaving afterwards. Have you ever seen anyone more docile? Because I haven't. You know very well that Ruby would have obeyed and done what he was told. 

Of course, I am only speaking in the context of the official story. In reality, I think Pierce and Vaughan deliberately let Ruby enter. It was all planned. But, since there was, admittedly, an outright failure on the part of Dallas Police to maintain the security of that environment, how were they not partly responsible? And therefore, how do you put Ruby to death over it? 

What Vladimir Putin said the other day about the JFK assassination was really very damning. That's because he didn't just say that there was a conspiracy in the JFK assassination. Isn't that how they usually put it? For instance when they take polls? "Do you think Oswald acted alone or was part of a conspiracy?" They don't give you the choice of declaring Oswald's innocence. But, Putin not only challenged the official story but named the real culprits: the U.S. intelligence agencies. How ironic for him to say that now because we just passed JFK's 100th birthday, and there was some fanfare for it. I watched a program on CNN, on their series called The Sixties, in which they went through the whole thing, the whole propaganda, once again. I didn't catch all of it, but I caught the part where they reveled in how LBJ held the country together, and how heroic the Warren Commissioners were, and the whole thing was most disgusting and nauseating for them to once again drag it out and plop it down - as if people will surely be convinced if they just hear it one more time. And then, just days after that, Vladimer Putin lays it on the line to the dazzling Megyn Kelly that it was U.S. intelligence agencies. That was, in the words of the vernacular: cool. What Putin said about the JFK assassination registered 1000X better than what CNN said in their drone repetition of official blather. 

Adding more irony to this outcropping of JFK truth on the international stage is the fact that it was a Russian who first recognized that Jack Ruby was not the garage shooter of Lee Harvey Oswald. Ruby, like Oswald, was framed and innocent. And that man goes by the name of Maxim Irkutsk, which is an alias. He uses an alias because he fears for his life. And he lives in Russia. And, you know from what I just said that he can't possibly be afraid of Putin- and he isn't. He is afraid of CIA agents in Russia. And I don't mean American spys. I mean native Russians who are working for and on the payroll of the CIA. I mean Putin's enemies in Russia. That's who he fears would kill him if they could find him.