Do you think the Mafia was involved in the JFK assassination? Based on what? There is the claim that one or more of the shooters were Mafia, but we don't know that for sure. It makes no sense for the CIA to use Mafia shooters. Why would they need to do that? They had Special Ops of their own, plus they had access to the U.S. Military. Do you really think the CIA couldn't come up with shooters without going to the Mafia?

And think about the risk that it entailed. If you get Mafia shooters, it means that the Mafia knows that you did it. It means that you are trusting the Mafia to guard your secret. Why would the CIA do that?

We know that the JFK assassination was a CIA operation, done in conjunction with LBJ and the FBI. There were others involved too, but those were the three prime movers. So, why would they want to involve the Mafia?

LBJ had his own hitman, Malcolm Wallace, and many believe that he was on the 6th floor. I'm not sure of it, but I'm open to it.

It could not have been a Mafia operation. The Mafia couldn't control the press. They couldn't determine the motorcade route. The coverup was done by Johnson and Hoover, and they wouldn't have done it for the Mafia. They did it for themselves.

Yet, the HSCA said that the JFK assassination was a Mafia operation, through and through, and that the Mafia got Oswald to do it. That is ridiculous. Why would Mafia put Oswald on it when he spent 3 years soldering radios together in Minsk, and the only shooting he did was to occasionally go rabbit-hunting with a shotgun. And then when he returned here, he did no shooting at all. He was never in combat in the Marines. He practically flunked his last shooting test in the Marines. WHY WOULD THE MAFIA CHOOSE OSWALD?

I tell you that it was decided in advance that the lone-nut story needed a backup; hence the Mafia story. It's likely that the CIA started the rumor about Mafia shooters just for that purpose.

And yes, I know about James Files, and I don't consider him credible. Even if you do, there is no proof that anything he says is true. There is no definitive proof that the Mafia was involved in the JFK assassination in any way.

And what about the claim that the Mafia ordered Ruby to kill Oswald? It is bull shit.. Oswald didn't work for the Mafia or know anything about the Mafia. Oswald didn't even know that JFK's motorcade was going to come down Elm. He went to James Jarman and asked him why people were gathering on the sidewalk. There is absolutely nothing that Oswald could have told authorities about the Mafia. So, why would they have wanted him killed? It is ridiculous and stupid on the face of it.

Jack Ruby was not in the Mafia, and his nightclubs were not Mafia nightclubs. And the whole idea that he would kill Oswald because the Mafia ordered him to is preposterous. It's a Hollywood thing. What if the Mafia ordered you to kill someone? Would you do it? I should think not.

And remember that most murders are done with the hope and expectation of getting away with it. But, in this case, it meant shooting Oswald in a crowd of police, which meant destroying your entire life and losing everything. You wouldn't do that for the Mafia. So, why do you think Ruby would?

I can prove that Ruby was not ordered by the Mafia to kill Oswald. The proof is that he lived for 3 years. Would the Mafia have trusted him to keep his mouth shut? All he had to do was wake up one morning with a fed-up attitude, and he could have named names. Don't you think they would have killed him?

And as I have said, there is no time over that weekend that he could have met with someone from the Mafia or talked to them on the phone. All of his actions and doings are fully documented, and no such thing happened. He never met with anyone from the Mafia, and he never got a call from anyone from the Mafia.

The bottom line is that Mafia shooters is the only claim of Mafia involvement in the JFK assassination, but a claim is all it is. There is no proof that it is true. And it is not credible that the CIA would want or need to have Mafia shooters. However, they welcomed rumors of Mafia shooters because "the Mafia did it" was the backup story for the lone-nut story, in case it didn't survive.

After the HSCA issued its Final Report in January 1979, claiming that the Mafia killed JFK, did law enforcement, at any level, start probing it? No, absolutely not. It was completely ignored.

Your government killed JFK, and then they killed Oswald. Oswald and Ruby were both completely innocent. And that is the truth.

You think the Mafia ordered Ruby to kill Oswald? When and how? If they did, it had to have been that weekend. They certainly didn't order him to kill Oswald before JFK was killed. So, when during that weekend did they meet with Ruby and tell him to kill Oswald?

Here is a timeline of everything Jack Ruby did that weekend. It includes everyone he talked to; every phone call he made or received; every place he went to; and every person with whom he interacted.

https://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/Issues_and_evidence/Jack_Ruby/Timeline_of_Ruby.html

And everything on that list is sourced. So, where does it say that he met with some Mafia kingpin who ordered him to kill Oswald?

It never happened. So, why do people keep saying it? It's because it's an urban legend that the perpetrators fueled. They realized beforehand that many people were not going to accept the lone-nut story, and they wanted to give them an alternate story that would work just as well for them. And the alternate story was that the Mafia did it.

Many people claim that there were Mafia shooters. I don't claim to know. It's not an area that I have probed. But, if it’s true, they certainly didn't need to do that. They certainly could have come up with JFK-shooters without going to the Mafia. So, if they did that, it was just to involve the Mafia, so that they could blame the whole thing on them.

And you know that that’s what the HSCA settled on, that the Mafia did it. And it's ridiculous because they kept Oswald as shooter. Why would the Mafia want LHO as shooter when he almost flunked his last marksman exam in the Marines in 1959, and then he did no shooting in Russia for 3 years except to occasionally go rabbit-hunting with a shotgun. And then after returning to the US in June 1962, he did no shooting at all, except, supposedly taking a pot-shot at General Walker, which he didn't do. Why would the Mafia think that a guy who spent 3 years soldering transistor radios together in Minsk would be the best assassin for JFK? I can just hear it now: one Mafia don telling another: "I heard tings about dis Oswald guy."

But, let's get back to Ruby, supposedly, shooting Oswald. If you wanted to confirm it, where would you start? What would you look at first? The answer is: YOU WOULD COMPARE IMAGES OF THE SHOOTER TO IMAGES OF RUBY AND MAKE SURE THEY MATCH.

We are talking a human being with his own unique DNA. There can't be any discrepancies between Ruby and the Shooter if they were the same man. And if there are discrepancies, it means Ruby didn't do it- regardless of anything else. There is no counter to it. There is nothing that trumps it. If the comparison shows different men, then that’s it; it's over. They were different men, and Ruby was innocent.

So, on the left is Ruby at the Midnight Press Conference and on the right is the Garage Shooter from the Jackson photo. THEY DON'T EVEN LOOK ALIKE, LET ALONE LOOK IDENTICAL. Ruby on the left had a long face that was angular and jutting, while the Shooter had a very round face. Ruby had a long neck, while the Shooter had the shortest neck I have ever seen. It was almost like his head was sitting on his shoulders, with practically no neck at all. And his neck was very burly. It didn't taper. It was thick.

And the Shooter was pudgy like the PillsburyDoughboy while Ruby was quite lean. And their hair was nothing alike either. The Shooter had long hair in back that curled up at the bottom. And I tell you that it was a wig. You don't see a single hair growing out of his head. It looks matted like a wig.

THEY’RE NOT THE SAME MAN, and there is no blah-blah-blah for it. You just have to admit that they are not the same man or else you don't have an honest bone in your body.

And this is a brand-new collage. I just made it today. I have never put these two images together before. So, don't tell me I am reposting something because I'm not.

Ruby was innocent, and every mature and honest person who looks at this will admit it.

 Several people tried to claim that Ruby's right index finger was severed. False. It was his left index finger, as you can see here.

Then, they tried to claim that it was the Mafia way of shooting, but again: false. That is just an urban legend that was invented for this story. And if you were to shoot a little revolver like that Colt Cobra with your middle finger, you might very well blow your index finger off because of the burning hot gases that emit from the cylinder gap.

I tell you with 1000% certainty that Ruby was innocent. They had the guy masquerading as him (James Bookhout) use his middle finger in the staged photo they took because they mistakenly thought that Ruby would have had to.

They didn't mind if people questioned Oswald's guilt, but they didn't want anybody questioning Ruby's. So, they invented this whole narrative, this alternate story, that Ruby wasn't just bad; he was super-bad; that he was a Mafioso, a hit-man, a pimp, and that he not only killed Oswald, but he was also involved in killing Kennedy, that he delivered guns to Dealey Plaza, etc.

And they had it all worked out in advance. I'm telling you: it was the greatest psy-op of all time. It bamboozled everybody for 50 years. It wasn't until 2013 that the Russian Maxim Irkutsk first declared that Jack Ruby was innocent.

But, we've got them by the marachas now. They treated us like Pavlovian dogs for half a century. But, we've exposed their lies. Oswald and Ruby were both innocent, and LBJ and the intelligence agencies (CIA and FBI) killed JFK.

 

The Jackson photo was supposed to have been taken .3 seconds after the shot. The story goes that there was .6 seconds between Beers and Jackson, with the shot in-between. So, that means Beers, then .3 second later the shot, and then .3 second later Jackson.

In that case, why isn’t the Shooter’s trigger finger wrapped around the trigger? Why is it instead just poking through? I’ll tell you why. It’s because it is a staged photo, and they wanted to make sure the use of the middle finger was noticed. If it was wrapped around, it might not be so obvious.

They thought they had struck gold with this, thinking that Ruby had lost his right index finger and would have had to use his middle finger. However, he lost his left index finger. So, it was misinformation. There was no reason why Jack Ruby would have used his middle finger.

It is certain what I have been telling you, that Ruby was Innocent, and that the Dallas Police, with the help of the FBI and the Secret Service, killed Oswald and framed Ruby. It was FBI Agent James W. Bookhout who masqueraded as Ruby, and that is who we see in the Jackson and Beers photos, and also the films.

The State killed Oswald, and it’s because the State killed Kennedy, and they knew they couldn’t actually try Oswald. That would have blown up on them. They had to get Oswald killed before he even talked to a lawyer.  They hoped it would happen in the theater, but it didn’t. They hoped that they could pull it off at the Midnight Press Conference (which was the purpose of the MPC) but they couldn’t. But, they finally got it done on Sunday morning.