Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The alternatives to your contentions are as follows:Oh lord. Where to begin….
"There is no real proof as of yet and most likely never will be that will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty or that he was just a patsy.”
- A rifle Oswald bought
- A rifle he posed with
- Is found in the place where Oswald worked
- The bullets shot that day that killed the President are tied to the rifle
- The wrapper he constructed to smuggle it in was even found
- At least one paraffin wax test for gunpowder residue came back positive
- He leaves his workplace for no reason
- Takes evasive action on the way home to get his gun
- Shoots a police officer
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was guilty based on the first 4 bullet points alone. Capital Murder cases have been tried successfully based on less.
You cannot prove Oswald bought the rifle....how many times do you have to be told that the rifle was purchased via mail order. No one can identify Oswald as the purchaser.
Someone posed as Oswald to rent a PO Box.
Someone using an alias that Oswald was known to use bought a rifle.
Someone manufactured a picture of Oswald holding the rifle.
Someone stole the rifle out of Oswald’s garage.
Someone planted Oswald's rifle in the TSBD
Someone got Mr. Frazier to lie about the package Oswald brought work that day.
Someone got Mr. Frazier to invent a story about Oswald bringing curtain rods.
Someone had to manufacture evidence of Oswald’s fingerprints on the rifle.
Those are the minimum requirements for the alternative you propose. We’re leaving out Oswald being placed at the TSBD that day and forcing Oswald to take the evasive moves after he shot Kennedy.
And someone had to get out of the TSBD without being seen.
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was the gunman.
I think you’re giving them too much credit.
The reason most become conspiracy theorists is, in my view, is to get attention essentially. Those who go “against the grain” get noticed so that is what they do. I just heard a story on the television about a random shooting over in Texas. It sounds suspicious that a shooting would just be done randomly in a suburban neighborhood. Would any of the resident conspiracy folks give this a second look? No. Because it won’t get them noticed. If the shooter or victim turned out to be famous and the conspiracy kook could get some attention by questioning the victim, the shooter, or the findings of the authorities…they’d be on it.
This is why you have the usual suspects thinking that the Apollo moon landings were faked, 9/11 was a conspiracy on a global scale, the JFK topic at hand….
As I mentioned earlier, I too speculate about the events that lead Oswald to pull the trigger so I don’t mind questioning the findings of the WC. The known physical evidence is available and every shred of it points to Oswald pulling the trigger, he being the only person who fired a rifle at Kennedy that day, and that the fatal wounds and injuries to others were at the hands of LHO and he alone. If you want to say that there was a violation of the law, the autopsy was not done by the book, or that the authorities went to extraordinary lengths to silence any conjecture about a larger conspiracy afoot to kill our President, I will listen to that. There is, in my view, evidence of all three being true. For example, the coroner in Dallas County (I think it was Dallas County) is responsible for the autopsies of murder victims in Dallas County; not the SS.
Inside the Autopsy Room: The Details Doctors Gathered About JFK’s Assassination | History | Smithsonian
But there isn’t any thing that has been brought to light in nearly 60 years that points to anyone other than Oswald being an active shooter in the JFK assassination.
Utter gibberish.
There is no logical reason for you to believe half of the stuff you’ve posted in this thread alone. There are no logical conclusions on your part.
Occam's razor. In order to avoid the simplest explanation, you have to construct ever larger, ever more complex conspiracies, and somewhere along the way, you have to assume large facts not in evidence, like, "Can you imagine how easy it would be for the CIA and the Mossad to frame a patsy with all their resources?", which substitutes for evidence that they did. Pick a few details that may have plausible alternate explanations, ignore the rest of the evidence, and imagine large numbers of shadow people pulling strings in the background, and soundly ridicule anyone who dares say otherwise.
Occam’s razor isn’t always right.
Well, as I said, I think that Oswald was promised support in return for killing Kennedy. This is strictly my opinion but it is based on the known facts; not “could haves” like the other guys rely on.
We know Oswald showed up that day without his pistol. We know he wasted precious time after he killed Kennedy to go home and get it. I theorize any reasonable person would have collected it prior to needing it.
Again, I theorize, that if something isn’t important at noon on Monday but is important at noon on Tuesday, that means one thing…the circumstances have changed during that 24 hour period. Events changed.
You couple that with the following knowns:
Oswald was one of the few (if not the only) person(s) to defect to Russia, then defect back to the US during the cold war. Was able to leave Russia with his wife. Was quite active in politics while he was back here. And that he just happens to show up at the TSBD on that day seems like too remarkable a coincidence to me in my theory on what happened to lead up to JFK’s assassination. This is pure speculation based only on known facts.
Oswald, in the month before killing Kennedy, visited the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City. The CIA handlers who were watching the embassies saw this. This was not reported to the WC. And then in the next 30 days or so, he ends up killing Kennedy. Seems to me like that was indicative of those nations being involved. My point isn’t to indict the CIA but the fact that they have him visiting the embassies down there is informative to my theory that there may have been other nations involved. This also comes from Emmy Award Winning Frontline on PBS; not the kook-of-the-month website.
Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
You are being very in-coherent for the most part in the above post....not even to mention you contradict yourself.
Also...I already gave you a very logical reason why Oswald did not take his pistol to work....he had no need for it....as in....he did not plan to shoot JFK. If he had planned to shoot JFK...most likely he would have taken his pistol with him...as in it could have come in handy during his escape from the scene......but when he realized he had been set up....he most likely realized they might come for him next...thus he went directly home to get his pistol for protection.
You say you believe the Warren Commission report and then you turn around and say other nations were involved??? Do you not know the Warren Commission reported that Lee was the only one involved in the assassination....has someone on here persuaded you otherwise?
Here is something that might help you to get a grip.......I challenge you to a mock trial....you are the prosecutor and I am Oswald's defense attorney....I will demonstrate to you how a competent attorney would shred your extremely weak evidence.
The alternatives to your contentions are as follows:I have no problem with evidence....I do have a problem with dupes who coinfuse evidence with proof.
There is evidence that oswald was guilty....there is evidence he was what he claimed to be and in my opinion most likely was ......a patsy.
There is no real proof as of yet and most likely never will be that will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty or that he was just a patsy.
The Warren Commission did have the power at the time when most of the players in this tragic episode of American history were still alive ....to conduct a fair and thorough investigation....they failed.
They failed because for whatever reason or reasons they pursued one theory only...that Oswald was just a lone nut case who decided out of the blue just to kill jfk for no good reason.
It was a masterful plot and their master stroke was the selection of the perfect patsy.
Oh lord. Where to begin….
"There is no real proof as of yet and most likely never will be that will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty or that he was just a patsy.”
- A rifle Oswald bought
- A rifle he posed with
- Is found in the place where Oswald worked
- The bullets shot that day that killed the President are tied to the rifle
- The wrapper he constructed to smuggle it in was even found
- At least one paraffin wax test for gunpowder residue came back positive
- He leaves his workplace for no reason
- Takes evasive action on the way home to get his gun
- Shoots a police officer
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was guilty based on the first 4 bullet points alone. Capital Murder cases have been tried successfully based on less.
You cannot prove Oswald bought the rifle....how many times do you have to be told that the rifle was purchased via mail order. No one can identify Oswald as the purchaser.
Someone posed as Oswald to rent a PO Box.
Someone using an alias that Oswald was known to use bought a rifle.
Someone manufactured a picture of Oswald holding the rifle.
Someone stole the rifle out of Oswald’s garage.
Someone planted Oswald's rifle in the TSBD
Someone got Mr. Frazier to lie about the package Oswald brought work that day.
Someone got Mr. Frazier to invent a story about Oswald bringing curtain rods.
Someone had to manufacture evidence of Oswald’s fingerprints on the rifle.
Those are the minimum requirements for the alternative you propose. We’re leaving out Oswald being placed at the TSBD that day and forcing Oswald to take the evasive moves after he shot Kennedy.
And someone had to get out of the TSBD without being seen.
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was the gunman.
No amount of evidence will ever convince the conspiracy theorists. They will simply ignore contrary evidence or insist it is fake, pick out one or two factoids that seem to support their cause even after they have been debunked, and will grow the conspiracy to ridiculous sizes.
I think they just can't accept that sometimes one person or a handful of people can cause tremendous upset in the right circumstances. They don't want to believe a president can be assassinated or the World Trade Center be brought down that easily, so they invent wild conspiracies and resort to insulting and ridiculing anyone who disagrees.
I think you’re giving them too much credit.
The reason most become conspiracy theorists is, in my view, is to get attention essentially. Those who go “against the grain” get noticed so that is what they do. I just heard a story on the television about a random shooting over in Texas. It sounds suspicious that a shooting would just be done randomly in a suburban neighborhood. Would any of the resident conspiracy folks give this a second look? No. Because it won’t get them noticed. If the shooter or victim turned out to be famous and the conspiracy kook could get some attention by questioning the victim, the shooter, or the findings of the authorities…they’d be on it.
This is why you have the usual suspects thinking that the Apollo moon landings were faked, 9/11 was a conspiracy on a global scale, the JFK topic at hand….
As I mentioned earlier, I too speculate about the events that lead Oswald to pull the trigger so I don’t mind questioning the findings of the WC. The known physical evidence is available and every shred of it points to Oswald pulling the trigger, he being the only person who fired a rifle at Kennedy that day, and that the fatal wounds and injuries to others were at the hands of LHO and he alone. If you want to say that there was a violation of the law, the autopsy was not done by the book, or that the authorities went to extraordinary lengths to silence any conjecture about a larger conspiracy afoot to kill our President, I will listen to that. There is, in my view, evidence of all three being true. For example, the coroner in Dallas County (I think it was Dallas County) is responsible for the autopsies of murder victims in Dallas County; not the SS.
Inside the Autopsy Room: The Details Doctors Gathered About JFK’s Assassination | History | Smithsonian
But there isn’t any thing that has been brought to light in nearly 60 years that points to anyone other than Oswald being an active shooter in the JFK assassination.
Utter gibberish.
There is no logical reason for you to believe half of the stuff you’ve posted in this thread alone. There are no logical conclusions on your part.
Occam's razor. In order to avoid the simplest explanation, you have to construct ever larger, ever more complex conspiracies, and somewhere along the way, you have to assume large facts not in evidence, like, "Can you imagine how easy it would be for the CIA and the Mossad to frame a patsy with all their resources?", which substitutes for evidence that they did. Pick a few details that may have plausible alternate explanations, ignore the rest of the evidence, and imagine large numbers of shadow people pulling strings in the background, and soundly ridicule anyone who dares say otherwise.
Occam’s razor isn’t always right.
Well, as I said, I think that Oswald was promised support in return for killing Kennedy. This is strictly my opinion but it is based on the known facts; not “could haves” like the other guys rely on.
We know Oswald showed up that day without his pistol. We know he wasted precious time after he killed Kennedy to go home and get it. I theorize any reasonable person would have collected it prior to needing it.
Again, I theorize, that if something isn’t important at noon on Monday but is important at noon on Tuesday, that means one thing…the circumstances have changed during that 24 hour period. Events changed.
You couple that with the following knowns:
Oswald was one of the few (if not the only) person(s) to defect to Russia, then defect back to the US during the cold war. Was able to leave Russia with his wife. Was quite active in politics while he was back here. And that he just happens to show up at the TSBD on that day seems like too remarkable a coincidence to me in my theory on what happened to lead up to JFK’s assassination. This is pure speculation based only on known facts.
Oswald, in the month before killing Kennedy, visited the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City. The CIA handlers who were watching the embassies saw this. This was not reported to the WC. And then in the next 30 days or so, he ends up killing Kennedy. Seems to me like that was indicative of those nations being involved. My point isn’t to indict the CIA but the fact that they have him visiting the embassies down there is informative to my theory that there may have been other nations involved. This also comes from Emmy Award Winning Frontline on PBS; not the kook-of-the-month website.
Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
The alternatives to your contentions are as follows:I have no problem with evidence....I do have a problem with dupes who coinfuse evidence with proof.
There is evidence that oswald was guilty....there is evidence he was what he claimed to be and in my opinion most likely was ......a patsy.
There is no real proof as of yet and most likely never will be that will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty or that he was just a patsy.
The Warren Commission did have the power at the time when most of the players in this tragic episode of American history were still alive ....to conduct a fair and thorough investigation....they failed.
They failed because for whatever reason or reasons they pursued one theory only...that Oswald was just a lone nut case who decided out of the blue just to kill jfk for no good reason.
It was a masterful plot and their master stroke was the selection of the perfect patsy.
Oh lord. Where to begin….
"There is no real proof as of yet and most likely never will be that will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty or that he was just a patsy.”
- A rifle Oswald bought
- A rifle he posed with
- Is found in the place where Oswald worked
- The bullets shot that day that killed the President are tied to the rifle
- The wrapper he constructed to smuggle it in was even found
- At least one paraffin wax test for gunpowder residue came back positive
- He leaves his workplace for no reason
- Takes evasive action on the way home to get his gun
- Shoots a police officer
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was guilty based on the first 4 bullet points alone. Capital Murder cases have been tried successfully based on less.
You cannot prove Oswald bought the rifle....how many times do you have to be told that the rifle was purchased via mail order. No one can identify Oswald as the purchaser.
Someone posed as Oswald to rent a PO Box.
Someone using an alias that Oswald was known to use bought a rifle.
Someone manufactured a picture of Oswald holding the rifle.
Someone stole the rifle out of Oswald’s garage.
Someone planted Oswald's rifle in the TSBD
Someone got Mr. Frazier to lie about the package Oswald brought work that day.
Someone got Mr. Frazier to invent a story about Oswald bringing curtain rods.
Someone had to manufacture evidence of Oswald’s fingerprints on the rifle.
Those are the minimum requirements for the alternative you propose. We’re leaving out Oswald being placed at the TSBD that day and forcing Oswald to take the evasive moves after he shot Kennedy.
And someone had to get out of the TSBD without being seen.
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was the gunman.
No amount of evidence will ever convince the conspiracy theorists. They will simply ignore contrary evidence or insist it is fake, pick out one or two factoids that seem to support their cause even after they have been debunked, and will grow the conspiracy to ridiculous sizes.
I think they just can't accept that sometimes one person or a handful of people can cause tremendous upset in the right circumstances. They don't want to believe a president can be assassinated or the World Trade Center be brought down that easily, so they invent wild conspiracies and resort to insulting and ridiculing anyone who disagrees.
I think you’re giving them too much credit.
The reason most become conspiracy theorists is, in my view, is to get attention essentially. Those who go “against the grain” get noticed so that is what they do. I just heard a story on the television about a random shooting over in Texas. It sounds suspicious that a shooting would just be done randomly in a suburban neighborhood. Would any of the resident conspiracy folks give this a second look? No. Because it won’t get them noticed. If the shooter or victim turned out to be famous and the conspiracy kook could get some attention by questioning the victim, the shooter, or the findings of the authorities…they’d be on it.
This is why you have the usual suspects thinking that the Apollo moon landings were faked, 9/11 was a conspiracy on a global scale, the JFK topic at hand….
As I mentioned earlier, I too speculate about the events that lead Oswald to pull the trigger so I don’t mind questioning the findings of the WC. The known physical evidence is available and every shred of it points to Oswald pulling the trigger, he being the only person who fired a rifle at Kennedy that day, and that the fatal wounds and injuries to others were at the hands of LHO and he alone. If you want to say that there was a violation of the law, the autopsy was not done by the book, or that the authorities went to extraordinary lengths to silence any conjecture about a larger conspiracy afoot to kill our President, I will listen to that. There is, in my view, evidence of all three being true. For example, the coroner in Dallas County (I think it was Dallas County) is responsible for the autopsies of murder victims in Dallas County; not the SS.
Inside the Autopsy Room: The Details Doctors Gathered About JFK’s Assassination | History | Smithsonian
But there isn’t any thing that has been brought to light in nearly 60 years that points to anyone other than Oswald being an active shooter in the JFK assassination.
Utter gibberish.
There is no logical reason for you to believe half of the stuff you’ve posted in this thread alone. There are no logical conclusions on your part.
Occam's razor. In order to avoid the simplest explanation, you have to construct ever larger, ever more complex conspiracies, and somewhere along the way, you have to assume large facts not in evidence, like, "Can you imagine how easy it would be for the CIA and the Mossad to frame a patsy with all their resources?", which substitutes for evidence that they did. Pick a few details that may have plausible alternate explanations, ignore the rest of the evidence, and imagine large numbers of shadow people pulling strings in the background, and soundly ridicule anyone who dares say otherwise.
Occam’s razor isn’t always right.
Well, as I said, I think that Oswald was promised support in return for killing Kennedy. This is strictly my opinion but it is based on the known facts; not “could haves” like the other guys rely on.
We know Oswald showed up that day without his pistol. We know he wasted precious time after he killed Kennedy to go home and get it. I theorize any reasonable person would have collected it prior to needing it.
Again, I theorize, that if something isn’t important at noon on Monday but is important at noon on Tuesday, that means one thing…the circumstances have changed during that 24 hour period. Events changed.
You couple that with the following knowns:
Oswald was one of the few (if not the only) person(s) to defect to Russia, then defect back to the US during the cold war. Was able to leave Russia with his wife. Was quite active in politics while he was back here. And that he just happens to show up at the TSBD on that day seems like too remarkable a coincidence to me in my theory on what happened to lead up to JFK’s assassination. This is pure speculation based only on known facts.
Oswald, in the month before killing Kennedy, visited the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City. The CIA handlers who were watching the embassies saw this. This was not reported to the WC. And then in the next 30 days or so, he ends up killing Kennedy. Seems to me like that was indicative of those nations being involved. My point isn’t to indict the CIA but the fact that they have him visiting the embassies down there is informative to my theory that there may have been other nations involved. This also comes from Emmy Award Winning Frontline on PBS; not the kook-of-the-month website.
Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
The alternatives to your contentions are as follows:Oh lord. Where to begin….
"There is no real proof as of yet and most likely never will be that will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty or that he was just a patsy.”
- A rifle Oswald bought
- A rifle he posed with
- Is found in the place where Oswald worked
- The bullets shot that day that killed the President are tied to the rifle
- The wrapper he constructed to smuggle it in was even found
- At least one paraffin wax test for gunpowder residue came back positive
- He leaves his workplace for no reason
- Takes evasive action on the way home to get his gun
- Shoots a police officer
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was guilty based on the first 4 bullet points alone. Capital Murder cases have been tried successfully based on less.
You cannot prove Oswald bought the rifle....how many times do you have to be told that the rifle was purchased via mail order. No one can identify Oswald as the purchaser.
Someone posed as Oswald to rent a PO Box.
Someone using an alias that Oswald was known to use bought a rifle.
Someone manufactured a picture of Oswald holding the rifle.
Someone stole the rifle out of Oswald’s garage.
Someone planted Oswald's rifle in the TSBD
Someone got Mr. Frazier to lie about the package Oswald brought work that day.
Someone got Mr. Frazier to invent a story about Oswald bringing curtain rods.
Someone had to manufacture evidence of Oswald’s fingerprints on the rifle.
Those are the minimum requirements for the alternative you propose. We’re leaving out Oswald being placed at the TSBD that day and forcing Oswald to take the evasive moves after he shot Kennedy.
And someone had to get out of the TSBD without being seen.
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was the gunman.
I think you’re giving them too much credit.
The reason most become conspiracy theorists is, in my view, is to get attention essentially. Those who go “against the grain” get noticed so that is what they do. I just heard a story on the television about a random shooting over in Texas. It sounds suspicious that a shooting would just be done randomly in a suburban neighborhood. Would any of the resident conspiracy folks give this a second look? No. Because it won’t get them noticed. If the shooter or victim turned out to be famous and the conspiracy kook could get some attention by questioning the victim, the shooter, or the findings of the authorities…they’d be on it.
This is why you have the usual suspects thinking that the Apollo moon landings were faked, 9/11 was a conspiracy on a global scale, the JFK topic at hand….
As I mentioned earlier, I too speculate about the events that lead Oswald to pull the trigger so I don’t mind questioning the findings of the WC. The known physical evidence is available and every shred of it points to Oswald pulling the trigger, he being the only person who fired a rifle at Kennedy that day, and that the fatal wounds and injuries to others were at the hands of LHO and he alone. If you want to say that there was a violation of the law, the autopsy was not done by the book, or that the authorities went to extraordinary lengths to silence any conjecture about a larger conspiracy afoot to kill our President, I will listen to that. There is, in my view, evidence of all three being true. For example, the coroner in Dallas County (I think it was Dallas County) is responsible for the autopsies of murder victims in Dallas County; not the SS.
Inside the Autopsy Room: The Details Doctors Gathered About JFK’s Assassination | History | Smithsonian
But there isn’t any thing that has been brought to light in nearly 60 years that points to anyone other than Oswald being an active shooter in the JFK assassination.
Utter gibberish.
There is no logical reason for you to believe half of the stuff you’ve posted in this thread alone. There are no logical conclusions on your part.
Occam's razor. In order to avoid the simplest explanation, you have to construct ever larger, ever more complex conspiracies, and somewhere along the way, you have to assume large facts not in evidence, like, "Can you imagine how easy it would be for the CIA and the Mossad to frame a patsy with all their resources?", which substitutes for evidence that they did. Pick a few details that may have plausible alternate explanations, ignore the rest of the evidence, and imagine large numbers of shadow people pulling strings in the background, and soundly ridicule anyone who dares say otherwise.
Occam’s razor isn’t always right.
Well, as I said, I think that Oswald was promised support in return for killing Kennedy. This is strictly my opinion but it is based on the known facts; not “could haves” like the other guys rely on.
We know Oswald showed up that day without his pistol. We know he wasted precious time after he killed Kennedy to go home and get it. I theorize any reasonable person would have collected it prior to needing it.
Again, I theorize, that if something isn’t important at noon on Monday but is important at noon on Tuesday, that means one thing…the circumstances have changed during that 24 hour period. Events changed.
You couple that with the following knowns:
Oswald was one of the few (if not the only) person(s) to defect to Russia, then defect back to the US during the cold war. Was able to leave Russia with his wife. Was quite active in politics while he was back here. And that he just happens to show up at the TSBD on that day seems like too remarkable a coincidence to me in my theory on what happened to lead up to JFK’s assassination. This is pure speculation based only on known facts.
Oswald, in the month before killing Kennedy, visited the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City. The CIA handlers who were watching the embassies saw this. This was not reported to the WC. And then in the next 30 days or so, he ends up killing Kennedy. Seems to me like that was indicative of those nations being involved. My point isn’t to indict the CIA but the fact that they have him visiting the embassies down there is informative to my theory that there may have been other nations involved. This also comes from Emmy Award Winning Frontline on PBS; not the kook-of-the-month website.
Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
Perhaps he didn't take his pistol because he didn't expect to escape the School Book Depository. Perhaps he wasn't sure he had the nerve to do it or maybe the pistol was in Oak Cliff while Oswald spent the night at Ruth Payne's house with Marina. Whatever, I don't think it's a sign of conspiracy.
The alternatives to your contentions are as follows:Oh lord. Where to begin….
"There is no real proof as of yet and most likely never will be that will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty or that he was just a patsy.”
- A rifle Oswald bought
- A rifle he posed with
- Is found in the place where Oswald worked
- The bullets shot that day that killed the President are tied to the rifle
- The wrapper he constructed to smuggle it in was even found
- At least one paraffin wax test for gunpowder residue came back positive
- He leaves his workplace for no reason
- Takes evasive action on the way home to get his gun
- Shoots a police officer
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was guilty based on the first 4 bullet points alone. Capital Murder cases have been tried successfully based on less.
You cannot prove Oswald bought the rifle....how many times do you have to be told that the rifle was purchased via mail order. No one can identify Oswald as the purchaser.
Someone posed as Oswald to rent a PO Box.
Someone using an alias that Oswald was known to use bought a rifle.
Someone manufactured a picture of Oswald holding the rifle.
Someone stole the rifle out of Oswald’s garage.
Someone planted Oswald's rifle in the TSBD
Someone got Mr. Frazier to lie about the package Oswald brought work that day.
Someone got Mr. Frazier to invent a story about Oswald bringing curtain rods.
Someone had to manufacture evidence of Oswald’s fingerprints on the rifle.
Those are the minimum requirements for the alternative you propose. We’re leaving out Oswald being placed at the TSBD that day and forcing Oswald to take the evasive moves after he shot Kennedy.
And someone had to get out of the TSBD without being seen.
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was the gunman.
I think you’re giving them too much credit.
The reason most become conspiracy theorists is, in my view, is to get attention essentially. Those who go “against the grain” get noticed so that is what they do. I just heard a story on the television about a random shooting over in Texas. It sounds suspicious that a shooting would just be done randomly in a suburban neighborhood. Would any of the resident conspiracy folks give this a second look? No. Because it won’t get them noticed. If the shooter or victim turned out to be famous and the conspiracy kook could get some attention by questioning the victim, the shooter, or the findings of the authorities…they’d be on it.
This is why you have the usual suspects thinking that the Apollo moon landings were faked, 9/11 was a conspiracy on a global scale, the JFK topic at hand….
As I mentioned earlier, I too speculate about the events that lead Oswald to pull the trigger so I don’t mind questioning the findings of the WC. The known physical evidence is available and every shred of it points to Oswald pulling the trigger, he being the only person who fired a rifle at Kennedy that day, and that the fatal wounds and injuries to others were at the hands of LHO and he alone. If you want to say that there was a violation of the law, the autopsy was not done by the book, or that the authorities went to extraordinary lengths to silence any conjecture about a larger conspiracy afoot to kill our President, I will listen to that. There is, in my view, evidence of all three being true. For example, the coroner in Dallas County (I think it was Dallas County) is responsible for the autopsies of murder victims in Dallas County; not the SS.
Inside the Autopsy Room: The Details Doctors Gathered About JFK’s Assassination | History | Smithsonian
But there isn’t any thing that has been brought to light in nearly 60 years that points to anyone other than Oswald being an active shooter in the JFK assassination.
Utter gibberish.
There is no logical reason for you to believe half of the stuff you’ve posted in this thread alone. There are no logical conclusions on your part.
Occam's razor. In order to avoid the simplest explanation, you have to construct ever larger, ever more complex conspiracies, and somewhere along the way, you have to assume large facts not in evidence, like, "Can you imagine how easy it would be for the CIA and the Mossad to frame a patsy with all their resources?", which substitutes for evidence that they did. Pick a few details that may have plausible alternate explanations, ignore the rest of the evidence, and imagine large numbers of shadow people pulling strings in the background, and soundly ridicule anyone who dares say otherwise.
Occam’s razor isn’t always right.
Well, as I said, I think that Oswald was promised support in return for killing Kennedy. This is strictly my opinion but it is based on the known facts; not “could haves” like the other guys rely on.
We know Oswald showed up that day without his pistol. We know he wasted precious time after he killed Kennedy to go home and get it. I theorize any reasonable person would have collected it prior to needing it.
Again, I theorize, that if something isn’t important at noon on Monday but is important at noon on Tuesday, that means one thing…the circumstances have changed during that 24 hour period. Events changed.
You couple that with the following knowns:
Oswald was one of the few (if not the only) person(s) to defect to Russia, then defect back to the US during the cold war. Was able to leave Russia with his wife. Was quite active in politics while he was back here. And that he just happens to show up at the TSBD on that day seems like too remarkable a coincidence to me in my theory on what happened to lead up to JFK’s assassination. This is pure speculation based only on known facts.
Oswald, in the month before killing Kennedy, visited the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City. The CIA handlers who were watching the embassies saw this. This was not reported to the WC. And then in the next 30 days or so, he ends up killing Kennedy. Seems to me like that was indicative of those nations being involved. My point isn’t to indict the CIA but the fact that they have him visiting the embassies down there is informative to my theory that there may have been other nations involved. This also comes from Emmy Award Winning Frontline on PBS; not the kook-of-the-month website.
Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
Perhaps he didn't take his pistol because he didn't expect to escape the School Book Depository. Perhaps he wasn't sure he had the nerve to do it or maybe the pistol was in Oak Cliff while Oswald spent the night at Ruth Payne's house with Marina. Whatever, I don't think it's a sign of conspiracy.
The alternatives to your contentions are as follows:Oh lord. Where to begin….
"There is no real proof as of yet and most likely never will be that will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty or that he was just a patsy.”
- A rifle Oswald bought
- A rifle he posed with
- Is found in the place where Oswald worked
- The bullets shot that day that killed the President are tied to the rifle
- The wrapper he constructed to smuggle it in was even found
- At least one paraffin wax test for gunpowder residue came back positive
- He leaves his workplace for no reason
- Takes evasive action on the way home to get his gun
- Shoots a police officer
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was guilty based on the first 4 bullet points alone. Capital Murder cases have been tried successfully based on less.
You cannot prove Oswald bought the rifle....how many times do you have to be told that the rifle was purchased via mail order. No one can identify Oswald as the purchaser.
Someone posed as Oswald to rent a PO Box.
Someone using an alias that Oswald was known to use bought a rifle.
Someone manufactured a picture of Oswald holding the rifle.
Someone stole the rifle out of Oswald’s garage.
Someone planted Oswald's rifle in the TSBD
Someone got Mr. Frazier to lie about the package Oswald brought work that day.
Someone got Mr. Frazier to invent a story about Oswald bringing curtain rods.
Someone had to manufacture evidence of Oswald’s fingerprints on the rifle.
Those are the minimum requirements for the alternative you propose. We’re leaving out Oswald being placed at the TSBD that day and forcing Oswald to take the evasive moves after he shot Kennedy.
And someone had to get out of the TSBD without being seen.
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was the gunman.
I think you’re giving them too much credit.
The reason most become conspiracy theorists is, in my view, is to get attention essentially. Those who go “against the grain” get noticed so that is what they do. I just heard a story on the television about a random shooting over in Texas. It sounds suspicious that a shooting would just be done randomly in a suburban neighborhood. Would any of the resident conspiracy folks give this a second look? No. Because it won’t get them noticed. If the shooter or victim turned out to be famous and the conspiracy kook could get some attention by questioning the victim, the shooter, or the findings of the authorities…they’d be on it.
This is why you have the usual suspects thinking that the Apollo moon landings were faked, 9/11 was a conspiracy on a global scale, the JFK topic at hand….
As I mentioned earlier, I too speculate about the events that lead Oswald to pull the trigger so I don’t mind questioning the findings of the WC. The known physical evidence is available and every shred of it points to Oswald pulling the trigger, he being the only person who fired a rifle at Kennedy that day, and that the fatal wounds and injuries to others were at the hands of LHO and he alone. If you want to say that there was a violation of the law, the autopsy was not done by the book, or that the authorities went to extraordinary lengths to silence any conjecture about a larger conspiracy afoot to kill our President, I will listen to that. There is, in my view, evidence of all three being true. For example, the coroner in Dallas County (I think it was Dallas County) is responsible for the autopsies of murder victims in Dallas County; not the SS.
Inside the Autopsy Room: The Details Doctors Gathered About JFK’s Assassination | History | Smithsonian
But there isn’t any thing that has been brought to light in nearly 60 years that points to anyone other than Oswald being an active shooter in the JFK assassination.
Utter gibberish.
There is no logical reason for you to believe half of the stuff you’ve posted in this thread alone. There are no logical conclusions on your part.
Occam's razor. In order to avoid the simplest explanation, you have to construct ever larger, ever more complex conspiracies, and somewhere along the way, you have to assume large facts not in evidence, like, "Can you imagine how easy it would be for the CIA and the Mossad to frame a patsy with all their resources?", which substitutes for evidence that they did. Pick a few details that may have plausible alternate explanations, ignore the rest of the evidence, and imagine large numbers of shadow people pulling strings in the background, and soundly ridicule anyone who dares say otherwise.
Occam’s razor isn’t always right.
Well, as I said, I think that Oswald was promised support in return for killing Kennedy. This is strictly my opinion but it is based on the known facts; not “could haves” like the other guys rely on.
We know Oswald showed up that day without his pistol. We know he wasted precious time after he killed Kennedy to go home and get it. I theorize any reasonable person would have collected it prior to needing it.
Again, I theorize, that if something isn’t important at noon on Monday but is important at noon on Tuesday, that means one thing…the circumstances have changed during that 24 hour period. Events changed.
You couple that with the following knowns:
Oswald was one of the few (if not the only) person(s) to defect to Russia, then defect back to the US during the cold war. Was able to leave Russia with his wife. Was quite active in politics while he was back here. And that he just happens to show up at the TSBD on that day seems like too remarkable a coincidence to me in my theory on what happened to lead up to JFK’s assassination. This is pure speculation based only on known facts.
Oswald, in the month before killing Kennedy, visited the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City. The CIA handlers who were watching the embassies saw this. This was not reported to the WC. And then in the next 30 days or so, he ends up killing Kennedy. Seems to me like that was indicative of those nations being involved. My point isn’t to indict the CIA but the fact that they have him visiting the embassies down there is informative to my theory that there may have been other nations involved. This also comes from Emmy Award Winning Frontline on PBS; not the kook-of-the-month website.
Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
If the Warren Commission was "covering anything up", it was the idea that the USSR or Cuba might have had ties to Oswald. That might have created so much pressure to retaliate against those 2 countries that LBJ wouldn't have been able to stop it.
The alternatives to your contentions are as follows:You cannot prove Oswald bought the rifle....how many times do you have to be told that the rifle was purchased via mail order. No one can identify Oswald as the purchaser.
Someone posed as Oswald to rent a PO Box.
Someone using an alias that Oswald was known to use bought a rifle.
Someone manufactured a picture of Oswald holding the rifle.
Someone stole the rifle out of Oswald’s garage.
Someone planted Oswald's rifle in the TSBD
Someone got Mr. Frazier to lie about the package Oswald brought work that day.
Someone got Mr. Frazier to invent a story about Oswald bringing curtain rods.
Someone had to manufacture evidence of Oswald’s fingerprints on the rifle.
Those are the minimum requirements for the alternative you propose. We’re leaving out Oswald being placed at the TSBD that day and forcing Oswald to take the evasive moves after he shot Kennedy.
And someone had to get out of the TSBD without being seen.
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was the gunman.
Utter gibberish.
There is no logical reason for you to believe half of the stuff you’ve posted in this thread alone. There are no logical conclusions on your part.
Occam's razor. In order to avoid the simplest explanation, you have to construct ever larger, ever more complex conspiracies, and somewhere along the way, you have to assume large facts not in evidence, like, "Can you imagine how easy it would be for the CIA and the Mossad to frame a patsy with all their resources?", which substitutes for evidence that they did. Pick a few details that may have plausible alternate explanations, ignore the rest of the evidence, and imagine large numbers of shadow people pulling strings in the background, and soundly ridicule anyone who dares say otherwise.
Occam’s razor isn’t always right.
Well, as I said, I think that Oswald was promised support in return for killing Kennedy. This is strictly my opinion but it is based on the known facts; not “could haves” like the other guys rely on.
We know Oswald showed up that day without his pistol. We know he wasted precious time after he killed Kennedy to go home and get it. I theorize any reasonable person would have collected it prior to needing it.
Again, I theorize, that if something isn’t important at noon on Monday but is important at noon on Tuesday, that means one thing…the circumstances have changed during that 24 hour period. Events changed.
You couple that with the following knowns:
Oswald was one of the few (if not the only) person(s) to defect to Russia, then defect back to the US during the cold war. Was able to leave Russia with his wife. Was quite active in politics while he was back here. And that he just happens to show up at the TSBD on that day seems like too remarkable a coincidence to me in my theory on what happened to lead up to JFK’s assassination. This is pure speculation based only on known facts.
Oswald, in the month before killing Kennedy, visited the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City. The CIA handlers who were watching the embassies saw this. This was not reported to the WC. And then in the next 30 days or so, he ends up killing Kennedy. Seems to me like that was indicative of those nations being involved. My point isn’t to indict the CIA but the fact that they have him visiting the embassies down there is informative to my theory that there may have been other nations involved. This also comes from Emmy Award Winning Frontline on PBS; not the kook-of-the-month website.
Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
You are being very in-coherent for the most part in the above post....not even to mention you contradict yourself.
Also...I already gave you a very logical reason why Oswald did not take his pistol to work....he had no need for it....as in....he did not plan to shoot JFK. If he had planned to shoot JFK...most likely he would have taken his pistol with him...as in it could have come in handy during his escape from the scene......but when he realized he had been set up....he most likely realized they might come for him next...thus he went directly home to get his pistol for protection.
You say you believe the Warren Commission report and then you turn around and say other nations were involved??? Do you not know the Warren Commission reported that Lee was the only one involved in the assassination....has someone on here persuaded you otherwise?
Here is something that might help you to get a grip.......I challenge you to a mock trial....you are the prosecutor and I am Oswald's defense attorney....I will demonstrate to you how a competent attorney would shred your extremely weak evidence.
No.
I said the physical evidence of what happened that Day in Dallas when JFK was killed is in Lockstep correctness with the WC.
I do have reservations about the WC’s conclusion that Oswald did it all by himself.
The reservations are based on known facts. Not your cartoonish conclusions.
The alternatives to your contentions are as follows:You cannot prove Oswald bought the rifle....how many times do you have to be told that the rifle was purchased via mail order. No one can identify Oswald as the purchaser.
Someone posed as Oswald to rent a PO Box.
Someone using an alias that Oswald was known to use bought a rifle.
Someone manufactured a picture of Oswald holding the rifle.
Someone stole the rifle out of Oswald’s garage.
Someone planted Oswald's rifle in the TSBD
Someone got Mr. Frazier to lie about the package Oswald brought work that day.
Someone got Mr. Frazier to invent a story about Oswald bringing curtain rods.
Someone had to manufacture evidence of Oswald’s fingerprints on the rifle.
Those are the minimum requirements for the alternative you propose. We’re leaving out Oswald being placed at the TSBD that day and forcing Oswald to take the evasive moves after he shot Kennedy.
And someone had to get out of the TSBD without being seen.
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was the gunman.
Utter gibberish.
There is no logical reason for you to believe half of the stuff you’ve posted in this thread alone. There are no logical conclusions on your part.
Occam's razor. In order to avoid the simplest explanation, you have to construct ever larger, ever more complex conspiracies, and somewhere along the way, you have to assume large facts not in evidence, like, "Can you imagine how easy it would be for the CIA and the Mossad to frame a patsy with all their resources?", which substitutes for evidence that they did. Pick a few details that may have plausible alternate explanations, ignore the rest of the evidence, and imagine large numbers of shadow people pulling strings in the background, and soundly ridicule anyone who dares say otherwise.
Occam’s razor isn’t always right.
Well, as I said, I think that Oswald was promised support in return for killing Kennedy. This is strictly my opinion but it is based on the known facts; not “could haves” like the other guys rely on.
We know Oswald showed up that day without his pistol. We know he wasted precious time after he killed Kennedy to go home and get it. I theorize any reasonable person would have collected it prior to needing it.
Again, I theorize, that if something isn’t important at noon on Monday but is important at noon on Tuesday, that means one thing…the circumstances have changed during that 24 hour period. Events changed.
You couple that with the following knowns:
Oswald was one of the few (if not the only) person(s) to defect to Russia, then defect back to the US during the cold war. Was able to leave Russia with his wife. Was quite active in politics while he was back here. And that he just happens to show up at the TSBD on that day seems like too remarkable a coincidence to me in my theory on what happened to lead up to JFK’s assassination. This is pure speculation based only on known facts.
Oswald, in the month before killing Kennedy, visited the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City. The CIA handlers who were watching the embassies saw this. This was not reported to the WC. And then in the next 30 days or so, he ends up killing Kennedy. Seems to me like that was indicative of those nations being involved. My point isn’t to indict the CIA but the fact that they have him visiting the embassies down there is informative to my theory that there may have been other nations involved. This also comes from Emmy Award Winning Frontline on PBS; not the kook-of-the-month website.
Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
Perhaps he didn't take his pistol because he didn't expect to escape the School Book Depository. Perhaps he wasn't sure he had the nerve to do it or maybe the pistol was in Oak Cliff while Oswald spent the night at Ruth Payne's house with Marina. Whatever, I don't think it's a sign of conspiracy.
Ok.
But the known fact remains that we know he went home to get it.
So I reject the not needing it because his survival was a surprise theory. I think most reasonable people would get out of dodge if they surprisingly survived a crime they didn’t expect to live through.
Nerve? He brought the murder weapon. That’s a sign of enough nerve for most people I suspect.
As for the distance, it was proven that he had time and the means to collect the pistol.
Good give and take
If that's what you want to make believe in order to prop up you absurd boot licking nonsense.Ahh…so now Frazier is “in on it” too? LOL
I said "whether smuggled in or not". How does that indicate to your diseased mind I thought Oswald did smuggle a rifle into the TBSD? Wake the fuck up!Oh…so now it’s “he smuggled it in but didn’t shoot anyone”? LOL
You didn't read the link did you?No. It does not. No where close. A gun he purchased showed up in his house with the photograph, then showed up in the place where he worked and the bullets found that day are tied ballistically to the weapon he purchased.
So stupidly non self aware.Thanks for another reason to laugh at you.
The alternatives to your contentions are as follows:
Someone posed as Oswald to rent a PO Box.
Someone using an alias that Oswald was known to use bought a rifle.
Someone manufactured a picture of Oswald holding the rifle.
Someone stole the rifle out of Oswald’s garage.
Someone planted Oswald's rifle in the TSBD
Someone got Mr. Frazier to lie about the package Oswald brought work that day.
Someone got Mr. Frazier to invent a story about Oswald bringing curtain rods.
Someone had to manufacture evidence of Oswald’s fingerprints on the rifle.
Those are the minimum requirements for the alternative you propose. We’re leaving out Oswald being placed at the TSBD that day and forcing Oswald to take the evasive moves after he shot Kennedy.
And someone had to get out of the TSBD without being seen.
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was the gunman.
There is no logical reason for you to believe half of the stuff you’ve posted in this thread alone. There are no logical conclusions on your part.
Occam's razor. In order to avoid the simplest explanation, you have to construct ever larger, ever more complex conspiracies, and somewhere along the way, you have to assume large facts not in evidence, like, "Can you imagine how easy it would be for the CIA and the Mossad to frame a patsy with all their resources?", which substitutes for evidence that they did. Pick a few details that may have plausible alternate explanations, ignore the rest of the evidence, and imagine large numbers of shadow people pulling strings in the background, and soundly ridicule anyone who dares say otherwise.
Occam’s razor isn’t always right.
Well, as I said, I think that Oswald was promised support in return for killing Kennedy. This is strictly my opinion but it is based on the known facts; not “could haves” like the other guys rely on.
We know Oswald showed up that day without his pistol. We know he wasted precious time after he killed Kennedy to go home and get it. I theorize any reasonable person would have collected it prior to needing it.
Again, I theorize, that if something isn’t important at noon on Monday but is important at noon on Tuesday, that means one thing…the circumstances have changed during that 24 hour period. Events changed.
You couple that with the following knowns:
Oswald was one of the few (if not the only) person(s) to defect to Russia, then defect back to the US during the cold war. Was able to leave Russia with his wife. Was quite active in politics while he was back here. And that he just happens to show up at the TSBD on that day seems like too remarkable a coincidence to me in my theory on what happened to lead up to JFK’s assassination. This is pure speculation based only on known facts.
Oswald, in the month before killing Kennedy, visited the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City. The CIA handlers who were watching the embassies saw this. This was not reported to the WC. And then in the next 30 days or so, he ends up killing Kennedy. Seems to me like that was indicative of those nations being involved. My point isn’t to indict the CIA but the fact that they have him visiting the embassies down there is informative to my theory that there may have been other nations involved. This also comes from Emmy Award Winning Frontline on PBS; not the kook-of-the-month website.
Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
You are being very in-coherent for the most part in the above post....not even to mention you contradict yourself.
Also...I already gave you a very logical reason why Oswald did not take his pistol to work....he had no need for it....as in....he did not plan to shoot JFK. If he had planned to shoot JFK...most likely he would have taken his pistol with him...as in it could have come in handy during his escape from the scene......but when he realized he had been set up....he most likely realized they might come for him next...thus he went directly home to get his pistol for protection.
You say you believe the Warren Commission report and then you turn around and say other nations were involved??? Do you not know the Warren Commission reported that Lee was the only one involved in the assassination....has someone on here persuaded you otherwise?
Here is something that might help you to get a grip.......I challenge you to a mock trial....you are the prosecutor and I am Oswald's defense attorney....I will demonstrate to you how a competent attorney would shred your extremely weak evidence.
No.
I said the physical evidence of what happened that Day in Dallas when JFK was killed is in Lockstep correctness with the WC.
I do have reservations about the WC’s conclusion that Oswald did it all by himself.
The reservations are based on known facts. Not your cartoonish conclusions.
So you only agree with part of the Warren Commission report?
Well there may be some hope for you.
Did you ever see the James Files interview on video?.....he speaks with remarkable detail regarding the assassination.....seems very credible ......as far as I know the FBI has never investigated his statements
The alternatives to your contentions are as follows:
Someone posed as Oswald to rent a PO Box.
Someone using an alias that Oswald was known to use bought a rifle.
Someone manufactured a picture of Oswald holding the rifle.
Someone stole the rifle out of Oswald’s garage.
Someone planted Oswald's rifle in the TSBD
Someone got Mr. Frazier to lie about the package Oswald brought work that day.
Someone got Mr. Frazier to invent a story about Oswald bringing curtain rods.
Someone had to manufacture evidence of Oswald’s fingerprints on the rifle.
Those are the minimum requirements for the alternative you propose. We’re leaving out Oswald being placed at the TSBD that day and forcing Oswald to take the evasive moves after he shot Kennedy.
And someone had to get out of the TSBD without being seen.
Any reasonable person would conclude that Oswald was the gunman.
There is no logical reason for you to believe half of the stuff you’ve posted in this thread alone. There are no logical conclusions on your part.
Occam's razor. In order to avoid the simplest explanation, you have to construct ever larger, ever more complex conspiracies, and somewhere along the way, you have to assume large facts not in evidence, like, "Can you imagine how easy it would be for the CIA and the Mossad to frame a patsy with all their resources?", which substitutes for evidence that they did. Pick a few details that may have plausible alternate explanations, ignore the rest of the evidence, and imagine large numbers of shadow people pulling strings in the background, and soundly ridicule anyone who dares say otherwise.
Occam’s razor isn’t always right.
Well, as I said, I think that Oswald was promised support in return for killing Kennedy. This is strictly my opinion but it is based on the known facts; not “could haves” like the other guys rely on.
We know Oswald showed up that day without his pistol. We know he wasted precious time after he killed Kennedy to go home and get it. I theorize any reasonable person would have collected it prior to needing it.
Again, I theorize, that if something isn’t important at noon on Monday but is important at noon on Tuesday, that means one thing…the circumstances have changed during that 24 hour period. Events changed.
You couple that with the following knowns:
Oswald was one of the few (if not the only) person(s) to defect to Russia, then defect back to the US during the cold war. Was able to leave Russia with his wife. Was quite active in politics while he was back here. And that he just happens to show up at the TSBD on that day seems like too remarkable a coincidence to me in my theory on what happened to lead up to JFK’s assassination. This is pure speculation based only on known facts.
Oswald, in the month before killing Kennedy, visited the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City. The CIA handlers who were watching the embassies saw this. This was not reported to the WC. And then in the next 30 days or so, he ends up killing Kennedy. Seems to me like that was indicative of those nations being involved. My point isn’t to indict the CIA but the fact that they have him visiting the embassies down there is informative to my theory that there may have been other nations involved. This also comes from Emmy Award Winning Frontline on PBS; not the kook-of-the-month website.
Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
Perhaps he didn't take his pistol because he didn't expect to escape the School Book Depository. Perhaps he wasn't sure he had the nerve to do it or maybe the pistol was in Oak Cliff while Oswald spent the night at Ruth Payne's house with Marina. Whatever, I don't think it's a sign of conspiracy.
Ok.
But the known fact remains that we know he went home to get it.
So I reject the not needing it because his survival was a surprise theory. I think most reasonable people would get out of dodge if they surprisingly survived a crime they didn’t expect to live through.
Nerve? He brought the murder weapon. That’s a sign of enough nerve for most people I suspect.
As for the distance, it was proven that he had time and the means to collect the pistol.
Good give and take
I agree he had time AFTER the assassination to get the pistol. But, he had ridden from work with Buell Frazier to Ruth Payne's in Irving and then TO work from Irving, so there wasn't time to go to get the pistol on the morning of the assassination.
Occam's razor. In order to avoid the simplest explanation, you have to construct ever larger, ever more complex conspiracies, and somewhere along the way, you have to assume large facts not in evidence, like, "Can you imagine how easy it would be for the CIA and the Mossad to frame a patsy with all their resources?", which substitutes for evidence that they did. Pick a few details that may have plausible alternate explanations, ignore the rest of the evidence, and imagine large numbers of shadow people pulling strings in the background, and soundly ridicule anyone who dares say otherwise.
Occam’s razor isn’t always right.
Well, as I said, I think that Oswald was promised support in return for killing Kennedy. This is strictly my opinion but it is based on the known facts; not “could haves” like the other guys rely on.
We know Oswald showed up that day without his pistol. We know he wasted precious time after he killed Kennedy to go home and get it. I theorize any reasonable person would have collected it prior to needing it.
Again, I theorize, that if something isn’t important at noon on Monday but is important at noon on Tuesday, that means one thing…the circumstances have changed during that 24 hour period. Events changed.
You couple that with the following knowns:
Oswald was one of the few (if not the only) person(s) to defect to Russia, then defect back to the US during the cold war. Was able to leave Russia with his wife. Was quite active in politics while he was back here. And that he just happens to show up at the TSBD on that day seems like too remarkable a coincidence to me in my theory on what happened to lead up to JFK’s assassination. This is pure speculation based only on known facts.
Oswald, in the month before killing Kennedy, visited the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City. The CIA handlers who were watching the embassies saw this. This was not reported to the WC. And then in the next 30 days or so, he ends up killing Kennedy. Seems to me like that was indicative of those nations being involved. My point isn’t to indict the CIA but the fact that they have him visiting the embassies down there is informative to my theory that there may have been other nations involved. This also comes from Emmy Award Winning Frontline on PBS; not the kook-of-the-month website.
Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
You are being very in-coherent for the most part in the above post....not even to mention you contradict yourself.
Also...I already gave you a very logical reason why Oswald did not take his pistol to work....he had no need for it....as in....he did not plan to shoot JFK. If he had planned to shoot JFK...most likely he would have taken his pistol with him...as in it could have come in handy during his escape from the scene......but when he realized he had been set up....he most likely realized they might come for him next...thus he went directly home to get his pistol for protection.
You say you believe the Warren Commission report and then you turn around and say other nations were involved??? Do you not know the Warren Commission reported that Lee was the only one involved in the assassination....has someone on here persuaded you otherwise?
Here is something that might help you to get a grip.......I challenge you to a mock trial....you are the prosecutor and I am Oswald's defense attorney....I will demonstrate to you how a competent attorney would shred your extremely weak evidence.
No.
I said the physical evidence of what happened that Day in Dallas when JFK was killed is in Lockstep correctness with the WC.
I do have reservations about the WC’s conclusion that Oswald did it all by himself.
The reservations are based on known facts. Not your cartoonish conclusions.
So you only agree with part of the Warren Commission report?
Well there may be some hope for you.
Did you ever see the James Files interview on video?.....he speaks with remarkable detail regarding the assassination.....seems very credible ......as far as I know the FBI has never investigated his statements
They are bulletproof on the physical evidence.
On Motivations....ironically you and some others have something in common. As you know the WC is bulletproof on the physical evidence and your entire resistance is quickly reduced to two words: “could have”. “Pure garbage” is also acceptable but literally your arguments are that _____ could have happened followed by ______ could have happened then your crusher is that ______ could have happened.
The ones who buy the lone nut theory have a similar problem. Why did LHO who was meticulous enough to create a wrapper for his rifle forget his gun if he was going to waste precious time to go home and get it after the fact? Their answers range from “who cares” to LHO being mentally ill. Just like your “could have” nonsense, those explanations are open ended and could be applied to anything while not addressing the known facts.
LHO wasted time most would have spent leaving Dallas (if possible) to go get his pistol when he could have collected it before.
LHO visited enemy embassies in the months preceding the assassination of JFK.
LHO is one of the few double defectors and just happens to wind up shooting JFK.
Their assessment of mental illness is likely valid. But for whatever mental screws loose he had, he was a functional nutcase.
Occam's razor. In order to avoid the simplest explanation, you have to construct ever larger, ever more complex conspiracies, and somewhere along the way, you have to assume large facts not in evidence, like, "Can you imagine how easy it would be for the CIA and the Mossad to frame a patsy with all their resources?", which substitutes for evidence that they did. Pick a few details that may have plausible alternate explanations, ignore the rest of the evidence, and imagine large numbers of shadow people pulling strings in the background, and soundly ridicule anyone who dares say otherwise.
Occam’s razor isn’t always right.
Well, as I said, I think that Oswald was promised support in return for killing Kennedy. This is strictly my opinion but it is based on the known facts; not “could haves” like the other guys rely on.
We know Oswald showed up that day without his pistol. We know he wasted precious time after he killed Kennedy to go home and get it. I theorize any reasonable person would have collected it prior to needing it.
Again, I theorize, that if something isn’t important at noon on Monday but is important at noon on Tuesday, that means one thing…the circumstances have changed during that 24 hour period. Events changed.
You couple that with the following knowns:
Oswald was one of the few (if not the only) person(s) to defect to Russia, then defect back to the US during the cold war. Was able to leave Russia with his wife. Was quite active in politics while he was back here. And that he just happens to show up at the TSBD on that day seems like too remarkable a coincidence to me in my theory on what happened to lead up to JFK’s assassination. This is pure speculation based only on known facts.
Oswald, in the month before killing Kennedy, visited the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City. The CIA handlers who were watching the embassies saw this. This was not reported to the WC. And then in the next 30 days or so, he ends up killing Kennedy. Seems to me like that was indicative of those nations being involved. My point isn’t to indict the CIA but the fact that they have him visiting the embassies down there is informative to my theory that there may have been other nations involved. This also comes from Emmy Award Winning Frontline on PBS; not the kook-of-the-month website.
Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
Perhaps he didn't take his pistol because he didn't expect to escape the School Book Depository. Perhaps he wasn't sure he had the nerve to do it or maybe the pistol was in Oak Cliff while Oswald spent the night at Ruth Payne's house with Marina. Whatever, I don't think it's a sign of conspiracy.
Ok.
But the known fact remains that we know he went home to get it.
So I reject the not needing it because his survival was a surprise theory. I think most reasonable people would get out of dodge if they surprisingly survived a crime they didn’t expect to live through.
Nerve? He brought the murder weapon. That’s a sign of enough nerve for most people I suspect.
As for the distance, it was proven that he had time and the means to collect the pistol.
Good give and take
I agree he had time AFTER the assassination to get the pistol. But, he had ridden from work with Buell Frazier to Ruth Payne's in Irving and then TO work from Irving, so there wasn't time to go to get the pistol on the morning of the assassination.
Could have done it the night before. Easily
Occam’s razor isn’t always right.
Well, as I said, I think that Oswald was promised support in return for killing Kennedy. This is strictly my opinion but it is based on the known facts; not “could haves” like the other guys rely on.
We know Oswald showed up that day without his pistol. We know he wasted precious time after he killed Kennedy to go home and get it. I theorize any reasonable person would have collected it prior to needing it.
Again, I theorize, that if something isn’t important at noon on Monday but is important at noon on Tuesday, that means one thing…the circumstances have changed during that 24 hour period. Events changed.
You couple that with the following knowns:
Oswald was one of the few (if not the only) person(s) to defect to Russia, then defect back to the US during the cold war. Was able to leave Russia with his wife. Was quite active in politics while he was back here. And that he just happens to show up at the TSBD on that day seems like too remarkable a coincidence to me in my theory on what happened to lead up to JFK’s assassination. This is pure speculation based only on known facts.
Oswald, in the month before killing Kennedy, visited the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City. The CIA handlers who were watching the embassies saw this. This was not reported to the WC. And then in the next 30 days or so, he ends up killing Kennedy. Seems to me like that was indicative of those nations being involved. My point isn’t to indict the CIA but the fact that they have him visiting the embassies down there is informative to my theory that there may have been other nations involved. This also comes from Emmy Award Winning Frontline on PBS; not the kook-of-the-month website.
Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
Perhaps he didn't take his pistol because he didn't expect to escape the School Book Depository. Perhaps he wasn't sure he had the nerve to do it or maybe the pistol was in Oak Cliff while Oswald spent the night at Ruth Payne's house with Marina. Whatever, I don't think it's a sign of conspiracy.
Ok.
But the known fact remains that we know he went home to get it.
So I reject the not needing it because his survival was a surprise theory. I think most reasonable people would get out of dodge if they surprisingly survived a crime they didn’t expect to live through.
Nerve? He brought the murder weapon. That’s a sign of enough nerve for most people I suspect.
As for the distance, it was proven that he had time and the means to collect the pistol.
Good give and take
I agree he had time AFTER the assassination to get the pistol. But, he had ridden from work with Buell Frazier to Ruth Payne's in Irving and then TO work from Irving, so there wasn't time to go to get the pistol on the morning of the assassination.
Could have done it the night before. Easily
Could have, you're right. But, maybe he just didn't.
Occam's razor. In order to avoid the simplest explanation, you have to construct ever larger, ever more complex conspiracies, and somewhere along the way, you have to assume large facts not in evidence, like, "Can you imagine how easy it would be for the CIA and the Mossad to frame a patsy with all their resources?", which substitutes for evidence that they did. Pick a few details that may have plausible alternate explanations, ignore the rest of the evidence, and imagine large numbers of shadow people pulling strings in the background, and soundly ridicule anyone who dares say otherwise.
Occam’s razor isn’t always right.
Well, as I said, I think that Oswald was promised support in return for killing Kennedy. This is strictly my opinion but it is based on the known facts; not “could haves” like the other guys rely on.
We know Oswald showed up that day without his pistol. We know he wasted precious time after he killed Kennedy to go home and get it. I theorize any reasonable person would have collected it prior to needing it.
Again, I theorize, that if something isn’t important at noon on Monday but is important at noon on Tuesday, that means one thing…the circumstances have changed during that 24 hour period. Events changed.
You couple that with the following knowns:
Oswald was one of the few (if not the only) person(s) to defect to Russia, then defect back to the US during the cold war. Was able to leave Russia with his wife. Was quite active in politics while he was back here. And that he just happens to show up at the TSBD on that day seems like too remarkable a coincidence to me in my theory on what happened to lead up to JFK’s assassination. This is pure speculation based only on known facts.
Oswald, in the month before killing Kennedy, visited the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City. The CIA handlers who were watching the embassies saw this. This was not reported to the WC. And then in the next 30 days or so, he ends up killing Kennedy. Seems to me like that was indicative of those nations being involved. My point isn’t to indict the CIA but the fact that they have him visiting the embassies down there is informative to my theory that there may have been other nations involved. This also comes from Emmy Award Winning Frontline on PBS; not the kook-of-the-month website.
Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?
Perhaps he didn't take his pistol because he didn't expect to escape the School Book Depository. Perhaps he wasn't sure he had the nerve to do it or maybe the pistol was in Oak Cliff while Oswald spent the night at Ruth Payne's house with Marina. Whatever, I don't think it's a sign of conspiracy.
Ok.
But the known fact remains that we know he went home to get it.
So I reject the not needing it because his survival was a surprise theory. I think most reasonable people would get out of dodge if they surprisingly survived a crime they didn’t expect to live through.
Nerve? He brought the murder weapon. That’s a sign of enough nerve for most people I suspect.
As for the distance, it was proven that he had time and the means to collect the pistol.
Good give and take
I agree he had time AFTER the assassination to get the pistol. But, he had ridden from work with Buell Frazier to Ruth Payne's in Irving and then TO work from Irving, so there wasn't time to go to get the pistol on the morning of the assassination.
Could have done it the night before. Easily
True. All we really know is that he didn't.
True. All we really know is that he didn't.
Thats true.
And that doesn’t strike you as a bit strange?
True. All we really know is that he didn't.
Thats true.
And that doesn’t strike you as a bit strange?
Perhaps. But, perhaps he was just excited and forgot. On this issue, I just don't know.
True. All we really know is that he didn't.
Thats true.
And that doesn’t strike you as a bit strange?
Perhaps. But, perhaps he was just excited and forgot. On this issue, I just don't know.
ok.
I guess as a conspiracy theorist…at this point I should now insist that you have not graduated elementary school and encourage you to leave your mom’s basement? LOL
True. All we really know is that he didn't.
Thats true.
And that doesn’t strike you as a bit strange?
Perhaps. But, perhaps he was just excited and forgot. On this issue, I just don't know.
ok.
I guess as a conspiracy theorist…at this point I should now insist that you have not graduated elementary school and encourage you to leave your mom’s basement? LOL
LMAO! ! ! !
I do love a good conspiracy theory and do like the speculation. But, in the end, all the evidence and science supports the Warren Commission and those drooling trollish conspiracy theory nuts just wear me out my patience with their name calling and infantile insults that they use as a substitute for argument.
Thank you for the big smile.
