There is no doubt that the feds took custody of Marina on Saturday, November 23, when Oswald was still living, and it demonstrates their awareness that his death was imminent. 

Note that it is absolutely certain that Marina did not spend the night of November 23 at the home of Ruth Paine. The night of November 22 was the last night Marina ever slept there. 

But, I have come to realize that the government is aware of the impropriety of grabbing Marina on Saturday when Lee was still living. And that's why it's hard to find explicit details about it. 

But, hard doesn't mean impossible, and I have found them. It's an article from the Dallas Morning News about Secret Service Agent Mike Howard. It's dated November 22, 2013, so the 50th anniversary. It states:

"But on Nov. 23, 1963, his attention and care shifted from the first families to the family of Lee Harvey Oswald. Howard and another agent picked up Robert Oswald and took him to the Executive Inn, near Love Field, where Marguerite, Marina and the girls had been taken. Next, they drove to the Irving home of Marina’s friend Ruth Paine to pick up supplies for the babies. Marina had been living at Paine’s house at the time of the assassination. It was there, over the police radio in Howard’s car, that Marguerite heard her son had been shot. She shouted for her daughter-in-law: 'Marina, Lee has been shot.'"

RC: That's murkily written because it starts on November 23 but then progresses to November 24, the day Oswald died. But, the division between the two days is obscured, the way it's written. But fortunately, there is an FBI statement that clears it up. It's from January 1, 1964:

"On the night of November 23, 1963, Marina and her children and Marguerite spent the night at a hotel in Dallas. Then, on Sunday, November 24, she was moved to the Inn of the Six Flags, halfway between Dallas and Ft. Worth."

So, the FBI statement makes clear that Marina was in custody on the night of Saturday, November 23, but without naming the Executive Inn as the location. And then she was moved to the Inn of the Six Flags the next day, November 24, which was the day Oswald died.

But, which hotel she was kept at on Saturday night doesn't matter. What matters is that she was kept. So, they definitely took custody of her on Saturday, November 23, when Oswald was still living, which they never would have done if they didn't know full-well that he was going to be dead on Sunday.

 I know it's difficult for people to accept that Ruby did not kill Oswald, and I've heard all the talking points: that millions saw him do it on television, that he admitted doing it, etc. But, there is no talking point that can't be rebutted and refuted. And, I'm going to tell you something now that I hope will get you over the hump to believing that Ruby didn't do it. 

The point is: that the Dallas Police, Secret Service, and FBI took custody of Marina on Saturday afternoon. 

We have spousal privilege in this country, which means that a wife is considered a witness for and advocate for her husband. Their conversations are privileged. She does not have to divulge what was said between them, and she cannot be forced to testify against her husband. 

Oswald was charged with murder, and D.A. Henry Wade already announced that he would seek the death penalty. So, the State was out to put Oswald to death. He was entitled to a fair trial, but that couldn't possibly happen if the State was holding his wife. 

You know how Oswald reacted when he found out that the FBI went to talk to Marina. He stormed into the FBI office and made a scene. It's been claimed that he threatened to blow up the building if they harassed his wife again, but we don't know if that's true. 

But, I don't doubt that he was mad. So, how would he have reacted upon hearing that the FBI had taken his wife and kids? 

The idea that it was necessary for her safety is completely unfounded. There were no threats against Marina. On the contrary, there was a lot of sympathy for her. Americans started sending her money. 

But, what you need to realize is that because of the way our legal system works, they could not have proceeded to prosecute Oswald while holding his wife. That has NEVER happened in the history of American jurisprudence, that a wife, who was not suspected of any wrongdoing, was held by the State during his prosecution. 

And consider further that, had he lived, they couldn't go much longer without getting him a lawyer. He was already clamoring about it. They concocted the phony story that he was offered a lawyer by H Louis Nichols, and he turned it down. Don't believe it. You didn't hear it from Oswald, did you? Oswald pleaded to the whole world the night before for legal assistance. He devoted his whole Midnight Press Conference speech to it. Do you really think that less than 24 hours later, he would shrug and say "Nah" when offered one? I hope you're smarter than that. I hope you know that that was John Armstrong's "Lee" who met with Nichols, not "Harvey," who was the Oswald of fame. 

So, if they didn't get Oswald a lawyer soon, the whole world would have known that they were violating his Constitutional rights. Remember: Ruby was allowed to speak to a lawyer before he had to speak to Fritz. Fritz waited while Ruby talked to his lawyer.  Fritz even said to reporters, and we have it on tape, "I'm going to talk to him, but he's talking to his lawyer right now, which is his right." 

His right? What about Oswald's right?

So, the authorities took possession of Marina on Saturday afternoon. Didn't they know that Oswald was going to scream Bloody Murder as soon as he found out? Didn't they know that Oswald's inevitable lawyer would too and file a complaint with the Court, demanding her release? The authorities had to know those things. 

So, why did they do it if they knew it was going to ignite a firestorm, and that it could not endure? 

There is only one possible answer: It was because they knew that Oswald was going to be killed on Sunday. 

Do you know that it is part of the record that Oswald was unable to reach Marina on Saturday evening? He tried calling her. He reached Ruth Paine at 9:30 pm. Ruth divulged that Marina wasn't there, but she wouldn't tell him where she was. 

Mrs. PAINE - I said she was not there, that I had a notion about where she might be, but I wasn't at all certain. That I would try to find out. He said, he wanted me to--he said he thought she should be at my house. He felt irritated at not having been able to reach her. And he wanted me to--
Mr. JENNER - Did he sound irritated?
Mrs. PAINE - Yes; he sounded just a slight edge to his voice. And he wanted me to deliver a message to her that he thought she should be at my house.
Mr. JENNER - And he so instructed you?
Mrs. PAINE - Yes.
Mr. JENNER - That is what he said?
Mrs. PAINE - Yes. That was so far as I remember, the entire conversation.
Mr. JENNER - What response did you give to his direction?
Mrs. PAINE - I said I would try to reach her.

Now, that doesn't wash. It is not credible. The fact is that if she said she had a notion where Marina might be, Oswald would have demanded to know what that notion was. Any man would have. I can speak for the entire gender. And was it really just a notion? Ruth and Marina were friends. So, if Marina were just out somewhere at 9:30 at night, wouldn't Ruth have been frantic with worry? Ruth knew where she was, and she, obviously, didn't want to tell Oswald. 

There isn't a smidgen of doubt that the Secret Service and the FBI, with the cooperation of the Dallas Police, took Marina Oswald into federal custody on Saturday afternoon, and that is proof-positive that they knew that Oswald was going to be dead on Sunday. That action of taking possession of Marina on Saturday could ONLY have been made if they knew that Oswald was to die on Sunday. That is certain and incontrovertible. 

 Who was Prayer Man? He was nobody; an invented figure.

This collage, supposedly, shows two images of Prayer Man. The top one is from the Wiegman film, and the bottom one is, supposedly, from the Darnell film. 

In Wiegman, the vague spots that you see to the left of Doorman (Oswald) are supposed to be visible manifestation of Prayer Man. But, is that bankable? Explain the physics and optics to me of how a person could be visually captured so faintly. Point me to any other photograph of someone captured so faintly. Or, better yet, conduct an experiment. You could even go to that doorway to do it. Show me how you can take a photo of someone standing there in the shadow and capture him as minimally as that. Until the Prayermanites do it, they can STFU about calling that a person. 

And remember that the Wiegman film is highly altered. Look how blurred it is. Dave Wiegman was an NBC filmer. That's the National Broadcasting Corporation. Channel 4. And they surely provided him with state-of-the-art equipment. So, why is it so blurry? Because: they made it blurry. They didn't want us to see it clearly. Why? Well, for one thing: Oswald was standing there. So, the Wiegman film was highly tampered with, which makes that spottiness in the corner even more suspicious. There is a ton of weird freakiness about the Wiegman film. 

The bottom image is supposed to be from the Darnell film, but if you watch the Darnell film, you don't see it. Someone tried to trick me about it by sending me a link to the Darnell film that included it, but it turned out that it was a compilation. 

Just as the Martin film does not contain the Lovelady (Gorilla Man) clip, the Darnell film does not contain the Prayer Man clip. 

And that supposed clip from the Darnell film wasn't even seen until 1990. It was never seen by the public until Oliver Stone, regrettably, put the clip in his movie, JFK.  What it supposedly shows is Officer Marrion Baker running to the entrance of the TSBD after the shots. But, according to Baker, which was confirmed in WC experiments using him running, he got to the entrance just 15 seconds after the last shot, which was the fatal head shot. So, who are those people, and how could the population in front of the building have changed so drastically and so fast, in just 15 seconds or less? We can't recognize any of those people. And again, it's super-blurry. 

And why are all those people flowing into the TSBD? There is no evidence for that. There were no reports of that. It's like a herd was herding into the TSBD, which did not happen. 

So, that second image is NOT from the Darnell film, and it isn't real. It's fake; phony; and fabricated. And in it, the figure of "Prayer Man" is still faint, yet, more substantial than in Wiegman, but not in a good way. Whoever did it had no grasp of the proportion between the size of head and the size of the body in a human being. That figure had microcephaly, due to the ignorance of the artist. In other words: nobody's head could be that small in comparison to their body. 

So, who was Prayer Man? Nobody. He wasn't Oswald; nor was he anyone else.  Like Black Tie Man in the Altgens photo, who was also nobody, he was inserted into the image. And it was done to distract from Oswald in the doorway of the Altgens photo. It was like a heat sink; to draw heat away from Altgens. 

So, just dismiss Prayer Man because he isn't real. It is a con. And while you're at it, dismiss the Prayermanites because they are con artists. They are just distractors and noise-makers. Lee Harvey Oswald was the Doorway Man in the Altgens photo, and that is as certain as anything you can say about the JFK assassination.  

 Nothing pleases me more than for someone to reach the same conclusion I did, but independent of me. And that seems to have happened between me and Michael Ward. What follows is a comment of his establishing that, yes, Oswald did go to the 2nd floor lunch room and encounter Baker and Truly, and it unequivocally proves that he could not have assassinated JFK.

One caveat though: he agrees with me that Carolyn Arnold's 1st floor sighting was real. She saw Oswald behind the glass shortly before the motorcade arrived. However, she didn't keep looking at him. She just glanced at him. As you would expect, she turned around and faced forward to watch the motorcade. And after she turned around, that is when Oswald stepped outside and stood on the landing, where he was captured in both the Altgens photo and the Wiegman film.

Michael Ward:

I believe Oswald was on first floor… looking out glass front doors at time of parade as Carolyn Arnold did say.

Why? Because of 2 reasons.

1. No way Oswald came down stairs from 6th floor to be in 2nd floor lunch room without being seen. The 2 ladies (Adams, Styles) coming down the same wooden loud stairs would have seen or heard Oswald hurriedly coming down those same stairs to get to 2nd floor lunch room.

2. The way the door with window on 2nd floor where Officer Baker saw a person (movement) from right to left. It’s situated in such a way the only way Baker would see such movement is from someone coming from the office area. This was Oswald coming to lunch room from the 1st floor. Oswald would have come up the flight of stairs in front entrance area that only led to 2nd floor. Oswald then proceeded across 2nd floor office area heading to lunch room area. Oswald would have been moving from (Bakers view) right to left as he crossed that window area (in the anteroom) just before entering the lunch room. This is what caught Baker's vision as Oswald moved into the lunch room.

Plus… the door with window was heavy with a very slow closing mechanism which took 15-20 secs to slowly close. And no way Oswald entered through that door in time for door to completely close without Baker noticing it’s movement closing when he saw Oswald's movement through the glass.

Just more evidence that Oswald was on 1st floor and moved back to lunch area across 2nd floor as he told police.

Ralph Cinque

It is very regrettable that some people deny that the 2nd floor enounter took place. It is absolutely certain that it did. Oswald said it did. It's in the Fritz Notes. And Baker correctly described the anatomy of the rooms there, with the little anteroom with glass in the door adjacent to the lunch room. How could he know about any of that without being there and seeing it? He also accurately described Oswald's clothes as a "light brown jacket and white shirt." It was actually a shirt, not a jacket, but it had the lay of a jacket. And the shirt was just a t-shirt. Still, Baker accurately recalled the uniqueness of Oswald's distinctive outfit.

Marrion Baker was a lowly motorcycle cop. Nobody tapped him on the shoulder and said, "Psst. Do you know that we're killing Kennedy on Friday?" He wasn't in on it. He wasn't a conspirator. He didn't conspire with Roy Truly to lie. Now, Truly was a conspirator. He was in on it. But, Baker and Truly did not know each other. They had never met before. And neither ever referred to the other by name. It was always "the super" and "the officer." They were strangers, and one thing strangers don't do is conspire to commit perjury together. And what reason did Baker have to lie? He did nothing wrong, and he was not involved in the plot.

Oswald did not leave the TSBD until several minutes after the shooting. One of the images of the Three Tramps shows Oswald talking to a police officer at the top of the steps as he was leaving the building. That was a few minutes after the assassination. It was not at 2:00, as is commonly claimed, but more like 12:33. Jim Marrs agreed with me about that. He's the one who laid it out for me.

So, we have to account for Oswald from 12:30 to 12:33. He was not hiding in a closet. But, if you do the Math for the time it took him to move from the doorway to the 2nd floor lunch room, it works out perfectly for him to be back at the doorway at 12:33 when he was leaving for his boarding room. That's Oswald standing there top-right talking to Police Inspector J. H. Sawyer.

So, how did Oswald kill 3 minutes? He wasn't hiding in a closet. He made the trek to the 2nd floor where he encountered Baker and Truly.

 This combines two FBI statements that together and sequentially establish that Oswald went outsde to watch the motorcade. The first is by FBI Agent James Hosty, who wrote down by hand that Oswald said he ate lunch in the 1st floor lunchroom and then went outside to watch the Parade. The second is by FBI Agent Richard Harrison who interviewed Carolyn Arnold on November 26, and he wrote down that she said that she was standing in front of building, waiting to watch the motorcade, when she caught a glimpse of Oswald standing at the entrance. He was just inside the door, but the door and the whole entrance was clear glass; so, she could recognize him easily. He hadn't stepped out yet, but he was about to.

Harrison wrote that she left to go outside at 12:15, but that is not what she said. She said 12:25. And we have a document which she signed in March 1964, stating that it was 12:25. Harrison foolishly thought that making it 12:15 left Oswald enough time to still get up to the 6th floor in time to shoot Kennedy. But, smarter men than him at the FBI realized that 12:15 still put the kabash on the official story. If Oswald was at the doorway at 12:15, he could not have shot Kennedy at 12:30, and they knew it. That's why they went back to the TSBD in March to get a signed statement from her stating that she didn't see Oswald at all that day, in which they let her state the time accurately as 12:25.

But, my point is that these two statements go from one to the other. Hosty's statement confirmed that Oswald ate in the 1st floor lunch room and then proceeded to the entrance. And because the entrance was clear glass, Carolyn Arnold was able to recognize him standing there behind the glass.

And she was a 19 year old girl. I take the liberty of using the word "girl" because even though she was of legal age, 19 is still a teenager. It's still awfully young. A 19 year old girl is certainly not going to lie to the FBI, which is the American equivalent of the KGB. So, what she said about seeing Oswald at the doorway shortly before the shooting was certainly the truth.

When we combine this with all the photographic evidence of Oswald and Doorway Man, matching not only the person but the very unique clothing that Oswald wore, there isn't a smidgen of doubt that Oswald was him. It is futile and hapless to deny it, and doing so is just brash, brazen arrogance. It's over.

  This is the anteroom, which was a tiny passageway room to the lunch room. It had a door from the office side, and another from the stairwell side, and a third door between the two which went into the lunch room. The door with the glass pane was the one on the stairwell side through which Baker saw Oswald when he was in the anteroom. Oswald entered the anteroom through the door we can't see, the office side door. If he had come down from the 6th floor, he would have had to enter through the door with the glass. And if he had done that, that door would have still been in motion. You can see how small the anteroom was. By the time Oswald cleared the door with the glass, he would have been in the lunchroom and out of view. The fact that Baker could see him in the anteroom meant that Oswald entered through the other door, the third door, which was on the office side.

There was no access to the 6th floor on the office side, which means that, for sure, Oswald did not come down from the 6th floor. The only way he could have gotten there was by going up the one flight of stairs that was next to the doorway in front. It means that he was innocent, and this realization about the anteroom, by itself, proves it. We have so much more, but this alone proves it.

The State lie that Lee Harvey Oswald killed President Kennedy may be the biggest and most draconian State lie of them all, and every self-respecting American should fight it. Because: when the State lies to you, that is tyranny. It is an attack on your rational mind, which is your most valuable asset. When we fight for JFK truth, we're not just doing it to for JFK and Oswald; we are doing it for ourselves. So, let's do it.

 

This diagram shows you how impossible it was for Oswald to have come down from the 6th floor. In the center, it shows Oswald in the anteroom to the lunch room, which was a little passageway. It shows Baker on the 2nd floor landing. And it shows Truly heading up to the 3rd floor.

It was weird for Truly to be leading the way, since they were searching for an armed gunman. You'd think he'd let the cop with the gun lead the way.

But, Baker saw Oswald moving through the anteroom. He just got a fleeting glimpse of him. Then, he followed him in there and ordered him to stop, and Oswald did. Baker estimated that Oswald had gone 20 feet before stopping and turning around and approaching Baker. Truly, upon realizing that he had lost Baker, turned around and retraced his steps to look for him. And when he got to the scene, Baker asked him if he knew this man. Truly said he did, that he worked for him. And then they left. But, realize that Truly must have been very reassuring. His tone must have conveyed that no way could Oswald have done it. So, it's very strange that 30 minutes later, just from hearing that Oswald wasn't present for a roll call, that Truly began to suspect him and went to the police with his alarm. ROY TRULY IS THE ONE WHO SIC'D THE POLICE ON OSWALD. So, if he was able to think that Oswald did it 30 minutes later, why was he unable to suspect Oswald 30 minutes before?

I can answer that. Roy Truly was involved. The reason he didn't want Baker to arrest Oswald was because the plan was to get a gun in Oswald's hand, so that, hopefully, he would die in a shoot-out with the police. So, the plotters did NOT want Oswald to be arrested unarmed at the TSBD. And to Baker, I'm sure Truly was very convincing the way he brushed off the idea of Oswald being the culprit. Him? He couldn't crush a bug.

But, it's the mechanics of this diagram that I want to focus on.

If Oswald had come down from the 6th floor, he would have had to get into that anteroom before even Truly reached the landing. Never mind Baker; Oswald would have had to beat Truly there. And he would have had to beat him there by a lot because otherwise Truly would have heard him.

Remember, they did experiments having men run from the Sniper's Nest to the spot where Oswald supposedly hid the rifle, and then he had to fly from the southeast corner to the northwest corner where the stairs were. Then, he had to fly down four flights of stairs. And each flight consisted of two opposing runs with a landing in-between. And they were wooden stairs; crickety, crackety wooden stairs. So yes, Truly and Baker would have heard Oswald pounding on them.

So, do you think it was possible for Oswald to have slipped into the anteroom before Truly saw him or heard him?

But, if so, why would Oswald still be in the anteroom by the time Baker got there? The anteroom was not a place to linger. It was no bigger than a closet. It was tiny. Your passage through it took about a second.

The truth is that Oswald entered the anteroom from the office side, not the stairwell side. And his getting there coincided with Baker being on the landing and seeing him through the glass in the door. And as soon as Baker saw him, Oswald was gone. It was just a fleeting flash.

So, there was no chance that Oswald could have gotten there before Truly by coming down from the 6th floor because if he had, he wouldn't have been there for Baker. Oswald could not have beaten Truly and still been there for Baker. Oswald did NOT come down from the 6th floor. He came up from the 1st floor, using the elegant stairs in the southeast corner of the building, which were adjacent to the entranceway, which is where he was during the shooting.

It was physically impossible for Oswald to have reached that lunch room from the 6th floor. It was also impossible for Oswald to have been in the lunch room during the shooting because he just got there at 12:31. SINCE HE WAS JUST WALKING INTO IT AT 12:31, IT MEANS HE WASN'T THERE AT 12:30.

So, this proves two things: it proves that Oswald did not get to the 2nd floor lunch room from the 6th floor, which was impossible, and it proves that he was not there, in the lunch room, at the time of the shooting.

So, it means that the official story that he was on the 6th floor shooting at Kennedy is absolutely false, and the alternate official story that he was in the 2nd floor lunch room eating at the time of the shooting is also false. And the indisputable, unequivocal truth is that Oswald was standing in the doorway at the time of the shots, and we are seeing his person and his clothing in the Altgens photo.

 The TSBD moved into the 411 Elm building the summer of 1963. Few people are aware of that. And lies are often told about it. But, William Weston, the author of The Spider's Web: The TSBD and the Dallas plot, he found a quote by Roy Truly admitting that they just moved into the building that summer.

But, why did they move there? They were previously across the street in the Dal-Tex Building. They occupied just one floor, the first floor, of the Dal-Tex building. So, why would a company that was operating with just one floor move into a gigantic 7 story building?

But, the story goes that once the TSBD moved there that several major book publishers moved their offices into the building as well. I wonder if it's true or if it's just another lie. I say that because: why would a book publisher think that it needed to be located in the same warehouse as a book distributor? What's the benefit? Where's the advantge? I can't see any purpose in it. One publishes books, while the other distributes books. Why do they have to be under the same roof? And especially that roof because the place was old, dingy and ugly.

And the way the TSBD kept it, so sloppy and dilapidated, had to be depressing. Imagine having to work at that unsightly place month. I've known slobs in my life, but this was a slob company. When you look at the squalor of those pictures- it's unbelievable. And there was no organization at all; no system. They just plopped the boxes down on the various floors, and the "order-fillers" had to wade through the mess of it all.

For a minute, think about how YOU woudl organize your book distributing company. Your objective would be to have a system so that everything was very accessible. You would organize it, and you might even do it the way a library is organized or even a retail bookstore, with divisions, sections, and signs telling you exactly where everything is. But, they had nothing like that; just stacks of boxes just plopped down- as much as 7 boxes high!

And there were so many open boxes that it's obvious that they were taking individual books out, rather than shipping whole boxes. If you were shipping whole boxes, you wouldn't have to open any. But again, this was not retail. They were NOT selling to the public. They were providing textbooks to school for classes. Were they all one room, prairie schoolhouses with three students?

And then there was the plywood. The story went that the wholesale grocer who was in there before the TSBD was the John Sexton Company, and they had boxes of meat which leaked meat juice, and lo and behold, the meat juice damaged the books. But wait. Didn't they find that out when they inspected the building to consider renting it? You can't tell me that they didn't learn about it until after they moved in. Don't tenants expect to get a building or a home in good condition?

Then, the solution became to fasten plywood down over it. But, wouldn't that just be like a bandaid? How long before the meat juice soaked into the porous plywood? Why didn't they just clean and dry the floors? It's not like there was a continuing source of meat juice. Theoretically, once they cleaned it up, it would be gone. So, why nail plywood over the problem?

But, plywood was decided on. So, Bill Shelley, who was the supervisor of the "order-fillers," took on the job of "foreman." And the work-crew was the same motley crew of order-fillers that we've all come to know and love.

But, was that a good idea? Construction involves lifting and moving and cutting. Nobody in his right mind would cut plywood with a hand saw- not if square cuts and straight edges matter. Compared to order-filling, it's dangerous work. I know a man who practically cut his hand off with a table saw.

So, on a construction site, the workers are all bonded. There is insurance in case of an accident. You wouldn't proceed without it if you're in business.

But, why use those young whippersnappers in the first place? Why not let them stick to their order-filling and get real craftsmen in there to build the floor? Why try to squeeze skilled work out of these young guys, some of whom were still teenagers?

And the owner of the building was David Harold Byrd, a bazillionaire. Wasn't it his responsibility to provide dry floors to his tenant? So, why didn't he take care of it? Why did they have to do it? They're not the ones who made the mess. Would you rent a place and then undertake construction to deal with the previous tenant's mess?

Now, let's consider how they were doing it. I'm attaching two pictures. One is the 5th floor that had the plywood installed. You can see that that floor is practically empty. There are some boxes on the left, but mostly, the floor is empty. And that's what you'd expect, right? If you were going to install flooring, you would start by clearing the room. Wouldn't you? Well, they didn't do that on the 6th floor. We have many images of the 6th floor- in all its clutter- and even though they started putting plywood down in the southwest corner that morning, they chose to do it by working around the clutter. Is that how you would tackle that job? Not even the worst workman in the world would do it that way.

And by the way, how do you cut plywood without a table? You can cut a 2x4 with a couple saw horses, but you can't cut plywood that way. The cuts are too big and too long. And some plywood is very flimsy. It doesn't look like they were using thick, heavy plywood. It looks like it was pretty thin, cheap stuff. And there's a lot of leverage in an 8 foot board. It's big and unwieldly, and you've got to support it throughout. You need a large table saw with guides to do it right. And, you need plenty of open space around the table to do it effectively and safely.

So, let's try to picture how it was that morning on the 6th floor. You had Billy Lovelad, Bonnie Ray Williams, Harold Normanm, Charles Givens and others, manning the saws and hammers, presumably, though we don't see them. And, you had Bill Shelley in his suit acting as foreman.

And how were they fastening the plywood? You wouldn't use nails, unless it was going to be temporary. It definitely had to be screws if it was permanent. And you'd have to get considerable depth into original floor to make it solid and secure. And that would be a long way to go turning a screwdriver by hand. And you can't tell me they had electric drills for every man to drive those screws in. We're not aware of any drills. And think about how many screws you would want to use on each piece of plywood to secure it. Every 8x4 has a perimeter of 24 feet!

I'm telling you that the book-distributing at the TSBD was bogus and so was the floor-laying. You notice how posed the picture of the finished floor is, with the guys lined up for the picture. That was not taken on 11/22/63. That was taken later as damage control; to legitimize the bogus floor-laying on 11/22/63.

The Texas School Book Depository was CIA, CIA, CIA.

 Officer Marrion Baker, unwittingly, vouched for Oswald's innocence, and in multiple ways. Right now, I wish to focus on what he said in his WC testimony about Oswald's clothes. He said that Oswald was wearing a light brown jacket and a white shirt. The white shirt was, of course, his t-shirt, and the light brown jacket was his arrest shirt. It was definitely a shirt and not a jacket, but it looked more like a jacket. That's because it was a Russian shirt that he acquired during his 3 year stay there. And it was constructed differently than American shirts. 

American shirts have stiff collars, and also a stiff piece of material going down the button holes called a placket. Oswald's shirt was made entirely of soft material. The result was that it folded over easily, which mimicked the lapel of a jacket. 

And before going any further, I need to tell you that CE 150 was NOT Oswald's shirt. That shirt did have a hard collar, and it could not have done what Oswald's shirt did. And Oswald's shirt was grainy with contrasting fibers that produced contrast- even in a black and white photo. Look at the collage.

 You see on the right how Oswald's shirt folded over. The other shirt CE 150 couldn't do that. And you see how dark and uniform CE 150 was. 

So, what happened with Marrion Baker is that he was asked what Oswald was wearing when he saw him at the 2nd floor lunch room. And he said that Oswald was wearing a light brown jacket and a white shirt. 

Just recently, little more than a week ago, Kendall Miller did the exact same thing. He described both Oswald's shirt and Doorman's shirt as jackets. He said they were different jackets, but both jackets. Well, neither was a jacket. They were both Oswald's unusual shirt; his Russian shirt. By describing both Oswald's and Doorman's garment as a jacket, Miller, like Baker, unwittingly gave away that they were the same shirt being worn by the same man. 

But, let's return to Baker. So, he was asked what Oswald wore, and he said a light brown jacket and a white shirt. But then, his interrogator showed him CE 150 and asked him to confirm that that was what he saw Oswald wearing. Baker couldn't do it. He equivocated. Read it yourself. and notice the confusing flip-flopping between the word "shirt" and the word "jacket." 

Mr. BELIN - Did you notice what clothes the man was wearing as he came up to you?
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.
Mr. BELIN- 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.

Keep in mind that Baker was not a hostile witness. He wasn't trying to help Oswald. He wasn't being ornery. He was a team player. But, he was also honest, and the fact was that Oswald's shirt looked like a jacket to him, just as it looked like a jacket to Kendall Miller in 2023. 

Oswald beat them that morning just by getting dressed. He made hell for them just by wearing that distinctive Russian shirt, which they have been lying about ever since. Again, CE 150 was NOT Oswald's shirt. So, our own government fabricated evidence and obstructed justice in order to "convict" Oswald. The very distinctive shirt of Oswald was the same very distinctive shirt of Doorman, and that's because Oswald was Doorman. 

 This is in response to Robert Orourke, who made a joke about the idea of an ice bullet. But, in 1975, then CIA Chief William Colby testified to the Church Committee that the gun worked; that it was effective. After Mythbusters did a program that ridiculed ice bullets, these two young men did an experiment of their own, using a dummy whose texture and resistance was comparable to a human torso. And they got a very different result.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79DyfiPAJp4

But, keep in mind that in the JFK assassination, the ice bullet did not have to be lethal. All it had to do was penetrate an inch. The physical damage was minimal, and killing him was not the purpose of it. Ice is an unstable substance, expecially when the water contains minerals that interfere with hydrogen bonding. The extra hydrogen bonds that form when water freezes increases the space between the molecules, causing a decrease in overall density. So, there is a lot of empty space in ice. It is hard, but it's also a delicate crystal. And they used that to their advantage. The idea was for the ice to penetrate and burst, thereby delivering its toxic payload as it vanished.

So no, an ice bullet couldn't reach a man's heart. But, that wasn't the idea. They didn't even shoot JFK on the side of his heart, his left side. They shot him on his right side. Think about what the Bethesda doctors found. They found an entrance wound in his back which they palpated and found to be very shallow. The bullet path seemed to stop; to come to an end. Now, the story became that the bullet went all the way through Kennedy and came out his neck. Think about how easy it would have been to dissect him and confirm that. But, they didn't do it. The story goes that the Admirals in the room wouldn't let them do it. But, when I put myself in Dr. Humes's shoes, knowing that I had the responsibility to determine exactly what happpened to the President, my response would have been:

"I am going to dissect him now to find out exactly what happened to him, and you better step aside and let me do it because if you don't, I am going to scream bloody murder. I will go to the Secretary of the Navy and file a complaint against you. I will go on talk shows. I will write to every newspaper in the country. I will write a book about it. If there is going to be a dereliction of duty tonight, it's not going to be by me."

But, Dr Humes wasn't that kind of man. None of them were. They were cowards, all of them, including JFK's own physician. There was only ONE reason not to dissect JFK from back to throat, and that was: the risk of not finding that presumed bullet path. And the Admirals knew it.

And one final thought before you watch the video: The men who did this, and I mean who shot JFK in the back with a drug-laced ice bullet to immobilize him and take the fight out of him before he reached the Kill Zone, they knew that it would be off the radar, that nobody would anticipate it, and even if told about it, nobody would believe it. They counted on it then, and it's counted on today. They're counting on you to be close-minded and mentally indurated, enough to dismiss it as far-fetched. But, it happened.

You need to reject the Single Bullet Theory- completely. You need to look bare-bones at what Humes and his team actually found: a clean, very shallow wound in JFK's back. That's it! That's the reality! All the rest is gibberish. Well, a FMJ bullet could never stop that fast. The flight speed of the bullets from the Carcano rifle was about 2000 feet per second. How could a metal bullet travelling 2000 feet per second come to zero velocity in one inch of travel through soft tissue? It's impossible. That would break a law of physics. It would violate Newton's laws of motion. But, if it was an ice bullet that was designed to burst on penetration, then it could stop that fast because the delicate crystal was no more. It was gone. It collapsed. Once you realize that JFK really did have nothing but a very shallow wound in his back, then, in the chess game that this is, the ice bullet becomes an obligatory move, a forced move. You have to go to it.

 I chastened Will Ruha for claiming that Oswald was eating during the assassination. Like all the TSBD employees, Oswald was let off work 15 minutes early; 11:45 instead of Noon, just so that they could eat and drink and then place themselves to watch the motorcade. Oswald certainly knew about it. He discussed JFK's visit the night before with his wife Marina, and she expressed to him her wish that she could lay eyes on the President and First Lady.

Will Ruha claims to believe that Oswald was innocent, but he also thinks that Oswald was a liar; that he lied to police. I say that because Oswald told police that he ate lunch in the 1st floor lunch room and then went outside to watch the motorcade, and two of them wrote it down. That's Captain Will Fritz and FBI Agent James Hosty. I showed Ruha Hosty's handwritten note, but it didn't phase him. He still insists that Oswald was eating during the assassination.

So, let me ask you, the reader: if you knew that JFK and Jackie were going to be passing your building, would you go outside and watch them, or would you put off eating for 45 minutes (even though you had nothing else to do) so that you could eat alone in the dank lunch room and miss the motorcade? That is what Ruha is claiming Oswald did.

There is good reason to believe that Oswald would want to watch the motorcade. He liked President Kennedy. He spoke well of him to Marina's family in Russia. He started reading James Bond novels when he found out that JFK liked them. And he and Marina lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis which almost led to war between the US and USSR, and would have, if not for John F. Kennedy.

Oswald brought lunch which he fixed at Ruth Paine's house: cheese sandwiches and an apple. Fritz wrote that down too. And as he always did, he put it on the window counter in the domino room on the 1st floor. He did not eat breakfast that morning, and that's according to Ruth Paine. So, it's reasonable to think that he would have been ready to eat when they broke for lunch at 11:45.

So, upon ceasing work, he went into the 1st floor lunch room. which was called the domino room because there were dominos in there that some of the workers played. That room also had a daily newsapper, and it was Oswald's habit to browse through it as he ate. The theory goes that that's how he learned about the motorcade route, although there is no evidence that his eyes and his mind ever landed on that. You know how people browse a newspaper; it's hit or miss.

Oswald definitely ate in the 1st floor lunch room, as he ALWAYS did. He NEVER ate in the 2nd floor lunch room, which was for the office workers. He wasn't an office worker; he was an "order-filler" which was considered a warehouse worker. Office workers worked at desks doing office work.

Now, this is what Ruha the Bruha said to me: "WTFU, moron. If Oswald was "long done" eating, then why was he confronted IN the lunchroom directly after the assassination by his supervisor and a DPD officer?"

First, the confrontation was between Officer Marrion Baker and Oswald. Truly showed up afterwards. It was only seconds afterwards, but still, that's important.

So, Truly was ahead of Baker climbing the stairs, and Truly had already passed through the second floor landing and was on his way to the 3rd floor. As Baker crossed the landing, he spotted someone moving through the vestibule of the lunch room. The vestibule, or anteroom, was a small room, adjacent to the lunch room, that was a passsageway. It was a small room with 3 doors. One door gave access from the office side of the second floor. Another door gave access from the landing side, which is where Baker was. And that door had a glass pane through which Baker saw Oswald. And the third door gave access to the lunch room proper, and that door was spring-operated, and it was propped open.

Now, I want you to dwell on how small this room was. It was just a passageway. So, from the office side, Oswald had gone through the first door, and almost instantly he was at the threshold of the door to the lunch room, which he didn't even have to open. And Baker saw all this from the landing, which is to say that he glimpsed Oswald as he was passing through the tiny room.

Now, Ruha the Bruha can't dispute that because he claims to believe that Oswald was innocent. And if Oswald was innocent, it means he could not have come down from the 6th floor. There is really no chance that he did that because if so, he would have had to use the same door through which Baker was looking, which means that that door would have sitll been open. Baker's view would have been very different. He would have plainly seen Oswald using the door on his side. But, Baker said that his door was closed; stationary. So, Oswald had to have used the other door; the one on the office side; the office side.

So, the fact is that Baker saw Oswald just getting to the lunch room at 12:31. He saw Oswald IN MOTION just getting there; just arrviing. And since he was just getting there at 12:31, it means that he was somewhere else at 12:30, from which he came.

Furthermore, it involved no eating. Baker first saw Oswald passing through the anteroom. Then, he, Baker, entered the anteroom and stopped at the threshold of the lunch room. By then, Oswald was 20 feet into the lunch room; walking. So, Baker drew his gun and ordered Oswald to stop. Oswald did stop, and he turned around and walked to Baker. Nothing was said, according to Baker. Then Truly arrived, and Baker spoke to him. He asked Truly, "Do you know this man?" And Truly said, "Yes. He works for me." And he must have said it in a very reassurring way since it completely dissipated Baker's suspicion of Oswald, and he and Truly left.

And by the way, it also involved no Coke. Both Baker and Truly were adamant that Oswald had no Coke. But, how could he have one when he just got there? It takes time. You have to go to the machine; take out a dime; put it in the slot; pull down the crank; retrieve the bottle; then open the bottle. All that takes time, and Oswald was just walking when Baker saw him.

So, Oswald was NOT in the 2nd floor lunch room during the assassination because he didn't reach the 2nd floor lunch room until over a minute after the assassination.

How did Oswald get there? He took the stairs from the first floor. The famous stairs that Baker and Truly used were the back stairs. They were located in the northwest corner of that large building, and they were bare-bones. They were wooden plank stairs. But, there were other stairs in the southeast corner of the building that were elegant. However, they only went one flight: from the 1st floor to the 2nd floor.

What I have just laid out for you proves that Oswald did not come down from the 6th flooor, but rather, he came up from the 1st floor, using the stairs that were very close to the entrance, where he was. also known as the doorway.

I am attaching a diagram which has it all laid out in a simple but clear way.

So, reject forever the bogus claim that Oswald was eating in the 2nd floor lunch room during the assassination. He was not. He was standing in the doorway, and it is him that we see in the Altgens photo.

Continuing now with the comparisons, this is 2 seconds later.

So, Zapruder had his camera turned up a little more, catching more of the wall beyond the grass. But, the reenactor captured all of the street, whereas Zapruder didn't catch any of the street. He barely caught the side of the limo. So, to me, this is already a non-credible view. It isn't the natural way that people film a subject. Your natural instinct tells you to center him. Not perfectly, necessarily, but reasonably. That isn't reasonable. So, I think they started cutting the bottoms of the frames as part of the process of excluding the real Stemmons freeway sign from the film.  

After this, as I continued in 2 second intervals, I lost the wall, and it was just grass and road. 

So, that's 3 jumps, with a 2 second interval between jumps, so 6 seconds. The white vertical line on the right represents when he had the camera squarely in front of him, corresponding to 313.  After that, he was starting to turn right; shooting from behind. 

It's well accepted that it was right at 313, the fatal head shot, that JFK was even with Zapruder. That's how it's drawn on the plats. So, I went to the Zapruder film to get what there is from 252 to 313. 

Notice that it took a while to get to grass only. Because of their shenanigans with the phony sign, the limo was ahead of the background.  For the background, that is a greater distance from where we left off (252) to where we wound up (313). They had more background to cover between 252 and 313 than they had road to cover for the limo. So, how did they get JFK to arrive at 313 in line with Zapruder? They deleted frames from the background, and they probably had the background running at a faster speed than the limo. It's like they created two separate films; then adjusted the speed of each; and then re-stacked them, letting each run at its own speed. 

This was a very high-tech thing, and the means to do it did not exist in 1963. Ironically, electronic editing was born in 1963 with the Ampex EDITEC allowing the editing of video without physical cutting or splicing, but, it was still rudimentary. The big jump came in 1971 with the CMX 600, also known as the RAVE machine  (Random Access Video Editor). It was the first computer-powered, non-linear film editor. It cost $250,000, and that was in 1971 dollars. So, figure what? About $2 mil today? It's disc drives were as large as washing machines. 

The Zapruder film wasn't shown to the public until 1975, and it was because they had to wait on technological advances before they could accomplish all the editing they needed to do in order to tell the story they wanted to tell. 

I don't think there is any need for me to continue with this because they had it cinched up at 313, and after that, it was pretty straightforward and smooth-sailing (for them). But, what a quest, evil as it was.