One of the many important facts that Cheevers discusses is the fact that one of the leading anti-Diem plotters was a Communist agent, and that two Communist agents were feeding anti-war "journalist" David Halberstam information for his slanted, misleading stories about the Diem government and the war effort.

Heaven can wait.  Make this place right first.

I have no idea if anything awaits me after I assume room temperature. I'm certainly not counting on it. I want to make the most out of the life I know I have.

Baden was one of several members of the HSCA's FPP who believed that "when the body is repositioned in the anatomic position (not the position at the moment of shooting) the direction of the missile in the body on initial penetration was slightly upward". They were wrong. The majority of that 9 member panel disagreed with them. You have falsely claimed that "several members" equals a majority.

You again blunder over information that has been known for decades. First off, you realize that the term "several" can refer to as many as nine or 10, right? You can Google it.

If a majority of the FPP disagreed with the upward-trajectory finding, why does the FPP's SBT diagram (7 HSCA 100, Figure 12) show the bullet traveling upward through the neck and show JFK leaning substantially forward? Why did Dr. Baden, the FPP chairman, demonstrate an upward trajectory through the neck with a wooden pointer in his filmed interview for NOVA's 1988 JFKA documentary, and why did Baden then lean markedly forward, still holding the pointer, to show how an upward trajectory through the neck could line up with the sixth-floor window? And, why does the FPP's report say that the back wound's abrasion collar is "evidence that the bullet's trajectory at the instant of penetration was slightly upward in relation to the body"? Let's read what the FPP said on this issue:

A red-brown to black area of skin surrounds the wound, forming what is called an abrasion collar. It was caused by the bullet's scraping the margins of the skin on penetration and is characteristic of a gunshot wound of entrance. The abrasion collar is larger at the lower margin of the wound, evidence that the bullet's trajectory at the instant of penetration was slightly upward in relation to the body. (7 HSCA 175)

The FPP determined that the entry wound was superior to the ribs. T1 being the uppermost vertebra of the ribs.

Uh, yes, I already pointed this out. You realize that T1 was below the throat wound, right? Right? Look at the FPP's SBT diagram (7 HSCA 100, Figure 12). Here's a link to it:

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:HSCA-JFK-neck2-6-43.jpg

Notice that the diagram shows the bullet entering slightly below the throat wound. Why do you suppose that not a single pro-SBT diagram acknowledges the FPP's location for the back wound and the FPP's depiction of an upward trajectory through the neck? Humm? Why do you suppose that is?   

Humes was not responsible for the drawings. His placement of the wound on the drawings was too high.

What?! The drawing was made under Humes's direction and instruction. The medical artist, Harold Rydberg, only drew what Humes told him to draw; Humes presented the drawing to the WC as an accurate depiction of the SBT's trajectory through the neck; and the WC cited the drawing three times in the Warren Report and published it as an exhibit. The drawing, CE 385, shows the back wound above the throat wound and has the bullet traveling downward through the neck.

And every single pro-SBT trajectory illustration, from Lattimer's diagrams to Myers' fraudulent animation, erroneously has the mythical magic bullet traveling downward through JFK's neck. 

However, his testimony that the wound was in the low neck was probably correct.

T1 is not in the "low neck." The neck ends at C7. The "C" stands for "cervical." The "T" stands for "thoracic." The FPP correctly referred to the T1 location as being "in the back area" and noted it was "a few inches lower" than where Humes placed it in CE 385 (1 HSCA 256).

It is just incredible that you guys still refuse to deal with the fact that the only way to make the T1 location and its upward trajectory work for the SBT is to make the demonstrably false assumption that JFK was leaning markedly forward when the bullet struck.

Your denial of obvious reality here is akin to your long-standing refusal to acknowledge the fact that JFK's clothing clearly, self-evidently refutes any notion that the back-wound bullet exited the throat. Objective people can read your grasping replies in my threads "JFK's Clothing Refutes the Single-Bullet Theory" and "JFK's Throat Wound Was an Entrance Wound: Refuting the Shored-Wound Theory" and see that you guys have no tenable, sensible explanation for the clothing evidence.

If you guys were dealing rationally and credibly with the evidence, you would have abandoned the SBT way back when we learned (1) that there was no hole through JFK's tie and no nick on either edge of the tie knot, and (2) that the bullet holes in the back of JFK's shirt and coat were over 5 inches below the collar.

As most here know, many people who reject the lone-gunman theory are not liberals but are staunch conservatives.

Both LNs and CTs come in all political stripes. I've never seen any indication that liberals or conservatives are more prone to be CTs. Vincent Bugliosi was very much a liberal and John McAdams was certainly a staunch conservative and both were firmly of the opinion that Oswald acted alone. There are plenty of people on this forum who I disagree with politically but share my view that Oswald acted alone and others with whom I share a political viewpoint who are CTs. [/quote]

One of them is conservative journalist Allan Favish. In an article published last year in the conservative journal American Thinker, Favish takes the media to task for failing to cover the important information that has been discussed in the Luna Committee hearings on the JFK case. His article, titled "The Media’s Failure to Effectively Confront Recent JFK Assassination Testimony," can be found at this link:

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/06/the_media_s_failure_to_effectively_confront_recent_jfk_assassination_testimony.html

Here are some excerpts:

Rather than being ignored or dismissed as a “conspiracy theory,” the facts alleged at the House hearing deserve detailed, accurate evaluation, and thereafter, either detailed, accurate refutation, support, or further evaluation. . . .

Another witness was Dan Hardway, who was a researcher on the staff of the House Select Committee on Assassinations (“HSCA”) in 1977-78. His written testimony is here. In his testimony at 1:12:05 - 1:20:10, he testifies in detail about how he personally witnessed the Central Intelligence Agency conduct an illegal, domestic covert operation involving at least one undercover agent to subvert and obstruct the HSCA. . . .

Bullet fragments known to have been removed from President Kennedy’s body at Bethesda Naval Hospital were never placed into the official record and are missing today. . . .

The fourteen (14) brain photographs in the National Archives today cannot be, and are not, photos of John F. Kennedy’s brain. They have been impugned by the official photographer at the brain examination and by one of the FBI agents present at JFK’s autopsy. . . .

The film of the assassination taken by bystander Abraham Zapruder that the public has seen is not the original film. The version seen by the public is an altered copy of the original that hides the large exit wound in the back of Kennedy’s head, among other things. The original Zapruder film was in the custody of the Central Intelligence Agency during the weekend after the Friday assassination.
[/quote]

Just what has the Luna Committee come up with that hasn't been rehashed ad nauseam for decades.

The WC Report tells us that the Sniper's Perch was mainly constructed using "Rolling Reader" boxes taken from a few aisles away from the SN. It tells us that there was a long paper bag found in the southeast corner which may have been used to carry the disassembled to that corner and that there was a box just by the Sniper's Perch which a shooter could sit on while assembling the rifle. It also tells us that it took a firearms expert around 6 minutes to assemble the rifle.
The impression we are left with is that the shooter took time to construct a Sniper's Perch using boxes from different areas on the 6th floor and assembled his rifle while hid in the Sniper's Nest.

Question - when, exactly, did all this preparation take place?

We don't know when the preparation took place but since Oswald hadn't filled any of his assigned orders that morning, he had plenty of time. We also don't know whether he stacked the boxes to make the wall or just took advantage of what was there. A crew was laying a new floor and they might have stacked those boxes up to get them out of the way while they worked on another part of the floor. In any case, we know a wall of boxes had been built by someone, and we know Oswald had reassembled his rifle prior to using it to kill JFK. It is unnecessary to prove when he did it.