John Simkin Posted October 1, 2004 Share Posted October 1, 2004 Seth Kantor was working for the Scripps-Howard newspaper group in Washington in November, 1963. However, in the early 1960s he worked for the Dallas Times Herald. While working in Dallas he became friendly with Jack Ruby who supplied him with the material for several stories that appeared in his newspaper. Kantor was in the presidential motorcade when John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dealey Plaza. He arrived at Parkland Hospital while Kennedy was receiving medical care. Kantor testified before the Warren Commission that while in the hospital he entered into a conversation with Jack Ruby. It has been suggested that Ruby might have been involved in tampering with the evidence. Ruby denied he had been at the hospital and the Warren Commission decided to believe him rather than Kantor. This seems very strange. Why would the Warren Commission believe Ruby over an awarding winning journalist. In his book Who Was Jack Ruby (1978), Kantor examines the reasons why the Warren Commission seemed to be unwilling to carry out "an in-depth probe of Ruby's past". Kantor also provides information that suggests that Ruby was "allowed" into the Dallas Police Station so that he could kill Lee Harvey Oswald. Kantor later wrote that after reading his book: "Burt W. Griffin, the Warren Commission attorney who developed these conclusions about Jack Ruby for the Warren Report, has changed his mind about Ruby not appearing at Parkland soon after the President had been brought there. Griffin, who since has become a judge in Ohio, now says "the greater weight of the evidence" indicates I did see Ruby at Parkland." http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKkantorS.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kerrigan Posted October 2, 2004 Share Posted October 2, 2004 I just finished watching part of The Men Who Killed Kennedy (again). I saw Kantor's testimony and it is very persuading. How could anyone claim Kantor was mistaken when he vividly remembers his confrontation with Ruby? He shook Ruby's hand, Ruby asked Kantor what he thought about his closing of the Carousel Club in respect of the President, Kantor said it was probably "a good idea" and then said something to the effect of "Excuse me, I have to go now." Kantor would then say he was stunned about how the Warren Commission portrayed his testimony and immediately wondered how they had treated other's testimony. He also wondered how many witnesses the Commission chose not to believe and why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter McGuire Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I just finished watching part of The Men Who Killed Kennedy (again). I saw Kantor's testimony and it is very persuading. How could anyone claim Kantor was mistaken when he vividly remembers his confrontation with Ruby? He shook Ruby's hand, Ruby asked Kantor what he thought about his closing of the Carousel Club in respect of the President, Kantor said it was probably "a good idea" and then said something to the effect of "Excuse me, I have to go now." Kantor would then say he was stunned about how the Warren Commission portrayed his testimony and immediately wondered how they had treated other's testimony. He also wondered how many witnesses the Commission chose not to believe and why. It is indeed amazing that the Warren Commission chose to believe a murderer over a respected newsman! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bauer Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 On 4/8/2011 at 7:49 PM, Peter McGuire said: It is indeed amazing that the Warren Commission chose to believe a murderer over a respected newsman! Not just a murderer. An extremely mentally unbalanced one. How could anyone on the Warren Commission suffer through hours and hours of Ruby's crazy meanderings and paranoid break down thoughts and then justify placing such a person's word over someone of Seth Kantor's character, career achievements and mental health. Kantor's resume even included serving in the Marine Corps during WW II. This specific irrational credibility decision by the Warren Commission defies logic to such a degree it's disturbing. Surprised this one issue wasn't brought up more in interviews of the WC members later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Harper Posted July 15, 2018 Share Posted July 15, 2018 On 7/10/2018 at 7:05 AM, Joe Bauer said: This specific irrational credibility decision by the Warren Commission defies logic to such a degree it's disturbing. You mentioned this disjuncture before and I concur. For me, it happened when I saw Kantor on a You-Tube clip. Why would this guy lie? You read his book, the question echoes all over and rings your brain to think again of killer Ruby, his pals, his truthfulness, his rambling evasions when questioned. If this were the only Warren Commission mistake it would be enough to tarnish them; but there are so many that it becomes useless to categorize which are the worst. And. And. Our history books and our journalists keep up the echo. Someday it will cease but I think it will take a period of atonement and reconciliation like that experienced by South Africa after apartheid. The first order is to face the truth; the second is to figure a way to live with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 https://www.amazon.com/Ruby-Cover-Up-S-Kantor/dp/0821739204/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1531714531&sr=1-1&keywords=seth+kantor&dpID=511E5tHKukL&preST=_SX218_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch Seth Kantor knew Jack Ruby, saw and talked to him at Parkland Hospital on 11/22/63 Jack inquired of Seth if the President had survived if I remember correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 Classic Simkin. "This seems very strange. Why would the Warren Commission believe Ruby over an award winning journalist? " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bauer Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 Why would the WC state in their final report this finding which any rational person who has read, seen or heard anything about Jack Ruby/ Seth Kantor would instantly see as so illogical it's...well, nuts. What were they afraid of in providing cover for this specific Ruby lie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Carvalho Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, Joe Bauer said: Why would the WC state in their final report this finding which any rational person who has read, seen or heard anything about Jack Ruby/ Seth Kantor would instantly see as so illogical it's...well, nuts. What were they afraid of in providing cover for this specific Ruby lie? Despite Ruby's professed "love" for president Kennedy, at the time of the assassination Ruby was waiting outside a newspaper office for an advertising man who was not there. The last known time Ruby was seen at the newspaper offices was approximately 1:15 p.m.. At that very moment, several miles away, a civilian's voice was heard on a police radio calling for help, that "... a policeman's been shot...". Following Oswald's attempt on the life of Gen. Edwin Walker there are nearly three hours of Oswald's whereabouts that are unaccounted for. Question: Where does a man who has little money and no vehicle hide for that amount of time between the hours of 9 p.m. and roughly midnight? Allen Dulles raised this question in a closed hearing of the Warren Commission. I have never seen any follow-up on this in the official record. Ruby's Vegas Club was only 6-7 blocks from Walkers home. Then attorney general, Henry Wade, later wrote a confidential memorandum to J. Lee Rankin suggesting that it appeared Oswald had been headed in the general direction of Ruby's apartment when he left his rooming house at N. Beckley following the assassination. Wade requested that the commission look into this further. Again the official record shows no signs of any such interest on the part of the Warren Commission. Question: Why would a man who sees Oswald at midnight, and knows enough about Oswald's politics to correct the DA on the "Fair Play for Cuba Committee", then go on an all night quest until 6 a.m. the next morning trying to find evidence of a right-wing conspiracy? During Ruby's plea to be taken to Washington, D.C. before Chief Justice Earl Warren during his sworn testimony, Ruby named Walker specifically when asked why he feared for his life, and those of his family members. Let's not forget that Ruby was found guilty of premeditated murder. It is my opinion that Ruby and Oswald had met at least eight months prior to the assassination... and the government knew it. BTW, read Kantor's book several years ago. Very insightful. Edited July 16, 2018 by Craig Carvalho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bauer Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 (edited) On 7/15/2018 at 12:07 PM, Robert Harper said: You mentioned this disjuncture before and I concur. For me, it happened when I saw Kantor on a You-Tube clip. Why would this guy lie? You read his book, the question echoes all over and rings your brain to think again of killer Ruby, his pals, his truthfulness, his rambling evasions when questioned. If this were the only Warren Commission mistake it would be enough to tarnish them; but there are so many that it becomes useless to categorize which are the worst. And. And. Our history books and our journalists keep up the echo. Someday it will cease but I think it will take a period of atonement and reconciliation like that experienced by South Africa after apartheid. The first order is to face the truth; the second is to figure a way to live with it. The Jack Ruby - Parkland Hospital lie was so obvious that as mentioned, even Burt. W. Griffin ( the Warren Commission attorney who developed these conclusions for the Warren Report ) changed his mind about it later. And like you say Robert "if this were THE ONLY Warren Commission mistake it would be enough to tarnish them." When you read Ruby's WC testimony you notice that his questioners mostly asked him general questions and let him find his own narrative and ramble on for hours. Ruby for sure used this rambling on tactic to keep distracting from so many other more important areas of his full life actions, connections and history, which if seriously gotten into, would have revealed that Jack Ruby and his career doings were much more intriguingly involved than simple strip joint owner. There were SO MANY other areas of questioning the Warren Commission could have pursued with Ruby that would have revealed so many other nefarious higher crime doings on his part. Drug running? Gun running? Gambling and prostitution set up man? FBI informant? Bag man for who knows what groups and agencies? Look up Mark Lane's interview with Nancy Hamilton ( on You Tube ) and listen to her first hand account of seeing Jack Ruby ( her former employer ) appear at a gun running meeting she was attending and how Ruby was clearly the money man. How about asking Ruby about his pimping hookers for possibly some of the most powerful men in Texas politics and police agencies and members of the Mafia? Ask him who some of these johns were. Everyone knows the strip joint business back then was often a multi-state organized and connected front for prostitution and there were establish networks over many states where their hookers would be shuffled back and forth for this purpose. From Florida to Texas in this case? And as one might expect, this same established network was used to ship drugs. Rose Cherami ( another former employee of Jack Ruby ) confirmed this scenario with Louisiana state police officer Francis Fruge'. Ruby's trips to New Orleans never included even one personal meet up with JFK/RFK death wish level hating Godfather Carlos Marcello or someone close to him? Yet, Ruby is sent to Cuba and gets a personal sit down to see and talk to Santos Trafficante while Trafficante is in a Castro jail? Little ole Jack Ruby? Personally meeting one of most powerful Mafia heads in the country? If the WC had truly wanted to know the full picture of Jack Ruby they could have easily gotten this. Instead they kept their questions centered mostly around Ruby's specific movements and actions around 11,22,1963 thru 11,24,1963. Pinning Ruby down as far as his other nefarious areas of activity, especially the gun running, drug running and possible FBI informant role and who he was working for in these duties, would have revealed so much more valuable Ruby background information. When asked why he didn't have any inclination to see his "beloved" JFK and classy Jackie in the flesh in their motorcade just two blocs away the day of 11,22,1963 and instead holing up in a newspaper office waiting area the whole time...Ruby actually threw out this ridiculous explanation..."I don't like crowds." ! Yet less than one hour after the motorcade, crowd averse Ruby ( who attended state fairs, major boxing events, skating rinks and YMCA pools, etc ) thrusts himself into the mad house crush crowd at Parkland and then just hours later he again thrusts himself into one of the most crazy crowded situations ever seen inside the Dallas Police Department building? Ruby lied and diverted so much. His WC testimony was a long, drawn out, crazy rambling narrative that must have had everyone present numb with boredom and fighting yawns and falling asleep. Overall, the full Ruby story truth was kept under purposely intended wraps. And since the FBI was controlling the WC investigation, we know who was keeping it this way. Edited September 21, 2018 by Joe Bauer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 20, 2018 Share Posted September 20, 2018 Ruby doc, thanks to Malcolm Blunt Pay careful attention to the annotations. http://jfkassassinationuk.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Ruby.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted September 21, 2018 Share Posted September 21, 2018 (edited) 9 hours ago, Bart Kamp said: Ruby doc, thanks to Malcolm Blunt Pay careful attention to the annotations. http://jfkassassinationuk.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Ruby.pdf Excellent info I've never read. In just the first 5 pages. Scrolled through the rest for the moment to the bottom of the page looking for any names regarding who wrote this and who did the annotations. I see "the commission", first thought this might be from the FBI. Edited September 21, 2018 by Ron Bulman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 21, 2018 Share Posted September 21, 2018 Correct Ron the WC was responsible for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathias Baumann Posted September 21, 2018 Share Posted September 21, 2018 On 7/17/2018 at 9:17 PM, Joe Bauer said: Ruby for sure used this rambling on tactic to keep distracting from so many other huge areas of his full actions and connections which if seriously gotten into would have revealed Jack Ruby to be much more than simply a small business owner JFK and Jackie loving guy who was just so stressed out from inconsolable grief he didn't know what he was doing wen he shot Lee Harvey Oswald to death the following Sunday morning. That "rambling on tactic" becomes especially obvious when the Warren Commission ask Ruby if he knew Tippit. Add that to the fact that Oswald was heading in the direction of Ruby's home and you'll understand how Tippit ended up in that calm neighborhood far from any crime scene. But when Tippit failed to carry out his assigned task Ruby himself had to step in... On 7/16/2018 at 8:40 PM, Craig Carvalho said: It is my opinion that Ruby and Oswald had met at least eight months prior to the assassination... and the government knew it. According to one of James di Eugenio's recent posts Jim Garrison had a job application filled out by Oswald that cited Ruby as a reference. Unfortunately that document has since disappeared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted September 21, 2018 Share Posted September 21, 2018 Interesting aside in that Jeff Morley bumped a old Jack Ruby thread on his site yesterday, though not related to Kantor. http://jfkfacts.org/ex-flame-says-jack-ruby-had-no-choice-but-to-kill-oswald/#more-3504 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now