Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

Ruth Paine actually said that she had no idea that Oswald's rifle was stored in her garage. That is mind-boggling. Who would put a rifle in someone's garage without telling her? And he supposedly put the ammunition there too, and she had small children in the house. Who does a thing like that?

And when did he put it there? He, supposedly, ordered the rifle in March before he left for New Orleans. There are no grounds to assume that he took the rifle with him to New Orleans. I won't even entertain that. Did he leave it in a bus locker in Dallas? No. There's no record of it. Plus, when he went to New Orleans, he presumably didn't know how long he was going to be there. He went there to find a job, and if the job had worked out, who knows how long he would have stayed. I am speaking from his perspective. Of course, the conspirators would have seen to it that he returned in time for the big event, but Oswald didn't know anything about that. So, in going to New Orleans open-ended, he certainly would not have paid weekly rent just to store his rifle in Dallas. Remember, he was tight with money. 

So, as I see it, if you believe he ordered that rifle, you have to assume that he stored it the whole time in Mrs. Paine's garage without telling her. But again, who does that? I mean, besides the issue of child safety, and safety in general, there is the issue of ownership. Possession is 99% of the law. Isn't that what they say? So, if not for safety, wouldn't he want her to know about the rifle just so that in case she found it (it was a small garage) she would know that it was his? 

According to Ruth Paine, she didn't know the rifle was there, but Marina did. Is that true? Well, it can't be true from my perspective, but is there a basis for claiming it? We'll put that aside. Let's just assume that Marina knew. Does that get Oswald off the hook?

Not really because Marina joined him in New Orleans shortly after he got there, and she stayed with him until close to the end. In other words, that whole "Summer of Love" as I like to call it, involved Marina being down there with him, with June, and pregnant with Rachel. So, it means that even if Marina knew about the rifle being stored in Ruth Paine's garage, it made no difference. We are left with the conclusion that he left his rifle and ammunition in the garage of someone who was more his wife's friend than his, whom he wasn't even on a first name basis with (he called her "Mrs. Paine" even though she was only 32) and knowing that there were young children in her house, and perhaps neighborhood kids would come over, and plus she may have had the habit of leaving the garage open during the day.

   
Wouldn't you be worried about a thing like that?
At the time, Ruth and Marina were very close. Marina wrote letters, very personal, revealing letters to Ruth the whole time that she (Marina) was in New Orleans. Some of those letters have become part of the official record. And when Marina was ready to return to Dallas,  the separated and soon to be divorced Ruth Paine, who had two children of her own, drove all the way to New Orleans to get Marina. Now, that's friendship for you. But wait. You mean that whole time Marina knew that there was a rifle and ammunition in Ruth's garage that Lee left there, that she never informed her? That is incredible. It's unbelievable. 

Why didn't Oswald leave his rifle with his brother Robert? Robert had rifles of his own. Didn't they go shooting together?

I know, I know, it's weird to think that that guy was this guy:

But hey, this is the world of JFK assassination research. So, for the moment, just go with the flow.

So, Robert had guns at home anyway, and he had a place to store them. And he certainly could be trusted. So, why didn't Oswald store his rifle at the home of his brother? And I mean with full understanding between them, rather than stash it in Ruth Paine's garage without telling her. 

The stuff you have to believe to believe the official story of the JFK assassination is crucifying to the rational mind. But, rationality has nothing to do with it. 

You know that Stephen King, the author, wrote a novel about the JFK assassination which presumes the official story in all its details. Now, he is undoubtedly a smart man. How could he write all those books and create all those captivating stories unless he was smart? But, how smart do you have to be to realize that the official story of the JFK assassination is a crock of shit? 

Well, here's what happens. People don't look at the evidence in the JFK assassination to determine what happened and what to believe. Instead, they decide what to believe about the JFK assassination, based on other criteria, and mainly: how they feel about America. If they believe that America is righteous and good, including its institutions, meaning its government, its media, etc., then they believe the official story of the JFK assassination. They really have to because if they consider the alternative, that the US government killed Kennedy and the US media has been covering it up for 51 years, then all that goodness goes away. And, I'm saying that Stephen King is someone who wants to feel good about America. So, that's why he accepts the official story- uncritically. 

So, people decide what to believe based on their view of America, and then, if they look at the evidence at all (and many don't) they look at it from the standpoint of using it to uphold the official story. 

But, what I'm saying is that only when you look at the evidence in the JFK assassination with red, white, and blue colored glasses can you even stomach it. Without those glasses on, it's enough to make you throw up.