Now let’s enlarge that photo and you can see a man
standing in the doorway of the Texas school book
That man is obviously Lee Harvey Oswald.
He has the same shirt on….. unbuttoned the same way as he
wore it later that day in this official arrest picture. Now even if it isn’t Oswald, don’t you think it’s strange that two people who look that much alike wore almost identical shirts at the same building on the same day on the most historic day in American history? And if Oswald went home to change his shirt after the shooting, don’t you think that’s strange as well that he coincidentally changed to a shirt that matched a man in the depository doorway on the most historic day in American history? In addition, there is strong evidence that this photo has been altered to intentionally make it look more like Lovelady….When photo is enlarged,you can clearly see the hairline has been tampered with as is the pattern on the shirt…
Now, everything didn’t go as planned on that fateful day in 1963. Kennedy was supposed to be shot as the motorcade turned onto Elm street. It didn’t turn out that way, He was shot much too late as the motorcade approached the underpass.
Oswald was supposed to be killed leaving the school book depository and Kennedy was supposed to be killed with the first shot fired from behind from the Dal-Tex building where a man named Charles Nicoletti was firing. Neither happened. That’s why the planned “patsy” Lee Harvey Oswald (who never fired a shot) was arrested and an assassin named James Files had to fire from the stockade fence…
WHO FIRED THE FATAL SHOTS THAT KILLED JFK
The Incredible Post-Assassination Journey Of Lee Harvey Oswald:
Lee Harvey Oswald was, in all probability, standing in the ground level entrance way of the Texas School Book Depository Building when the shots were fired. In the famous photograph, taken by AP’s James Altgens just after the first shot was fired, shows the presidential limousine with the President visible through the windshield…. clutching at his throat. The Depository’s doorway, with several interested spectators looking on, appears in the background. One of these spectators bears an uncanny resemblance to Oswald. The Warren Commission, for once actually addressing a controversy, “identified” the individual as Billy Lovelady, a fellow Book Depository employee….(BELOW
IS THE DOORWAY FROM THE INSIDE)
The problem with that explanation is that Lovelady, while identifying the person in the Altgens’ photo as himself, stated that he’d worn a red and white vertically striped shirt on the day of the assassination, while the man in the doorway’s shirt in not striped and is open in front, exposing the tee shirt underneath. In color films taken from another angle, the color of the shirt worn by the man in the doorway was revealed to be orange-brown. When Oswald was arrested, he was wearing what appeared to be an identical shirt- an orange-brown tweed with missing buttons and tee-shirt underneath. Other films taken on November 22, 1963 revealed that Lovelady was in fact wearing a red and blue plaid shirt. Many critics have now accepted that the man in the doorway is in fact Billy Lovelady, but it is difficult to understand why they would accept what appears to be yet another lame “explanation” by the official “investigators” of the Crime of the Century. Perhaps they are merely trying to lend credence to Oswald’s own alleged explanation for his whereabouts at the time of the shooting- eating lunch in the first floor “Domino Room” (BELOW) and don’t wish to contradict his statement. The problem is that none of Oswald’s alleged statements to authorities while in custody can be verified, and therefore there is no reason to assume that he did in fact tell them he was on the first floor. He might have told them he was watching the motorcade from the doorway.
Ninety seconds (at most) after the final shot was fired, motorcycle police officer Marrion L. Baker, accompanied by Book Depository manager Roy Truly, encountered Oswald in the second-floor lunchroom. (BELOW
He remained incredibly calm, even as Baker thrust a gun into his stomach. What no critic has heretofore questioned about this incident are the curious actions of Officer Baker. Exactly why did he approach a man standing calmly in front of a soda machine and draw a gun on him? There were numerous employees scattered throughout the Book Depository Building; why was Oswald singled out when he was clearly doing nothing suspicious? Rationalizing any or all of the acts attributed to Oswald and incidents like this, which appear to make little sense, is necessary if we are to find the truth behind the events of November 22, 1963. There were witnesses on the stairwell leading down from the sixth floor-where he allegedly had just fired shots at the presidential motorcade-but no one reported seeing a fleeing assassin barging down four flights of stairs, after he’d completed his foul act and carefully hidden his old, defective mail order rifle.
If we accept Baker’s and Truly’s account of the encounter with Oswald, then that is the last reliable sighting of the alleged assassin until he was dragged out of the Texas Theater, by an enormous throng of law enforcement personnel later that afternoon. Everything that is attributed to Oswald from the time he encountered Baker and Truly until his arrest can be questioned and must be taken with a huge grain of salt.
Oswald – Through the Window Glass – Physics Proves Oswald’s Innocence:
Besides the assassin wearing a white shirt, while Oswald wore a brown one, and the assassin sticking around the Sniper’s Nest for four to five minutes, possibly rearranging the boxes, there is hard physical evidence of Oswald’s being innocent because of his presence on the second floor within a minute and a half after the assassination. When Roy Truly and Dallas police officer Marion Baker entered the TSBD within a minute of the last shot, they immediately went to the back of the building and began going up the stairs. Truly was ahead of Baker, but it was Baker who saw a man in the small window of the door leading to the vestibule of the Second Floor lunchroom. Truly continued up the stairs but Baker stopped and looked in the window and saw a man in the lunchroom, and opened the door, drew his gun and stopped the man as he was about to buy a coke. Truly appeared and said the man, Oswald, was an employee, and the two then continued up the stairs. After testifying before the Warren Commission, Truly was recalled and placed under oath again and asked ONE question – did the door to the Second Floor lunch room have an automatic closing mechanism….. Yes. And when seen in the blueprints of the building, the vestibule has TWO doors, one from the west, the one Baker saw Oswald through, and one to the south. If the one to the west was even partially open, as if Oswald had just passed through there as he had to in order to be the assassin, then the window would have been smaller, as physics will tell you – and Oswald would have been to the left, having already entered the lunchroom. For Baker to have seen Oswald through that window, the door would have had to be closed, and Oswald would have had to have entered the vestibule through the South door, coming from the offices or the mens room or the first floor where he said he was at the time of the assassination. When the Secret Service began to film their “reenactment” to prove the scenario they wanted to prove, they
STOP at that door, knowing that if they open the door, you can no longer see through the window and Oswald is innocent. So they don’t bother to go any further and follow the Patsy out of the TSBD and to the bus and to the cab and to the rooming house and to 10th and Patton and to the Theater, because he is no longer a suspect in the assassination. Presumed Guilty -How and why the Warren Commission framed Lee Harvey Oswald.
A factual account based on the Commission’s public and private documents.
by Howard Roffman:
The authorities claimed that Oswald left the Depository building at 12:33. There is absolutely no evidence for this assumption, and no witnesses to it-not even the notoriously unreliable types so heavily relied upon by the Warren Commission. The official story then has Oswald walking seven blocks to the east (his rooming house was located west of the building). The fleeing assassin then caught a bus that would take him
BACK towards the Book Depository, to the scene of the crime, and would appear-to non-Warren Commission types-to make his seven block walk in the opposite direction a stupendous exercise in futility. This bus subsequently became stuck in a traffic jam, and Oswald soon disembarked. After walking four more blocks, Oswald took a cab-after first offering to allow a woman waiting for a cab as well to go ahead of him, in the style most fleeing killers employ. For some mysterious reason, Oswald directed the cab five or more blocks past his rooming house and then walked to it. After arriving at his rooming house, Oswald went into his room and left three or four minutes later, and was last seen by housekeeper Earlene Roberts standing calmly at the bus stop waiting for the bus going north on Beckley Street.
The murder of Officer J.D. Tippit, which would be attributed to Oswald, occurred only moments later at a point south of the rooming house. Oswald, seemingly discarding any ideas of catching a northbound bus, then walked in the opposite direction (south), in a confusing, illogical manner, taking the hardest route possible to Tenth and Patton Streets, where he supposedly shot and killed Officer Tippit for the same unknown reasons that compelled him to assassinate the president.
After firing the shots at Tippit, Oswald carefully dropped two empty casings from his revolver where they could be easily found. Continuing his confounding journey, the assassin on the lam suddenly decided to take in a movie. While according to the fanciful calculations employed by the Warren Commission, Oswald was such a fast walker he traveled at a block a minute pace in his earlier movements, he now inexplicably slowed down and took a half hour to cover the five blocks to the Texas Theater.
Despite this slow, leisurely pace, Oswald was seen by shoe store manager Johnny Brewer and said to appear as if he’d been running. Oswald then-seemingly trying to draw more attention to himself, disappeared into the theater without paying, although neither the cashier- Mrs. Julia Postal, nor the usher- Warren Burroughs- saw him enter. At Brewer’s (and yes, the role of Johnny Brewer should be examined very carefully here; he was, at the very least, an exceptionally suspicious and industrious shoe salesman) urging, Mrs. Postal calls the police, giving them a description of a “ruddy-looking” man. The police respond by saying “well, it fits the description.”
No one knows for certain just how many times patrons had entered that theater without paying previously, but it is safe to say that this particular non- paying patron attracted an inordinate amount of attention from the law enforcement community. A very large number of police officers (and at least one federal agent) descended upon the theater in order to apprehend a man whom a single witness claimed looked “funny” and had entered without buying a ticket. There was absolutely no reason to connect this non- paying theater patron with the assassination of the President, which had transpired barely an hour previously. Remember, Oswald was not supposed to be arrested but was supposed to be killed in a shootout as he left the depository.
So, that’s why the powers that be ordered Jack Ruby to kill Oswald on national T.V. If you were watching that day, you were supposed to be. How dramatic would that be to have the nation witness the killing of Kennedy’s assassin? If you were watching television that day, (BELOW
LEFT)...here is the exact image you saw…
And here is what the viewers saw on live TV:
WHICH GUN IS OSWALD’S? All of these guns have at one time or another been attributed to Oswald as being the murder weapon. The only problem is that they are all different guns.
OSWALD PASSED THE TEST! During his questioning Lee Harvey Oswald was administered a paraffin test by W. E. Barnes of the Dallas Police Department. In this test warm paraffin, which is applied to the skin to open up its pores, collects contaminants. If the suspect had fired a gun, one potential contaminant would be the nitrates from gun powder residue. Once the paraffin hardens, either diphenylamine or diphenylbenzidine is introduced to the paraffin cast, which will turn it blue in the presence of nitrates. Thus, the presence of blue dots on the paraffin casts is evidence that the suspect had fired a gun. A paraffin test was applied to Oswald’s hands and right cheek; his hands reacted positively, whereas his cheek did not. Since shooting a rifle should have exposed his right cheek to gunpowder, the negative reaction is often cited as evidence that he did not fire a rifle. One such example of a writer citing this test as proof Oswald did not shoot a rifle is Oglesby, from The JFK Assassination: The Facts and the Theories, p. 283: Nitrate tests performed on Oswald when he was arrested supported his claim that he had not fired a rifle in the previous 24 hours. Mark Lane makes a similar assertion in Rush to Judgment, p. 149: A positive response on both hands and a negative response on the face is consistent with innocence. It is also consistent with Oswald’s claim that he had not fired a rifle on November 22. And that treasure trove of conspiracy lore, Jim Marrs’ Crossfire, makes a similar claim: Another important piece of evidence involved a paraffin test made on Oswald the day of the assassination. The results of this test presented evidence that Oswald may not have fired a rifle that day, yet these results were downplayed and even suppressed by the federal authorities.
. . .
Oswald’s hands both reacted positively to the paraffin test, indicating the presence of nitrates. But a cast of his right cheek showed no reaction. Any competent defense attorney would have pointed to this test as evidence that his client had not fired a rifle. (pp. 442-443) We also want to point out that just because Oswald’s hand tested positive, doesn’t mean he fired a gun, you can test positive from striking a match. But the fact his face tests were negative is proof positive of Oswald’s innocence.
Let’s hear from someone who knew Oswald better than anyone, his widow Marina. She continues to insist on Oswald’s innocence to this very day: (BELOW).
Now, let’s look at Oswald after his arrest. The media tried to portray him as “crazy” or a “madman” You can see he is anything but that. He proclaims his innocence. He asks for a lawyer and a shower. He looks like a man who has been accused falsely of a crime and his asking for legal representation which he was denied. Every American has a right to talk to a lawyer. At least a half-dozen other of Oswald’s Constitutional rights were violated by the Dallas police.
Let’s look at this video which shows a face on the 6th floor seconds after the assassination, but it’s not Oswald and it’s on the extreme Western window, not at the “alleged” window. (BELOW)
TIMELINE Determined to learn Oswald’s last words, his only testimony, The People’s Almanac assigned one of the leading authorities on the Kennedy assassination, Mae Brussell, to compile every known statement or remark made by Oswald between his arrest and death. The quotes, edited for space and clarity, are based on the recollections of a variety of witnesses present at different times and are not verbatim transcripts. “After 14 years of research on the
JFK assassination,” Mae Brussell concludes, “I am of the opinion that Lee Harvey Oswald was telling the truth about his role in the assassination during these interrogations.” 12:30 P.M.,
CST, NOV. 22, 1963: Pres. John F. Kennedy Assassinated 12:33 P.M. Lee Harvey Oswald left work, entered a bus, and said, “Transfer, please.”
12:40 – 12:45 P.M. Oswald got off the bus, entered a cab, and said, “May I have this cab?” A woman approached, wanting a cab, and Oswald said, “I will let you have this one. . . . 500 North Beckley Street [instructions to William Whaley, driver of another cab]. . . . This will be fine.” Oswald departed cab and walked a few blocks.
1:15 P.M. Officer J. D. Tippit Murdered
1:45 P.M. Arrest at the Texas Theater
“This is it” or “Well, it’s all over now.” Oswald arrested. (Patrolman M. N. McDonald heard these remarks. Other officers who were at the scene did not hear them.) “I don’t know why you are treating me like this. The only thing I have done is carry a pistol into a movie. . . . I don’t see why you handcuffed me. . . . Why should I hide my face? I haven’t done anything to be ashamed of. . . . I want a lawyer. . . . I am not resisting arrest. . . . I didn’t kill anybody. . . . I haven’t shot anybody. . . . I protest this police brutality. . . . I fought back there, but I know I wasn’t supposed to be carrying a gun. . . . What is this all about?” 2:00 – 2:15 P.M. Drive to Police Dept.
“What is this all about? . . . I know my rights. . . . A police officer has been killed? . . . I hear they burn for murder. Well, they say it just takes a second to die. . . . All I did was carry a gun. . . . No, Hidell is not my real name. . . . I have been in the Marine Corps, have a dishonorable discharge, and went to Russia. . . . I had some trouble with police in New Orleans for passing out pro-Castro literature. . . . Why are you treating me this way? . . . I am not being handled right. . . . I demand my rights.” 2:15 P.M. Taken into Police Dept.
2:15 – 2:20 P.M. “Talked to” by officers Guy F. Rose and Richard S. Stovall. No notes.
2:25 – 4:04 P.M. Interrogation of Oswald, Office of Capt Will Fritz
“My name is Lee Harvey Oswald. . . . I work at the Texas School Book Depository Building. . . . I lived in Minsk and in Moscow. . . . I worked in a factory. . . . I liked everything over there except the weather. . . . I have a wife and some children. . . . My residence is 1026 North Beckley, Dallas, Tex.” Oswald recognized FBI agent James Hosty and said, “You have been at my home two or three times talking to my wife. I don’t appreciate your coming out there when I was not there. . . . I was never in Mexico City. I have been in Tijuana. . . . Please take the handcuffs from behind me, behind my back. . . . I observed a rifle in the Texas School Book Depository where I work, on Nov. 20, 1963. . . . Mr. Roy Truly, the supervisor, displayed the rifle to individuals in his office on the first floor. . . . I never owned a rifle myself. . . . I resided in the Soviet Union for three years, where I have many friends and relatives of my wife. . . . I was secretary of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans a few months ago. . . . While in the Marines, I received an award for marksmanship as a member of the U.S. Marine Corps. . . While living on Beckley Street, I used the name 0. H. Lee. . . . I was present in the Texas School Book Depository Building, I have been employed there since Oct. 15, 1963. . . . As a laborer, I have access to the entire building. . . . My usual place of work is on the first floor. However, I frequently use the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh floors to get books. I was on all floors this morning. . . . Because of all the confusion, I figured there would be no work performed that afternoon so I decided to go home. . . . I changed my clothing and went to a movie. . . . I carried a pistol with me to the movie because I felt like it, for no other reason. . . . I fought the Dallas Police who arrested me in the movie theater where I received a cut and a bump. . . . I didn’t shoot Pres. John F. Kennedy or Officer J. D. Tippit. . . . An officer struck me, causing the marks on my left eye, after I had struck him. . . . I just had them in there,” when asked why he had bullets in his pocket. 3:54 P.M.
NBC newsman Bill Ryan announced on national television that “Lee Oswald seems to be the prime suspect in the assassination of John F. Kennedy.” 4:45 P.M. At a Lineup for Helen Markham, Witness to Tippit Murder
“It isn’t right to put me in line with these teenagers. . . . You know what you are doing, and you are trying to railroad me. . . . I want my lawyer. . . . You are doing me an injustice by putting me out there dressed different than these other men. . . . I am out there, the only one with a bruise on his head. . . . I don t believe the lineup is fair, and I desire to put on a jacket similar to those worn by some of the other individuals in the lineup. . . . All of you have a shirt on, and I have a T-shirt on. I want a shirt or something. . . . This T-shirt is unfair.” 4:45 – 6:30 P.M. Second Interrogation of Oswald, Captain Fritz’s Office
“When I left the Texas School Book Depository, I went to my room, where I changed my trousers, got a pistol, and went to a picture show. . . . You know how boys do when they have a gun, they carry it. . . . Yes, I had written the Russian Embassy. (On Nov. 9, 1963, Oswald had written to the Russian Embassy that FBI agent James Hosty was making some kind of deals with Marina, and he didn’t trust “the notorious FBI.”) . . . Mr. Hosty, you have been accosting my wife. You mistreated her on two different occasions when you talked with her. . . . I know you. Well, he threatened her. He practically told her she would have to go back to Russia. You know, I can’t use a phone. . . . I want that attorney in New York, Mr. Abt. I don’t know him personally but I know about a case that he handled some years ago, where he represented the people who had violated the Smith Act, [which made it illegal to teach or advocate the violent overthrow of the U.S. government] . . . I don’t know him personally, but that is the attorney I want. . . . If I can’t get him, then I may get the American Civil Liberties Union to send me an attorney.”
“I went to school in New York and in Fort Worth, Tex. . . . After getting into the Marines, I finished my high school education. . . . I support the Castro revolution. . . . My landlady didn’t understand my name correctly, so it was her idea to call me 0. H. Lee. . . . I want to talk with Mr. Abt, a New York attorney. . . . The only package I brought to work was my lunch. . . . I never had a card to the Communist party. . . . I am a Marxist, but not a Leninist-Marxist. . . . I bought a pistol in Fort Worth several months ago. . . . I refuse to tell you where the pistol was purchased. . . . I never ordered any guns. . . . I am not malcontent. Nothing irritated me about the President.” When Capt. Will Fritz asked Oswald, “Do you believe in a deity?” Oswald replied, “I don’t care to discuss that.” “How can I afford a rifle on the Book Depository salary of $1.25 an hour? . . . John Kennedy had a nice family. . . .” (Sheriff Roger Craig saw Oswald enter a white station wagon 15 minutes after the assassination. Oswald confirmed this in Captain Fritz’s office. A man impersonating Oswald in Dallas just prior to the assassination could have been on the bus and in the taxicab.) “That station wagon belongs to Mrs. Ruth Paine. Don’t try to tie her into this. She had nothing to do with it. I told you people I did. . . . Everybody will know who I am now.”
“Can I get an attorney?. . . I have not been given the opportunity to have counsel. . . . As I said, the Fair Play for Cuba Committee has definitely been investigated, that is very true. . . . The results of that investigation were zero. The Fair Play for Cuba Committee is not now on the attorney general’s subversive list.” 6:30 P.M. Lineup for Witnesses Cecil J. McWatters, Sam Guinyard, and Ted Callaway
“I didn’t shoot anyone,” Oswald yelled in the halls to reporters. . . . “I want to get in touch with a lawyer, Mr. Abt, in New York City. . . . I never killed anybody.” 7:10 P.M. Arraignment: State of Texas v. Lee Harvey Oswald for Murder with Malice of Officer J. D. Tippit of the Dallas Police Dept.
“I insist upon my constitutional rights. . . . The way you are treating me, I might as well be in Russia. . . . I was not granted my request to put on a jacket similar to those worn by other individuals in some previous lineups.” 7:50 P.M. Lineup for Witness J. D. Davis
“I have been dressed differently than the other three. . . . Don’t you know the difference? I still have on the same clothes I was arrested in. The other two were prisoners, already in jail.” Seth Kantor, reporter, heard Oswald yell, “I am only a patsy.” 7:55 P.M. Third Interrogation, Captain Fritz’s Office
“I think I have talked long enough. I don’t have anything else to say. . . . What started out to be a short interrogation turned out to be rather lengthy. . . . I don’t care to talk anymore. . . . I am waiting for someone to come forward to give me legal assistance. . . . It wasn’t actually true as to how I got home. I took a bus, but due to a traffic jam, I left the bus and got a taxicab, by which means I actually arrived at my residence.” 8:55 P.M. Fingerprints, Identification Paraffin Tests—All in Fritz’s Office
“I will not sign the fingerprint card until I talk to my attorney. [Oswald’s name is on the card anyway.] . . . What are you trying to prove with this paraffin test, that I fired a gun? . . . You are wasting your time. I don’t know anything about what you are accusing me.” 11:00 – 11:20 P.M. “Talked To” by Police Officer John Adamcik and
FBI Agent M. Clements “I was in Russia two years and liked it in Russia. . . . I am 5 ft. 9 in., weigh 140 lb., have brown hair, blue-gray eyes, and have no tattoos or permanent scars.” (Oswald had mastoidectomy scars and left upper-arm scars, both noted in Marine records. “Warren Report,” pp. 614-618, lists information from Oswald obtained during this interview about members of his family, past employment, past residences.) 11:20 – 11:25 P.M. Lineup for Press Conference; Jack Ruby Present
When newsmen asked Oswald about his black eye, he answered, “A cop hit me.” When asked about the earlier arraignment, Oswald said “Well, I was questioned by Judge Johnston. However, I protested at that time that I was not allowed legal representation during that very short and sweet hearing. I really don’t know what the situation is about. Nobody has told me anything except that I am accused of murdering a policeman. I know nothing more than that, and I do request someone to come forward to give me legal assistance.” When asked, “Did you kill the President?” Oswald replied, “No. I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question. . . . I did not do it. I did not do it. . . . I did not shoot anyone.” 12:23 A.M.,
NOV. 23, 1963 Placed in Jail Cell 12:35 A.M. Released by Jailer
Oswald complained, “This is the third set of fingerprints, photographs being taken.” 1:10 A.M. Back in Jail Cell
1:35 A.M. Arraignment: State of Texas v. Lee Harvey Oswald for the Murder with Malice of John F. Kennedy
“Well, sir, I guess this is the trial. . . . I want to contact my lawyer, Mr. Abt, in New York City. I would like to have this gentleman. He is with the American Civil Liberties Union.” (John J. Abt now in private practice in New York, was the general counsel for the Senate Sub-Committee on Civil Liberties from 1935-1937, and later served as legal adviser for the Progressive party from 1948-1951. Mr. Abt has never been a member of the ACLU.) 10:30 A.M.-1:10 P.M. Interrogation, Capt. Will Fritz’s Office
“I said I wanted to contact Attorney Abt, New York. He defended the Smith Act cases in 1949, 1950, but I don’t know his address, except that it is in New York. . . . I never owned a rifle. . . . Michael Paine owned a car, Ruth Paine owned two cars. . . . Robert Oswald, my brother, lives in Fort Worth. He and the Paines were closest friends in town. . . . The
FBI has thoroughly interrogated me at various other times. . . . They have used their hard and soft approach to me, and they use the buddy system. . . . I am familiar with all types of questioning and have no intention of making any statements. . . . In the past three weeks the FBI has talked to my wife. They were abusive and impolite. They frightened my wife, and I consider their activities obnoxious.”
(When arrested, Oswald had FBI Agent James Hosty’s home phone and office phone numbers and car license number in his possession.)
“I was arrested in New Orleans for disturbing the peace and paid a $10 fine for demonstrating for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. I had a fight with some anti-Castro refugees and they were released while I was fined. . . . I refuse to take a polygraph. It has always been my practice not to agree to take a polygraph . . . The FBI has overstepped their bounds in using various tactics in interviewing me. . . . I didn’t shoot John Kennedy. . . . I didn’t even know Gov. John Connally had been shot. . . . I don’t own a rifle. . . . I didn’t tell Buell Wesley Frazier anything about bringing back some curtain rods. . . . My wife lives with Mrs. Ruth Paine. She [Mrs. Paine] was learning Russian. They needed help with the young baby, so it made a nice arrangement for both of them. . . . I don’t know Mrs. Paine very well, but Mr. Paine and his wife were separated a great deal of the time.”
(Michael Paine worked at Bell Aerospace as a scientific engineer. His boss, Walter Dornberger, was a Nazi war criminal. The first call, the “tipoff,” on Oswald, came from Bell Aerospace.)
“The garage at the Paines’ house has some seabags that have a lot of my personal belongings. I left them after coming back from New Orleans in September. . . . The name Alek Hidell was picked up while working in New Orleans in the Fair Play for Cuba organization. . . . I speak Russian, correspond with people in Russia, and receive newspapers from Russia. . . . I don’t own a rifle at all. . . . I did have a small rifle some years in the past. You can’t buy a rifle in Russia, you can only buy shotguns. I had a shotgun in Russia and hunted some while there. I didn’t bring the rifle from New Orleans. . . . I am not a member of the Communist party. . . . I belong to the Civil Liberties Union. . . . I did carry a package to the Texas School Book Depository. I carried my lunch, a sandwich and fruit, which I made at Paine’s house. . . . I had nothing personal against John Kennedy.” Below is a site that has every single quote attributed to Oswald during his interrogation. Contrary to popular belief as you can see from the above statements, he DID in fact talk while he was under arrest. You can read more about that below:
I need to note at this point, that Oswald had the snot beat out of him by the Dallas authorities. They actually had the gall to show him on TV beaten up!
Oswald was an innocent victim and ‘patsy’ of the New World Order Oswald whom had always proclaimed his innocence, continued to state he was a “patsy” and was being set-up! There was no such thing as Miranda rights back then gang. You were always at the mercy of law enforcement, just like today! Joe public had already forgotten about the media (whom the very day before) on the day of
JFK’s killing, was telling us about gunshots being heard from the
grassy knoll, at the masonic Dealey plaza! It was then the media switched their tune and everyone swallowed the governments explanation hook, line and sinker…just like 9-11, so to seal the deal it was at this time, the new world order mass media seized this opportunity
to plant one of the most heinous concepts ever conceived into the minds of the American public.
There seems to be all kinds of strange images in the windows of the Texas school book depository just before, during and immediately after the shooting..and
NONE of them are Oswald (BELOW). VIDEO
Need more proof? Here is an interview with a Dallas deputy Roger Craig who was an eyewitness to the fact that the shells they found in the depository did not match the rifle they originally found in the building. Proof positive either the rifle, shells or both were planted by the investigators! Roger Craig was killed by a gunshot in 1975.
Proof the autopsy photos were faked: Below you can see a portion of the Presidents skull that was found in the grass shortly after the assassination by Dallas resident Billy Harper. You can see where that piece of skull came from in the back of Kennedy’s head which means the shot came from the front.
Now look at the fake autopsy photo below right which shows no such wound or missing skull.
HERE’S AN INTERVIEW WITH LEE HARVEY’S OLDEST DAUGHTER,
JUNE OSWALD By Steve Salerno As America’s obsession with her father goes on, a daughter tries to set the record straight. From The New—York Times Magazine April 30, 1995.
MORE THAN 40 YEARS AFTER the Kennedy assassination, Lee Harvey Oswald is a name that will not go away. One of the latest authors to wade into the conspiracy waters is Norman Mailer, whose book “Oswald’s Tale: An American Mystery” will be published next month. The assassination has also been a constant in the life of June Oswald Porter, the 33-year-old daughter of Lee Harvey Oswald. In her early years, grocery shopping with her mother, Marina, and sister, Rachel, took place amid stares and finger-pointing; hushed conversations ignited around them like flash fires as they walked the supermarket aisles. Because Marina Oswald realized that she and her children could become the focus of attention at any time, she made sure June and Rachel were always neatly dressed – no matter how small the chore, and despite the fact that the family was often financially strapped. “She never knew when we’d run into someone, and she didn’t want us to look like poor white trash”’ June says simply. Upon entering public school, June took the surname of her stepfather, Kenneth Porter, who married Marina in 1965. But anonymity exacted a curious price of its own, as June faced myriad graceless references to her father, mother and family. Even an intended compliment could hold hidden barbs – as when a male co-worker remarked on June’s resemblance to “a young Marina Oswald,” then immediately apologized, saying he “didn’t mean to insult her” by invoking the infamous name. Nonetheless, during several interviews over the past she reports being content. And she recalls her childhood as a “pretty happy” time, thanks in large part to her stepfather. June is quieter about her own marriage, which ended in 1992. She remains protective of her privacy, distancing herself and her sons, ages 6 and 3, from the overall clique of assassination cultists who have dogged the Oswald women – Marina, now 53, June, and Rachel, 31 – ever since the events of Nov. 22, 1963. (June has requested that her married name, which she still uses in business, not be printed) Despite privacy concerns, she’s pushing for the release of all records pertaining to the assassination. “We have to get the Government to move before it’s too late.”
*Q: What are your thoughts on Norman Mailer’s new book? A: I don’t have a comment on it as far as its conclusions because I haven’t read them, but I did start the book. Mailer is such a great writer; I was just so enthralled. The first chapter opens with my family, and he goes way back to my great-grandmother in Russia.
This is material I never would have known about insofar as my mother’s side of the family, because my mother was illegitimate, you know. It’s a little bit like opening a family album you didn’t know existed before. I can tell you that I am very excited about the book in concept. I believe he’s the first writer-researcher to get interviews with sources in the Russian Government and so this is an opportunity to shed new light on the subject from an area that has never been explored in any meaningful depth.
Q: To what extent have you followed the various conspiracy theories?
A: It’s only in recent years that I’ve started to get into all that, mostly as part trying to get the records released. There was a bill passed at the end of the Bush Administration that required all Government agencies to review their files for any information related to the assassination and to release it – unless they felt there were matters of national security or a couple of other issues. The law said that if they felt that way, then those documents needed to be turned over to the Assassination Records Review Board and those folks would review the records and either concur, release them in blacked out state or release them entirely.
Q: Over the years, you’ve kept a pretty low profile. Why have you started to speak out?
A: Well, there was a lot of misinformation being released related to a book, “Case Closed,” by Gerald Posner. And they got my mother on television in a live interview – she still doesn’t have a good grasp of the language – and they were asking her specific questions about this book. She hadn’t read it. I felt they manipulated her and made her look foolish. I had already written a we got to President Clinton to try to make sure he would appoint this review board from the Bush legislation to review assassination records, and to release those records. I was really supportive. Since I hadn’t gotten a response, I toyed with the idea that I might have to go public. When my mother came on and this interview went so badly, I decided I really wanted to rebut.
Q: I guess you must be encouraged that the review board was finally sworn in last year.
A: Yes, I’m also very excited about that. They first met last April in Washington. And there have been public hearings there and in Dallas and Boston.
Q: What is the status of your present-day identity? It sounds as if most people are not aware you’re Lee Oswald’s daughter.
A: Yes and no. Now, Mom does articles that she doesn’t bother to tell me she’s doing, and sometimes my name comes up. We always used my stepfather’s name, Porter, growing up, even though we were never legally adopted. My secretary in my last job put two and two together based on one of those articles. She copied it and put it on all my staff’s desks. I didn’t really want to be the center of gossip in this whole building. So I called my staff in, a group of 10 or so, and I said: “Yes, that is me in the article. Obviously, if I’d wanted to share that I would have told everyone a long time ago. I don’t think it’s relevant to anything we do here and I appreciate you keeping it to yourself.” My biggest concern was that people at the office had my home address and phone number and I didn’t want it leaked to The National Enquirer I have two small children, I’m divorced, I didn’t want people to harass the kids.
Q: Give me an example of what you’d consider harassment
A: When I was pregnant with my first, some lady got my phone number and called in the middle of the night. And she said, “June Oswald?” That catches you off guard when you just wake up. And I said, “Yes?” And she said: “I’m so and so, and I just want you to know that I’ve written a song about you – and your child. And I’m gonna be in Dallas, and I want to sing it to you.” I said I appreciate it, but I really don’t get involved in that. You try to be nice because you don’t want to make somebody upset who’s going to seek you out if they’re kooky enough to do that stuff anyway. There’s always been this little group that’s followed us, Mom, Rachel and me and calls us and is fascinated by anything surrounding us. My first serious boyfriend, that’s what he was fascinated about. He tracked me down. He said things when we were together like he really wanted to have children because “that would be the blood of Lee Harvey Oswald that was flowing through the kids.” So he moved to Boston and wanted me to join him. I move all the way up there, and his parents wouldn’t even let us stay in his house because I was the daughter of Lee Harvey Oswald. They said it would depreciate the value of their home. Then I find out he’s been doing some quote-unquote assassination research. So I ended up supporting him. Anyway, the only person I knew up there was Priscilla Johnson McMillan, who wrote my mother’s book. We stayed with her for the summer. My boyfriend would sneak down to Priscilla’s basement and read all her old files. He sold an article for an astronomical amount back then, I think it was $25,000. The way I finally woke up was, one night he said, “I’m gonna sell an article to Penthouse or Playboy”, I forget which “and it’s about your mother. I’m convinced that your mother and Priscilla had a sexual relationship.” So I said, O.K, this is it. Just get out.
Q: Tell me about growing up in the aftermath of the assassination. I know you were just a toddler, but do you have any recollections of turbulence in the household?
A: I don’t have any real memories of those ages. I know some people can remember vividly like it was yesterday, but I don’t do that – even about yesterday. I do remember that our phones were tapped. We always had this really bad connection, and when you’d pick up the phone you’d hear that other click. This was before wiretapping got more sophisticated. For all I know it’s still tapped. Mom was always overprotective of us. We didn’t use the Oswald name, and it didn’t come, up a lot around the house except when reporters would call It was always a big deal in November, when it was very stressful in the house. Mom would smoke all the time. Reporters came over and she would tell us, “shhhh, go in the other room”
Q: When were you actually told about your father and the assassination?
A: Something had come up where Mom had old boxes of letters out. People sent us money following the assassination, because Mom was young with two small children and didn’t speak the language. Somehow those boxes came down and she was reading, and I guess she felt it was time to tell us. She sat us down, with my stepbrother, and started to explain who our father was- that it wasn’t Kenneth – and who Lee was and what he had done. I just remember crying a lot because Mom was crying.
Q: How old were you then?
A: It would have been, like, first grade. And then, they tell a story about how after that I stood up in front of the whole class and said, “My father shot the President.” Just out of the blue. But I don’t remember that. The next memory I actually have is in second grade. We were studying the Presidents. The Presidents were all around the walls in the rooms. And we got to President Kennedy and I was told to go across the hall during that one. So I sat across the hall in a time-out room.
Q: How did you feel about being singled out?
A: I remember what I did during that time-out was, I plotted how I could run for class president and win! So l never connected it as a big negative or anything.
Rachel felt differently. She his always felt really bogged down by it. She didn’t feel like Kenneth was her dad. She wanted to know Lee; she wants lee to be a saint. Well, I was satisfied with my dad, so I’ve never felt this big need to connect with Lee or do the daughter-father thing.
Q: One can’t help but notice that you address him as “Lee.”
A: I’ve always called him that. My father is Kenneth Porter, the man I grew up with, the man who was there for my mother and Rachel and me.
Q: And if someone were to show scientifically that Lee Oswald was or wasn’t involved, that wouldn’t make a difference to you?
A: I would make a difference in the sense of justice being served. If the truth can be found that shows Lee had nothing to do with the assassination, I would feel better in that there have been a lot of things said and done regarding my family that all proceeded from an erroneous perception of what he did or didn’t do. But you have to understand that, aside from what role he had in the assassination, there’s the issue of what role he had in our family. I know that in my life, Lee wasn’t a good man. He wasn’t much of a husband, he wasn’t much of a father. He beat my mother. There were times when we didn’t have milk to drink. We lived in poor housing or were taken in by others. So if I’m able to be detached or seem cold and unemotional about it, it’s because I look at Lee in those terms.
Q: I assume you’ve seen the footage of Lee being shot by Jack Ruby. Are you able to maintain the same detachment when you see that?
A: The first time l saw it l was very upset, but it gets to the point where it almost becomes unreal, this movie you’re watching that has very little to do with you as a person. Mostly I feel bad that Lee was never able to tell his story. He tried to after the arrest but everybody discounted it. I would have liked for him to have his day in court.
Q: Where do you stand today as far as your perception of what really happened out there in Dealey Plaza?
A: I’ve never publicly said one way or the other for sure. There are a lot of assassination buffs who have analyzed all the technical data and the other available material and even they don’t agree about what happened.
Q: But are you comfortable with the fact that Lee Oswald played at least some role?
A: I think there definitely is circumstantial evidence that could imply he had something to do with it because of the characters he was hanging out with in New Orleans. But you know, just because you’re hanging out with a weird group – they could have set him up, and he could have had no idea what was going on that day.
Q: Did you ever take the so-called assassination tour?
A: Not until recently. I went on a car trip up to the house I had lived in with Lee, Lee’s boarding house, another house Mom had lived in with Lee that’s still standing, the path of the motorcade, where the bullets hit.
Q: How did you feel about that?
A: It was – unusual. I didn’t break down and cry or anything. It was just kind of eerie.
Q: I’m sure there must have been a lot of unusual incidents as you were growing up.
A: I remember Rachel’s seventh grade dance. So this little boy she was going with, his parents were going to come get her and they were going to go to the dance. Well, we’re all waiting and a car pulls up in the driveway, and Mom rushes out to greet these parents, and they happen to be a man and a woman, and they’ve got a camera and she says, “Oh, you’re gonna take pictures! Great!” And she’s just welcoming them with open arms. And they say: “Oh, we can take pictures? Oh great!” Another car pulls up – and that’s the parents and the little boy. The first car was The National Enquirer. But it was so funny because Mom talked to them for – I mean, nobody noticed that the date wasn’t there! During college, Rachel supported herself at the Texas Chili Parlor in Austin. It’s right across from the Capitol, and she was a waitress. Well, there’s a travel guide she found out about that actually listed the Texas Chilli Parlor and said the daughter of Lee Harvey Oswald worked there. So she became a sort of tourist attraction.
Q: Your childhood doesn’t sound like it was easy.
A: Mom kept us together. She was pretty strong. I don’t know if I could’ve done it and kept my sanity: two small children, don’t speak the language, dirt poor, everybody in the country pointing their finger at you -hating you in some cases. I’m a strong woman, but I don’t know if I could’ve kept myself together. But she did. She kept herself together for us.
Q: Was any of this an issue in your marriage?
A: No. My husband couldn’t have cared less. But I still have problems in that area, because I date a lot. I always feel torn by whether I’m required to tell somebody about my history. I usually end up telling people that I’m seeing very often. And I’ll tell you why: It could come up at any minute.
Q: Did you see the “Seinfeld” episode in which they’re at the ballpark, and they get spat upon, and-
A: The “second spirter,” right. It was hilarious.
Q: If someone was to ask you today who your father is, what would you say? Whom do you really think of as dad?
A: Kenneth. Now, the word father does mean Lee to me, But dad is Dad. And you know, it’s not Lee’s fault he got killed by Jack Ruby. I don’t blame him for not being here for me. I do blame him for having beat my mother, and not being a good father or a good provider. Because some people have called me and said, “I knew your father and he really loved you.” I have to admit that when I heard that he used to play with me all the time, that was a nice feeling. I try to hold that in the back of my head.
Q: Do you worry about telling your children as they grow up?
A: I do. I started worrying about, first of all, do I have a responsibility to tell them? What do I tell them? And I realize that I’m kind of cold about it, so how do I tell them? Do I need to be more compassionate’ about it? I want to make sure they understand why I’m so matter-of-fact about it. But see, I’m matter-of-fact about a lot in my life. The other thing is, you just worry genealogically: Lee was illegitimate, and so was my mother. I’ve wondered what my kids are going to turn out like. Are they going to take after some ancestor we don’t even know? There’s a lot of genetic things you can’t even control that are inborn in your kids.
Q: How are things between you and your mom these days?
A: The last two years have been very stressful, because she started doing things that she hasn’t let us know about, then all of a sudden I hear about it or see it on TV. Like she did a movie and it involved me and Rachel, and she didn’t tell us first. l think her physical health and mental health have been damaged in recent years over all of the pressures put on her.
Q: After all this time?
A: Part of it was the big anniversary, the 30th. There were a lot of things leading up to that that they wanted Mom to do, and Mom in recent years has gotten more and more involved, I guess because she’s getting older and trying to rectify some of the things she may have done unintentionally – like stating publicly that Lee did it. I’ve never seen her act like that, like she needed to become more of a crusader, and it’s taking its toll.
Q: On your relationship with her as well?
A: It has put certain strain on it. Mom accused me one day of being ashamed of who I was. I don’t think that’s true. It’s not a matter of being ashamed, it’s a matter of wanting to be judged as June Oswald and not “the daughter of Lee Harvey Oswald.”
Q: Do you and Rachel argue much about this? *
A: Yes. Just in recent years; but yes. We are very close – except when these kinds of things come up. See, this is the difference. We visited the set of “JFK” when it was going on, and somebody said, “Your father was a hero.” Well, that’s what Rachel wants to believe. Rachel loved listening to that. She got all caught up, because she wants so badly to have this identification with her father. That didn’t set well with me. If they could prove somehow that he was innocent, he’d still not be a hero, he’d be a martyr. I have to remind Rachel that this is the man who beat our mother, who didn’t provide for his children. I tell her, “Rachel, for all we know, we could have been living in the streets.” Because that’s mostly what I think of when I think of Lee. As for what his exact role in the assassination was – well, he’ll have to be judged for that before God.