An especially egregious element of the official story of the JFK assassination is that Marina Oswald, after finding out that her husband was a homicidal maniac, continued to live with him and expose her daughter to him. You get married with certain expectations, and one of them is that your spouse is not going to turn into a homicidal maniac. But supposedly, Marina's husband did. But, she just accepted the new him and went on living with him. 

Not only did she go on living with him, but when he moved away to New Orleans, she followed him there so that she could continue living with him. So, after knowing that he shot at Walker and was going to shoot at Nixon (which she prevented by locking him in the bathroom, so the story goes) she followed him to New Orleans with her daughter. Wow. That is taking "for better or for worse" to the limit.   

But, it's ridiculous because no woman would do that, and least of all a woman with a small child. What mother would subject her daughter to that? She wouldn't. She couldn't. She didn't. 

There is also the issue of her not reporting him to the police. If he could be incited to kill two men, Walker and Nixon, then why not a third? A fourth? A fifth? So you see, the official story is that Marina Oswald was directly responsible for the killing of President Kennedy since she failed to report her criminally insane husband to the police. 

But, the whole story of Oswald as a homicidal maniac is a crock of bull. Everything she told the Warren Commission about Oswald was lies -and she painted a very scary picture of her life with him, like it was something out of The Shining. But, it was a pack of lies- lies that were drilled into her by the FBI.

But, how did they get her to say those terrible things? I can imagine how it began. They told her that she was traumatized, that her mind was blocking out memories in order to protect her, but they were going to help her get those memories back. And the way they did it, besides drilling her in the things they wanted her to "remember" was with drugs: hallucinogenic drugs. 

One of the effects of hallucinogens is to blur the distinction between fantasy and reality. I am referring to drugs such as LSD, mescaline (from peyote) and hallucinogenic mushrooms. The CIA used all three of those and more in the MK-ULTRA program. That's what Marina became: an MK-ULTEA subject. 

Consider these two statements: 

"Sirhan testified in his own defense, saying he had no memory of killing Kennedy."

"Dr. Walter Bromberg, the clinical director of Pinewood Psychiatric Hospital in Westchester County, said Ruby had told him that he did not remember the killing of Lee H. Oswald on Nov. 24." 

Ruby and Sirhan. They were both MK-ULTRA patsies. Both of them were completely innocent. In Ruby's case, he wasn't even in the garage at the time. He was already tucked away up on the 5th floor, having arrived much earlier than reported.

Both of them were heavily drugged. And so was was Marina Oswald. 

One of the effects of LSD is to cause you to lose weight. It disrupts your circadian rhythms of eating and sleeping. It kills your appetite. 

John Lennon underwent a lot of weight loss from taking LSD.  But no more than Marina did when she was under the protective custody of the U.S. Secret Service. You'd think they starved her. 

And, her weight loss was not from grief. 

Do you know how they sometimes ask you if you could interview anyone, living or dead, who would it be? For me, it would be Marina Oswald. I would like to find out from her exactly what they did to her when she was MK-ULTRAd.

And think about this: When James Hosty went to Irving to interview Marina a couple weeks before the assassination, he reportedly did it to find out about Oswald.  Rubbish. They knew everything about Oswald.  He went there to find out about her; specifically, to find out how respectful she was and how submissive she was to authority. Would she cooperate? Will she do exactly as she is told? And I think he came away thinking that, yes, she will, that when the time came, when the shit hits the fan,  she will not be a problem; she will be an asset.  

I've been talking to Chris Chrichton, and he reminded me about how short and stocky the neck of the Garage Shooter was. His neck was nothing like that of Jack Ruby, whose neck was longer and narrower. You can see it here. There is no way these are the same neck. And anyone who is awake can see it. There is no basis for anyone to deny it. It's insanity to deny it. They were different men. The only reason to deny it is if you just don't want to accept the truth that Jack Ruby was innocent. 

HOW COULD THESE TWO BE THE SAME MAN?
  

Look at this pepper I just picked. I tell you, I eat good. And when you eat good, you feel good, and you can probably whip your weight in wildcats. It's just a metaphor.

 An Open Letter to Dan Abrams

from Ralph Cinque 

Dan, you are wrong about Jack Ruby. If you just look closely at the images of the Shooter and compare them to Ruby on 11/24/63, you can see that it wasn't him. Compare the backs of their heads and their hair in back. 

How can those two be the same man on the same day? 

Ruby was 5'9" the same height as Oswald. The Shooter was short. He was the shortest man in the garage. He must have been no more than 5'6." That's how tall FBI Agent James Bookhout was. And Bookhout was masquerading as Ruby during the shooting.

5.9" is average height, then and now, and there is no way a 5'9" man would appear so short in that crowd.  He isn't Ruby.

On the right below is the only frontal view of the Shooter. He is a spot-on match to James Bookhout, age-adjusted.

So, on the right, they blackened out his eyes and did other things to obscure the fact that he was James Bookhout and not Jack Ruby. 

Dan, the reason Ruby had no memory of shooting Oswald is because he didn't shoot him. Ruby showed up at the garage 45 minutes to an hour earlier than claimed. He was pounced upon and dragged up to the 5th floor jail. That's where he was when the made-for-television spectacle occurred. 

Jack Ruby is the most wronged man in history. He was totally innocent of shooting Oswald. He had nothing to do with it. But, he was impaired mentally (due at least in part to drugs that he was given) and he was incapable of grasping what really happened. What about you, Dan? Are you capable of grasping what really happened? Please respond to this email if you want to know more; if you want to be on the side of truth and on the right side of history.  Thank you. Ralph Cinque 

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.  

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LAYknihwNz_eMQawBl6ZkpNw73qCp41p/view?fbclid=IwAR0-fb4xnRWdYt8B9W-CmGYu3IyscSsnZu0rf_BCEd3ragbxnDRAXMhUg2w

Jack Ruby was innocent; completely, totally innocent. These two men cannot possibly be the same man on the same day. 

Paul Popa laid down a beautiful guitar track to the voice of Hannah Vaughn singing Pallin' Around With Me which I wrote for my 3rd film The Pro Bono Watchman. And now, I'm going to share some inside information about the film. In it, a character gets attacked by being shot with an ice dart that is laced with a poison. 

Now, where do you think I got that from? I got it from real life. That is exactly what happened to John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963, and with our own eyes, we can see in the Zapruder film the effects that the poison was having on him: his spasmodic paralysis, where he couldn't put his arms down. It was like they were frozen. Also, the effect on his mental state, the complete obliteration of his mind, where he became docile and childlike and totally incapable of realizing what was happening to him or doing anything about it. And that was the whole idea, to make him a sitting duck once he entered the Kill Zone.  

Of course, there is nothing about the JFK assassination in the movie. It has nothing to do with it. But, I feel good about introducing this way of attacking someone. And we should not assume that JFK was the only one who was targeted in this manner. Billy Lovelady died suddenly of a "heart attack" when he was only 41. It was right before the HSCA Final Report was released. Richard Case Nagell died of a heart attack one day after the ARRB informed him in a letter that they wanted him to submit to questioning about the assassination. And there are others similar. Dead men tell no tales. 

But, let me be clear: JFK is the only one that I know, with absolute certainty, was attacked in this manner. The others are just suspicious.

Paul flew in just to do the song for the film, and he's gone now. But, before we left, we recorded one of his favorite songs, This Masquerade, by Leon Russell. It's a very nice song, even with my raspy voice. So please give it a listen. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZT2MdDNPQzM

This has been a very busy week for me working on the film, The Pro Bono Watchman, and also on the song for the film which I composed, Pallin' Around With Me. This picture was taken on Tuesday evening at the recording studio of George Coyne in Manchaca, Texas. Paul Popa and I are posing with our vocalist, the lovely Hanna Vaughn, who laid down her vocal track to the song, and she did a great job. What an evening.