New image claimed to be Jack Ruby emerges

[Ralph Cinque]

This is weird. I have been saying for a long time that I dispute the claim
that the man shooting Oswald in the garage was Jack Ruby. And, it is
absolutely undeniable that we don't get enough of a view of his face to
visually confirm that he is Ruby. There isn't enough visual data in the
images of him to confirm, with our own eyes, that he is Ruby. We just have
to take the word of authority.

Well now, suddenly, Joseph Backes, who pretends to be an Oswald defender
but isn't really, has discovered some frames of the shooter's face from
the Bill Lord film that have never been seen before. Supposedly, right in
the middle of the ruckus, right in the middle of the wild, pandemonious,
frantic, chaotic melee that broke out right after the shooting, "Ruby"
turned and posed for the camera. Isn't that convenient?

You can see the image on my blog. I deny that the guy was Ruby, and I'm
not even sure he's real. I suspect he is more photographic flim-flam and
probably of recent origin.

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2016/09/backes-none-of-films-as-we-watch-them.html

[Mark OBLAZNEY]

Give it up, Ralphie. Go grow some bok choy.

[Ace Kefford]

Mark, I'd like your opinion. To me it looks more like the double Ruby
Jack than it does to the bona fide Jack Ruby. Or maybe it's a third Ruby?
Any thoughts?

[Ralph Cinque]

You give it up, Pinkie. Go grow some weed.

That guy wasn't Ruby, nor was he the garage shooter, who also wasn't Ruby.


http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2016/09/how-does-it-go-from-this-to-this-what.html

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2016/09/here-is-ruby-just-minutes-later-posing.html

[Jason Burke]

See. There's two or three of everyone.
And you can chose to include whichever of these two or three you need to
make your point.
Does this sound reasonable to any sane person?

[Mark OBLAZNEY]

I'm with you, Ace. It's definitely the Double Ruby Jack, no question.
Coming from a grapefruit like Cinque, that explains a lot.

[Ralph Cinque]

Jack Ruby didn't shoot Oswald, and there is no image of the shooter that
provides enough visual data to confirm that he did.

And then after the shooting, they scurried him out of there so fast,
without even cuffing him, that we simply have no image of Ruby doing it.

Seeing a guy from behind who kinda/sorta looks like Ruby doesn't cut it
because we can't see his face. I said: we can't see his face.

[Jason Burke]

Geez. Raff* is getting even more desperate.


Who'd thunk that it was even possible.

[David Von Pein]

And Ruby admitting he did it doesn't mean a thing to you, does it Ralph?

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/11/jack-ruby-interview-1966.html

And the verification that it was Ruby by the various police officers who
were there in the basement on November 24, 1963, also means zilch to you,
right Ralph? Such as Jim Leavelle:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/02/james-leavelle.html

[Ace Kefford]

OK, we're in agreement, this was Ruby Jack and not Jack Ruby. But which
one was arrested? Maybe it's time to start the Ruby Innocence Project?

[Anthony Marsh]

Childish. We can see his face while he is waiting for Oswald to come down.

[Ralph Cinque]

The fact that there are NO discernible images of Ruby doing it doesn't
mean a thing to you, does it, David? Despite all those different camera
angles, there is not a single frame in which we can tell from looking that
it's him.

Then, after the shooting, the police scurried him away without handcuffing
him and keeping him totally covered, and I mean blanketed, and that
doesn't bother you either?

Then, there is the fact that Ruby had no memory of doing it. He didn't
remember a thing about the shooting. He only remembered going to the
garage and then being pushed down to the ground by police. Nothing
in-between. And that doesn't bother you?

And you have the nerve to bring up Leavelle? A man who claimed to have
seen Ruby coming which made him jerk Oswald behind him which we know with
100% certainty did not happen. Leavelle did not react in any way until
after the shot went off.

David: It wasn't Ruby. The little bit of visual data we have from the
films and photos guarantees that it wasn't Ruby; for instance; different
hairline in back, different facial contour, different weight, different
height.

Jack Ruby most certainly did NOT shoot Oswald.

[Anthony Marsh]

You forgot to mention that many of the cops there knew Jack Ruby very
well. "Jack, you son of a bitch!"

> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/02/james-leavelle.html
>

[glenn...@gmail.com]

I think you'd do better copying and pasting Wm Weston stuff than actually
typing your own thoughts.

just sayin'.

[David Von Pein]

Tony is right (this time)....

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9ckb6QPb-a8/Ukh_Kxls3SI/AAAAAAAAv5A/YbuxS-FRM6s/s1600/Jack-Ruby-On-Right-Via-NBC-TV-Raw-Footage-In-DPD-Basement-11-24-63.png

[Ralph Cinque]

That is untrue, Marsh. You post the frame in which we can see Ruby's face
while he is waiting for Oswald to come down. And after you can't find it,
I want a frickin' apology and retraction.

[Ralph Cinque]

Marsh, that doesn't matter. It wasn't Ruby. He didn't shoot Oswald. If he
did, there would be a discernible, recognizable picture of him doing it.
There isn't. And it's because he didn't do it. They couldn't show the face
of the shooter because he wasn't Ruby. They couldn't show the face of the
shooter because he wasn't Ruby. They couldn't show the face of the shooter
because he wasn't Ruby.

[David Von Pein]

Talk about a bad case of denial. Ralph's got it.

You might as well be arguing that Dallas isn't in the state of Texas.
That's how silly you've become, Ralph.

Is there any end to your "denial" about *every* aspect of this case? Any
end at all?

[Anthony Marsh]

But our resident kook says everyone in Dallas wore that same silly Fedora.

[Jason Burke]

I wonder what ol' Raff* is replying to.

Nah, I don't.

[Ralph Cinque]

Don't give me that crap, David. This isn't trivial. There is no image of
Jack Ruby doing it. There are images that are claimed to be of him, that
are assumed to be him, but they provide so little visual information that
you can't tell if it's him. And what little visual information they
provide conflicts with him. We're not going to assume it's him just
because he's wearing a Fedora hat, are we? And the fact that they said it
was him, and he didn't deny it means nothing because he couldn't remember
doing it. He had no memory of doing it. What is the meaning of that? That
he blocked it out of his mind? Too painful to remember, was it?

And then, immediately after the shooting, they scurried him out of there
lightening-fast, under tight, close cover because God forbid anyone should
get a look at him. Why would they do that? There's only one reason:
because that shooter was NOT Jack Ruby.

If you want to defend it, go ahead. But, stop acting high and mighty about
it. I say it wasn't Ruby.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 9/24/2016 4:19 PM, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> Marsh, that doesn't matter. It wasn't Ruby. He didn't shoot Oswald. If he
> did, there would be a discernible, recognizable picture of him doing it.

Wrong. We have the photo.

> There isn't. And it's because he didn't do it. They couldn't show the face
> of the shooter because he wasn't Ruby. They couldn't show the face of the
> shooter because he wasn't Ruby. They couldn't show the face of the shooter
> because he wasn't Ruby.
>

We don't need to see his face to know it was him.

[Anthony Marsh]

Yes, I did post it. You can't figure out how to use Google. Ask a third
grader.

[Anthony Marsh]

You have to be able to translate kookspeak.
He is challenging me to post the photo or film frame which shows Jack
Ruby's face as he's waiting for Oswald to come down. I did already.
If he was kooky enough he would stipulate to my point then claim that
while Jack Ruby was doing that another man was lunging to shoot Oswald.

> Nah, I don't.
>

[Anthony Marsh]

On 9/25/2016 9:52 PM, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> Don't give me that crap, David. This isn't trivial. There is no image of
> Jack Ruby doing it. There are images that are claimed to be of him, that

So, you deny that the event was broadcast live on TV?

> are assumed to be him, but they provide so little visual information that
> you can't tell if it's him. And what little visual information they
> provide conflicts with him. We're not going to assume it's him just
> because he's wearing a Fedora hat, are we? And the fact that they said it

Not just that, but the Fedora is unique to Ruby in that crowd.

> was him, and he didn't deny it means nothing because he couldn't remember
> doing it. He had no memory of doing it. What is the meaning of that? That
> he blocked it out of his mind? Too painful to remember, was it?
>

Preparing for an insantity defense.

> And then, immediately after the shooting, they scurried him out of there
> lightening-fast, under tight, close cover because God forbid anyone should
> get a look at him. Why would they do that? There's only one reason:
> because that shooter was NOT Jack Ruby.
>

Ah, what would you expect them to do, hold a press conference right
there and then. Why shouldn't they put a criminal in jail?

> If you want to defend it, go ahead. But, stop acting high and mighty about
> it. I say it wasn't Ruby.
>

What you say has no relation to reality.

[Jonny Mayer]

I've went back on this when I said it wasn't Ruby since the photo was
shown to show his face while waiting for Oswald last time this was
discussed.

[Ace Kefford]

The way he proceeds he might deny that there even was an "event".

[Ralph Cinque]

These are my latest on the Jack Ruby impostor. The garage shooter was NOT
Jack Ruby. NOT Jack Ruby. He was an impostor who dressed like him and made
sure he kept his face out of view. And, he got help with that from the
cops who scurried him into the garage without cuffing him.


http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2016/09/here-is-good-clean-shot-of-ruby-after.html

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2016/09/epistemology-is-study-of-theory-of.html

[Mark OBLAZNEY]

You better check with OIC 'senior member' David Caban before coming to any
conclusions, Ralph. Then write a post about it.

[Jason Burke]

Your stuff gets more and more hilarious, Raff*!

I wonder how you do it.

[Ralph Cinque]

I do get letters of support from people about the Garage Shooter NOT being
Ruby, such as this one:

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2016/10/mr.html

Hey! He wasn't Ruby. There is absolutely no chance that he was. You
evaders and self-deluders can joke your jokes and crack your wisecracks
until the cows come home; it won't change it.

[Anthony Marsh]

He has a club to help him.

[Mark OBLAZNEY]

Ralph has assistants, like John Nash, but not as smart.