The LHO Escape -- Panic and Shock

[Richard Smith]

Well it did not take you long at all to try to place your words in my mouth , and also for you to try and be insulting . But insults never bother me , many have tried that and all have failed .

I was quite clear in what i said about miss mcmillan and her connections to the CIA . There is no mystery there , she wouldnt be the only member of the media that had an interest in being part of such organizations . here is a little information in regard miss mcmillan .

 In August, 1993, thousands of pages of CIA documents were made available to researchers at the National Archives that had been previously classified, including several documents associated with Priscilla Johnson McMillan, author of Marina and Lee, and the subject of several earlier articles by this writer.(1)

The first document, dated December 11, 1962 (and numbered 17456), is a "contact report," previously classified "secret," written by Donald Jameson, Chief SR/CA, which possibly stands for "Soviet Russia/Covert Actions." The report is based on a 90- minute meeting with Priscilla Johnson in her room at the Brattle Inn, located in Cambridge, Massachusetts. It was pointed out that, according to Mr. Butler at the "OO Office" in Boston, Priscilla was "...allowed to use the Harvard-Russian Research Center for her own work, mainly the writing of articles and a book, but that she has no other official relationship to the center."

Jameson described Priscilla as being "able, astute and conscientious," reflected also in her writing, but at the same time, was "rather nervous and shy," suggesting a "lack of self-confidence." He noted, however, that she certainly had a large number of Soviet contacts, and knew how to meet and talk to people. Jameson indicated at the outset of his report that Priscilla had been "selected as a likely candidate to write an article on Yevtushenko in a major U.S. magazine for our campaign." He recognized that Priscilla was "concerned about making her articles accurate as to fact and free from any external influence," but believed that "she might be worked around to writing an article in which she genuinly (sic) believed, but would also further our purposes for Yevtushenko" (a popular Russian poet).

Much of the report is a summary of Jameson's discussion with Priscilla about various Russian poets and Yevtushenko especially, whom the CIA seemed to be particularly interested in. Priscilla informed Jameson that she had arranged to write several articles for The Reporter - including one on Yevtushenko - and emphasized that "she thought she must write only the truth, without defining exactly what that was to me."

In conclusion, Jameson pointed out that, despite what she had stated:

    "I think that Miss Johnson can be encouraged to write pretty much the articles we want. It will require a little more contact and discussion, but I think she could come around ... Basically, if approached with sympathy in the cause she considers most vital, I believe she would be interested in helping us in many ways. It would be important to avoid making her think that she was being used as a propaganda tool and expected to write what she is told. I don't think she would go along with that idea at all. On the other hand, she is searching for both more information and more understanding of the problem of the Soviet intellectual and is consequently subject to influence."

 Based on the fact that Priscilla had made the call to the CIA, regardless of her motivation, it would appear that she had become an informer for the Agency, although it is impossible to know how much other information she provided, and whether any of it related to her contact with Marina Oswald.

It should be noted that the CIA's interest in Priscilla Johnson began at an early date, based on the fact that a "201 file" was opened most likely in the mid-1950s(2) and, according to a fourth document declassified in 1993 entitled, "Review of 201 File on U.S. Citizen," Priscilla's file had not been closed as of Jan. 28, 1975. She was listed as a "witting collaborator," although the nature of her collaboration was not described .

http://www.jfk-info.com/pjm-cia.htm

"The facts are that Oswald made an unusual trip to the Paine residence on a Thursday.  There was no apparent reason for him to deviate from his normal schedule " richard

There was a reason , you just want to ignore it . Hes marriage was in such a bad way that he felt he had to go and talk to marina and try to reconcile . she herself confirmed that he tried to talk with and reconcile with her , so his reason to her should have been patently obvious without it being said , have you had a relationship richard ? . I ask because if there is a problem with my better half , if i see she is not her self or indeed if we had had an argument (as couples some times do ) i go out of my way to talk to her and make things right .And if i had to change all my plans to do do i would , because some things are more important. Especially when one has children .

You likewise choose to continually infer that  Oswald had some sort of long standing routine . such a long standing routine that when he did something in any way different that it stood out a mile wide . However you refuse to acknowledge that we are only talking about a several week time line here , some 5 weeks . And that the week prior he did not go to irving at all YET FUNNILY ENOUGH NO ONE WAS SHOT THAT FRIDAY . And that prior to that he deviated again and came over on a different day because of a holliday , veterans day if my memory is correct . So what ? he goes home  perhaps twice maybe 3 times on a friday in those 5 weeks , one week not going to irving at all , one week he went on a thursday , and one he went home on a different day due to a holliday and you call that a routine ? .Or infer some kind of long standing routine ? .

I am in no way saying there is nothing pointing at oswald , i am saying the veracity of the evidence can be easily challenged .

oswald was picked from unfair and perhaps even illegal line ups . one such line up had oswald a 24 year old man who looked 30 atleast placed in line with 3 teen boys , ONE OF WHOM WAS LATINO or dark complected .this was i believe the line up whalley and scoggins attended . and whalley said ANYONE WOULD HAVE PICKED OSWALD ...HE WAS BEING RAILROADED AND HE KNEW IT .

Oswald offered no alibi , he said he ate alone .

As has been pointed out here when the FBI processed the rifle the only prints found on the rifle were on the left side of the trigger guard , and were classified as useless for identification purposes . the FBI found no trace of any palm print or any other print on that rifle . When LN tell me that the FBI identified a palm print belonging to oswald they did so only after the fact .It was a print later provided to them by the dallas police after oswalds death .LT day stated that the palm print was STILL VISIBLE on the weapon even after he lifted it , yet the FBI found zero trace .

This is like UFO believers arguing that the reason they can never provide evidence is because the government is suppressing it.  There is no reason to believe that McMillian wrote her book or made up the money left with Marina story as part of a CIA conspiracy to frame Oswald years after his death.  But if this were the case, Marina is still alive.  Has she ever come forward and claimed that was not true?  She has expressed doubt as to Oswald's guilt.  Why not with this story about Oswald leaving the money that morning?  Why not contact her and see if she responds?  Surely she would want to correct that story if untrue.

[Martin Weidmann]

This is like UFO believers arguing that the reason they can never provide evidence is because the government is suppressing it.  There is no reason to believe that McMillian wrote her book or made up the money left with Marina story as part of a CIA conspiracy to frame Oswald years after his death.  But if this were the case, Marina is still alive.  Has she ever come forward and claimed that was not true?  She has expressed doubt as to Oswald's guilt.  Why not with this story about Oswald leaving the money that morning?  Why not contact her and see if she responds?  Surely she would want to correct that story if untrue.

Why not contact her and see if she responds?  Surely she would want to correct that story if untrue.

Now the forum's one trick pony thinks he also knows what Marina would want to do. And, of course, he never considers the possibility that Marina has even read the book and/or after 60 years of madness, simply wants to enjoy retirement.

The premise that what McMillian has written in her book must be true because Marina has not claimed that it was not true is simply idiotic, but it's exactly what to expect from "Richard Smith".

[Fergus O'Brien]

This is like UFO believers arguing that the reason they can never provide evidence is because the government is suppressing it.  There is no reason to believe that McMillian wrote her book or made up the money left with Marina story as part of a CIA conspiracy to frame Oswald years after his death.  But if this were the case, Marina is still alive.  Has she ever come forward and claimed that was not true?  She has expressed doubt as to Oswald's guilt.  Why not with this story about Oswald leaving the money that morning?  Why not contact her and see if she responds?  Surely she would want to correct that story if untrue.

And now you are seemingly attempting to link me with ufo stuff lol . and in addition again putting your words in my mouth . i never said Priscilla made up anything about the money , what i did was reiterate that the money was money kept in an old wallet at the very least over a period of 5 weeks and up to 2 months prior to the assassination , and before they ever lived at the paines . the very person you cite (marina ) stated as much all be it as you can see i did not quote her . i feel i need to say that because i feel the next attack on me will probably be that i made some sort of claim without citing a quote .

I know what marina said about the old wallet , i have posted it here multiple times , i dont need to question her on it . if i was to question her my questions would be on far more important matters believe me .

[John Mytton]

I'm not going to waste a lot of time dealing with the whole list because most of it, as per usual is just drivel. Instead, to demonstrate clearly just how superficial and narrowminded John really thinks about this case, I'll give a couple of examples.

The Hidell ID was manufactured by conspirators
The Hidell ID was planted by the Police
The Hidell ID negatives were manufactured by conspirators
The Hidell ID negatives were planted by conspirators in the Paine residence

There is no evidence that Oswald was carrying the Hidell ID in his wallet when he was arrested. Paul Bentley stated that he took the wallet from Oswald in the car and found only documents in name of Oswald. Not a word about Hidell. There is no report by any of the officers in the car with Oswald that the Hidell ID was found on his person. On the other hand, there is evidence that a wallet was found at the Tippit murder scene which did contain identification for Oswald and Hidell. There is also no ambiguity about the fact that Gus Rose was the first DPD officer who asked Oswald at the police station about the Hidell alias and that he did so after a still, to this day, unidentified officer gave him a wallet and told him it belonged to Oswald.

There is also no contempary record that negatives were found at Ruth Paine's "the gift that kept on giving" garage. John, of course, is too superficial to deal with these facts honestly and prefers to simply state his usual BS as if it is "rock solid evidence".

The Hidell name was inserted by conspirators into the New Orleans post box application records.
The Hidell name was connected To Oswald's New Orleans Chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee by conspirators.
The Hidell name was used as The "Chapter President" of Oswald's made up Cuba Committee by conspirators.
The Hidell name was forged by conspirators onto Oswald's "Fair Play for Cuba" leaflets
The Hidell name was written on membership cards by conspirators other than Marina, who must have lied.

There is no reason to assume that "conspirators" did any of this. Having said that, Oswald could well have been manipulated into using the Hidell alias to apply for a N.O. Post box and use it in connection with the "Fair play for Cuba". But even if he did, how does something that Oswald possibly did in New Orleans, months prior to the assassination, somehow becomes "evidence" in the assassination case? The answer is simple; the actual evidence against Oswald is so weak that they (the WC and FBI) needed to paint the darkest picture of him so that any easily persuaded fool would believe their flawed narrative.

The Hidell name was forged onto the Kliens coupon
The Hidell Kleins coupon addressed to Oswald was forged onto the Kliens microfilm
The Hidell name was forged onto the Kleins envelope
The Hidell Kleins Envelope addressed to Oswald was forged onto the Kleins microfilm
The Hidell name on on the Kleins Coupon found by Waldman on the night following the assassination was forgotten?
The Hidell rifle was never sent to Oswald's PO box
The Hidell newly manufactured microfilm was substituted at some point with Kleins business records microfilm.

Again, John ignores are far more likely and possible explanation. The easiest way to get the order form documents onto Klein's microfilm is to simply manipulate Oswald to fill out those forms and mail them to Klein's. We don't know what actually happened after that. What we do know is that Oswald ordered a 36" rifle and the MC found at the TSBD was a 40" rifle. The explanation, for the LNs, for this that Klein's simply had run out of 36" rifles and thus sent Oswald a 40" instead. There is no evidence for that, just as there is no evidence that any rifle was ever sent to Oswald. There is no shipping document and no proof that Oswald, or anybody else, ever collected a rifle at the Dallas postoffice. All there is, is an internal document, Waldman #7, which shows a handwritten circle around the letters "PP", which according to Waldman (who himself was not involved in the transaction) means that the item was sent by post. Could Waldman actually confirm that this is what really happened in this instance? No of course not. He wasn't even asked.

But instead when faced with their very own posts, the obvious enormity of conspiracy and the amount of deception required, CT's like Martin say blank faced without a worry in the World, and I'm paraphrasing here, "any conspiracy I've talked about endlessly for thousands of posts was just very small with possibly just a few people involved" and yes this is seriously how they think!

In three examples I have just demonstrated just how superficial John really is. In every example that are several possible explanations which were never really resolved and John, who is so desperate to maintain the "Oswald did it alone" mantra just selects the most simple explanantion and ignores everything else.

The irony is that in the three examples (as well as in the ones not discussed) it would only require a couple of persons to actually manipulate Oswald and get him to do things that can later be used against him. But don't tell John that, because he is to narrowminded to accept any of it as a possibility.

Wow, so many words and silly excuses trying to justify Martins teeny weeny conspiracy. Hilarious!

But I will respond to one of his claims.

The easiest way to get the order form documents onto Klein's microfilm is to simply manipulate Oswald to fill out those forms and mail them to Klein's. We don't know what actually happened after that.

So in Kleins normal business transaction, they received the order but Martin says and I quote him verbatim "We don't know what actually happened after that." but we do know Martin, we do know!

Oswald received the exact same rifle that Kleins sent.

Oswald was photographed with C2766.



And the very same rifle that Kleins sent was found on the 6th floor of Oswald's workplace!



Now 3..2..1 like clockwork, Martin will claim that the HSCA expert was wrong about Oswald being photographed with C2766 and don't forget dear reader that the backyard rifle was the same make and model as the one Oswald was sent, and at the time Kleins new stock was for the 36 inch model which means that this relatively rare make of rifle was made even more obscure by the shorter new stock!
And then Martin will spin some malarkey about how Oswald didn't put C2766 on the 6th floor but allude to some mysterious unknown person/persons somehow over the previous 8 months somehow acquired C2766 and snuck it into the building to set Oswald up??

You simply can't make this stuff up, but you just gotta laugh at the unbelievable lengths that these Oswald apologists will go to to claim Oswald's innocence. Hardy Ha Ha!!

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Wow, so many words and silly excuses trying to justify Martins teeny weeny conspiracy. Hilarious!

But I will respond to one of his claims.

So in Kleins normal business transaction, they received the order but Martin says and I quote him verbatim "We don't know what actually happened after that." but we do know Martin, we do know!

Oswald received the exact same rifle that Kleins sent.

Oswald was photographed with C2766.



And the very same rifle was found on the 6th floor of Oswald's workplace!



Now 3..2..1 like clockwork Martin will claim that the HSCA expert was wrong about Oswald being photographed with C2766 and don't forget dear reader that the backyard rifle was the same make and model as the one Oswald was sent and at the time Kleins new stock was for the 36 inch model which means that this relatively rare make of rifle was made even more obscure by the shorter new stock!
And then Martin will spin some malarkey about how Oswald didn't put C2766 on the 6th floor but allude to some mysterious unknown person/persons somehow over the previous 8 months somehow acquired C2766 and snuck it into the building to set Oswald up??

You simply can't make this stuff up but you just gotta laugh at the unbelievable lengths that these Oswald apologists go to to claim Oswald's innocence. Hardy Ha Ha!!

JohnM

Wow, so many words and silly excuses trying to justify Martins teeny weeny conspiracy. Hilarious!

When a LN starts with an ad hom attack, you already know it's go down hill fast from that moment on. Instead of dealing with what I actually said, John exposes the superficial way he deals with "evidence" and just simply dismisses what I said as "silly excuses". A classic move by somebody who doesn't really want to debate, because they have nothing credible to say....

But I will respond to one of his claims.

So in Kleins normal business transaction, they received the order but Martin says and I quote him verbatim "We don't know what actually happened after that." but we do know Martin, we do know!

Oswald received the exact same rifle that Kleins sent.

And here we go again, the king of gifs strikes again. He posts a copy of Waldman 7, presumably as some sort of proof that Oswald received a rifle from Klein's, but in reality that document doesn't show anything of the kind. There is no evidence whatsoever that Klein's ever sent a rifle to Oswald's P.O. address and there is no evidence whatsoever that Oswald or anybody else ever received a rifle.

What John fails to understand (which is more likely than simply ignores) is that Waldman 7 is an internal document of Klein's that was allegedly found on a microfilm, which FBI agents took with them on 11/23/63. The microfilm was never returned to Klein's and the first (and only) time Waldman saw it again was during his WC testimony, several months later. Now let's not forget that Waldman 7 is a photocopy (which are easy to manipulate) and most of it's content is printed. Only the serial number is handwritten (by whom, we don't know). So, when Waldman was shown exhibit 7, he could and did not have any knowledge about the authenticity of the document, for which there was never a chain of custody provided. Now, just how convenient was it to have the serial number of the rifle found at the TSBD handwritten on the only document that could provide a link between the Hidell order form and the rifle? Do the math; Waldman 7 has very limited, if any, evidentiary value, no matter what John and his ilk claim.

Oswald was photographed with C2766.

If that is true, you should be able to show us that serial number on the rifle Oswald is holding in the photograph, right? So, why don't you show us an enlargement showing the number, John? Go on then...

And the very same rifle was found on the 6th floor of Oswald's workplace!

And what evidence exactly do you have that the rifle found at the TSBD is the exact same one as the rifle Oswald is holding in the BY photo? Surely, you're not just making this crucial claim without anything solid to back it up, right? So, why don't you tell is what that evidence is, John?

Now 3..2..1 like clockwork Martin will claim that the HSCA expert was wrong about Oswald being photographed with C2766

Show me the report of the HSCA expert in which he unequivocally states that the rifle Oswald was holding had the serial number C2766. I won't hold my breath, though.

and don't forget dear reader that the backyard rifle was the same make and model as the one Oswald was sent and at the time Kleins new stock was for the 36 inch model which means that this relatively rare make of rifle was made even more obscure by the shorter new stock!

Who are you trying to fool with this nonsense? Hidell ordered a 36" rifle. The rifle found at the TSBD was 40". So, not the same model at all. As already stated, there is no evidence that Oswald was sent any rifle.

And then Martin will spin some malarkey about how Oswald didn't put C2766 on the 6th floor but allude to some mysterious unknown person/persons somehow over the previous 8 months somehow acquired C2766 and snuck it into the building to set Oswald up??

Rather than trying to incorrectly predict what I would say, I would prefer that you actually present some conclusive evidence for all the BS you are spewing.

You simply can't make this stuff up but you just gotta laugh at the unbelievable lengths that these Oswald apologists go to to claim Oswald's innocence. Hardy Ha Ha!!

You should know what you can't make up, as you are the expert in - and only one here - making things up.

A photograph of a man holding a rifle, taken 8 months earlier, is somehow evidence of ownership of that rifle....... Hilarious
A handwritten circle on the letters "PP" on a photocopy of an unauthenticated document is proof that Oswald was sent and received a rifle ..... Pathetic
A rifle found at the TSBD somehow becomes "Oswald's rifle" because of a serial number that can't be seen on the photograph of him holding a rifle..... LOL

Get back to me when you have anything substantive to bring to the discussion, so you won't waste anymore of my time with your propagandistic drivel.

[John Mytton]

Wow, so many words and silly excuses trying to justify Martins teeny weeny conspiracy. Hilarious!

When a LN starts with an ad hom attack, you already know it's go down hill fast from that moment on. Instead of dealing with what I actually said, John exposes the superficial way he deals with "evidence" and just simply dismisses what I said as "silly excuses". A classic move by somebody who doesn't really want to debate, because they have nothing credible to say....

But I will respond to one of his claims.

So in Kleins normal business transaction, they received the order but Martin says and I quote him verbatim "We don't know what actually happened after that." but we do know Martin, we do know!

Oswald received the exact same rifle that Kleins sent.

And here we go again, the king of gifs strikes again. He posts a copy of Waldman 7, presumably as some sort of proof that Oswald received a rifle from Klein's, but in reality that document doesn't show anything of the kind. There is no evidence whatsoever that Klein's ever sent a rifle to Oswald's P.O. address and there is no evidence whatsoever that Oswald or anybody else ever received a rifle.

What John fails to understand (which is more likely than simply ignores) is that Waldman 7 is an internal document of Klein's that was allegedly found on a microfilm, which FBI agents took with them on 11/23/63. The microfilm was never returned to Klein's and the first (and only) time Waldman saw it again was during his WC testimony, several months later. Now let's not forget that Waldman 7 is a photocopy (which are easy to manipulate) and most of it's content is printed. Only the serial number is handwritten (by whom, we don't know). So, when Waldman was shown exhibit 7, he could and did not have any knowledge about the authenticity of the document, for which there was never a chain of custody provided. Now, just how convenient was it to have the serial number of the rifle found at the TSBD handwritten on the only document that could provide a link between the Hidell order form and the rifle? Do the math; Waldman 7 has very limited, if any, evidentiary value, no matter what John and his ilk claim.

Oswald was photographed with C2766.

If that is true, you should be able to show us that serial number on the rifle Oswald is holding in the photograph, right? So, why don't you show us an enlargement showing the number, John? Go on then...

And the very same rifle was found on the 6th floor of Oswald's workplace!

And what evidence exactly do you have that the rifle found at the TSBD is the exact same one as the rifle Oswald is holding in the BY photo? Surely, you're not just making this crucial claim without anything solid to back it up, right? So, why don't you tell is what that evidence is, John?

Now 3..2..1 like clockwork Martin will claim that the HSCA expert was wrong about Oswald being photographed with C2766

Show me the report of the HSCA expert in which he unequivocally states that the rifle Oswald was holding had the serial number C2766. I won't hold my breath, though.

and don't forget dear reader that the backyard rifle was the same make and model as the one Oswald was sent and at the time Kleins new stock was for the 36 inch model which means that this relatively rare make of rifle was made even more obscure by the shorter new stock!

Who are you trying to fool with this nonsense? Hidell ordered a 36" rifle. The rifle found at the TSBD was 40". So, not the same model at all. As already stated, there is no evidence that Oswald was sent any rifle.

And then Martin will spin some malarkey about how Oswald didn't put C2766 on the 6th floor but allude to some mysterious unknown person/persons somehow over the previous 8 months somehow acquired C2766 and snuck it into the building to set Oswald up??

Rather than trying to incorrectly predict what I would say, I would prefer that you actually present some conclusive evidence for all the BS you are spewing.

You simply can't make this stuff up but you just gotta laugh at the unbelievable lengths that these Oswald apologists go to to claim Oswald's innocence. Hardy Ha Ha!!

You should know what you can't make up, as you are the expert in - and only one here - making things up.

A photograph of a man holding a rifle, taken 8 months earlier, is somehow evidence of ownership of that rifle....... Hilarious
A handwritten circle on the letters "PP" on a photocopy of an unauthenticated document is proof that Oswald was sent and received a rifle ..... Pathetic
A rifle found at the TSBD somehow becomes "Oswald's rifle" because of a serial number that can't be seen on the photograph of him holding a rifle..... LOL

Get back to me when you have anything substantive to bring to the discussion, so you won't waste anymore of my time with your propagandistic drivel.

OMG, let's have a quick review of this solitary topic, one of many more, of what it takes for a teeny weeny conspiracy.

Kleins were incompetent.
That Kleins made up their internal records then conveniently kept the stock?
Forgets that Oswald ordered C20-T750 and Oswald received C20-T750
That Waldman had complete memory failure when in the early hours of the following day he saw the most important document in this entire investigation.
Implies that for some reason Kleins never sent C2766.
Or perhaps the American Post Office just lost the order.
Forgets that there is no record of Oswald following up on the lost order.
Oswald just after he received and was photographed with the exact same make and model of an obscure rifle that Kleins sent was somehow not that rifle?
The FBI were involved.
Alludes to the FBI manipulating Kleins business records
Waldman 7 was faked.
Waldman 7 had a faked rifle serial number.
Photocopy's are easy to manipulate!
That the HSCA photographic expert who said "indeed it's the same rifle" was incompetent.
Etc etc etc

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

OMG, let's have a quick review of this solitary topic, one of many more, of what it takes for a teeny weeny conspiracy.

Kleins were incompetent.
That Kleins made up their internal records then conveniently kept the stock?
Forgets that Oswald ordered C20-T750 and Oswald received C20-T750
That Waldman had complete memory failure when in the early hours of the following day he saw the most important document in this entire investigation.
Implies that for some reason Kleins never sent C2766.
Or perhaps the American Post Office just lost the order.
Forgets that there is no record of Oswald following up on the lost order.
Oswald just after he received and was photographed with the exact same make and model of an obscure rifle that Kleins sent was somehow not that rifle?
The FBI were involved.
Alludes to the FBI manipulating Kleins business records
Waldman 7 was faked.
Waldman 7 had a faked rifle serial number.
Photocopy's are easy to manipulate!
That the HSCA photographic expert who said "indeed it's the same rifle" was incompetent.
Etc etc etc

JohnM

Please note that nowhere in this pathetic rant does John provide even a shred of the evidence I asked him for. But that's no surprise....

Instead of providing actual evidence, which he hasn't got, John is desperately trying to influence the reader, with bogus arguments, to believe his silly fairytale story despite a total lack of conclusive evidence.

[John Mytton]

Instead of providing actual evidence, which he hasn't got,......

Huh?, What?, You can't be serious?  I'm the only one that has provided a stack of powerful irrefutable evidence and as is your right, you have attempted to refute my evidence but your scattershot attempts to create reasonable doubt which involve attacking any person or organisation that stand in your way, are so far pisspoor.

My advice would be to forget about wasting your time with endless unprovable allegations and just accept the truth, Oswald all by his lonesome killed two men on the Twenty Second of November Nineteen Sixty Three! See easy peasy!

Sincerely

JohnM