David Josephs

this is what I mean Greg... It was a housekeeper, Louise Robertson, who supposedly called the FBI and told that story... not John. I helped impeach Ms Robertson by pointing out that Jacobi did not open until 1955 so please, give credit where it's due and get your facts straight. http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/ref/collection/po-arm/id/18246 should be the link to John's notebook with her report (you need to go to page 2) Wow are you something... your link shows that John asks a question as to whether Oswald could have been at Jacobi instead of school... except this is not John's work but Jim H's. I know that MO actually said that her son NEVER went to Jacobi. It should say that LOUISE said that MO said... blah blah I will let Jim/John know that this is a misquote of the book and the EVIDENCE that was offered. Not everything is as nefarious as you would make it. Sometime simple mistakes are made... DJ

Speculation - yes - "wild" no. Robert did indeed give a previous reporter a photo of Lee. I was giving the benefit of the doubt that the the photo used by the Star Telegraph wasn't Lee. That being the case, the simplest explanation is that Robert gave a photo of himself. I'm more than happy for the original photo to depict Lee Harvey Oswald. Talk about switcheroos... here I am giving your theory some leeway and you're the one saying "no".... The substantive issue is the Frankenstein Oswald created by Jack White. Essentially, you don't know who is in that photo and simply can't post a link or evidence which substantiates your, "Robert did indeed give a previous reporter a photo of Lee" statement. You can guess based on Occum's razor... yet in this case that cannot be treated as an axiom we can hang our hats on - it's just a generality. No offense Greg, it's just that you or anyone just saying it is not the same as offering anything to assist in proving it. It doens't really matter who that photo is or where it came from unless you can prove it... The "substantive issue" is that none of this is my work. You want to know why Jack or John A did something you should have talked to them when you had a chance and when you have one. The ISSUE is the EVIDENCE... taken as a whole. When the time is taken to corroborate and authentic the huge variety of Evidence and the info subsequently found via research and direct interview, the EVIDENCE holds within it clues that point to the existence of these two boys/men. Do one or two of your rebuttals destroy the presentation and mountian of evidence to consider? Sorry Greg, but to me the answer is no. You try to be reasonable in these rebuttals yet they are predominantly your opinion as it applies to the Evidence... not Evidence to impeach other evidence. You don't have to subscribe to the explanation - yet just as I would assume you'd rather not have others disparage your work unless they could PROVE YOU WRONG - I think you might want to offer 1) a bit more respect for the work done & 2)a more complete rebuttal which includes some sort of real evidence that counters the claims and corroborations found rather than what you believe is the simpliest or easiest answer, and that's it so obivous I'm an #@!%$% for not seeing it. This situation is neither simple or easy and your lack of investigation into the rest of the corroborating evidence (the book, notebooks and images) for the existence of H&L just makes you look disgruntled and your responses half-assed. WCR tells us FELDE was with Oswald FELDE's chronology does not match the USMC The FBI/WCR went out of its way not to present information from people who knew LEE - that man who did not complain about politics, did not sat alone and had friends The FBI/WCR went out of its way to stay away from 1954-55 The WC lawyers skipped completely over 1947 with Robert - the year of 101 San Saba Mr. OSWALD. No, sir. I would say at no time it was. In moving up perhaps there to the time of the divorce and everything, I don't remember when Mr. Ekdahl moved out of the house. At that time we were living on Eighth Avenue in Fort Worth. This was during a summer period there. And I think this was the summer after the second year that we attended there this would be the summer of 1947. Mr. DULLES. If it is agreeable, I think we will adjourn for just a minute. It is now 11 o'clock. Mr. DULLES. Very well. Mr. JENNER. At the recess, Mr. Oswald, we were dealing with excuse me. We were dealing with the period of time that you and your mother and your two brothers lived in Benbrook, Tex. This brought us through the summer of 1948, I believe. Am I correct? Mr. OSWALD. That is correct, sir. Mr. JENNER. Mr. Liebeler has determined that the divorce of Mr. Ekdahl and your mother took place in 1948. We cannot give you the month and the day in 1948, but it was during the year 1948. We had reached the point in which you related to us that, I believe, following the divorce of Mr. Ekdahl and your mother, she purchased a small home. Mr. OSWALD. That is correct. Mr. JENNER. And refresh my recollection, please--was that in Benbrook, Tex.? Mr. OSWALD. That was in Benbrook, Tex. Mr. JENNER - Excuse me, was that 101 San Saba? Mr. PIC - No, sir; I don't know nothing about 101 San Saba. Mr. PIC - During Christmas vacation of 1945 Robert and I received money to go home for the Christmas holidays. We were to take the train from Vicksburg, Miss., to Shreveport, La. These were instructions and when we arrived at Shreveport, we were to wait for Mr. Ekdahl to pick us up. We arrived and he wasn't there. So I think we waited around, I have an estimate of between 1 and 2 hours, and then he showed up. He then drove us to Fort Worth, Benbrook, Tex., and we had a house about 15 miles below Fort Worth in Benbrook, it was way out. It wasn't the same Benbrook house, it was further. This was a brick house. Mr. PIC - It was rather isolated on one of the main highways. In fact, I just drove that way recently and I couldn't find the place. When I went up to Fort Worth in 1962 I was looking for the house, I couldn't find it. Mr. JENNER - Was it Granbury Road, Box 567, Benbrook, Tex.? Mr. PIC - Yes, sir; that sounds familiar. Mr. JENNER - He (Lee) entered in September 19, 1946, and continued to January 23, 1947, old Covington Grammar School. (In New Orleans) PIC: ...During the school year 1947--48 I was informed about divorce proceedings. Christmas holidays, 1947, Robert and I returned 'to the house on Eighth Avenue in Fort Worth and those are the pictures of Lee sitting on the bike, it is in that time period. John Pic does not know about San Saba since it was not his family who lived there. The discussion on San Saba is on page 26 of H&L and involves Georgia Bell and Tarrant County Land records which JA dug up. That San Saba is unknown to John and Robert's testimony specifically skips this year is at the very least an interesting coincidence - yet winds up being much more - when one does the digging and sees how these elements fit together. Could everything we know about H&L and the JFK assassination be complete BS? of course. I don't have to agree with everything Mr. Armstrong claims, yet at the same time I dont dismiss his research simply because I dont agree with some of the conclusions he reaches just as I would never dismiss yours if it too was supported with Evidence. Take care Greg.... DJ

Boy, look at the nose on the boy John Pic says is not his brother while Robert claims to have taken the photo... They do seem kinda similar don't they?

Well Tommy - I've seen the Jack White work and another version of the photo with that same blocked background but without "Jack's" work. Sure would have been nice to see the actual photo in context - with the Star Telegram heading and other columns... Wild speculation without a shred of evidence... your "guess" .... do you ever get to the point where your speculation is supported by any evidence? You ASSUME Robert did something then you accuse him of taking MONEY for it too boot. All without a lick of evidence... So the nose of person also changes drastically over time - goes from that braod flat nose to a pointed one in less than a couple years... - must be that Asperger's thing again or a black ops nosejob... You mean Jack White's H&L composite? The three photos I used for Oswald are not composites... The image on the right is Oswald's arrest. that photo deos not appear in Jack's work. Try to keep who you're attacking straight GP... you appear to have insulted quite a few people here. Maybe if you kept a card file or something?

Tommy - Your attitude and predetermined conclusions preclude me from wanting to engage with you any longer. If it's too much trouble to go do some work to come to your own conclusions you simply are not being sincere in your interest for an answer. Go play your condescending games with someone else... I'm done engaging with you on any level until you can show some maturity. They chose very well Tommy.

And as I answered the first time... What's to be found, racing around, You carry your pain wherever you go. Full of the blues and trying to lose You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. Take care Tommy...

Thanks for setting me straight Greg.... and Tommy, please don't exert yourself over silly things like fact checking, reading or research... like the WCR & HSCA, it only got in the way of the predetermined conclusions Regarding your question - like "who killed JFK" the answer is a result of your investigation into the matter - some believe one thing, others believe something else and both have evidence to support them. again Tommy: "you aint gonna learn what you dont wanna know" and you definitely do not want to know in this case... so maybe learn the vocabulary so you can put the answer in context. You might as well ask why Nagell was trying to rob the bank - if you dont understand the context, you're not going to understand the answer. I have my theories from the work I've done. yet there is no point in sharing them with you - you're neither open or receptive to the info, nor care about its history or context. So let's keep our "discussions" to the simple stuff that does't require anything beyond opinion... that way neither of us can ever be wrong. Opposing POVs have been offered - readers here can make up their own minds and use the following to dig deeper - y'know if "fact-checking" is important to them. These notebooks contain documents straight from the Archives and not available anywhere else convering topics well in excess of H&L. There is a wealth of "Evidence" in there. What it means and how it fits is an ongoing process. Enjoy http://www.baylor.edu/lib/poage/jfk/index.php?id=72484

Saw this on Consortium News and I asked Jim if I could post it here... https://consortiumnews.com/2015/03/10/ben-bradlees-not-such-a-good-life/ Ben Bradlee’s Not Such ‘A Good Life’ March 10, 2015 Special Report: Washington Post’s editor Ben Bradlee, whose memoir was entitled “A Good Life,” is remembered by many as a tough-talking, street-smart journalist. But that reputation was more image than truth as the real Bradlee was an Establishment insider who knew which secrets to keep, writes James DiEugenio. By James DiEugenio When Ben Bradlee died last Oct. 21 at age 93, his widow Sally Quinn and his protégé Bob Woodward dutifully made the media rounds. They both lavishly praised his long tenure as executive editor of the Washington Post, which was predictable, since it was Bradlee who first hired Quinn at the Post (before marrying her) and Bradlee was influential in hiring Woodward, who then received much support from Bradlee. The Post treated Bradlee’s death something like the passing of a former president, putting the story on the front page, above the fold, accompanied by a huge close-up picture of the man – despite the fact that Bradlee had stepped down from the editor’s position more than two decades prior and although the Post had passed from the Graham family, which had hired Bradlee as editor and made him rich, to Internet entrepreneur Jeff Bezos who bought the paper in 2013

Jon Isn't a set-up by default a series of actions designed to incriminate someone who did not do the deed he is being set-up for? Oswald's actions are at the very least duplicitous. If he was part of a program to use aliases to purchase mail order rifles for Dodd (Kleins was a target of the Dodd investigation btw) and does order a rifle under HIDELL which is later used to "set him up" - did he does this to paint himself as JFK's killer or did the plotters use this to aid in his incrimination. He did not go to Russia as part of the plan to kill JFK He did not start the FPCC chapter as part of that plan He did not go to Mexico at all - yet the "set-up" used a proven imposter's voice and photo to satisfy the evidence needed to place him at the Cuban embassy attempting to get to Russia... at the time it may have had other purposes - for the assassination that happens in Dallas, it was very useful for the "set-up" The "set-up" ID's the patsy and the official story The "cover-up" insures those who had a part in it are not caught and that none of the evidence required to understand what really happened EVER becomes available. I find it very hard to separate the "set-up" from the "cover-up" since the components of the set-up must be known to accurately provide the cover-up... What are they covering up? The fact that Oswald never pulled the trigger, bought the rifle, bought the hand-gun or was where they claimed he was to accomplish what he accused of. Mr. Harvey Oswald was used as an asset, an expendable asset who was maneuvered into various positions based on some over-arching plan. These positions were used to his disadvantage as needed and to his handler's advantages as needed. I firmly believe that plans such as these do not move forward unless a scapegoat is in place... Vallee was in place and loaded to the teeth and my gut tells me that the same batch of duplicitous events surrounded him which could and would have been paraded out to "set-up" this patsy as they were to set-up ours. ============ Hey Tommy - if you're that interested, go read the book, examine the CD-ROM and plow thru the notebooks - took me 2 years WITH Armstrong's help - or take the word of those who have put the time and effort in and maybe consider stop being so condescending to lines of thought you have not bothered to research in any depth. Sure, ask questions. But don't tell us we are wrong when you simply do not know any better... k?

I explain it by stating the one man the WC found who spent time with HARVEY gives us a completely different timeline. I explain it by reiterating the premise - there were two men using the name Lee Oswald yet the records of these men were combined to create one record. The records and information we find in the WCR and HSCA reports is designed to do one thing, implicate Oswald. And yet you are incredulous and suprised to find out that some of these FBI sourced reports were either fabricated, altered, and/or combined as needed. Or, instead of the highly motivated FBI creating a document to help tell the Oswald story, an un-motivated Marine associate of HARVEY's tells his story and must be what, lying? mistaken? Sorry Tommy but the FBI and their data has proven themselves untrustworthy, has Felde somehow done that to you? (I found the FBI took a Sept 1964 report and back-dated it to December 1963 so that there would be a bus for OSwald to leave New Orleans upon. So please Tommy - if you don't know of what you speak, better to keep it to yourself) The information in the WCR's CE1961 is a composite - and is why the FBI went out of its way not to investigate the men who would contradict this information. Felde was only found out due to a May article in LIFE magazine. Like Tague, they simply did not care to be concerned with any evidence which could contradict their investigation. Sadly you seem to have stopped short of reading CE1962 or haven't the time or desire to go to the Baylor site and look it up. http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/tabs/collection/po-arm LHO: 1957, Military, Jan. – Aug. - Felde, Allen is a 60 page notebook trying to make sense of the FBI's wrong FELDE reports. Felde's dates and the FBI exhibit conflict. What you do from here is up to you. My position is clear and the H&L work is available for all to see. Thanks for your condescension though... me and my ilk will proceed accordingly DJ "you aint gonna learn what you dont wanna know"

Tommy - You havent' read the book - like GP You haven't read the notebooks - like GP You haven't bothered to speak with John Armstrong - like GP You haven't bothered to actually study the info - like GP You don't bother to actually look at and consider the real evidence provided here - like GP (how can the WCR state Felde was with the man yet nothing Felde says matches the MILITARY record as to where he was and when..?) Did you even bother looking at CE1961 versus 1962? Do you know what the Ping Tung situation was and how the DoD messes it up again via Blakey? Does it not bother you that none of the people who were LEE in the Marines are ever asked a question? Does it not bother you that when GP posts evidence on a question about the '53-'54 school years he gives me 7 links to unsigned, unsourced boiler plate FBI reports about 1954-55? And then claims I'm playing games. Yes, Tommy, I'm sure your time is oh so valuable, no one has asked that you read or comment upon my posts or the threads I start - amazingly enough, you make those decisions all on your own and now have to inform me that your decisions are beyond your own control? You have "fish to fry" (whatever that means) and don't have the self control to leave me alone and go fry them? Your disdain and lack of respect for Armstrong's work is most unfortunate - you seem able to do your own thinking and not rely on me or GP... but that takes a little work that you dont seem interested or willing to commit. Fine. that I spent all that time and effort to understand the theories and then created tools to help others falls on your deaf ears. Those who are interested in the subject and have done more than just give it lip service understand what I've done and continue to share and grow that understanding. Here's a thought: Don't read my threads, Don't read my posts and Don't pretend to care about what is written about H&L... cover your eyes, ears and mouth and go your merry way - I'm not taking it personnally or having to go start my own Board so I can post whatever I want without worry of rebuttal. I post here from time to time and anyone can offer up whatever they can in discussion. Expecting that these discussions include more than opinion and speculation is just too much I guess. I happen to think you offer a good mind and good questions that lead threads in positive directions. You sound more like VonPein accepting the WCR when you defend Mr. P's POV here... all faith and very little understanding.

#1 - No, the extant Zfilm is not an accurate recordation of what happened... not even close. #2 - I happen to believe that Alt 6 is an exact print of the negative - Oswald is not in that photo yet may be the person at the top left of the landing in the shadows... but that's even a stretch for me without better evidence... That person is standing there from well before the motorcade to well after... the bigger concern imo is Altgens 7 which does not have a negative and looks nothing like the other photos in terms of sharpness, contrast, detail and that the top right of the image has been cropped off... Altgens claims that the photo he took which is related to Z255 or so (Alt6) http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0304b.htm was of a limo and subject that were 30-40 feet away Mr. LIEBELER - And you say Exhibit No. 203 was taken about 30 feet away? Mr. ALTGENS - But it might be 40 feet, but I couldn't say that that's exactly the distance because while it may be in focus at 40 feet, my camera has it in focus 30 feet. It's the same thing--if I focus at 15 feet, my focus might extend 20 feet and it might also be reduced to 10 feet, but my focusing was in that general area of 30 feet. He then states that JFK himself was about 15 feet from the left side of the limo when JFK was hit. Mr. ALTGENS - This would put me at approximately this area here, which would be about 15 feet from me at the time he was shot in the head--about 15 feet from the car on the west side of the car--on the side that Mrs. Kennedy was riding in the car. One assumption to make is that the front of the limo was 30 feet away with JFK about 45 feet for Alt 6 and the left side of the limo was 15 feet with JFK about 20 feet further north. In either case the limo between Z255 and the "headshot" barely moves. Corroboration? BREHM expressed his opinion that between the first and third shots, the President's car only seemed to move 10 or 12 feet. It seemed to him that the automobile almost came to a halt after the first shot, but of this he is not certain. After the third shot, the car in which the President was riding increased its speed and went under the freeway overpass and out of his sight. By this time he was directly in front of us and I was looking directly at him when he was hit in the side of the head. /s/ William E. Newman, Jr. Muchmore claims to NOT having taken any film of the shooting yet the above image supposedly comes from her camera... The main point was that any moment in time does not necessarily tell an absolute truth and requires much more corroboration even to SPECULATE correctly. Speculation is step one Corroboration and authentication is Step two Evidence speculated upon cannot be accepted as evidence if it cannot be authenticated and/or corrorobated - yet this case is full of such evidence being accepted as evidence (such as C2766 was ordered, owned and used by Oswald - the evidence related to this conclusion can be proven false and/or unsupporting of the conclusion).

So a 5'8" boy becomes a 5'11" man after Basic - and then becomes a 5'9" dead man.. ok. The FBI goes out of its way to find the WRONG FELDE and reports thru the end of May 1964 that this FELDE did not know any Oswald. And then they find out they had the wrong man and finally, on June 26, 1964 interview Felde which becomes CE1962. According to the one and only man they seem to have bothered to find who actually spent time with our Oswald, the WCR recap of his USMC record is wrong. That Combat Training began at Camp Pendleton and lasted until May 1957 when they are sent to Jacksonville - except by May 3rd LEE Oswald has already completed this training... Felde (the right one not the one the FBI wanted us to believe they found) goes on to say that in July 1957 they go to Memphis for Aviation School - by JULY, USMC records have him completing this Memphis training and is already back in CA. In Sept 1957, when Felde is transferred to FL, Oswald is sent to Atsugi. (Note: if he was a radar operator why do his USMC records (and the WCR) tell us he was trained and preferred to be an Aircraft Mechanic?) - Page 7 of the Folsom Exh #1 Are we now going to say that THESE USMC are correct (Felde is wrong) while the ones related to his trip to Ping Tung while being treated for STDs are not... The records for Oswald in the USMC are a composite of two different people at these similar yet different locations (El Toto and Santa Ana are not the same facility) Mr. P, don't credit your words, thoughts or ideas as anyone elses's - especially mine... You use unsigned and unsourced FBI documents that describe the wrong years, wrong situations and wrong people to rebutt the H&L points - and then can't even admit you got it wrong - while offering up nothing but speculation and accusations. All the way down to accusing the doctor who performed the tonsillectomy of not being qualified or able to perform said operation and that MO made the entire thing up - again, wrong speculation without a speck of proof and when proven to you you can't even have the class to admit your errors... If you can't tell the difference between the two men I posted side by side - so be it Greg... your "acceptance" of these arguments or lack thereof is nothing I give much thought to... Someday, when you are actually qualified to discuss H&L we can pick it up again... until then maybe it's best if you just stick to your own work... (or at least bring some corroborated facts to the table so we're doing more than dealing with your opinions)

The symptoms of Asperger's syndrome vary and can range from mild to severe. Common symptoms include: Problems with social skills: Children with Asperger's syndrome generally have difficulty interacting with others and often are awkward in social situations. They generally do not make friends easily. They have difficulty initiating and maintaining conversation. Eccentric or repetitive behaviors: Children with this condition may develop odd, repetitive movements, such as hand wringing or finger twisting. Unusual preoccupations or rituals: A child with Asperger's syndrome may develop rituals that he or she refuses to alter, such as getting dressed in a specific order. Communication difficulties: People with Asperger's syndrome may not make eye contact when speaking with someone. They may have trouble using facial expressions and gestures, and understanding body language. They also tend to have problems understanding language in context and are very literal in their use of language. Limited range of interests: A child with Asperger's syndrome may develop an intense, almost obsessive, interest in a few areas, such as sports schedules, weather, or maps. Coordination problems: The movements of children with Asperger's syndrome may seem clumsy or awkward. Skilled or talented: Many children with Asperger's syndrome are exceptionally talented or skilled in a particular area, such as music or math. LEE Oswald was regarded as the leader in his classes and was always with friends. HARVEY was alone yet he seemed to make friends in Russia with ongoing correspondence shown in the WCR... All the photos I've seen of him in Russia shows him with women and men having a great time... Are there any examples you can offer to corroborate the claim, GP? Neither child/man exhibited these Anything evidentiary to point to here GP? HARVEY was always staring into the eyes with those he spoke - he gave speeches in fact LEE we do not have as much info yet there is nothing to indicate he did not HARVEY's Photography maybe - so now a strong interest of hobby can be attributed to Asperger's? LEE had no such concerns Not that I've seen of either man Again, maybe photographic skills but nothing earth-shattering "The exact cause of Asperger's syndrome is not known. However, the fact that it tends to run in families suggests that it may be inherited (passed on from parent to child)." Are we aware of any evidence that suggests mom or dad or any of the uncles and aunts had a form of Asperger's? Is there anything to offer beyond speculation?

Yup... they weren't killed for not naming the man they ran into coming down the stairs. They agreed to lie about the encounter and put Oswald further away from the 6th floor window than he could have been if Baker and Truly tell us the man coming down the stairs is Oswald. What would be more important than adding to the incrimination of Oswald - who could this person have been that he had to be ignored on purpose. Does this not suggest to you there was no lunchroom and only the affidavit's description of the scene? Mr. BELIN - How long did you stay in the lunchroom after Truly identified this person as being an employee? Mr. BAKER - Just momentarily. As he said, "Yes, he works here," I turned and went on up the stairs. Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir. There is a door there with a glass, it seemed to me like about a 2 by 2, something like that, and then there is another door which is 6 foot on over there, and there is a hallway over there and a hallway entering into a lunchroom, and when I got to where I could. see him he was walking away from me about 20 feet away from me in the lunchroom. Mr. BELIN - What did you do? Mr. BAKER - I hollered at him at that time and said, "Come here." He turned and walked right straight back to me. Mr. BELIN - Where were you at the time you hollered? Mr. BAKER - I was standing in the hallway between this door and the second door, right at the edge of the second door. Mr. BELIN - He walked back toward you then? Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir. Mr. BELIN - I hand you what has been marked Commission Exhibit 497 which appears to be a diagram of the second floor of the School Book Depository, and you will notice on this diagram there are circles with arrows. I want you to state, if you will, what number or the arrow approximates the point at which you were standing when you told him to "Come here". Is there a number on there at all or not? Mr. BAKER - This 24 would be the position where I was standing. Mr. BELIN - The arrow which is represented by No. 24, is that correct? Mr. BAKER - That is correct. Mr. BELIN - On Exhibit 497. http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0119b.htm When you first saw him in which direction was he walking? Mr. BAKER - He was walking east. Mr. BELIN - Was--his back was away from you, or not, as you first saw him? Mr. BAKER - As I first caught that glimpse of him, or as I saw him, really saw him? Mr. BELIN - As you really saw him. Mr. BAKER - He was walking away from me with his back toward me. Mr. DULLES - Can I suggest if you will do this, put on there where the officer was and where Lee Oswald was, or the man who turned out to be Lee Oswald, and which direction he was walking in. I think that is quite important. Mr. BELIN - Yes, sir. We are going to get to that with one more question, if I can, sir. When you saw him, he then turned around, is that correct, and then walked back toward you? Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir. Mr. BELIN - Was he carrying anything in his hands? Mr. BAKER - He had nothing at that time. Mr. BELIN - All right. Were you carrying anything in either of your hands? Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir; I was. Mr. BELIN - What were you carrying? Mr. BAKER - I had my revolver out. Mr. BELIN - When did you take your revolver out? Mr. BAKER - AS I was starting up the stairway. Again, it sure seems to me that he speaks as if what occurred in his Affidavit was accurate... He is virtually always on or near the stairs yet position #24 is inside the first auto closing door and near the lunchroom entrance... Not exactly by the stairs... yet this is something open to interpretation and not specific evidence - other than it is 4 months later, Oswald is now dead and the lunchroom scene is now famous. Too bad it contradicts the affidavit and the lawyers for the WC did not ask a single thing about the conflict, even though Baker mentions writing his affidavit at the DPD HQ when Oswald was there.

There are very basic difference in their body structure... LEE has sloped shoulders while HARVEY has squared off shoulders - shows in every image of either man... Can that condition affect body structure as well? (no word on the Basic Training problem - I guess the answer is "ignore" )

The central figure shows what happens to young men who go through boot camp. No more, no less. Speaking of boot camp Greg, why is it that you cannot answer the question about only 5 weeks of Boot Camp when every Marine goes thru at least 13 weeks with up to 3 more weeks special training? CE1961 and 1962. Real evidence with which you actually have to deal... or ignore. Up to you .

Getting back to the question of the Thread.... I truly feel it is a bit naive to proceed under the assumption that everything that occurs to incriminate Oswald as a Lone Nut was something that was arrived upon at the spur of the moment. Even poorly executed and planned activities are "planned" at some point. The autopsy was specifically designed to turn multiple shots and directions into "shots from above and behind" as a result of Bundy contacting AF-1. If Hoover can be credited with the idea, so be it yet I have yet to be convinced of that theory. Hoover was taken in by the Mexican charade as well and firmly believed that Alvarado was telling the truth... Until early December at least. If the CIA/Military was behing this as I think they were, how hard is it to put a CASTRO CUBAN in the 6th floor window, or on the knoll. They provided Powers with bogus documents for the downing of his U-2, first time he ever had these docs... So if CUBA and/or Russia was the goal, a real Reichstag fire would have made sure to set up a Russian or Cuban... But that didn't happen. There was an out from the very beginning. I firmly believe the references to Cuba and Russia were designed to curtail the investigation from the beginning as was part of the planning. The goal was the death of JFK... invading Cuba, while desired, was imo just an excuse. It was a place the CIA and FBI could not infultrate successfully. and that infuriated them. Kennedy infuriated them even more. DJ

Thanks Jon - I find it most revealing who offers links and evidence and who offers rhetoric and speculation. No Jon, it is not... flanking the New Orleans born LEE OSWALD are photos of Lee HARVEY Oswald as called by those in this charade. Folsom Exhibit #1 in Volume XIX starts off showing that in 1956 the Oswald who enters the Marines is 68" (5'8") and 135 lbs. (I believe LEE's USMC photo is placed on this record as part of the process) In 1952 LEE is 5'4" and 115 lbs as a 6th grader. He winds up being a 5'11" Marine with wide shoulders, large body who likes to drink, cause trouble and be with his friends. We can't know it this record is Lee or Harvey yet with mention of the scars it is most likely a composite. I'd suggest you read the testimony of John Pic and keep the related images he is commenting upon nearby... He separates Lee from Harvey in every case. Mr. JENNER - How did he look to you physically as compared with when you had seen him last? Mr. PIC - I would have never recognized him, sir.

Bravo Carmine... Seems amazing to me how much time we need to spend listening to GP "explaining" himself while claiming other's offerings do not make any sense or are easily disproven with a word or phrase; adding evidence to the rebuttal that actually corroborates has never been successfully accomplished on his part, imo. Here is a moment in time as Mark so eloquently put it... Altgens tells us that this last shot occurs when JFK is about 15 feet from him or 40 feet past z313... this is supported by the FBI's WCD298 and SS's CE884. Yet the image shows the shot having already taken place up the street... What is the "truth" when we have such conflicting evidence? The WCR and Specter would have us believe the physical evidence trumps the witness evidence... yet the physical evidence puts a shot 15 feet from Altgens, only the Zfilm doesn't corroborate this... which info is "false"?

When Oswald exited the Marines - on Sept 11, 1959 per his USMC records - he was 71" tall (5'11") and weighed 150 lbs and had entered the USMC with a variety of scars noted on his record. The FBI interviewed Maj GORSKY, https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10434&relPageId=2, who told them on Nov 22 that the LEE HARVEY OSWALD under his command in CA was discharged in MARCH 1959 a full 6 months before our Oswald. When ROSE does Oswald's autopsy - below - he is measured at 5'9" (69") and an ESTIMATED weight of 150lbs - (by the time he dies, little Ozzie barely weighed 135 soaking wet) and has none of the scars the USMC identified. Maybe "that condition" is the cause for a normal healthy male shrinking 2 inches between the ages of 21 and 24 ... while also healing and removing scars, regrowing tonsils, make an air traffic controller an Aircraft mechanic, speak Russian with a native accent as well as being determined that English was the man's 2nd language, create the ability to magically be in 2-4 places at once and to telepathically convince others that people using his name is just a coincidence and has no bearing on the case...

You make a good and important point Lawrence... Virtually everything the FBI tired to corroborate related to Oswald's guilt came up terribly short or in fact pointed in the opposite direction... (CIA placed the order for the 4 million rounds of MC ammo) Same deal with Mexico - Lee Harvey Oswald, killed by Ruby, did not go to Mexico yet the FBI was charged with proving he did. So they created one story that had to be changed to yet another sotry which also came up short. This runs rampant throughout... the Evidence (which as you'd know by now if you read anything of mine) IS the Conspiracy and good for little else but to illuminate it little by little. DJ (edit: Thanks Robert for you explanation)

It actually wasn't unti May 1964 and Sept 1964 that Truly's story finally jives with Baker's March testimony which directly conflicts with his same day affidavit which does not mention a door, a window, a Coke or a lunchroom... One has to wonder why Truly does not remember the events described on Baker's same-day affidavit... ?? Especially since leaving him on the stairs coming down is much more incriminating in placing Oswald back at the window... if the person they ran into was Oswald... the description doesn't really match, does it? This is yet another example of the use of uncorroborated and inauthentic evidence used to prove a point. Roy Truly and Marrion Baker lied to the WC during their testimony. Except a few small hints slip thru: Mr. BELIN - Did you notice, did he say anything or was there any expression after Mr. Truly said he worked here? Mr. BAKER - At that time I never did look back toward him. After he says, "Yes, he works here," I turned immediately and run on up, I halfway turned then when I was talking to Mr. Truly. If Baker is in the lunchroom, as opposed to the stairs like his affidavit says, he cannot "run on up" unless he actually WAS on the stairs and not in the lunchroom at the time... Truly was very aware of what was going on in the TSBD NOVEMBER 22, 1963 A man stepped forward and stated he was the building manager and that he would show me where the stairs were. I followed the man to the rear of the building and he said, "Let's take the elevator." The elevator was hung several floors up so we used the stairs instead. As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket. s/ M. L. Baker MAY 14, 1964 Mr. TRULY. This officer was right behind me and coming up the stairway. By the time I reached the second floor, the officer was a little further behind me than he was on the first floor, I assume--I know. Mr. BELIN. Was he a few feet behind you then? Mr. TRULY. He was a few feet. It is hard for me to tell. I ran right on around to my left, started to continue on up the stairway to the third floor, and on up. 11-22-63: As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me MAY 14, 1964 Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember? Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed. Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it? Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way. Mr. BELIN. What did you see? Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him? Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door 11-22-63: As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me MARCH 25, 1964 Mr. BAKER - As I came out to the second floor there, Mr. Truly was ahead of me, and as I come out I was kind of scanning, you know, the rooms, and I caught a glimpse of this man walking away from this--I happened to see him through this window in this door. I don't know how come I saw him, but I had a glimpse of him coming down there. 11-22-63: As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/html/WH_Vol26_0308b.htm This affidavit from ROY TRULY is the only thing which matches his testimony and is dated from September 23rd 1964 - only a day or so before the release of the WCR... http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/html/WH_Vol26_0358a.htm This affidavit from ROY TRULY MARRION BAKER the only thing which matches his testimony and is dated from September 23rd 1964 - only a day or so before the release of the WCR... (this is the crossed out Coke affidavit) and these two look very similar, even the signatures.... ================== parting thought to consider - what is Sawyer doing here? Within 4 minutes of the shots SAWYER and a couple men also go up into the TSBD - to the 4th floor, are there less than a few minutes to "make sure noboby was hiding" and then is back down Mr. SAWYER. We immediately went inside the building. I took--I believe Sgt. Harkness may have gone with me. I am not positive of that. Mr. BELIN. Was the elevator on the first floor when you got there, or did you have to wait for it to come down? Mr. SAWYER. Best of my recollection, it was there. Mr. BELIN. You got to the elevator, went up, looked around back there. How long did you spend up there at the top floor (4th) that the elevator took you to? Mr. SAWYER. Just took a quick look around and made sure there was nobody hiding on that floor. I doubt if it took over a minute at the most. Mr. BELIN. To go up and look around and come down? Mr. SAWYER. To look around on the floor. How long it took to go up, it couldn't have been over 3 minutes at the most from the time we left, got up and back down. Mr. BELIN. Then that would put it around no sooner than 12:37, if you heard the call at 12:34? Mr. SAWYER. Yes, sir.

The result of the work I described is a large Spreadsheet by date showing side by side who was where and when... If you IM me your email address I can send it to you. I posted it in a H&L Facebook group but you needed to be part of the group.... Doesn't explain everything yet makes what we do see much more understandable. Thanks for your kind words DJ

{yawn} And he said, "We wanted you to meet this American. His name is Leon Oswald." He repeated it twice. Then my sister Annie by that time was standing near the door. come to any conclusion you want