Authorities were in trouble. And they were IN FEAR of Oswald. That's because he had a mouth, and he could use it. He could talk to an attorney. And it would have been EASY for him to convince that attorney that he didn't do it and that authorities were using false and fabricated evidence against him.
Oswald was smart, and I assume his attorney would have been smart. And being smart, he or she would have known what to ask Oswald to test him, to put him on the spot, to try to trip him up. And Oswald would have passed that test. He would have handled any questioning from the attorney about the rifle he never ordered, about the paper bag he never built, about the photograph he never posed for, and more. And the attorney would have come away realizing that Oswald was innocent but law enforcement was guilty.
And then, do you know what would have happened? The plotters would have had to kill, not only Oswald, but also his attorney, and before he talked to anyone. How hard would that have been? Very.
The plotters knew all along that Oswald could not be allowed to speak to an attorney. But, how long could they deny him his rights? The answer is: not much longer than they did. And that meant: THEY NEEDED TO KILL HIM.
So, do you think they just got lucky that Jack Ruby came along and relieved them of their dire burden? Stroke o' luck, was it?
You would be wise not to apply the word "luck" to anything in the JFK assassination. But, it doesn't mean that they got Jack Ruby to do it. We can be absolutely sure that Ruby did not conspire with them to do it. If so, THE PLOTTERS WOULD HAVE HAD TO KILL HIM, and I mean fast. You know the drill. He hung himself in his cell. He got shot, trying to escape. He got into a fight with another inmate, who killed him. But, Ruby lived for three years, and that should tell you that he didn't have anything on the Dallas Police- or anyone else. And he was not involved with those who killed Kennedy. Again, if he was, they'd have killed him.
And that's why it irked me late last year when myriad stories appeared in the mainstream press about Ruby going to Dealey Plaza to "watch the fireworks" with a friend, a petty criminal. This is the same mainstream media that regularly trashes "conspiracy theorists" yet, there they were, pushing a new conspiracy theory about Ruby. Why did they do it? BECAUSE IT'S NOT TRUE. It's the same reason why the Dallas Morning News pushed the story about Carolyn Arnold seeing Oswald eating lunch in the 2nd floor lunch room at 12:25; because it's not true.
Seriously: the fact that Ruby lived 3 years is ironclad proof that he did not conspire with the Dallas Police - or anyone else - to kill Oswald.
So, the plotters needed Oswald dead, pronto, which is to say before he spoke to an attorney, to insure that he never spoke to one. And supposedly, Ruby didn't show up to do it until 1 hour and 20 minutes after Oswald was expected to momentarily be in the garage. Ipso facto, Ruby could not have had any plan to kill Oswald. And that means that he could not have conspired with anyone to do it. He didn't even conspire with himself to do it- which is exactly what he said. His exact words were, "Nobody knew...not even me."
So, the idea that Ruby conspired with someone or had any idea of killing Oswald is ridiculous. What's left? There is only the official story that he did it on sudden impulse, an act of temporary insanity, which J. Edgar Hoover said a mere 45 minutes after Oswald died.
But, they don't usually give you the death penalty for murder without premeditation. I think it is eerie that the argument that Ruby's attorney used at trial, and lost, came to be accepted.
But, let's look at the "psychomotor epilepsy" defense which was used. There is such a term in Medicine, but it does not refer to a complex action like shooting someone with a gun. Rather, it's like this:
"Often people exhibit odd behaviors during an episode, such as repeated swallowing and odd limb movements. Before a seizure occurs, what is called an aura is often experienced, usually lasting for only a few seconds or minutes. It is during the aura that strange thoughts and feelings are experienced, along with hallucinations of sight, sound, taste and smell, and visual distortions. Physical symptoms such as sweating and nausea may also be present. After an aura, a person generally appears vacant and may carry out strange, repetitive body movements, such as smacking the lips or chewing."
It does not involve anything as complex and linear as taking out a gun, rushing someone, and pulling the trigger to shoot him. So, the jury was right to reject that defense. Yet, it has become "official." It was presented in the 1978 tv movie, "Ruby and Oswald" starring Jim Leavelle.
But, it makes no sense, and Ruby conspiring with someone, anyone, to do it makes no sense, and Ruby planning to do it himself makes no sense (Who shows up late to a murder? Who sends a $25 money order right before destroying one's own life? Who eats breakfast while browsing through the newspaper right before leaving to annihilate another human being and himself?) then what's left? What's left is that he didn't do it, and the guy in the photos and films wasn't Jack Ruby. And, as I've said many times, there is not enough exposure, not enough visual information on the shooter to say that he's Ruby. There never was. The low-riding hat and the non-frontal views rule out any positive identification of the shooter. No one can claim to "see" Jack Ruby in the images of the shooter. Those images don't cinch it for Ruby. In fact, if you look at them closely, you can confirm that the Garage Shooter was NOT Ruby. Then, there is Ruby's "confession" but what does it consist of? It consists of: "They told me I did it, so I must have done it." It all came from them, the Dallas Police, not from Ruby. And no one in the garage except for the Dallas Police claimed to recognize Ruby.
Jack Ruby was innocent. This wrongly accused Jewish man is one of the most wronged men in history. I can't imagine anyone who was more wronged than him. And the claim that he did it is riddled with so many incredulities, (such as that, without even trying to evade, Ruby got past a 29 year old cop without being seen) that one has to be completely uninformed or misinformed or just plain gullible and stupid to believe it.
Look at this poor guy. Look at those dazed, unfocused eyes. Some murderer. He couldn't figure out how to open a tube of toothpaste, never mind murder someone.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.