There are other organizations which dispute the official story of the JFK assassination, but that is not the same thing. We insist that OSWALD WAS INNOCENT! That's what we say, and that's what we are about.
And to those who say there are better ways to prove Oswald's innocence than to say that he was in the doorway, I say: you are wrong.
In any criminal trial, the defense of a wrongly accused person comes down to one thing: proving that he or she was somewhere else at the time the crime was committed. It's called an ALIBI. To win, you have to have an alibi. Oswald has to have an alibi.
And Oswald does have an alibi! He was standing in the doorway at the time of the murder. He told Will Fritz he was "out with Bill Shelley in front." If you tell us not to use it, you're telling us not to use the most powerful thing that can exonerate him.
Like every other defendant, Oswald needs his alibi. The absurdity of the Single Bullet Theory can't save him. That only establishes that there were multiple shooters, but Oswald could have been one of them. Isn't that what the HSCA finally settled on? Did it help Oswald? No. Not in the least.
Where was Oswald during the murder if he was not in the doorway? Oswald was not in the lunch room at 12:30, and there is no basis to say that. He had already eaten lunch, and there is no doubt about that. And his Coke-drinking didn't come until after his encounter with Truly and Baker, and there is no doubt about that either. So, why oh why would Oswald prefer to sit in the dank lunch room alone at 12:30 doing nothing except stare at the walls when he could be outside in the sunlight watching President John Kennedy ride by? The Man in the Doorway does look like Oswald, and he is dressed like Oswald, exactly like Oswald. So, what is the problem about recognizing him as Oswald?
So, we make that the centerpiece of the OIC, but it's only because a credible alibi is the centerpiece of EVERY defendant's defense.
But, we are interested in all aspects of the JFK assassination. We want to exonerate him for the murder of Tippit as much as we do the murder of Kennedy. Likewise, we want to exonerate him for the attempted shooting of General Walker. Oswald never did that.
And let's be thorough: Oswald is also accused of having sought to kill Richard Nixon in April 1963, and according to officialdom, the only reason it didn't happen is because Marina locked him in the bathroom. It's complete nonsense. Nixon wasn't even in Dallas at the time.
So, we are into all aspects of the JFK assassination, but we know that there is no defending Oswald without providing him an alibi. We are approaching this as though we are Oswald's lawyers. And we do have two very prominent lawyers in our group: Mark Lane and Vincent Salandria. And as Oswald's lawyers, we know that our case rests on establishing that it was IMPOSSIBLE for Oswald to have done it because he was SOMEWHERE ELSE at the time, a place that can be pinpointed and proven.
So, when it comes to defending Lee Harvey Oswald, we are doing it the only way it can be done- the way it has to be done. And anyone who truly wants to help him will realize that we are right about this, and we are the only real defenders that he's got. And they'll join us.