JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[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.

[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?

[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]

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.

[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.