Antonio Veciana says Lee Harvey Oswald was CIA!

Antonio Veciana says Lee Harvey Oswald was CIA! His book "Trained to Kill: The Inside Story of CIA Plots against Castro, Kennedy, and Che" is now available (Skyhorse Pub.). Veciana, a leader of the CIA's Alpha 66, has finally admitted that David Atlee Phillips was his CIA handler - and Lee Harvey Oswald's handler as well. "The truth is coming out," says Judyth Vary Baker, whose book "Me & Lee" goes into more detail than Veciana's (hers is 608 pages, with documents and witnesses). Veciana says he and Oswald met with Phillips in Dallas in Sept, 1963. Veciana, who was shot in the head after testifying to the HSCA, refused to give Phillips' real name until 2013. At last he has openly verified what Baker first revealed in 1999. In 2003, Baker stated Phillips was Oswald's handler in the History Channel Documentary "The Love Affair" (#8 in the series "The Men Who Killed Kennedy."). "You will enjoy reading Veciana's 232 page book," Baker says, "but you will also enjoy getting all the dots connected with ME & LEE" (Trine Day). Both books are available at Amazon.com

NIXON AND "THE BAY OF PIGS THING""Tape Reveals Nixon Knew About Kennedy Assassination

    On June 17, 2014, journalist Jefferson Morley placed a very important NIXON TAPE online at his JFK Facts site, writing "The 42nd anniversary of the Watergate burglary reminded me of  Richard Nixon’s obsession with the “whole of Bay of Pigs thing.”

Nixon cavorting on JFK's (rebuilt) Limo after he became President

H.R. Haldeman, White House chief of staff for Nixon, wrote in his memoirs that he had come to the conclusion that his boss used the phrase as a kind of coded reference to the assassination of President Kennedy.  A tape of a conversation between Nixon and CIA director Richard Helms in October 1971 lends credence to the notion. Listen to the tape, published online by Luke A. Nichter, a history professor at Texas A&M University."
       "Nixon, it is clear, was interested in what he called the ‘Who Shot John?’ angle.
       You can listen to a shorter version (it is unedited, just cut off after the relevant part, so you'll hear a lot of squeaking of Nixon's desk chair and noise muffling some of it. such as when Nixon, who has been talking to his aide John Erlichmanm apparently rises and greets Helms, who enters the room, but it's the "real deal.")

   Morley continues:   
    " ‘The Dirty Tricks Department’
     Before Helms arrives, Nixon’s aide John Erlichman tells the president Helms has been stonewalling his request for documents about the Bay of Pigs. Erlichman makes it clear that he didn’t tell Helms his real purpose. “I was kind of mysterious about it,” he explains.
But they think they have leverage on Helms. At one point Ehrlichman says, “Helms is scared to death of this guy [Howard] Hunt we got working for us because he knows where a lot of the bodies are buried,” This is spoken eight months before Hunt and six other men were arrested at the Watergate office complex for breaking into the offices of the Democratic National Committee.
When then CIA director arrives, Nixon offers some typically awkward and forced small talk about baseball player Ted Williams and then gets down to business. He says he wants to address the “sensitive” issue of the documents he is seeking. He assures Helms that he fully supports what he calls “the dirty tricks department.”
“I know what happened in Iran and I know what happened in Guatemala and I totally approve of that. I know what happened with the planning of the Bay of Pigs,” he says.”The problem was not the CIA. My interest there is solely to know the facts.”
When Helms doesn’t say much, Nixon presses his case by reminding Helms he is the president.
“First. This is my information,” he says, “Second, I need it for a defensive reasons, for a negotiation.”
When those arguments elicit no response. Nixon tries another justification: He needs the information to protect the CIA. In making his case, Nixon talks about what might be in the records and he utters these words (at around 17:00 in the file):

“The ‘Who shot John?’ angle. Is Eisenhower to blame? Is Kennedy to blame? Is Johnson to blame? Is Nixon to blame? Etc, etc. It may become, not by me, a very vigorous issue but if it does, I need to know what is necessary to protect frankly the intelligence gathering and the Dirty Tricks Department and I will protect it. I have done more than my share of lying to protect you, and I believe it’s totally right to do it.”

(NOTE: The reference to "Kennedy" probably means Bobby Kennedy, who was involved in assembling anti-Castro wipe-out campaigns, the resources of which were able to be diverted to kill his own brother.   Morley continues:

"What does it mean? The reference to ‘Who shot John” can only be a reference to Kennedy’s assassination. It seems clear that Nixon thought that the CIA records on the Bay of Pigs might contain information about who was behind the assassination. This indicates, at a minimum, that Nixon did not have confidence in the official theory that Kennedy was killed by one man alone. It suggests that he thought the CIA knew more about JFK’s assassination than it let on. And, it is quite clear, that If the CIA’s actions did become an issue, Nixon would protect “the Dirty Tricks Department.”
Nixon never got the documents he wanted. After the arrest of the Watergate burglars on June 17, 1972, Nixon tried to enlist Helms in a cover-up. In a meeting on June 20, Nixon said an investigation of the burglary could “open up the whole Bay of Pigs thing,” causing the usually unflappable Helms to shout, “This has nothing to do with the Bay of Pigs!”
   In his posthumous memoir, Helms claimed that he did not know what Nixon was referring to. But if he remembered the conversation of October 10, 1971, he knew exactly what Nixon was talking about."

Note: we owe a debt of gratitude to Luke A. Nichter, who is much more than "a history professor at Texas A&M University" as Morley describes him.  Nichter is "a noted expert on Nixon's 3,451 hours of secret White House tapes. He is a New York Times bestselling author or editor of six books... the editor, with Douglas Brinkley, of The Nixon Tapes: 1971-1972 (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt) and...a former founding Executive Producer of C-SPAN's American History TV, launched during January 2011 ...Luke is a recognized advocate for government openness, having filed more than 1,000 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for the purpose of opening historically important records to public access — work that has been officially endorsed by the American Historical Association. He has an ongoing petition before Judge Royce Lamberth of the District Court for the District of Columbia — In Re: Petition of Luke Nichter, Case No. Misc. 12-74 — which has unsealed thousands of pages of government records in the custody of the National Archives and Records Administration.

LEE HARVEY OSWALD NEVER BOUGHT A MAIL-ORDER RIFLE: Steven Gaal Explains

 THIS ESSAY BY STEVEN GAAL REVEALS HOW LEE OSWALD WAS FRAMED AS THE 'OWNER' OF A RIFLE HE NEVER ORDERED

(As posted at The Education Forum in rebuttal to Warren Commission defenders)
Purchasing the Rifle
---------------------------------------
It has long been held that a key piece of evidence in the guilt of Lee Oswald is documentation that he bought a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle and the .38

YES, '7.65 mm MAUSER' HAS BEEN STAMPED on some Mausers!

pistol. In his possessions was a found a receipt dated March 12, for the money order he allegedly used to purchase the rifle (no receipts were ever found for the pistol in his belongings). The purchase amount was $21.45. This was for one rifle with a four power scope, but no clip or bullets. The letter had a postmark of 10:30 AM. So, Oswald had a window of 8:30 AM to 10:30 AM to purchase the money order and mail it off.

One important fact to remember is Oswald’s post office box was authorized for his name only. He ordered everything under his alias, A. Hidell. Any piece of mail coming to his box with the alias would be marked “addressee unknown, return to sender.” Keep this in mind for as we shall see later, the box plays an important role in Oswald’s acquiring of the weapons.

NO 'HIDELL' ON LEE'S P O BOX IN DALLAS

Another hitch is that Oswald’s work records show he was employed that morning at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovell with no absences. The nearest post office was 11 blocks away. A long walk back and forth for a man with no car. Even more curious is the postmark date has zone 12 listed on it. Zone 12 was roughly two miles away in downtown Dallas. Since it was established that the money order was purchased in zone 3, who would buy a money order at one office and then travel two miles to another one to mail it? Plus, Oswald didn’t have the time even if he had a friend to drive him there and back.
The order arrives at Klein’s Sporting Goods in Chicago the next morning [sent via Airmail: the Warren Commission was told that an overnight train could accomplish this, without mentioning that the order was posted TOO LATE to be collected, sorted and placed on the train that came early enough to make that possible. JVB].   Very good for pre-FedEx days! Kline’s reportedly deposited the money order in its bank account on March 13. However, under closer inspection the money order is missing many of the bank routing stamps which would show its path through the banking system. Only the endorsement stamp of Klein’s is there; it’s missing the stamps from the First National Bank of Chicago, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, and finally, the Federal Postal Money Order Center in Kansas City. None of those three routing stamps are on the back of the money order. The stamps have to be there to show that each bank pays only once, if not you have a mess on your hands. Other money orders that Oswald bought, such as the ones he used to pay off his State Dept. loan, all have these routing stamps. So this is most unusual and never investigated by the Warren Commission, the FBI, or any other agency. It certainly gives weight to the idea that Oswald’s payment never made it through the banking system.
One problem with the case and which is largely ignored, was in the spring of 1963 Klein’s was only selling the 36” model of the Mannlicher-Carcano.  This is clearly shown in ads they had running in various sporting magazines.  The rifle found on the sixth floor near the sniper’s nest was the 40” model.  Kline’s was not selling that model in March of 1963.
Adding to that, the FBI went through Klein’s microfilm records and found no sale of a Mannlicher-Carcano with a serial number of C2766 for March of 1963 or any month in that year.  They went back a year and never found one sold with that matching serial number in 1962 either.  It seems to have disappeared from the inventory.
However, there are several accounting records with the amount of $21.45 listed.  One entry is for March, 1963, but another for February 15th.  One is listed under the heading, “checks.”  But checks are a different type of financial instrument than a money order and should not be listed under that heading.  There is also a listing for “other banks” but what banks are those?  There is no serial numbers identified for the amount of $21.45.  It could be C2766 or somebody else’s order.  It should be noted that Klein’s went out of business in 1973 and its remaining financial records were destroyed.  Also, many accounting records on microfilm disappeared while in FBI custody (Armstrong, p.475).
What is known is Klein’s received a shipment of rifles (carton #3766) and Mannlicher-Carcano, C2766, in that shipment.  Also, it was stated by Louis Feldsott, President of Crescent Firearms (wholesaler) in a sworn affidavit to the Warren Commission that he found a record of a sale of a Mannlicher-Carcano, C2766 to Klein’s Sporting Goods, Inc., for June 18, 1962.

Affidavit of Louis Feldsott, President of Crescent Firearms.
June of 1962 is an important date.  It’s the same month Oswald, his wife and child, traveled back to the USA from the Soviet Union.  His DOD ID card expires that year (sidebar–his mother’s tax returns are sealed from 1956, ending in 1962.).  Apparently, one must conclude that somebody created false paperwork to connect Oswald to the

back of money order

rifle, from Klein’s Sporting Goods accounting to bogus money order missing it routing track.
(It should be noted the original money order was found in the National Archives by one of the employees there, Robert Jackson.  Jackson was never interviewed by the FBI in regards to how he found it.  How it made it there is unknown.  Oswald’s receipt was found in his personal possessions but that is suspect because of the all the difficulties already mentioned.)
The Controversy With Post Office Delivery
It’s been implied by some researchers, such as John Armstrong (Harvey and Lee) that Oswald’s P. O. Box was authorized for his name only and any mail arriving with another name, in this case his Hidell alias would result in a return to sender.  This makes getting his gun shipment to him problematic to say the least.  The Warren Commission knew this and simply stated in the final report that, “It is not known whether the application for post office box 2915 listed ‘A. Hidell’ was a person entitled to receive mail at this box.”  They had the original application, published in evidence volume 19, page 286.  While it lists Lee Oswald as the applicant there is no authorization for mail under his name only.
There are other issues at play to further complicate this besides the mail box.  [NOTE by JVB: the Warren Commission was told by Holmes, the Postal Inspector, that a note --that there was a package in Lee Oswald's box -- could have been possible, so Oswqald could ask for the rifle, but it would have been illegal to hand over a RIFLE for "Hidell" to Lee Oswald, who could presumably take the rifle for himself.  That fact makes this excuse by the postmaster absurd.].
      One of the postal regulations at the time required that anybody purchasing a firearm had to fill out and sign a 2162 form.  Not only the buyer but the seller as well.  This form was to be kept on file for four years.  This form was never found on either end, from buyer or shipper.  The FBI never requested it and Klein’s never volunteered a copy.  Dallas Postal Inspector Harry Holmes told the Warren Commission that it basically didn’t matter than Oswald could have received the rifle under his alias.  Interestingly, Holmes had been monitoring Oswald’s mail for up to a year since he was receiving subversive materials in the mail (i.e., FPCC and other communist literature) but couldn’t tell the Warren Commission that Oswald had received a package with a gun in it. 
      Why didn’t he know?  Oswald’s box was basically flagged.  Oddly, Holmes apparently never mentioned that Oswald would have to have filled out the aforementioned 2162 form if that were the case.
      All indications are that Oswald did not pick up the rifle package at the Post Office in Dallas.  There is no paperwork to prove it and no witnesses to the fact.
The Smith & Wesson Pistol
If the weirdness with rifle is not enough, enter the .38 caliber pistol that Oswald allegedly used to kill Dallas police officer J. D. Tippet. Sold from Seaport Traders, Oswald [supposedly] took order of a snub nosed Smith &Wesson .38. Before he could order it he would be required under Texas law to get a “certificate of good character” from either the Justice of the Peace or a District Court Judge. This would be hard to do since he was ordering the pistol under his Alek Hidell alias. Imagine applying for a certificate verifying your character using a phony name! Apparently, he never did. The certificate would have to have been shown to the shipper before the firearm was released to the buyer.
Like the Mannlicher-Carcano, there is not a lot of solid documentary proof that Oswald bought the pistol. There is one invoice (#70638) saying the gun was shipped COD via Railway Express Agency to a A. J. Hidell. This particular invoice is a copy--the original was never obtained by the FBI. It also states that it was shipped to his post office box address, which of course can’t be done and was shipped to the REA office for pick-up. The FBI could have checked the bank records of both Seaport Traders and REA but never did.  [Holmes, the Postal Inspector, insinuated that the rifle and the revolver came to the same P.O. Box--JVB]
When a shipment would arrive at REA it was common procedure to send a postcard alerting the buyer the gun had arrived. Once again, since Oswald had a post office box authorized in his name only, he would never have seen the postcard. It would have been marked “returned to sender” like his rifle should have been. Researcher John Armstrong looked into this in great detail and found that a phone call would determine if an order arrived at REA. No ID was required to show up and pay the COD charge and retrieve the package. Anybody could have appeared at the office and paid for the pistol.
There are no receipts of any kind that were found in Oswald’s personal belongings. No invoices, no postcard alerting the arrival of the shipment, no receipt for paying of COD charges...nothing. Oswald obtained a leather holster and bullets for it but no receipts for any of those items either.
----------------------------------------------
In Summary
Here are the major points covered:
•Post office box address only authorized for his name Lee Oswald. Anything sent with another name (as the rifle allegedly was) would be marked return to sender.
•Money Order not marked with proper routing stamps proving his path through the banking system.
•Work records at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovell show Oswald was employed at the time the MO was allegedly purchased and mailed.
•No finger prints found on the MO or the order coupon.
•MO eventually found in the National Archives in Washington, DC rather than the final resting place in Kansas City, MO.
•No 2162 form ever found from the buyer or the shipper.
•Oswald ordered the 36” model but apparently possessed the 40” model not for sale at Klein’s Sporting Goods at the time of sale.
•Klein's financial records did not list a sale of a rifle with C2766 in March of 1963 but instead, June of 1962–when Oswald could not possibility have ordered it and spent part of that month out of the country.
•No “certificate of good character” acquired for use in receiving the .38 handgun.
•Both the rifle and pistol are different models than the ones he ordered.
How do we resolve all of this?  Evidently, somebody else bought the guns and fabricated a false paper trial linking it all to Oswald.  The missing routing stamps on the back of money order indicate that it was most likely never deposited in Klein’s bank account and even the VP of the company could not verify it was deposited.  Oswald’s work records show he never left work the morning of March 12 when he is supposed to have mailed the order to Klein’s for the rifle.  When means he couldn’t have done it.  In regards to the .38 revolver, that is even more murky and nearly undocumented.  Only one receipt is in existence and it is a copy.  Oswald himself may not have been aware of the set up that was going on behind his back.  If he did he never told a soul.  The guilty man has been framed once again.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources: Newman, John, Oswald and the CIA; Armstrong, John, Harvey and Lee; McKnight, Gerald, Breach of Trust; Warren Commission Report; Douglass, James, JFK and the Unspeakable; www.ctka.net (Probe Magazine article archive); www.history-matters.com [slightly edited for spelling by JVB]  

Edited by Steven Gaal, 26 May 2015 - 11:52 PM.

LEARN MORE AT http://www.judythbaker.blogspot.com

READ ABOUT THE REAL LEE HARVEY OSWALD IN JUDYTH'S BOOK ME & LEE. 

LEARN MORE BY ATTENDING THE JFK ASSASSINATION CONFERENCE IN DALLAS 

LEE HARVEY OSWALD: HE WASN'T A DEADBEAT!

This is what 4905 Magazine St. looked like in 1963. It is the small apartment with overhead sunscreens and the fenced-ij front yard, set back from the road. At the front it is gated, and you can see the white mailbox there for 4905. The big part of the house to which it is attached held 4907 (to the right--note the big white mailbox) and 4909 to the left. Behind it was 4911.
   All four addresses had their own mailboxes (even though Lee used 4907 for mail, he did so to protect his Russian-born wife and child... my critics try to say that Lee had no mailbox of his own. This was not true, though he did not place that address on his correspondence. 4907 was EMPTY until mid-July, when Mr. and Mrs. Eric Rogers moved in. Mrs. Rogers was ill and could do very little. Lee paid Mr. Rogers' utility bill, which went up about 30% after Mr. and Mrs. Rogers moved in. Prior to that, lee used 4907 as a kind of office, as it was vacant (*I have that reference from the Polk Directory).
When Lee left in September, the Rogers' utility bill went in the red by mid-month, and Lee was later accused by the Warren Commission of being a deadbeat for not paying it, even though we know from the Rogers' testimony that they continued to live in the apartment and were still there in 1964 when they were interviewed by the Commission. They obviously had to start paying that utility bill themselves. My critics try to say that Lee never paid the utility bill for thje Rogers and that I have blackened the Rogers' name. Rogers did not get a job until the end of September, when he began working for Meal-a-Minute.
Lee did not use the address of 4907 publicly until he began handing out FPCC Hands Off Cuba flyers at the Trade Mart, as I recall. He was not about to put 4905 on them, where his wife and child lived in that set-back apartment that was all safely fenced in. But from the beginning -- even when vacant-- all mail to the Oswalds came to 4907. This was at the height of the Cold War, and mail from the USSR, The Daily Worker, etc. was coming to that vacant apartment and was not connected in the postman's mind to 4907. Then the Rogers moved in. However, Lee still kept his mail coming to 4907, but obviously, the Rogers needed to have some incentive to keep receiving such mail. Their utility bill got paid and they allowed the mail to come to their address.
This simple arrangement is not believed by my critics. According to them, for some reason unknown to normal people, they insist that all mail to 4905 AND 4907 went ONLY to 4907, the vacant apartment, . When the Warren Commission asked Mr. Rogers about this mail problem. Rogers had this to say: Mr. Liebeler.
You lived right next door to Oswald?
Mr. Rogers.
My apartment was in the front and my window was fight next--near his apartment.
Mr. Liebeler.
You met Oswald and came to know him? Did you ever meet him?
Mr. Rogers.
No; I never met him. He didn't bid the time to anyone.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did you talk to him or anything?
Mr. Rogers.
No; never did.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did you know what his name was?
Mr. Rogers.
Just by mail coming in the box on the front.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did you ever talk to his wife?
Mr. Rogers.
She spoke Russian. She did bid the time of day, that's all, but he didn't. He wouldn't bid the time to no one.
Mr. Liebeler.

Mr. Liebeler.
Now do you remember anybody else that visited Oswald at his apartment?
Mr. Rogers.
Probably at the time they had this--you know--Fair Play for Cuba, something like that. I think they were radio interviewers, I think. Looked like local people. Didn't look like--heard him saying something about wanting to play on radio. That's all."
NOTE THAT ERIC ROGERS KNEW ABOUT "FAIR PLAY FOR CUBA." HOW? At one point Lee plastered some signs all over his porch and Mrs. Garner told him to take them down. But he uses 'radio interviewers' -- plural-- when only one person ever admitted coming to Lee's apartment. He had to ask at Eric Rogers' home, because the only address he had was for 4907.
Later in the same testimony, Eric Rogers says that a mailman 'brought a big package in" for Lee Oswald-- He says it this way:
Mr. Liebeler. Did you ever see any rifle or firearms of any type in his possession at that time?
Mr. Rogers. No; I never. We did see one time some the mailman brought a big package in. I wouldn't say what it was, of course. I guess they checked that through the mail.
Mr. Liebeler. When was that?
Mr. Rogers. It was in the summer, some time before he left, somewhere around that time.
The words "Brought a big package in" sounds like a delivery to the door of the Oswald's, having to go through the fenced-in yard straight to their apartment. Rogers guesses that "they checked that through the mail."
Mr. Rogers accidentally shows that he knows a lot about Lee getting ready to move, for he says this:
Mr. Rogers. He left that following evening. I figured he was moving. I don't know. If he was moving, he was supposed to tell the landlord.
Mr. Liebeler. Did he talk to the landlord about it?
Mr. Rogers.
No; but she knew about it. He didn't talk to her. He didn't talk to nobody. He would give you the money and wouldn't say nothing. He was quiet himself, that's all.
HOW DID MR. ROGERS KNOW THAT LEE DIDN'T TALK TO THE LANDLORD, BUT SHE 'KNEW ABOUT IT'? Any comments?
Marina and Ruth Paine used the 4907 address to writ to each other. All Russian materials came to 4907. The flyers said 4907. Yet it is certain that lee lived at 4905. I contend that he could have had his mail directed to 4905 but did not do so to protect his family. This is also why he placed "4907 Magazine Street" on the Hands Off Cuba flyers..
My critics try to say that all mail came to 4907 anyway and that the utility bill paid for 4907 was really for 4905.
I was there and I hope that common sense will guide you as to the real reason that the utility bill went into the red by the end of September when Lee left. The bill was NOT for BOTH 4907 AND 4905 as these people try to tell you. Lee paid the bill because he was using the vacant apartment as an office. By having the Rogers move in, Lee was able to place '4907' on the flyers without having to use 4905 instead. Lee paid the utility bill at 4907 in May, June, July, August and part of September, even though Eric Rogers said this:
Mr. Liebeler.
When did you move there?
Mr. Rogers.
It was around in the in July, around July.
These people have to prove that the Rogers paid their utility bill for 4907 for at least 2 weeks in July, for all of August, and of course for all of September all the way to July 21, 1964 when Eric Rogers stated that he was still living at 4907. Instead, they insist that Lee Oswald paid on 4905 by paying for the 4907 utility bill. It seems that "anything goes" no matter how absurd, if only it can be used to discredit me. SEE THE ATTACHED STATEMENT THAT LEE OSWALD WAS RESPONSIB LE FOR THE UTILITY BILL AT 4907, EVEN THOUGH THE ROGERS WERE LIVING THERE, AND THAT HE LEFT THE BILL AT 4907 UNPAID IN SEPTEMBER, AND THEREFORE WAS A DEADBEAT, below...
For objecting to this false statement, I am attacked on Facebook and online with posts defending poor old Mr. Rogers as a truth-teller. Sure he was. Just as Kerry Thornley was. Just as Marina Oswald was. Just as Ruth Paine was..
I won't be here forever to defend the truth. Share this. Pass it on! It matters! This is an example pof how facts that prove who lee Oswald really was are being twisted right before our eyes, today, by armchair 'researchers' who basically object to everything I say, but who themselves do nothing to to exonerate that innocent man. They are obstructing justice for our fallen president, and with my last breath, i come against that.
To those of you who read this: SAVE IT, SHARE IT, AND SHOW TO INTELLIGENT PEOPLE.
thank you for whatever you do to spread the truth.
JVB

Comments

Reuel Smith also, what about the statement "he would give you the money.."?

Judyth Baker yes... Lee said he gave the Rogers money for watching out for Marina and his little girl, in that people came to THEM inquiring for Lee, due to THEIR address being printed on the HANDS OFF CUBA flyers. See this:

THE SHOW WAS COAST TO COAST, AND LISTENERS 

FINALLY HEARD SOME TRUTH ABOUT THE REAL LEE 

HARVEY OSWALD AND THE REAL DAVID W. FERRIE.  

 DAVID W. FERRIE -- SKILLED PILOT, LINGUIST, CANCER RESEARCH ASSOCIATE AND PATRIOT--HE PRETENDED TO HATE JFK AND GATHERED INFORMATION ABOUT THE  IMPENDING ASSASSINATION.

BOTH BOOKS, PUBLISHED BY TRINE DAY,  ARE FILLED WITH HUNDREDS OF PHOTOS AND DOCUMENTS REVEALING THE PLAYERS, MOVERS AND SHAKERS IN THE KENNEDY ASSASSINATION.
LEE OSWALD -PROUD MARINE AT AGE 17-PATRIOT TO THE END!

ORDER AN AUTOGRAPHED COPY OF ME and LEE: HOW I CAME TO KNOW, LOVE AND LOSE LEE HARVEY OSWALD by clicking here.  You can also order unsigned books from TRINE DAY BOOKS, BARNES and NOBLE, OR AMAZON.COM! THIS IS THE BOOK THAT HAS OPENED THE EYES OF THOUSANDS TO THE TRUTH ABOUT THE FALSELY ACCUSED ASSASSIN. LEE WAS EXACTLY WHO HE SAID HE WAS --A PATSY-- AND I MEMORIZED HIS WORDS, SAVED DOCUMENTS, FOUND WITNESSES TO PROVE IT, BECAUSE I LOVED HIM, AND KNOW WHAT HE SACRIFICED, TRYING TO SAVE KENNEDY. 

"PLEASE TELL MY LITTLE GIRLS I WAS A GOOD GUY," LEE BEGGED OF ME. I HAVE KEPT MY PROMISE. 

YOU CAN OBTAIN AN AUTOGRAPHED, HARDCOVER, FIRST PRINTING EDITION OF ME and LEE BY ORDERING THROUGH PAYPAL AT THIS WEBSITE! (see Paypal button)

A CALL FOR VINDICATION!JOIN ME IN DEMANDING THAT A WORLD COURT BE CONVENED TO EXONERATE LEE HARVEY OSWALD AND TO FOCUS ON THE US GOVERNMENT COVER-UP OF THE TRUTH, INCLUDING VICE PRESIDENT LYNDON B. JOHNSON'S INVOLVEMENT !

WANT TO LEARN MORE? VISIT http://judythbaker.blogspot.com/  !!!!!!

http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-tippit-murder-unresolved-issues.html

IF THEY SAY LEE OSWALD KILLED KENNEDY--SHOW THEM THIS!

"Aren't hard facts and evidence always more believable than wild speculation and conjecture? And aren't many/most/all [JFK] conspiracy theories created out of just that -- speculation?"
THIS IS WHAT DAVID VON PEIN WRITES IN HIS BLOG, DECLARING:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LEE HARVEY OSWALD'S SOLE GUILT....

POINT-BY-POINT:
IN HIS ESSAY,WE'LL LOOK AT HOW DVP BEGINS HIS ARGUMENT, AND WHEHER HE CAN BE TRUSTED TO GIVE YOU THE FACTS. THEN YOU DECIDE WHETHER YOU WISH TO READ HIS HUGE BLOG ON THE SUBJECT.  I'M JUDYTH VARY BAKER, A WITNESS WHO KNEW LEE HARVEY OSWALD IN 1963.I SATE UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT OSWALD WAS INNOCENT.

Judyth, 1963

LEE OSWALD HIMSELF TOLD US,"DO NOT BELIEVE THE SO-CALLED EVIDENCE." 

Lee H.Oswald, 11/22/63

THIS MAN -- LEE HARVEY OSWALD-- HAD NO  MOTIVE TO KILL KENNEDY. HE ADMIRED KENNEDY. HE DENIED KILLING KENNEDY. 

BELOW, YOU WILL FIND COGENT ARGUMENTS REFUTING THE SO-CALLED EVIDENCE.

PART ONE: THE FIRST FIVE ARGUMENTS

DVP WROTE: "When one piece of evidence that favors Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt is piled atop another, and another, and another....I'm just curious to know how many pieces of evidence that show Oswald killed President John F. Kennedy in 1963 it takes to sway a person away from the notion of conspiracy? Or, if nothing else, to sway that person away from the "Oswald is completely innocent" claims?"

==CORRECTION: Calling faked information 'evidence' does not make it so. When one piece of faked evidence is piled atop another, and another, and another... we must question the veracity and honesty of the person who dares pretend such evidence is solid, real and irrefutable.==


DVP: "From everything I can see, it's a veritable mountain of "Oswald Is Guilty" evidence (both circumstantial and physical). And not a single speck of it has been shown to be refutable with 100% absolute certainty."

OH, REALLY?  DVP WROTE: "Not a single speck of it has been shown to be refutable with 100% absolute certainty." That's a pretty high standard. And it's unreasonable.  When determining the guilt of the accused, a wide variety of evidence is tendered to the court. DVP mentions 'circumstantial and physical' kinds of evidence. He accepts this evidence and will not allow it to be rejected unless it has been proven to be 100% wrong.

Consider two people describing what a burglar stole from a house. Each is asked to describe what was stolen from them. One says her jewelry was stolen. The other says his watch and wallet were stolen. DVP's argument would say this evidence is not 100% acceptable because the witnesses described different items as being stolen.  However--and it is important--the witnesses were responding to the question "What was stolen from you?" They were not asked "Can you list everything that was stolen?"

Evidence-gathering can be subjective. It is not subject,in other words, to a stringent standard where "100%" agreement is necessary in order to accept the evidence.  What is accepted as evidence?  What is rejected? What honest researchers have learned, in the case of Oswald's so-called guilt, is that many statements, matters of evidence, and witnesses were rejected, not considered,or never identified. 

VIEW HERE JUST A FEW OF THE DOZENS OF EXAMPLES OF HOW LEE OSWALD WAS FRAMED

WE MUST CONSIDER THE NATURE OF EVIDENCE, AND WHY EVIDENCE DOESN'T HAVE TO BE 100% IRREFUTABLE IN ORDER TO BE CONSIDERED.

THIS IS A TWO-EDGED SWORD: MUCH OF THE EVIDENCE AGAINST LEE OSWALD MUST BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY, JUST AS MUCH OF THE EVIDENCE SUPPORTING ARGUMENTS FOR HIS INNOCENCE MUST BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.  

DEFINITION OF EVIDENCE(SKIP THIS PART IF YOU UNDERSTAND THAT MOST EVIDENCE IS 'NOT' 100% IRREFUTABLE.

Relevant Evidence

• The most basic rule of evidence requires that proposed evidence be relevant to the case. This means that you can introduce only evidence that tends to make a fact in the case more or less likely. Relevant evidence does not have to be particularly strong, it just has to be related in some way to the fact it is being offered to prove or disprove. The judge decides whether the proposed evidence is relevant. However, even relevant evidence is not allowed if another rule of evidence requires its exclusion.

Real Evidence

• Real evidence is a tangible object that played a part in the dispute. Examples of real evidence include the weapon used in a crime or the actual contract that was breached.

Demonstrative Evidence

• Demonstrative evidence is used in conjunction with the testimony of a witness. Demonstrative evidence helps the judge or jury understand to what the witness is testifying. Demonstrative evidence is admissible when it is a fair and accurate representation of the witness's testimony. A map or photograph used during witness testimony would be considered demonstrative evidence.

Documentary Evidence

• Documentary evidence is usually a piece of writing that documents a fact or event that is in dispute. Common examples of documentary evidence include deeds, leases, ticket stubs, licenses and contracts. In some instances in which documentary evidence is present, it is the only evidence allowed on that issue. For example, if a lease is admitted into evidence in a renter's dispute, no one can testify about the contents of the lease.

Testimonial Evidence

• Testimonial evidence is verbal evidence given by a witness. Testimonial evidence is only admitted when the witness takes an oath to be honest and the witness has personal knowledge about what she is testifying. The witness must be able to remember and communicate what she perceived. Generally, witnesses may not testify to hearsay, that is, about what they heard another person say. There are exceptions to the hearsay rule, but they are quite complicated and require the expertise of a lawyer or judge to determine.

Read more: What Kind of Evidence Is Acceptable in a Court of Law? | eHow http://www.ehow.com/info_8390755_kind-evidence-acceptable-court-law.html#ixzz2VfsuLH6B

NOW, BACK TO DVP:

HE WRITES: "Does the average researcher just simply ignore all of the evidence that supports Oswald's lone guilt (and every bit of hard evidence supports it), or is the idea of a conspiracy in JFK's assassination so ingrained into subsequent generations of people since the event took place that they feel they have no choice BUT to go with the flow and believe the conspiracy theorists?"

LET'S EXAMINE THE ABOVE STATEMENT.
"Does the average researcher just simply ignore all of the evidence that supports Oswald's lone guilt...?"

DVP ARGUES THAT THE EVIDENCE (THAT DVP ACCEPTS) IS 'IGNORED' BY THE 'AVERAGE' RESEARCHER. WHAT IS AN 'AVERAGE' RESEARCHER? WE ASSUME HE MEANS THIS:

"One who conducts scholarly or scientific investigation or 

inquiry.   See Synonyms at inquiry. 2. Close, careful study."

(definition 'researcher')


THE VERY MEANING OF 'RESEARCH' IS TO CONDUCT CLOSE, 

CAREFUL STUDY, DVP ASKS IF "ALL OF THE EVIDENCE THAT 

SUPPORTS OSWALD'S LONE GUILT" IS BEING IGNORED BY THE 

'AVERAGE RESEARCHER.'      

BASED ON THE DEFINITION OF A RESEARCHER, DVP'S QUESTION 

IS INAPPROPRIATE.


DVP'S NEXT STATEMENT:

DVP:"For I ask --- How could ALL of the following evidence against Lee Harvey Oswald have been either fabricated, planted, distorted, or in some manner faked? There's just TOO MUCH stuff here on the "Oswald Did It" table to ignore.

DVP PRESENTS A LOGICAL FALLACY (BIFURCATION) BY ASKING HOW COULD 'ALL' THE EVIDENCE HAVE BEEN PLANTED, DISTORTED, OR IN SOME MANNER FAKED? (HE LEAVES OUT 'IGNORED' AND 'UNFOUNDED.').

BIFURCATION: (either-or, black or white, all or nothing fallacy) 

assumes that two categories are mutually exclusive and exhaustive.  

(BIFURCATION)

DVP REPEATS HE FALLACY AGAIN:
DVP: "Granted, I'd agree that perhaps one or two of these things could have been manufactured to set up a patsy. But ALL of these items?! And complete silence be maintained by the many, many operatives who must certainly have been involved in the acts themselves and ensuing 40-year cover-up?!"

NOTE WELL: NUMEROUS OPERATIVES OVER THE YEARS HAVE SPOKEN OUT, SUCH AS DON ADDAMS, RICHARD HELMS AND E. HOWARD HUNT:

THE CIA'S E. HOWARD HUNT CONFESSED THAT OSWALD DIDN'T DO IT

NOW, WHO'S IGNORING EVIDENCE?

DVP CONTINUES IN THE SAME FALLACIOUS VEIN:

DVP: "Common sense (to me) dictates otherwise. And the "otherwise" leads anybody who isn't prone to cry "Conspiracy!" at every turn in the road to finally envision the fact that 24-year-old Lee Oswald was a lone nut who DID indeed pull off what the majority of people say couldn't happen in a million years."

DVP NOW CALLS ON 'AUTHORITY' TO BOLSTER HIS ARGUMENT:

"Author and ballistics expert Larry M. Sturdivan said it very well in his 2005 book"The JFK Myths", when he said this on page 246:

"While one of the pieces of physical evidence could conceivably have been faked by an expert, there is no possibility that an expert, or team of super-experts, could have fabricated the perfectly coordinated whole...with superhuman abilities to fake physical evidence that is in complete agreement with all the other faked evidence." -- Larry Sturdivan"

DVP USES: "APPEAL TO AUTHORITY": (ipse dixit --also called ad verecundiam sometimes) attempts to justify an argument by citing a highly admired or well-known (but not necessarily qualified) figure who supports the conclusion being offered.

LARRY M. STURDIVAN is a wound ballistics expert who appears in TV specials arguing that Oswald killed JFK. All well and good. His argument assumes that the faked evidence is "perfectly coordinated."  But this is not the case.  Had it been so,we would not be exerting ourselves to defend Oswald.It would have been an open-and-shut case. Since that is not the case, Sturdivant's statement is merely an appeal to authority, since it has nothing to do with his expertise on ballistics.

 DVP then gives us a long list of statements that he presents as solid fact. He begins with this statement:

"Lee Harvey Oswald murdered President John F. 

Kennedy without the assistance of others in November of 

1963 in Dallas, Texas, USA."

"The evidence against Lee H. Oswald includes these 

subtle tidbits:"


'SUBTLE?' 'TIDBITS'?  THE SERIOUS CHARGES, BELOW, ARE LISTED AS FACTS. OUR COMMENTS ARE IN RED AND UNDERLINED.

1.) Lee Harvey Oswald owned the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository on Friday afternoon, November 22, 1963.

AS A WITNESS MYSELF, I KNEW LEE HARVEY OSWALD AND HIS TASTE IN GUNS. HE SPOKE WITH CRESCENT CITY GARAGE OWNER ADRIAN ALBA ABOUT BUYING A FINE RIFLE.  I NEVER SAW A RIFLE BELONGING TO LEE OSWALD. FURTHER, YOU CANNOT FIND A LOGICAL WAY FOR THE RIFLE TO HAVE REACHED NEW ORLEANS FROM TEXAS, AND THEN TO HAVE BEEN RETURNED TO TEXAS VIA RUTH PAINE'S CAR, WITHOUT ITS EVER BEING SEEN.

MARINA TOLD THE WARREN COMMISSION THAT LEE SAT WITH THE RIFLE DAY AFTER DAY IN BROAD VIEW OF A BUSY ROAD, YET NOT A SINGLE NOSY NEIGHBOR--AND THERE WERE PLENTY OF THEM--EVER SAW A RIFLE IN LEE'S HANDS. THEY KNEW WHEN HE HAD VISITORS, THEY SAID THEY SAW HIM READING ON THE PORCH FOR HOURS, AND THEY EVEN KNEW HOW MANY SUITCASES LEE TOOK WITH HIM WHEN HE LEFT FOR GOOD.  BUT THEY NEVER REPORTED A RIFLE IN NEW ORLEANS.  EVEN IF THE RIFLE REMAINED IN TEXAS, WE HAVE ONLY THE WORD OF THE DEMOHRENSCHILDTS AND MARINA THAT IT EVER EXISTED, THE DEMOHRENSCHILDTS ARE THE ONLY PERSONS TO HAVE SUPPLIED A BACKYARD PHOTO THAT WAS OBVIOUSLY MADE FROM A NEGATIVE THAT COULD BE LINKED TO THE SUSPICIOUS CAMERA 'FOUND' WEEKS LATER OH-SO-CONVENIENTLY IN RUTH PAINE'S GARAGE.

  LEE OSWALD WOULD NEVER HAVE PURCHASED A TRACEABLE, CLUMSY, INFERIOR RIFLE BY MONEY ORDER, FURTHER, IT WAS ORDERED UNDER THE NAME 'HIDELL'-- BUT OSWALD'S LIST OF RECIPIENTS AT THE POST OFFICE BOX HAD NO SUCH NAME,SO HOW WAS THE RIFLE DELIVERED? CONVENIENTLY, THE POST OFFICE HAD NO RECORD OF ITS DELIVERY,OR OF THE HANDGUN THAT SUPPOSEDLY CAME THE SAME DAY (CAN'T HAVE 'TWO''LOST' RECEIPTS, CAN WE? SO THEY WERE ANNOUNCED TO HAVE BEEN DELIVERED ON THE SAME DAY-- EVEN THOUGH THE TWO ITEMS WERE ORDERED WEEKS APART FROM EACH OTHER.).

  MIRACULOUSLY, THE RIFLE ORDER REACHED CHICAGO, AND THE MONEY ORDER WITH IT WAS PROCESSED --AND RIFLE PACKED --ONE DAY LATER, THOUGH THE MAIL ORDER WAS SUPPOSEDLY SENT ALL THE WAY FROM DALLAS TO CHICAGO BY REGULAR MAIL,USING A POSTBOX DROP MILES FROM WHERE OSWALD, WHO HAD NO CAR, WORKED AT THE TIME.  DVP GETS AROUND ALL OF THIS BY SIMPLY STATING THIS HAIRY RIFLE PROBLEM AS 'FACT.'

THIS GIVES THE READER A GOOD INDICATION OF HOW ACCURATE THE REST OF HIS LONG PROPAGANDA PIECE WILL BE. FOR FULL INFORMATION, SEE THESE LINKS:

"FAULTY EVIDENCE: THE CASE AGAINST LEE HARVEY OSWALD" by Michael T.Griffith

"The Rifle" by Gil Jesus

"The Spent Rifle Shells"by Gil Jesus

MARINA OSWALD DID ADMIT TO TAKING PHOTOS. BUT WHAT DVP DOESN'T TELL YOU IS THAT MARINA SAID SHE TOOK HER PHOTOS FROM A DIFFERENT DIRECTION: SEE:

http://www.mtgriffith.com/web_documents/fraud.htm

AND FOR A GOOD GENERAL SUMMARY, SEE:

"The Backyard Photos of Lee Harvey Oswald Are Fakes" by John Kays

AS WELL AS MY OWN ESSAY:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/38733842/Farid-s-Folly-and-the-Lee-Harvey-Oswald-Backyard-Photo-Fiasco

SEE YOUTUBE CHANNEL LOLA4JVB4LHO FOR VIDEOS CONCERNING LEE OSWALD'S INNOCENCE.

Eben Rey Interviews Judyth Vary Baker About the Kennedy Assassination, Her Book ME & LEE and Weaponizing Cancer

Eben Rey Interviews Judyth Vary Baker About the Kennedy Assassination, Me & Lee,  and Weaponizing Cancer

GO HERE TO DOWNLOAD PART ONE OF THE INTERVIEW:
 http://www.divshare.com/download/23471933-c55
GO HERE TO DOWNLOAD PART TWO OF THE INTERVIEW:
http://www.divshare.com/download/23471953-4b1
GO HERE TO DOWNLOAD PART THREE OF THE INTERVIEW:
http://www.divshare.com/download/23471972-db8

Eben Rey is one of the most fascinating women I've ever met. She's strong, compassionate, and literate, with an open mind, unafraid to tackle controversial subjects.

Eben had already read Me & Lee and comprehended the enormity of what had happened in the cover-up of the Kennedy assassination, as well as the tragic consequences for those of us who wanted to cure cancer in the 60's and 70's. The cancer treatment industry-- focused on cutting, irradiating and chemically poisoning cancer cells-- would not be very interested in curing cancer when treating cancer was such a lucrative endeavor.  Why cure cancer, and, for that matter, why prevent it?

The interview below was originally supposed to last an hour (including breaks) but we ended up recording much more. The interview is broken into three segments for listening ease. Feel free to share this interview with everyone who is interested in the truth about the Kennedy assassination, the true role of Lee Harvey Oswald, and how cancer was weaponized.

I entered the USA for the first time in over five and a half years to give interviews and seminars on the contents of Me & Lee: How I Came to Know, Love and Lose Lee Harvey Oswald.  We had very little publicity, but wherever people heard about our sudden arrivals, we received tremendous welcomes. I will never forget the kindness of the people, and what it meant to them to learn firsthand information from a living witness. We encountered no hecklers whatsoever: all of that happened afterwards on the Internet.  I wondered if the reason we encountered no problems was because I had a professional bodyguard with me.  If I were a troublemaker, I certainly wouldn't want to have to deal with HIM!

In Chicago, I didn't have to worry, either, with former UDT-12/Navy Seal trained Jesse Ventura at my side, a man who towered over me and who brooks no foolishness. Jesse demonstrates immense self discipline, not responding to inappropriate questions and keeping his head; he doesn't drink, and only chews on his cigars.  My Dallas hero, Robert Groden, also flew in from Dallas, and Dr. Jim Fetzer also came to Chicago to join in the discussions.  Without Phil Singer, and, of course, my publisher Kris Millegan, a stay in Chicago would not have been safe or possible. In Knoxville, I was also safely surrounded by researchers and friends, notably former ORIN employee and researcher Jim Phelps. There at the Haslam Theater, I was accompanied by my son, who flew up from Florida, as we viewed Lisa Soland's fine play about Me & Lee -- "The Sniper's Nest."  

Caitlin Campbell is Judy Vary Baker, and Walker Harrison is Lee Harvey Oswald in Lisa Soland's Play, "The Sniper's Nest"

I commented that Lisa got "her" "just right." i'm almost 70 years old now.  That girl seems so far away now... that girl in New Orleans, whose career in cancer research was destroyed because she objected to using one or more "volunteers" from Angola Prison for a cancer experiment at Jackson, LA's mental hospital that, if successful, would kill the volunteers.  I had to lay it all aside, breaking my heart.

I'd never actually ever recover from the order to become "a vanilla girl" -- or die.  At least writing the book, and now seeing the play "The Sniper's Nest" is bringing the suppressed information to the fore.  Too late for Lee Oswald, but not too late for his wife, Marina, his children June and Rachel, and their children.  And it's not too late for America, to wake up and realize what was taken from them, when their government arranged for the murder of John F. Kennedy and the immediate framing of Oswald and cover up that followed. Many were duped, for far too long, even though from the very beginning, the framing of Lee Harvey Oswald and his murder only 47 hours after his arrest, in the presence of 70 Dallas police, brought serious questions to bear, especially by attorney Mark Lane.

The truth will set us free, if it's not too late.

JVB

LEE HARVEY OSWALD, THE COKE, THE SHIRT, AND MARRION BAKER'S TESTIMONY

This man tried to save the President.
He would be arrested as Kennedy's killer an hour after the deed.
He would be murdered by the Mafia to silence him, only 47 hours later.

FBI AGENT DON ADAMS SAW HIS EVIDENCE WIPED OUT --EVIDENCE THAT PROVES A CONSPIRACY KILLED JFK AND THAT LEE HARVEY OSWALD WAS INNOCENT!

IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THIS VIDEO, SEE IT NOW!

SO..."WHERE WAS OSWALD FROM 11:50 to 12:35 P.M.

ON THE DAY OF THE ASSASSINATION?"

Michael T. Griffith (excerpt)

 "Oswald was at the sniper's nest on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting, then how is it he was seen by the building manager and a pistol-waving police officer less than 90 seconds afterwards on the second floor, standing in the lunchroom with a Coke in his hand, giving every appearance of being perfectly calm and relaxed? (The manager was Roy Truly and the policeman was Officer Marrion Baker.)

Jim Moore and other lone-gunman theorists assume that Oswald bought the Coke after the encounter with the manager and the policeman (3:53). However, the available evidence indicates Oswald purchased the Coke before the second-floor encounter (5: 50-52). Oswald had no reason to lie about when he bought the Coke. When he mentioned the Coke-buying during his questioning, he did so in passing, and he could not have known the important role the timing of this detail would subsequently play in the investigation. I agree with what David Lifton has said on this subject: 

The original news accounts said that when Baker first saw Oswald, the latter was drinking a Coke. This seemingly minor fact was crucial, because if Oswald had time to operate the machine, open the bottle, and drink some soda, that would mean he was on the second floor even earlier than the Commission's reconstructions allowed. In a signed statement Officer Baker was asked to make in September 1964, at the tail-end of the investigation, he wrote: "I saw a man standing in the lunchroom drinking a coke." A line was drawn through "drinking a coke," and Baker initialed the corrected version. [Dallas] Police Captain Will Fritz, in his report on his interrogation of Oswald, wrote: "I asked Oswald where he was when the police officer stopped him. He said he was on the second floor drinking a Coca Cola when the officer came in." If I were a juror, I would have believed Oswald already had the Coke in hand, and indeed, had drunk some of it, by the time the officer entered the lunchroom. (18:351)

"...DRINKING A COKE"  TESTIMONY CROSSED OUT

BUT ACCORDING TO CRITICS, THE DEPOSITION WAS WRITTEN JUST TWO DAYS BEFORE THE WARREN COMMISSION CEASED ITS INVESTIGATION AND THE WRITER WAS IN A BIG HURRY AND SIMPLY WROTE DOWN SOME EXTRA WORDS THAT MARRION BAKER NEVER SAID--SO BAKER HAD TO CROSS THEM OUT.  YES, THE FBI AGENT TAKING THE DEPOSITION JUST REPEATED A MYTH HE'D HEARD. BAKER ALSO TOLD THE WARREN COMMISSION HE SAW NOTHING IN LEE'S HANDS AT THAT TIME. ALL WELL AND GOOD. BUT WHY, THEN, DO WE HAVE THIS:

1) TESTIMONY INCLUDES A COKE:

Mrs Robert A Reid, a TSBD Clerical Sup

ervisor... described eating her lunch in the second floor lunchroom about noon, then going downstairs to see the motorcade. After Kennedy was shot, she was frightened, and ran up the front stairs to her second floor office.

MR BELIN: "And then what did you do?"
MRS REID: "Well, I kept walking and I looked up and Oswald was coming in the back door of the office. I met him by the time I passed my desk several feet and I told him: 'Oh, the President has been shot, but maybe they didn't hit him.' ..... He had gotten a coke and was holding it in his hands ..... The only time I had seen him in the office was to come and get change and he already had his coke in his hand ..... " (3H 274).

Mrs Reid saw Lee Oswald after Baker and Truly saw him. (3H 275). Reid also said that Lee's coke bottle was full. (3H 278). We cannot prove when the coke was purchased from her account. Griffith, however, tells us that A WARREN COMMISSION COUNSEL also said Baker saw a coke in Lee Oswald's possession:

"During a radio program on December 23, 1966, Albert Jenner, a former senior WC counsel, said that when Baker saw Oswald in the lunchroom, Oswald was holding a Coke in his hand. Said Jenner, "the first man this policeman saw, was Oswald with a bottle of Coke" (17:226)."

Now, why would he do that? Is it true that this coke might have become a "myth" by then, as Oswald-did-it theorists maintain?  But if so, how? And why would a Warren Commissioner senior counsel bring it up? Griffith goes on to say:

"The fact that Oswald was holding a Coke when Baker confronted him in the lunchroom was one of the details that Chief Jesse Curry of the Dallas police mentioned to reporters the day after the shooting."

OOPS! Jesse Curry was mentioning all sorts of evidence AGAINST Lee Oswald. Who told Curry just one day after the shooting that BAKER saw Lee Oswald with a coke in his hand? This was the earliest account of the coke's existence -- and Curry connects it firmly with Baker:

  "When Jesse Curry retired as police chief of Dallas, Texas, he wrote a book called "JFK Assassination File." In a 1969 interview for the Dallas Morning News around the time of publication, Curry stated,

"We don't have any proof that Oswald fired the rifle, and never did.
Nobody's yet been able to put him in that building with a gun in his hand." [1]

 Griffith adds that "As late as ten days later this detail was still being reported in major newspapers, such as theWashington Post."

We can consider the early statement by Curry as too important to dismiss. 

Griffith next argues that:

"Oswald simply could not have made it to the second floor without first being seen by Roy Truly, who was running ahead of Patrolman Baker. The Dallas police descriptions of the rifle in its hiding place indicate that the alleged murder weapon was very carefully stashed under and between a stack of book boxes at the opposite end of the sixth floor from where the shots were supposedly fired. It is reasonable to assume Oswald would have attempted to wipe his fingerprints off the rifle (at least those parts of the rifle he had just handled while firing it). Someone wiped off the Carcano before it was "discovered" because the FBI found no identifiable prints on it when it examined the weapon on November 23. This would mean that in less than 90 seconds Oswald squeezed out of the sniper's nest, ran all the way to the opposite end of the sixth floor, wiped off the rifle (at least those parts that he would have just handled while firing it), carefully hid it under and between some boxes, ran down four flights of stairs to the second floor (actually eight small flights), went through the foyer door, and then made his way to the lunchroom, yet did not appear the least bit winded or nervous when seen by the manager and the policeman. And, if we add the Coke-buying, Oswald's alleged journey becomes even more implausible.

The WC's own reenactments of Officer Baker's encounter with Oswald indicated that it occurred no more than 75 seconds after the shots were fired. There is no way Oswald could have done everything the Commission said he did and still have made it to the lunchroom in time to be seen by Baker and without being seen by Truly."

Today we are told that Lee could not have made it down those stairs and across that hall and into that room, door closed even in 90 seconds. Some dishonest "time trials" have been made with athletes who ran down simulated stairway lengths (but not even built the same way)--which have been criticized elsewhere for their rigged results.  But even those rigged trial runs could not get around the startling testimony we now have from Victoria Adams--"The girl on the stairs":

"On November 22, 1963, a young Victoria Elizabeth Adams stood behind a fourth-floor window of the Texas School Book Depository in Dallas. She watched as John Kennedy was murdered in the streets below. Then, with a co-worker in tow, she ran down the back stairs of the building in order to get outside and determine what had happened.
At that precise moment, her life changed forever.

Unbeknownst to her but certainly in the forefront of the government's thinking was the fact that if Miss Adams was telling the truth, then she had descended those stairs at the same time Lee Oswald would have been on them as he made his escape from the sixth floor sniper's nest."

Yet Miss Adams saw no one.
And even though the stairs were old, wooden, and very creaky under any weight, she heard no one on them.


Her story presented obvious problems for the Warren Commission’s conclusion that Oswald was the sole assassin. When Miss Adams was called to testify before a Commission attorney, she was quickly discredited, humiliated, and eventually branded a liar. Behind closed doors she pleaded with the government to conduct time tests of her actions if she wasn’t believed. She begged the government to question her co-workers, particularly the woman who had accompanied her down the stairs, if she was felt to have been inaccurate.

But she was ignored.

And so, knowing the truth of what she had done and now fearing for her life because of it, she went into hiding and became willing to die with that private knowledge.
Intrigued by what little was available about Miss Adams, the author went in search of her. It took him 35 years to eventually find this elusive witness. Along the way, many of the rumors and speculations surrounding the JFK assassination were finally put to rest. And in the end, the truth of what Miss Adams did was discovered.
This is an important story, unique in this mess surrounding the Kennedy assassination and buried for decades. It is an account the government did not want us to hear, and actually went to the extreme of fabricating evidence in order to prevent us from hearing it."

These are the words written for the book THE GIRL ON THE STAIRS by author Barry Ernest.  

And if Lee wasn't on the stairs, he was in that room. The door was closed...Lee had to walk across the room, insert coins, wait for the coke to roll down, open the coke... and he was not seen crossing a wide hallway from stairs on the other side of that wide hallway, before entering the lunchroom. LEE OSWALD WAS NOT ON THE 6TH FLOOR 90 SECONDS EARLIER. He did not go down those stairs. Curry himself said Baker had seen Lee with a coke just a day after the assassination. Or should we believe that the words were accidentally written down in haste by somebody taking an oral deposition, which then needed correction by Baker himself?  Probably the most shameful batch of lies about Lee Oswald were written in the book MARINA AND LEE by Priscilla Johnson McMillan, who has been linked to the CIA. She went out of her way to impress upon readers --who would be unaware of her intentions, but which would plant the image in their head--that Lee had no coke in his hands, for she wrote, on p. 531: "When Baker and Truly reached the second-floor landing, Baker caught a glimpse of someone in the lunchroom. Revolver in hand, he rushed to the door and saw a man 20 feet away walking to the far end of the room. The man was empty-handed." 

 The way Baker was questioned by Dulles (and by Belin) for the Warren Commission was absolutely shameful, as an attempt was made to get Baker to say Lee Oswald wore the SAME SHIRT in the TSBD that he was wearing when arrested. This was important because a bus transfer ticket, obtained from his pocket due to Lee's 'escape by public transit'--would not have been in a different shirt.  The ticket had to be planted because it has not a single crease in it and was never tested for fingerprints, unlike so many other pieces of evidence. To get Baker to say it was the SAME SHIRT was essential, but the poor man just wasn't cooperating very well.  The persistence of Dulles is shocking as he tried to get around Lee's "escape by car" as seen by officer Roger Craig, which meant a conspirator was involved: (Baker's "brown jacket" and the 'other' short he saw, as well as the gist of the leading questions,  are underlined)

Mr. Baker.

At that particular time I was looking at his face, and it seemed to me like he had a light brown jacket on and maybe some kind of white-looking shirt.
Anyway, as I noticed him walking away from me, it was kind of dim in there that particular day, and it was hanging out to his side.

Mr. Belin.

Handing you what has been marked as Commission Exhibit 150, would this appear to be anything that you have ever seen before?

Mr. Baker.

Yes, sir; I believe that is the shirt that he had on when he came. I wouldn't be sure of that. It seemed to me like that other shirt was a little bit darker than that whenever I saw him in the homicide office there.

Mr. Belin.

What about when you saw him in the School Book Depository Building, does this look familiar as anything he was wearing, if you know?

Mr. Baker.

I couldn't say whether that was--it seemed to me it was a light-colored brown but I couldn't say it was that or not.

Mr. Dulles.

Lighter brown did you say, I am just asking what you said. I couldn't quite hear.

Mr. Baker.

Yes, sir; all I can remember it was in my recollection of it it was a light brown jacket.

Mr. Belin.

Are you referring to this Exhibit 150 as being similar to the jacket or similar to the shirt that you saw or, if not, similar to either one?

Mr. Baker.

Well, it would be similar in color to it--I assume it was a jacket, it was hanging out. Now, I was looking at his face and I wasn't really paying any attention. After Mr. Truly said he knew him, so I didn't pay any attention to him, so I just turned and went on.

Mr. Belin.

Now, you did see him later at the police station, is that correct?

Mr. Baker.

Yes, sir.

Mr. Belin.

Was he wearing anything that looked like Exhibit 150 at the police station?

Mr. Baker.

He did have a brown-type shirt on that was out.

Mr. Belin.

Did it appear to be similar to any clothing you had seen when you saw him at the School Book Depository Building?

Mr. Baker.

I could have mistaken it for a jacket, but to my recollection it was a little colored jacket, that is all I can say.

Mr. Dulles.

You saw Oswald later in the lineup or later

Mr. Baker.

I never did have a chance to see him in the lineup. I saw him when I went to give the affidavit, the statement that I saw him down there, of the actions of myself and Mr. Truly as we went into the building and on up what we are discussing now.
(At this point Senator Cooper entered the hearing room.)

Mr. Belin.

Officer Baker

Mr. Dulles.

I didn't get clearly in mind, I am trying to check up, as to whether you saw Oswald maybe in the same costume later in the day. Did you see Oswald later in the day of November 22d?

Mr. Baker.

Yes, sir; I did.

Mr. Dulles.

Under what circumstances? Don't go into detail, I just want to tie up these two situations.

Mr. Baker.

As I was in the homicide office there writing this, giving this affidavit, I got hung in one of those little small offices back there, while the Secret Service took Mr. Oswald in there and questioned him and I couldn't get out by him while they were questioning him, and I did get to see him at that time.

Mr. Dulles.

You saw him for a moment at that time?

Mr. Baker.

Yes, sir.

It should be clear that witnesses were being pushed to say what the Commission wanted. Some witnesses later insisted that their testimony had been changed. Those who defend the Warren Commission today either have double-digit IQ's, must be enamored of anti-conspiracy writers, and/or be in the pay of those still attempting to blame the Kennedy assassination on the one man who was trying to stop it. It is my hope that you will read the true story of Lee Oswald in  my book, ME & LEE.