Doggone it, this legal analyst Dan Abrams has got it completely and totally wrong about Jack Ruby. He's come out with a new book, Kennedy's Avenger, and of course, he supports the official story that Ruby shot Oswald, and he did it alone. And that's why he's getting a ton of media coverage and free publicity.
But, if he would just listen to himself, he points out two things that should tell him that he's wrong.
First, he admits that Ruby claimed, through his lawyers at trial and in public statements, that he had no memory of shooting Oswald. Well, Abrams today, like Ruby's lawyers then, refuses to consider that the reason he had no memory of it is because he didn't do it. Ruby's whole basis for "confessing" was that others told him that he did it.
And, the second thing Abrams points out is that Ruby brought his dog Sheba with him that Sunday morning. He mistakenly said that Ruby referred to Sheba as his child. That's not what Ruby said. He referred to Sheba as his wife.
So, the fact that Ruby brought his dog along, and the fact that by the time he reached the basement, it was well past the time that Oswald was to be transferred. convinces Abrams that Ruby had no intention of shooting Oswald.
And of course, Ruby didn't have the intention to shoot Oswald. And he didn't shoot him. If you just look at the pictures of the shooter and compare them to Ruby on 11/24/63, and we have pictures of him (mug shots) you can see that the Shooter was shorter, more portly, and had very different hair. He's not Jack Ruby, and you can see it. But, you have to have your eyes and your mind open.
Go ahead and watch this. Dan Abrams is a man who is engaging in self-delusion.
Jack Ruby was innocent; completely, totally innocent. These two men cannot possibly be the same man on the same day.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.