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

I still can't get over the mainstream media embracing that story about Jack Ruby inviting a near-stranger to "watch the fireworks" in Dealey Plaza with him. Why would they do that? They are constantly ridiculing "conspiracy theorists" and here they were feeding and spreading a conspiracy claim. The very fact that they, the mainstream media were doing it, doesn't it tell you something?That IT MUST BE A FALSE CONSPIRACY CLAIM? They wouldn't do it if it was a true one.

Let's remember that we have a lot of transcripts of Ruby talking, and we even have him talking on audio tape and even on video tape. And all of it together gives us a pretty good idea of his personality, his nature. And he certainly did NOT have a callus, sarcastic nature. And what could be more callus and sarcastic than to refer to the brutal, carnal slaughter of President Kennedy in Dealey Plaza as "fireworks"? In other words, it doesn't even sound like something Jack Ruby would say or was capable of saying from everything we know about him. 

And then, why would he tell this guy, Bob Vanderslice, a two-bit criminal? And why would he presume that Vanderslice would know what he meant when he said "fireworks"? Aren't there sometimes fireworks for Presidents? Real fireworks? Since the slaughtering of a President in the street is a pretty rare event, why would a person hearing Jack Ruby say that about fireworks go to the right place mentally? Wouldn't he at least ask? "Fireworks? What do you mean, fireworks? They're going to have fireworks?" If it had been you, and someone said that, would you instantly think, "OH, they're going to blow his brains out. Of course." ???  And then the extra bit about Vanderslice getting to know Jack Ruby better at the Dallas County Jail was the extra tidbit that really marked the thing as a piece of stinking CIA bull shit. 

And that is the short answer for why the mainstream media brandished the thing: because it's not true; because it's complete, total, utter bull shit. It's interesting though (and chilling) how there is some central control, where if they decide that they want to get something out there, that they can do it in one stroke. This story was reported everywhere, how Jack Ruby had foreknowledge of the JFK assassination. So, he must have been involved in it and with Oswald, right? It's contrary to the official story, but hey, don't you know? This is a new development. 

But, what's the long answer as to why they did it? What was the thinking of the central planner who propelled it, who got it started, who set it in motion as a media phenom? Why did that guy want to link Jack Ruby to the JFK assassination, which supposedly was the work of Lee Harvey Oswald and no one else?

It gets back to what I have said before, that they know there are always going to be JFK conspiracy theorists, and they want to control them. They want to control the whole movement. They want to lead the whole movement. They want to set its direction. They want to point it a certain direction, as you would a wind-up toy, and head it that way. As long as it's a wrong way, then no harm can be done- to them and theirs. It's a way of keeping conspiracy theorists busy with nonsense which will preoccupy them and keep them far away from the really dangerous stuff- the truth. 

So, a false conspiracy story is a thing to behold and to treasure. 

So, by setting the "buffs" off whaling about Jack Ruby having a role in the JFK assassination, it feeds their conspiracy urges with complete, total, utter nonsense, which can lead nowhere except to more nonsense. But, at the same time, it also reinforces the idea that Ruby killed Oswald because it plays into the idea that he had to silence Oswald by killing him. Of course, Jack Ruby did NOT kill Oswald, and the truth of that has arrived. It is definitely on the map. But, the percentage of the people in the "community" who have realized it is still very small; I admit that. However, you have to understand something, that for the other side, the bad guys: IT IS THEIR WORST NIGHTMARE: PEOPLE REALIZING THAT RUBY DID NOT KILL OSWALD.  That one realization destroys everything and exposes everything in one blow. So, if they can reinforce the idea that Ruby did kill Oswald while at the same time planting a false conspiracy story to preoccupy the buffs, then it's well worth it; so time to marshal the media. Oh, they are calculating; I'll grant them that.    

So, that is the long reason why this ridiculous, and patently, obviously false conspiracy story received so much daylight in the evil, rotten, lousy mainstream press. Every last thing about the story is false. The very idea that Ruby was there is false. Jack Ruby truly was at the Dallas Morning News tending to his ads at the time of the motorcade.