Jack Ruby was hit by the car…

[Jerry Freeman]

 

It appears to me that it at least threw Jack Ruby off balance and therefore made it easier for the other officers to get Ruby on the floor and disarm him very quickly. Who knows who else might have been inadvertently wounded or killed if Ruby had been able to stay upright and fight them with his gun still in hand.

Mr Ruby was intent on emptying his pistol into Oswald if he possibly could.

   Just think...had the driver of the car been there a fraction of a second sooner, Ruby would've probably missed his intended target, and Oswald would've stood trial, but as with all things JFK, it just didn't turn out that way.

One skeptical ...or cynical [if you will] thought is that had Ruby failed in his attempt, Mr Oswald would have pulled a Jeffery Epstein and hung himself in his cell.

[Charles Collins]

Mr Ruby was intent on emptying his pistol into Oswald if he possibly could.
One skeptical ...or cynical [if you will] thought is that had Ruby failed in his attempt, Mr Oswald would have pulled a Jeffery Epstein and hung himself in his cell.

Mr Ruby was intent on emptying his pistol into Oswald if he possibly could.


Yes, and I think that Ruby was somewhat of an athletic type (he reportedly liked to skate) and a fighter who might not have been so easily disarmed if the car hadn’t knocked him off balance.

[Charles Collins]

Wow. Wow. I think you are correct. This has got to be one of the most major 'facts' of this case that is not (or up till now, was not) generally known even among people interested in this history, including the people on this forum.

I call it a 'fact' with quotes because there are no absolute facts in this world. Maybe the car barely missed touching him, but I doubt it.

This is the most surprising fact about the case that I have ever heard at this forum, or any JFK forum. At least nothing comes to my mind. Unlike most 'facts' presented at this forum, like Oswald is seen in the Altgens's photo in front of the TSBD building, this fact is both very interesting and very likely true. Most facts brought to light on this forum are either almost certainly false, or not that interesting. An excellent observation.

If the police and Ruby were all conspiring to kill Oswald, this has to be one the all time screw ups in the history of conspiracies. Having the police driver of the car, possibly 'pretending' he was trying to pick up Oswald, actually hitting the hitman. It would rank right up there with the a part of the police force trying to kill Oswald ended up arresting him in the theater instead.

Question:

If anyone has a 'fact' that was ever first (perhaps) presented on this forum that was:

* as interesting
* very likely true
* not generally known to people at this forum

let's hear what it is.

If anyone has a 'fact' that was ever first (perhaps) presented on this forum that was:

* as interesting
* very likely true
* not generally known to people at this forum

let's hear what it is.


I don’t remember who found it (it was someone on this forum though), but there is what appears to be the long paper bag (rifle size) laying, unfolded, on top of the boxes surrounding the sniper’s nest in one of the (I believe DPD) photos. You have to zoom in on the tops of the boxes to see it. I thought this was significant because before that discovery I think that there was not a known photo of that bag on the sixth floor of the TSBD.

[Richard Smith]

How close Ruby was to missing his opportunity further lends itself to the conclusion that he was not acting as part of a plan.  A few seconds later and Oswald is in the car and gone.  Ruby sleeps in, makes a pointless stop at the Western Union, and arrives with just seconds to spare.  Not how a plan works.  Just a matter of fate and bad luck for Old Ozzie.  Karma. 

[Steve M. Galbraith]

If anyone has a 'fact' that was ever first (perhaps) presented on this forum that was:

* as interesting
* very likely true
* not generally known to people at this forum

let's hear what it is.


I don’t remember who found it (it was someone on this forum though), but there is what appears to be the long paper bag (rifle size) laying, unfolded, on top of the boxes surrounding the sniper’s nest in one of the (I believe DPD) photos. You have to zoom in on the tops of the boxes to see it. I thought this was significant because before that discovery I think that there was not a known photo of that bag on the sixth floor of the TSBD.

Tracy Parnell has found and reported numerous new pieces of information in his research on the Antonio Veciana/Alpha 66 claim that his supposed handler was CIA officer David Atlee Phillips. And that he, Veciana, saw Phillips with Oswald in late September of 1963. Tracy has completely, for me, debunked it.

He's posted it all here and on his blog here: http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/p/the-bishop-hoax.html

[Joe Elliott]

If anyone has a 'fact' that was ever first (perhaps) presented on this forum that was:

* as interesting
* very likely true
* not generally known to people at this forum

let's hear what it is.

Tracy Parnell has found and reported numerous new pieces of information in his research on the Antonio Veciana/Alpha 66 claim that his supposed handler was CIA officer David Atlee Phillips. And that he, Veciana, saw Phillips with Oswald in late September of 1963. Tracy has completely, for me, debunked it.

He's posted it all here and on his blog here: http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/p/the-bishop-hoax.html

I don't know much about various CT claims, like the details about the involvement of the Texas Oil men, or the claims about Antonio Veciana. Still, to me, having Tracy Parnell shoot down a CT claim is like a "Dog bites Man" story. I may be good research, but not a super interesting story. Not like the "Hitman" getting bumped into while he was bumping off Oswald.

What did Antonio Veciana get from his claims? Well, he did get an Wikipedia article about him. I don't think he would have gotten one without his claims.

[David Von Pein]

I'm not 100% sure, but I think Joe Elliott, in his two posts in this thread, is just kidding around and having a little fun at the expense of overly dramatic conspiracy theorists.

Aren't you, Joe?

Anyway, I think Joe has probably got his tongue in his cheek in this discussion. Because to think that this news about Jack Ruby's leg just barely getting grazed by the barely-moving police car is (to quote Joe Elliott) "the most surprising fact about the case that I have ever heard at this forum, or any JFK forum" is a statement that seems a tad bit over the top....don't you think?

[Steve M. Galbraith]

I don't know much about various CT claims, like the details about the involvement of the Texas Oil men, or the claims about Antonio Veciana. Still, to me, having Tracy Parnell shoot down a CT claim is like a "Dog bites Man" story. I may be good research, but not a super interesting story. Not like the "Hitman" getting bumped into while he was bumping off Oswald.

What did Antonio Veciana get from his claims? Well, he did get an Wikipedia article about him. I don't think he would have gotten one without his claims.

Sure, if you judge Veciana's claims versus the general public's knowledge on the assassination I doubt more than one out of a thousand - ten thousand? - people know who Veciana was much less what he claimed. Of course, we can say that about most things we discuss here.

But during the "hot" phase of the JFK conspiracy cause in the 1970s and early 1980s - when we had more than 70% of the public believing there was a conspiracy - this was a major part of the "CIA killed JFK" allegation that was promoted. This was the Church Committee, HSCA, "CIA Family Jewels", period. From the accounts I've read, this piece, for example, caused a controversy in the country:  https://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/GaetonFonzi/WhoKilledJFK.html

It's still a major part of the claim today that Oswald was "connected" (whatever that really means) to the CIA. And from that "the CIA" was behind the assassination. If you disprove the "Phillips was with Oswald" allegation, as Tracy has done for me, then where's the evidence for this relationship? Atsugi? The "Oswald Project" claim? What is left? In the larger world this is a small footnote at most. But I think in "JFK assassination world" it's at least a chapter.

As to shooting down the conspiracy claims: well, this is a whack-a-mole exercise with these people. You knock down three claims and another three will pop up. Of course, they won't accept your evidence disproving the first three either. As in: Oswald was impersonated and didn't really go to Mexico City because the CIA had no photos of him. They reject all of the other evidence presented by the CIA or government that he went there as fake but will suddenly accept CIA photos showing Oswald there? Sorry, I don't think so; they'll say they are fake too.

It's like a game for them where they think they are scoring points with their incessant "whatabouts."