JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[cobalt]

Genuinely Cobalt I really can’t understand this deep-seated desire to see ‘conspiracy’ everywhere?

It's not so much a desire HS, more an instinctive reaction to a political murder.

If the assassin was Lee Harvey Oswald then his political motivation is as unignorable as the proverbial elephant in the room. No amount of amateur psychology can disguise Oswald's verified involvement in politics; politics that publicly criticised the government of the day in regard to its foreign policy. If Oswald was the assassin then his political reasoning might have been wrong-headed, misguided or incoherent but the assassination would have been politically driven just the same.

This was not Buell Fraser or Jack Dougherty. This was a man who had defected to the Soviet bloc, been interviewed on local radio and who was (for reasons as yet unexplained) being impersonated in Mexico City. On arrest Oswald had the opportunity to reveal his political motivation (or his psychological demons if you prefer) but did not do so.

Of course, if Oswald was not the assassin but was framed to be the assassin then the political element speaks for itself. Hence the existence of conspiracy theories either way.

[Fiver]

This was not Buell Fraser or Jack Dougherty. This was a man who had defected to the Soviet bloc, been interviewed on local radio and who was (for reasons as yet unexplained) being impersonated in Mexico City.

You admit that there is no discernable reason to impersonate Oswald in Mexico. It would take significant effort. It wouldn't gain anything for a Conspiracy. And we have both a rough and final draft of Oswald writing that he had gone to Mexico, as well as two witnesses, one his wife, that Oswald had written the letters.

Seems far more likely that it was a case of mistaken identity rather than impersonation.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It's not so much a desire HS, more an instinctive reaction to a political murder.

If the assassin was Lee Harvey Oswald then his political motivation is as unignorable as the proverbial elephant in the room. No amount of amateur psychology can disguise Oswald's verified involvement in politics; politics that publicly criticised the government of the day in regard to its foreign policy. If Oswald was the assassin then his political reasoning might have been wrong-headed, misguided or incoherent but the assassination would have been politically driven just the same.

This was not Buell Fraser or Jack Dougherty. This was a man who had defected to the Soviet bloc, been interviewed on local radio and who was (for reasons as yet unexplained) being impersonated in Mexico City. On arrest Oswald had the opportunity to reveal his political motivation (or his psychological demons if you prefer) but did not do so.

Of course, if Oswald was not the assassin but was framed to be the assassin then the political element speaks for itself. Hence the existence of conspiracy theories either way.

But it’s no amateur psychology Cobalt. A very real psychiatrist stated plainly and openly Oswald’s issues. The things that he did during is his lifestyle, issues in childhood, issues in the military, the wrist-cutting in the Soviet Union, the violence toward his wife, brother and mother, his moving from job to job. His attempt on Walker and threat to Nixon. How can we see Oswald as other than a disaffected, unbalanced figure. Yes, he was political but this doesn’t prove conspiracy. It makes him a not-very-trustworthy type of person. The last ‘type’ that would have been chosen as part of any conspiracy. It was also true that the people who knew him well said that they had no problem in believing that he might have killed Kennedy.

You assume that he was ‘impersonated’ in Mexico. What actually happened was that a photograph was mistakenly assumed to have been Oswald. This is no mystery. Why would anyone get someone to impersonate someone when they looked nothing like them? Oswald was hardly Andre the Giant or Phil Spector so it wouldn’t have been remotely difficult to find someone who at least matched Oswald’s general description.

Then his actions on the Thursday and Friday scream guilty just about as loudly as possible. It’s hard to imagine how anyone could have acted in a more guilty way.

So basically we have someone who is the ‘type’ of person who would do something like those. He acts like a guilty man. Physical evidence is found to prove his guilt. Then, on his route from his rooming house to the cinema, Officer Tippit is killed. How unlucky would Oswald have had to have been for so many random witnesses to have ID’d him? Then, just to top it off, he has the murder weapon on him.

The question really should be - how could this man have not been guilty?

[Fiver]

Of course, if Oswald was not the assassin but was framed to be the assassin then the political element speaks for itself. Hence the existence of conspiracy theories either way.

So far, no sensible motive has been given why any organization would attempt to assassinate JFK. And most Conspiracies require, not one, but several rival or even hostile organizations to cooperate.

Failure means death and disgrace. Yet most Conspiracies require repeated blind luck to succeed.

Every additional person added to the Conspiracy greatly increases the risk that someone will deliberately or accidentally betray the plot. Yet most Conspiracies require dozens, if not hundreds, of people to be in on the Conspiracy.

Then there are the decisions that make no sense for any Conspiracy with significant resources. For example, why attack the target in a moving vehicle when they were stationary on a raised platform earlier that same day?

[A P Tomlinson]

There's a homemade sling in the backyard photos. By the time of the JFK assassination, the rifle has a much better sling. The simple explanation is that the rifle had no sling when he bought it, he created an improved sling, and later replaced the improvised sling with a better sling.

The rifle comes with the bolted-on sling already in place. It's placed there at the time its built. It's not an after market add on. That rifle doesn't have loops on the underside of the stock where the home made version is attached. The strap is literally a part of the weapon.

A simpler explanation is that he was holding a different rifle in the photo to the one that was found.

[Herlock Sholmes]

So far, no sensible motive has been given why any organization would attempt to assassinate JFK. And most Conspiracies require, not one, but several rival or even hostile organizations to cooperate.

Exactly - and nothing significantly changed with Kennedy’s death to justify the act.

Failure means death and disgrace. Yet most Conspiracies require repeated blind luck to succeed.

Exactly - the consequences of failure can’t be exaggerated and yet they rely on a ridiculously convoluted plan sprinkled with a 1001 opportunities for failure whilst requiring regular chunks of luck.

Every additional person added to the Conspiracy greatly increases the risk that someone will deliberately or accidentally betray the plot. Yet most Conspiracies require dozens, if not hundreds, of people to be in on the Conspiracy.

Exactly - it’s almost of a game of ‘Hunt The Person That Wasn’t In-On-It.’

Then there are the decisions that make no sense for any Conspiracy with significant resources. For example, why attack the target in a moving vehicle when they were stationary on a raised platform earlier that same day?

Exactly - and why did they provide no means of escape? And why use the worst spot ever, the picket fence? And why the Tippit murder?

[Fiver]

The rifle comes with the bolted-on sling already in place. It's placed there at the time its built. It's not an after market add on. That rifle doesn't have loops on the underside of the stock where the home made version is attached. The strap is literally a part of the weapon.

A simpler explanation is that he was holding a different rifle in the photo to the one that was found.

A strap is an accessory, not a permanent part of the weapon.

Oswald didn't buy a new rifle direct from the factory. He bought a used rifle mail order. Unlike some other rifles in that ad, the Mannlicher-Carcano is pictured without a sling and no sling is mentioned in the rifle's description.

[cobalt]

Regarding the Oswald impersonation in Mexico City I was referring to the reported audio evidence collected by J. Edgar Hoover and related to newly appointed President Johnson on the evening (from memory) or perhaps the day following the assassination. It clearly mattered to Hoover. Now of course you might consider Hoover to have been a professional liar in his capacity of Head of the FBI, but the problem then is that all of the evidence collected by the FBI in the aftermath is potentially contaminated as well. Which then places you firmly in the conspiracy camp.

I am aware of the photo taken which in no way resembles Oswald and is referred to on this site; but I have yet to see a clear rebuttal of the Oswald impersonator (as described by Hoover) on tape in Mexico City.

The reason to impersonate Oswald is too obvious to require detailed explanation. He was visiting the Cuban and Soviet embassies. I am not aware of any CT who doubts this in broad terms. What we doubt are the suspicious references (as reported on tape) about a contact with an alleged assassin within the USSR Embassy. Had Oswald managed to acquire a Cuban visa then the conspiracy would have been something of a slam dunk.

[cobalt]

HS,

I'm as guilty of amateur psychology as anyone else on here but I don't see that it offers a credible account of Oswald as lone gunman. I can fully understand why the WC wanted to depoliticise the crime but in the long term it has not served them well.

I read your account recently of Oswald's suspicious activities leading up to the assassination. From my CT standpoint I have to suspend disbelief at various points in the material evidence but allowing for that, I thought you set out a reasonable case. And if we leap forward to the Tippit murder and the subsequent arrest of Oswald in the Texas Theatre, that too hangs together for the most part.

However there are massive problems in between and afterwards. On shooting Kennedy, Oswald had two obvious options: hold his ground on the 6th floor and go down in a Cagneyesque blaze of glory with his Carcano; or get out of the building as fast as possible and head for Mexico en route to Cuba. (Rather than a hero's welcome I suspect a bullet in the back of his head would have been more likely in Havana but Oswald was perhaps young enough to believe differently.)

But he does neither of these. He walks (he did not 'flee') from the building, catches a bus and goes back to the very place he is known to live. Why? To collect his revolver possibly, but what good will that do when every police officer in the USA is literally gunning for him? If he wanted a shoot out he could have got that on the 6th floor. Why delay the martyrdom?

We are then told Oswald was walking (aimlessly it seems to me) around Oak Cliff and is apprehended by Tippit. So where was Oswald, now tooled up, going? No one seems to know. Was it really the Texas Theatre or was that a knee jerk response following the murder of Tippit? The psychological framework which was just about credible enough to place Oswald on the 6th floor with a Carcano in hand is now like wet tissue paper.

On arrest, Oswald had the greatest opportunity in history (given the development of live media) to announce his martyrdom, whether political, social or psychological. His words would ring through history. Instead, he says he is innocent despite his knowledge (according to later investigation) that there is a paper trail that tracks him and his palmprint to the gun used in the assassination.

So was Oswald on a suicide mission on 22 November? Did he strike lucky and then walk around bemused by his temporary good fortune? Did he have second thoughts and decide martyrdom was not his thing? Did he assassinate the POTUS because his marriage was failing and at the age of 24, with two young children, he saw no future? The psychological implications are inadequate in my view.

[GBinOz]

A strap is an accessory, not a permanent part of the weapon.

Oswald didn't buy a new rifle direct from the factory. He bought a used rifle mail order. Unlike some other rifles in that ad, the Mannlicher-Carcano is pictured without a sling and no sling is mentioned in the rifle's description.

Did you not comprehend what A P Tomlinson was trying to explain to you? The sling studs on the rifle shown in the ad, and in the alleged backyard picture, that Oswald allegedly bought were UNDER the stock. If he had bought a sling as an accessory, it would have fitted the sling studs UNDER the stock. The sling studs on the rifle found in the TSBD had the sling studs let into the timber on the SIDE of the stock, and required a specialised sling that would have been factory fitted. Add the differences in length and weight and the conclusion is, different rifles.

[FISHY1118]

The ''Rifle'' in the video footage being removed from the Tsbd was a 7.65mm Mauser . Not the rifle shown in the catalog pics of the Italian Carcano .



Was this evidence given in the ''Mock trial'' that found oswald guilty ? I should think not .





To be more clear, Since Oswald did not do this, nor order the rifle, acquire the bullets, assemble the rifle, etc... I see that the rifle evidence was created, planted as needed. And you will find this evidence self-corroborating. There is nothing outside the 3-5 items of evidence which relates to each other, which supports the story about Oswald and the rifle.

I firmly believe the rifle carried out was yet another prop. If there was a Mauser it was removed in much the same manner as the shells, and boxes were moved. I interested, here is why I think that.

One wonders, Why would these deputies risk being mistaken and put these observations down on an affidavit and sign them when they didn't need to say anything about seeing the caliber? (Whitman in Boone's statement is supposed to be Weitzman). And then Craig corroborates as well.... who was then ostracized for that and a number of other things.

Of course it was a different rifle George.

[Herlock Sholmes]

So we can add yet another fact to the acts of staggering stupidity committed by our high level conspirators - they left the wrong rifle on the 6th floor.

Too silly for words.

EDDIE BARKER (CBS NEWS) -- "What kind of gun did you think it was?"

MR. WEITZMAN -- "To my sorrow, I looked at it and it looked like a
Mauser, which I said it was. But I said the wrong one; because just at
a glance, I saw the Mauser action....and, I don't know, it just came
out as words it was a German Mauser. Which it wasn't. It's an Italian
type gun. But from a glance, it's hard to describe; and that's all I
saw, was at a glance. I was mistaken. And it was proven that my
statement was a mistake; but it was an honest mistake."

Anyone that believes anything that Roger Craig says really does have a problem. This is the guy who said that they brought a rifle down from the roof. This is the guy who saw Oswald get into a Nash Rambler in Dealey Plaza nearly 10 minutes after he’d left and we know that he’d got on a bus.

I’ll repeat….why are so many conspiracy theory witnesses either barking mad or liars?

[FISHY1118]

Isn't funny how all these people changed their original documented testimony ?

I've never seen so many barking mad lies.

It was a Mauser , nice try.

The photo of the fbi agent taking the rifle from the tsbd doesn't match the Oswald rifle photo . FACT.

The autopsy photo of the back of jfks head doesn't match the sworn testimony of medical experts , clint Hill, nurse bell , Jacky Kennedy .Fact.

The warren commission lied...FACT.

[Fiver]

Did you not comprehend what A P Tomlinson was trying to explain to you? The sling studs on the rifle shown in the ad, and in the alleged backyard picture, that Oswald allegedly bought were UNDER the stock. If he had bought a sling as an accessory, it would have fitted the sling studs UNDER the stock. The sling studs on the rifle found in the TSBD had the sling studs let into the timber on the SIDE of the stock, and required a specialised sling that would have been factory fitted. Add the differences in length and weight and the conclusion is, different rifles.

There was no difference in length, weight, or sling studs between the photos of the Oswald with the rifle in his back yard and the photos and motion pictures taken of the rifle found on the sixth floor of the TSBD.

[Fiver]

Isn't funny how all these people changed their original documented testimony ?

I've never seen so many barking mad lies.

It was a Mauser , nice try.

The photo of the fbi agent taking the rifle from the tsbd doesn't match the Oswald rifle photo . FACT.

The autopsy photo of the back of jfks head doesn't match the sworn testimony of medical experts , clint Hill, nurse bell , Jacky Kennedy .Fact.

The warren commission lied...FACT.

So you're claiming a Conspiracy that was able to plant fake ID's in Oswald's wallet, forge purchase records, bank records, photographic evidence, witness testimony and ballistics evidence was too stupid to plant the correct rifle? And that they compounded the stupidity by letting multiple newsmen take still and motion pictures of the wrong rifle?

Who's running this Conspiracy - Moe, Larry and Curly?