This story proves Jack Ruby didn’t shoot Oswald, while proving there were likely at least four different Jack Ruby assassin decoys involved in the Lee Harvey Oswald assassination.
This should not come as a surprise as it is a well documented fact there were also just as many, if not more Lee Harvey Oswald decoys used in the assassination of President Kennedy by the CIA. Just to be crystal-clear, when I put forth the notion the CIA spearheaded President Kennedy’s assassination, I am referring specifically to an ultra-clandestine, elite cloak-and-dagger faction of the CIA that operated in the most invisible and stealth manner, lead by CIA chief of counterintelligence and master spy, James 'Jesus' Angleton. JFK Assassination expert and accomplished author Jefferson Morley once referred to this entity as “The CIA-within-the-CIA.”
This is a deeply profound story you are about to read. Many people are aware of the formal narrative put forth in the Warren Commission which suggested a lone nut gunman named Lee Harvey Oswald, who was a pro-Castro communist, shot JFK, then Jack Ruby shot Oswald as he didn't want the president's widow to have to testify as to what she witnessed.
Of course, none of this makes any sense or had a basis in reality. Ruby's killing of Oswald, just like Oswald's killing of JFK by definition were perfect crimes, weren't they? Just to be perfectly clear, a perfect crime by definition leaves no highly contradictory evidence behind.
The scenes shown above remains one of the most bizarre and macabre pieces of Kabuki theater in history. It's right out of the Twilight zone, and as with most things related to the JFK Assassination, represents a literal ultra-high-speed hurricane of coincidences, designed to deeply perplex and disorient the viewer.
Carefully study the image above and THINK for a moment about what you are seeing in the photo above? You can see and make 100% positive ID on the victim, Lee Harvey Oswald as he is being assassinated, yet conversely you can’t see Jack Ruby’s face at all!?!?! This is NOT a coincidence, but part of a well planned false flag CIA clandestine operation.
“President Kennedy's assassination was the work of magicians. It was a stage trick, complete with accessories and false mirrors, and when the curtain fell, the actors, and even the scenery, disappeared.”
—Arthur Schlesinger Jr.
L’Americque Brule (America is Burning)
I included the super profound cloak-and-dagger quote above as it is so profoundly true and on-point for Oswald's alleged assassination by Jack Ruby as well.
This is identical modus operandi to JFKs assassination in the Zapbruder film where you see JFK GETTING shot but the identity of the assassin(s) is hidden. This methodology is cloak-and-dagger 101. It has been said the video footage of Jack Ruby assassinating Oswald represents the first time anybody was murdered live on TV.
Before we go into detail I want to point out many of the research findings in this article are not my own, but were discovered by the amazing JFK Assassination researcher, Dr. Ralph Cinque.
I learned most of the information covered in the article from the great team at The New JFK Show, which is featured in the video below, as well as in the two AMAZING videos at the end of this article. I simply took their findings and researched them even more and came up with more details which I share in this story. I agree with all of Dr. Ralph Cinque's finding, with one exception which I point out later in this article.
The brilliant team at The New JFK Show recently published a new video where they exposed the fact the man who was alleged to be Jack Ruby, who reportedly shot Lee Harvey Oswald had a man approach him within a second of having shot Shot Oswald to place a bag over his head, as they showcase in the video below.
Photo of Lee Harvey Oswald just after he was arrested and was brought out of the Texas Theater
Jack Ruby would never say where he came from Yesterday don't matter if it's gone While the sun is bright Or in the darkest night No one knows, he comes and goes
Goodbye, Jack Ruby Who could hang Oswald's name on you? When you change with every new day Still, I'm gonna miss you
Don't question why Jacob needs to be so free He'll tell you it's the only way to be He just can't be chained To a life where nothing's gained And nothing's lost, at such a cost
Goodbye, Ruby Tuesday Who could hang a name on you? When you change with every new day Still, I'm gonna miss you
"There's no time to lose, " I heard Jack say Catch Oswald before he slips away Dying all the time Lose your dreams and you will lose your mind Ain't life unkind?
Goodbye, Jacob Rubenstien Who could hang Oswald's name on you? When you change with every new day Still, I'm gonna miss you
Goodbye, Jack Ruby Who could hang JFK on you? When you change with every new day Still, I'm gonna miss you
If you examine the video above you can see and judge for yourself. I would argue the man who was alleged to shoot Oswald was NOT Jack Ruby, but a stand-in body double decoy disguised to look like Ruby. In other words, a Jack Ruby doppelgänger.
I argue the whole event was carefully staged and choreographed by the CIA using the state of the art technology and script writing of the day, but left behind way too many clues as the technology at the time was limited and did not allow them to cover up all the details.
In the animated GIF video below we see the man purported to be Jack Ruby (center left) has lost his fedora hat and is literally falling (aiming) directly and intentionally toward the bald man who is on his right facing him, and notice the 'bagman' has opened a bag for the Ruby doppelgänger to stick his head into.
Animated above: Jack Ruby's head is immediately covered by unidentified
bald bagman within a second of having shot Lee Harvey Oswald.
Then we see the man placing the bag over the fake Ruby's head. When I carefully examined the raw video I noticed something really strange, and that is the how aggressively the bald 'bagman' approached Jack Ruby to cover his head with the bag!?!! Also, we see Ruby keep his head low like a bull charging the red flag of a matador. In other words you can see Ruby is intentionally keeping his head down intentionally diving his head into the bag—like a football player trying to sneak the ball forward over the line of scrimmage to get a first down.
Next, Ruby's head has been covered by the bag. Also, it is obvious this whole event was carefully choreographed to hide many of the details that could identify the real Jack Ruby. This is NOT a coincidence, but by design the camera NEVER got a good look at Ruby's face as this would have provided too much proof that it was not the real Jack Ruby.
Notice the men who supposedly jumped and tackled Ruby all stood behind him—with their backs to the camera to hide many identifiable characteristics of the fake Ruby decoy. This was done to hide or camouflage the Ruby look alike in case something went wrong as this footage was supposedly being transmitted live, and the CIA would not have a second chance if something went wrong. Thus, they did EVERYTHING they could think of to ensure success by playing it as safe as possible.
Bagman & Stingy Brim
Also, if you watch the video closely, it become obvious the man (Dallas Police Detective, Thomas B. Mcmillon) on the right with the black stingy brim fedora jumps out as a tag-team with the bald bagman (Louis Miller or Marvin Johnson)—like Batman and Robin—and intentionally rotates himself on purpose into the line of sight to run interference in between Ruby and the camera.
Stingy brim's ska-dancing-like maneuvering is non-sensical, as if he was really trying to stop Ruby he would have charged directly at him, not done a dosey-doe swing around your partner skanking move. Also, if you look very closely, you will notice as he completes his swing around for a frame or two there is an big airbrushed black blotch that appears to the left of his left elbow, which was obviously done to obfuscate the view of hands of bagman holding the bag over Ruby's head.
If you carefully examine the photo below we see the bald bagman and the black stingy brim fedora man in the photo below directly in front of the alleged assassin, Jack Ruby, with their backs agains the wall—laying in wait to leap out and fulfill their roles of camouflaging Ruby. Also, it is obvious the jail officer, Woodrow Wiggings (WhiteHat) with the white Police hat and uniform was positioned strategically to distract and pull attention from Bagman and Stingy Brim. Further evidence of this exists when you watch his body language and notice that he not only defers to Bagman and Stingy Brim, but does NOTHING but stand and watch as a spectator, which make little sense as he is supposed to be a highly decorated law enforcement officer.
The question you are likely asking is why would a man with a bag be standing next to Ruby to put it over his head within a second after shooting Oswald?
The answer is due to the fact the man who was alleged to have shot Oswald was NOT Jack Ruby, but somebody disguised as Ruby. The photo below offers proof of this fact. The man disguised to be Jack Ruby is pictured on the far right (in side profile) of the photo below wearing the grey fedora.
The image below on the left shows Jack' Ruby's arrest side profile mug shot photo taken right after his alleged assassination of Oswald. In other words, the two images below are purported to have been taken within less than an hour of each other. Look carefully at the real Ruby's hairline on the back bottom of his neck. Notice his hairline is tapered, and he has significant neck hair as he likely had not had a haircut for at least a couple of days.
The photo above on the right is a photo of the man who imitated Ruby, and notice it looks like he is wearing dark sunglasses, but in reality he was not wearing any glasses. That is because his eye detail was airbrushed out to try and camouflage his identity—like a raccoon with primitive, inaccurate falling shadows that don't match the lighting in the rest of the image. They claimed the video was broadcast live, but it is likely it was delayed so they could airbrush out detail.
Notice Jack Ruby's skin looks very natural and smooth in his side profile mug shot seen above on the left. The Jack Ruby doppelgänger on the right is wearing a primitive, sloppy prosthetic latex mask, but what really gives it away is the fact his hair line on his neck completely mismatches the hairline from Jack Ruby's arrest photo taken less than an hour later.
In other words, the man on the right is likely wearing a wig, and his blocked longer haircut is NOT tapered, and he does not have hair on his neck. Also, the real Jack Ruby's hairline is located much closer to his ear, whereas the Ruby decoy has far more white space distance between his ear and side rear hairline as seen below.
A complete hair taper and length mismatch in photos of the real and
fake Jack Ruby imposter taken less than an hour apart from one another.
So now that we know there were multiple Ruby doubles or doppelgängers the question is how many fake Ruby's body doubles were there? I have counted a total of 4, and maybe even 5 Jack Ruby's—including the real one. The collage below shows the side profile of the REAL Jack Ruby in the bottom left hand corner. Pay close attention to the way he wore his hair in the back, which was tapered. The man who was accused of having shot Oswald is pictured in the upper right hand corner, and notice there is a complete hair mismatch as he has a blocked (completely squared off) haircut with much longer hair and no taper.
So far this give us 2 Jack Ruby's. Next, carefully examine the man pictured in the upper left and lower right who the Warren Commision claimed in an exhibit were also Jack Ruby, walking thought the hallway just before the midnight press conference which took place on November 22, 1963 in the basement of the Dallas Police Station. This is where I disagree with Dr. Ralph Cinque, who argues this man pictured below is the real Jack Ruby, and I argue he is not the real Jack Ruby.
Alleged Jack Ruby (center) mingles with the crowd in a corridor at Dallas Police Headquarters on the night of November 22, 1963, after President Kennedy's assassination earlier that day. Screen grab appears courtesy of CBS News.
If you carefully examine the hair on the man in the upper left hand and lower right hand corner two images up, it is naturally wavy and falls straight down. Compare this to Ruby's official Dallas Police arrest mug shot photos shown below as well as the trial photo in the bottom left hand corner (also seen two images above) and we see the real Ruby wore his VERY straight hair slicked back with some kind of hair product. Also notice the man in the upper left hand and lower right hand corner (two images up) has a tapered hairline which comes to a point on center in the middle, whereas the man pictured in the upper right hand corner, who was featured in the video and photos has a straight across blocked hairline. It is literally impossible all three of these are the same man.
Also, notice the shape of the noses (three images up in this story) are completely different, and particularly the bridge of the nose is quite different. Also, the shape of the ears, sideburn and bald pattern. Also, if we examine the height of the white shirt collar on the man located in the upper left hand and lower right hand corner it is a COMPLETE mismatch with the man in the upper right hand corner. Once again, based upon tailoring details it is literally impossible these are the same man.
Above we see three different Ruby's, but there is one more! The photo below is of Jack Ruby taken in the Midnight Press Conference and it comes from another official Warren Commision Exhibit (Commission Exhibition Number 2424), and clearly it's not only not the real Jack Ruby, but a completely different fake Ruby decoy. Keep in mind, according to the official narrative put forth the man in the photo below who is supposed to be Jack Ruby at the Midnight Press Conference is the exact same man pictured in the collage above in the upper left hand and bottom right hand corners images!?!!
This fake Ruby is disguised with glasses, but if you look closely you will notice he is not the same man. Let's start with his tailoring. Jack Ruby had a short neck and always wore short collars that did not stick out of his jacket very much as detailed above. You could say the real Jack Ruby's shirt collar peaked out above his neckline between zero and a quarter inch.
Notice in the photo above taken at the Midnight Press Conference as well as the collage image above it the difference between the amount of collar linen, or the height of his white shirt that sticks out above his suit jacket collar.
As previously mentioned, the real Ruby's shirt collar does not stick out at all and the decoys collars sits up proud by almost an inch!?!! It is crystal-clear if you really study all these images they are NOT the same person!!!
High collars are typically the result of a custom made shirt. Also, if you look closely the man above in the midnight press conference looks a lot younger (think babyfaced) and more athletic than the real Ruby and has far more hair on the upper sides of his head.
Also, notice the fake Jack Ruby pictured above in the midnight press conference has a white pocket handkerchief in his left breast pocket, but the man with the lighter socks who was filmed shooting Jack Ruby lacks a handkerchief in his breast pocket. My observation is that most men who wear pocket linen in their breast pocket do it consistently, and Ruby himself said he didn't sleep that night, so it stands to reason he would NOT have changed his suit. If that is the case then this would be proof they are not the same person.
Dr. Ralph Cinque brilliantly hypothesized the purpose of the midnight press conference which only lasted a minute was for a fake Jack Ruby decoy to shoot Lee Harvey Oswald, but something went wrong. If you think about it, why would anybody ever hold a press conference at Midnight, when they could have held it the next morning? By holding it in the middle of the night, it also would have given them much more time to edit the footage before it 'supposedly' aired live. This potential 'buffer' could have been of special value in case something went wrong as it would have given them much more time to cover it up.
The Coup de Grâce Smoking Gun
This next piece of direct evidence is the coup de grâce or smoking gun piece of evidence that proves the man who allegedly shot and killed Oswald was NOT Jack Ruby.
The photo below appeared on the cover of the Dallas Morning News on November 25, 1963. Notice the color of the socks of the man who is alleged to be Jack Ruby. They are very light in color, and my best guess is they are a light grey or light tan. For frame of reference, notice Oswald's socks are clearly dark black.
The photo below offers a clearer version of the photo above, and once again look at the difference in between the color of Oswald's dark black socks and the fake Ruby's much lighter color socks. Also, notice the color of the fake Ruby's fedora seems to perfectly match the color of his socks, which suggests his socks were a light grey.
On a side note, the photo below, taken from a different angle, which has been colorized (not by me) really illustrates the difference between the length of hair on the Ruby imposter who allegedly shot Oswald, and the shorter, more cropped and tapered hairstyle of the real Jack Ruby.
According to the Warren Commision the photo above was taken less than an hour before the photo seen below. The challenge is the official arrest photo below of Jack Ruby shows him wearing a completely different outfit, than the suit he was wearing in the photo above???
Jack Ruby's ULTRA-BIZARRE Cabana Boy Outfit
High Top Shoes & Dark Black Socks
A CATASTROPHIC Continuity Error
A continuity error by definition occurs in a movie, when a detail in one scene is inconsistent with the following scene. So for instance, if in one scene a man is wearing a ring on his finger and in mid sentence the camera changes angle and he is suddenly no longer wearing the ring, you have a serious continuity error. This happens all the time in Hollywood films. Ruby's apparent complete change of outfit between having allegedly shot Lee Harvey Oswald, and being photographed for his mug shots by the Dallas Police department represent a VERY serious continuity error.
As pointed out in the photo two images up in the story of the fake Ruby shooting Oswald he is wearing very light colored socks, and in the photo above Ruby is suddenly wearing dark black socks, and completely different shoes!?!! Also, Jack Ruby is wearing white pants and a short-sleeved white casual shirt that could NOT be worn with a suit and necktie as it lacks a button at the top. We can logically deduce from these facts that could NOT have been the dress shirt he wore with a suit, nor is it a prison uniform. Reflect on this for a moment: Ruby went from wearing a long sleeved shirt and a coat with a Fedora to a short sleeve shirt?
No prison in history would provide a prisoner with an all-white uniform, and certainly if they did, it would not have a short sleeve shirt—especially in the middle of the winter in late November in a cold jail with cold concrete walls.
My background is in clothing design, which explains why I am so focused on all of Jack Ruby's outfit details, before and after he completely changed his outfit. Careful examination reveals Ruby’s white pants fit him perfectly in the waist and length. They are not too long or short. Same with his seemingly tailored short sleeve casual shirt. If this was some kind of prison uniform it would be baggier and not fit nearly as well. I also could not help but notice Ruby's pants are unusually wrinkled at top?
This is likely evidence he spent a lot of time sitting down while wearing them. It's impossible without seeing the chemical composition of his pant material to know what its wrinkling characteristics were, but most fabric would require a man to sit for many hours before their pants would become this heavily wrinkled. We also know Ruby was extremely fastidious about his clothing and outward appearance, so he would have gone out of his way to avoid looking so wrinkled. My best guess is the real Jack Ruby had been wearing this outfit of his own clothes for many hours prior to this photo being taken. Perhaps he even slept in this outfit.
Jack Ruby's highly nondescript white outfit almost looks Cuban, or like a uniform a Caribbean cabana towel boy would have worn at a resort in 1963. In other words, largely nonsensical, but clearly a red herring designed to confuse and distract the eye.
Why Did Ruby Change His Outfit?
The question is why, just after Ruby was arrested for shooting Oswald, did he obviously change his complete outfit? And, most importantly where did this mysterious change of clothes come from??? When Ruby was tackled to the ground—supposedly, did he have an overnight bag with him that he had stashed away with the change of clothes? And then he said to the arresting officers, "Hey guys, you don't mind if I change all my clothes before you take mug shots of me?"
What could the possible purpose of Ruby completely changing his entire wardrobe be??? Think about it for a moment? If you or I were the arresting officers of the man who had just allegedly shot the man who had been accused of murdering President Kennedy, and we arrested Ruby, would we allow him to change out of formal business suit, including dress shoes and socks and a fedora into something more casual and comfortable?
No. Absolutely not, because his clothes represent direct forensics evidence of the alleged crime that took place, including the jacket sleeve with gunpowder residue. In other words, if a man committed a crime while wearing an Easter bunny costume, the police would not arrest him, and then have him change into a spider man costume to take photos and mug shots? I am not aware of one single mug shot in history where the person arrested was allowed to completely change their wardrobe before posing.
Jack Ruby's formal Mug after being arrested for having shot Lee Harvey Oswald. Notice there is no button at the top of his casual shirt.
I will share the reason why I believe they changed Ruby's clothes from head to toe, which is due to the fact the man who allegedly shot Oswald was not Ruby, and thus none of his clothing or accessories would have accurately matched-up with the real Ruby who was hidden in a nearby room away from the camera.
In other words, if they took his mug shot wearing all the exact same clothing it would NOT match up 1-to-1 because it was a different man who shot Oswald, and this would have left painfully obvious and contradictory visual evidence.
RUBY'S SHOES
The strangest clue from the photograph above of Ruby's right pant leg is for some BIZARRE reason—perhaps due to static cling—has moved his right pant leg up to expose his dark black socks 👆🏼, which are a complete mismatch with the socks the man who allegedly shot Oswald was wearing!!!
Notice the shoes Ruby is wearing in the assassination of Oswald (above left) are cap-toe dress Oxford shoes with light socks and the shoes he is wearing after he was arrested have much thicker soles and are much higher up on his ankles and appear to be completely different.
One could argue, 'well maybe the Police department gave Ruby the change of clothes for some bizarre reason.' Let's say somebody were to argue the Dallas police department gave Ruby the change of clothes and socks and shoes, that would not make sense and here is why: The photo below is the official mug shot of Lee Harvey Oswald, taken the day after he was arrested.
The photo below of Oswald was also taken at the same time as the photo above mug shot images and we see the "patsy" was beaten up pretty badly while in police custody.
It is really interesting to note when Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested he was wearing a long-sleeve brown casual shirt as seen in the photo below just after he was arrested in front of the Texas Theatre located in the Oak Cliff neighborhood of Dallas, Texas.
After Oswald was brought into custody he was presented before members of the press as seen below and notice he is still wearing the long sleeved casual shirt that is only buttoned at the bottom.
When Ruby was alleged to have shot by Oswald, Oswald was over a half hour late because of a bizarre incidence that occurred during a police line-up as we witness below. Oswald was brought out to the police line-up and refused to participate as he argued he wanted his long sleeve shirt back.
Oswald was told his long sleeved shirt was lost, and the officer conducting the lineup asked him why he kept insisting he wanted his long sleeve shirt back? Oswald complained he was the only man in the police lineup wearing a t-shirt and his dirty t-shirt made him stand out from the other men in the line up, all of whom had long sleeve shirts.
Finally, Oswald said if they couldn't find his original long sleeved shirt, he wanted them to provide a long sleeved shirt so he wouldn't stand out like a sore thumb in the Dallas Police line-up. Captain Fritz refused Oswald saying, the Dallas Police County Jail Headquarters were extremely cramped and that they had no room to keep extra clothing for inmates that had been arrested.
So the question is if the Dallas Police County Jail Department couldn't provide Oswald with a long sleeve shirt, how, only an hour or so later were they able to provide Jack Ruby with a complete change of shoes, socks, pants and a shirt? None of this makes any sense for the simple reason that it was all choreographed as a piece of fake Kabuki theater, and it worked to fool the American people, at least for the first 59 years or so, but now that so many researchers have committed themselves to separating the fact from the fiction, the truth is coming out.
Also, it is worth noting Jack Ruby claimed until he died four years later he had zero memory of having shot Lee Harvey Oswald. He claimed during his trial that all he remembered was being woken up by men asking him why he shot Oswald. Ruby said, in his own words "They told me I shot Oswald".
This begs the question of whether the real Jack Ruby was perhaps drugged (Think MK Ultra), and brought into the Dallas Police Headquarters basement while wearing the white casual clothes. Then arrested and falsely accused of having shot Oswald. I don't think Ruby was an innocent man, but the preponderance of the evidence which I have presented in this article proves to a moral certainty, beyond a shadow of a doubt, Jack Ruby did NOT shoot Oswald...
I originally learned about Jack Ruby's strange change of wardrobe from two brilliant episodes of The New JFK Show #246 and #251 titled Ruby Shoes, and Midnight Press Conference which feature and are based upon Dr. Ralph Cinque's amazingly brilliant research findings as can be seen in the video below!!!
Ironically, while I came to remarkably similar conclusions as Dr. Cinque on most issues, I see some details differently. In particular, as I pointed out above I believe the Jack Ruby he thinks walking down the hallway toward the midnight press conference is real, is not, and I point out the reasons why. The two next videos are absolutely amazing and I cannot highly enough recommend watching them!!! I would like to thank Dr. Cinque for sharing his invaluable observations and contributions for this story.
One More Thing
After I wrote the article above, I reached out to Dr. Ralph Cinque and shared my article above with him. I also interviewed him in detail and he shared some really interesting insight with me. I was seeking clarity on some of the profound things he said in his interviews seen above, as he covered a lot of ground that he was clearly familiar with in a short period of time. One thing that was really fascinating is he said he thought the fake Jack Ruby decoy imposter who allegedly shot Oswald was NOT the same Ruby imposter who was seen in the video screen shot below.
I realize this sounds confusing but bear with me. Notice in the video screen grab above, the Jack Ruby decoy on the far right of the screen seen in side profile. Dr. Cinque argues this is NOT the same Ruby imposter who is pictured below shooting Oswald. Dr. Cinque says he believe the man pictured below shooting Oswald on camera is James Bookhout, who was an FBI agent, and he said there are almost zero photos of James Bookhout, as if he had been erased from history, but he said he is highly certain the man disguised below is James Bookhout.
If Dr. Cinque is correct, this would mean there would have been 5 Jack Ruby's it total, meaning 1 real Jack Ruby, and 4 Jack Ruby decoys. If you break it down, this would mean the Jack Ruby imposter pictured below would have had to have been located just out of the video camera view above, and would have had to rush out past the decoy pictured above, to shoot Oswald. On the surface this seems a little far-fetched, but then again that is what deep fake cloak-and-dagger false-flag operations is all about. Basically, this would mean there was a decoy for the decoy, but when you examine the video evidence, you realize it is defiantly within the realm of possibility.
