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

I want to thank OIC member Richard McHugh for sending me this video of Jack Ruby, which I hadn't seen before. 

First, I'll point out that once again, there is lots of doctoring of Ruby's hair. This doesn't even look natural. It looks like there is a thick tuft of hair in front that is short, then also extremely long strands swept back. And then there is a narrow but dense finger of long hair streaking back the other way. Look: this is NOT how men go bald. Have you ever seen such a thing as this on any other man? Because I sure haven't. They had the need to give Ruby hair because the Garage Shooter in the Jackson photo has such a thick carpet of hair. This is bogus.  

And note that the quality of the image is very poor. It's hazy; it's blurry, with poor contrast. That was done deliberately so that the hair additions would blend better. 

But, let's talk next about what Ruby said. He said he never spoke to Lee Oswald in his life. And there is no reason to doubt him. He wasn't lying. Yet, admittedly, there are Oswald/Ruby sightings. What does that mean? It means those sightings are false. 

You have to realize how clever they were, although diabolical is surely a better word. They knew that some people were not going to be buy the lone nut story about Ruby. But, the way to keep the snoops far away from the truth that Ruby was innocent was to paint him as being even more guilty. Impugn him for the JFK assassination as well. Link him to everybody, including Oswald. Give the buffs that sandbox to play in, and it will distract them from ever pursuing the truth, which is that Ruby was innocent. 

Then, Ruby said that the word "angry" is not in his vocabulary. He was referring to the fact that at the trial, Dallas detectives testified repeatedly about how angry Ruby was, talking trash about Oswald. "I'm glad I killed the son of a bitch," etc. Listen to Ruby because he's telling you that it wasn't even his nature to talk that way. It's not the person that he was. It was all made up. 

He said he was more remorseful than angry. And what he meant was that it never dawned on him to try to hurt or kill Oswald. There is absolutely no doubt that he went to that garage without the slightest glimmer of thought to shoot Oswald. And you can't doubt him. If he was bent on killing Oswald, he would have shown up in time for it, and the only time they ever gave was 10 AM. He said that he had no expectation of even seeing Oswald, let alone shoot him. 

And think about the defense that his lawyers used, that he had "psychomotor epilepsy" and shot Oswald like in a sleep-walk. Why would they resort to that defense? It must be because they asked Ruby what happened, and he said, "I don't know! I went to the garage, and the next thing I knew, the police were all over me. Then, they hustled me up to the 5th floor and told me I shot Oswald, but I don't have the slightest memory of doing it, and I never, for a second, had such a thought in my mind." 

So, from that, his lawyers concluded that he must have gone into some kind of trance, and as soon as it was over, he snapped out of it. 

But, it was a ridiculous defense. Epileptic seizures can't cause motor responses as intricate as reaching for a revolver and pulling the trigger. The problem was that his laywers had blinders on. Or, you could say that they had a wall in their mind that was preventing them from considering that Dallas Police were lying. The reality of the situation, that Dallas Police and FBI were the ones who killed Oswald, and the hapless Ruby was just their patsy- that they could not conceive of. They just couldn't go there. The disease of Americana had a grip on their minds- a lock on their minds. 

The video ends with Ruby crying and saying that he doesn't understand how such a great man as that (JFK) could be lost. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3frRy03qKV8&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR3XtyO_iW_nELpD-V4sKx5exarPkImLNNkUt-vSnWlg-7eYzfOBGb6XKGI

Ruby was childlike and innocent. He had no deceit in him at all. And until quite recently, the framing of Ruby so that the State could murder Oswald before he could speak to a lawyer, was one of the best kept secrets in the history of secrets. Over 50 years had passed with the only hostile suspicions being that Ruby was MORE involved in the whole assassination plot, not less. So, the naysayers were moving farther away from the truth, not getting closer to it.

But, all that has changed now. The truth has been moored, and it is not going to drift away. The work that I and the Wizard and Amy Joyce have done, following the lead of Maxsim Irkutsk from Russia, and with help and support from quite a few others, is not going away. And time is on our side because no matter how slowly it grows, it will grow. Ultimately, there will be JFK truth, and that includes both Oswald innocence and Ruby innocence.