Who Killed JFK?

“When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?”

Sherlock Holmes in “The Sign of the Four”

As I mentioned in my last and other posts I have made over the last couple of years, I have spent more than a little time watching TV programmes and reading books and magazine articles about the JFK assassination in November 1963. As I sit here staring at a blank page, I’m not sure what I’m going to write or what sort of conclusion I will draw. My Twitter buddy Sarah has put me up to writing this and because this is a long piece I have put it out of the way of the main part of this Blog.

I’ll begin with this closing dialogue from Oliver Stone’s 1991 film “JFK.”

“…’Treason doth never prosper,’ wrote an English poet, ‘What’s the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.’ The American public has yet to see the Zapruder film. Why? The American public has yet to see the real X-rays and photographs of the autopsy. Why? There are hundreds of documents that could help prove this conspiracy. Why are they being withheld or burned by the government? Each time my office or you the people have asked those questions, demanded crucial evidence, the answer from on high has always been ‘national security.’ What kind of national security do we have when we’ve been robbed of our leaders? What national security permits the removal of fundamental power from the hands of the American people and validates the ascendancy of an invisible government in the United States? That kind of national security, gentlemen of the jury, is when it smells like it, feels like it, and looks like it, you call it what it is: Fascism! I submit to you that what took place on November 22, 1963 was a coup d’etat. Its most direct and tragic result was a reversal of President Kennedy’s commitment to withdraw from Vietnam. The war is the biggest business in America worth $80 billion a year. President Kennedy was murdered by a conspiracy that was planned in advance at the highest levels of our government and it was carried out by fanatical and disciplined cold warriors in the Pentagon and CIA’s covert-operation apparatus. Among them, Clay Shaw, here before you. It was a public execution and it was covered up by like-minded individuals in the Dallas Police Department, the Secret Service, the FBI, and the White House – all the way up to and including J. Edgar Hoover and Lyndon Johnson, whom I consider accomplices after the fact.

The assassination reduced the President to a transient official. His job, his assignment is to speak as often as possible of this nation’s desire for peace, while he acts as a business agent in the Congress for the military and their hardware manufacturers. Now some people say I’m crazy, (laughter) a southern caricature seeking higher office. Well, there is a simple way to determine if I am paranoid. Let’s ask the two men who have profited the most from the assassination – your former President Lyndon Baines Johnson and your new President, Richard Nixon – to release the 51 CIA documents pertaining to Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby, or the secret CIA memo on Oswald’s activities in Russia that was ‘destroyed’ while being photocopied. All these documents are yours – the people’s property – you pay for it, but because the government considers you children who might be too disturbed or distressed to face this reality, or because you might possibly lynch those involved, you cannot see these documents for another 75 years. I’m in my early 40’s, so I’ll have shuffled off this mortal coil by then, but I’m already telling my 8 year-old son to keep himself physically fit so that one glorious September morning in the year 2038, he can walk into the National Archives and find out what the CIA and the FBI knew. They may even push it back then. Hell it may become a generational affair, with questions passed down from father to son, mother to daughter. But someday, somewhere, someone may find out the damned Truth. We better. We better or we might just as well build ourselves another government like the Declaration of Independence says to when the old one ain’t working – just – just a little farther out West.

An American naturalist wrote, ‘A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against its government.’ I’d hate to be in your shoes today. You have a lot to think about. You’ve seen much hidden evidence the American public has never seen. You know, going back to when we were children, I think that most of us in this courtroom thought that justice came into being automatically, that virtue was its own reward, that good would triumph over evil. But as we get older we know that this just isn’t true. Individual human beings have to create justice and this is not easy, because the truth often poses a threat to power and one often has to fight power at great risk to themselves. People like S.M. Holland, Lee Bowers, Jean Hill, Willie O’Keefe. They’ve all taken that risk. They’ve all come forward. I have here some $8,000 in these letters sent to my office from all over the country – quarters, dimes, dollar bills from housewives, plumbers, car salesmen, teachers, invalids. These are people who cannot afford to send money but do. These are the ones who drive the cabs, who nurse in the hospitals, who see their kids go to Vietnam. Why? Because they care, because they want to know the truth, because they want their country back, because it still belongs to us, as long as the people have the guts to fight for what they believe in! The truth is the most important value we have because if the truth does not endure, if the government murders truth, if we cannot respect the hearts of these people, then this is not the country in which I was born and this is certainly not the country I want to die in.

Tennyson wrote, ‘Authority forgets a dying king’. This was never more true than for John F. Kennedy, whose murder was probably one the most terrible moments in the history of our country. We, the people, the jury system sitting in judgment on Clay Shaw, represent the hope of humanity against government power. In discharging your duty, in bringing the first conviction in this house of cards against Clay Shaw, ‘ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.’ Do not forget your dying king.Show this world that this is still a government ‘of the people, for the people, and by the people’. Nothing as long as you live will ever be more important.

It’s up to you.”

It was from this film that many people around the world were first alerted to the fact that maybe, just maybe, Lee Harvey Oswald didn’t shoot the President of the United States in Dallas on 22 November 1963. He may have been, as he said himself, just a patsy – there to take the fall for the shadowy figures in the wings. He may have been part of a conspiracy, one of several gunmen. Yet for all of this he may have fired the fatal shots all on his own with no help from anyone just as the Warren Commission concluded, Before you can decide on Lee Harvey Oswald’s innocence or guilt or whether he was a part of a conspiracy then you must look at the man and his character.

Lee Harvey Oswald was born in New Orleans on 18th October, 1939 (which made him just 24 when JFK was murdered) and had spent time living in the Soviet Union (October 1959 until June 1962) Look for a minute at those dates. Look at his age when he “defected.” Much has been made over the years about Lee Harvey Oswald’s time in the Soviet Union. Many conspiracy theorists have viewed him as a CIA operative sent to gather intelligence. Others have seen Lee Harvey Oswald as a genuine defector, a young man feeling that the grass would be greener in the bastion of all things Communist.

Reading about his life it appears that he jumped from one thing to another quickly becoming bored or disillusioned. It also appears that he expected to be the centre of attention as if he had an inflated sense of his own importance. This is illustrated perfectly by what happened he went to the Soviet Union. Instead of being a trophy paraded by the Russian hierarchy, he was sent to be a lathe operator at the *Gorizont Electronics Factorye* in Minsk. Not exactly James Bond stuff that, so he came back to America. Here was young man who’d been a Marine Radar Operator, defected to Russia and come back all by the age of 22.

Back in America no one took the slightest notice of him. There was no extensive debrief by the CIA or the FBI, nevertheless his name must have been known to them. (Now that is weird in my opinion, especially as he returned with a Russian wife!) He found work difficult to come by and when he did land jobs managed to lose them by displaying obnoxious behaviour. All of these jobs were of a menial nature, usually paying minimum wage. He would berate anyone prepared to listen with his political ideologues and dogma concerning the failure of communist Soviet Union and capitalist America to look after their respective people. He was a fervent anti fascist and opposed the John Birch Society and the Minutemen. He sympathised with Cuba and Fidel Castro and perhaps felt that JFK was ready to launch another attack as the Russian missiles had been withdrawn. Who knows? I don’t. Just a thought though. He had flyers printed and stood on the streets on New Orleans handing them out. They were for the “Fair Play For Cuba Committee.” Oswald was beginning to become pretty conspicuous. Perhaps people were at last noticing him.

Lee Harvey Oswald was fast making himself the perfect patsy for any conspirators out there.

Everything I’ve briefly outlined above is taken by some investigators as evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald was working for the CIA, carefully building a “legend” around himself. In my opinion that is highly unlikely. The more that I’ve read about Lee Harvey Oswald, the more I’m convinced that he wasn’t the stuff that CIA operatives are made of. To think of Lee Harvey Oswald as a CIA operative is taking several leaps of faith. He was an enigma wrapped in a paradox in every sense. What I have read of him it seems to me that he was an odd character. He wasn’t unintelligent as evidence by IQ scores, but I do believe that psychologically he had serious character flaws. His wife Marina also revealed that he had a propensity for violence, regularly beating her and his controlling and demeaning manner was witnessed by others such as Ruth Paine, with whom Marina was living immediately prior to the birth of her second daughter, Rachel. (Over the years much of what Marina has said about Lee Harvey Oswald has been contradictory – a sign I believe – of the immense pressure she has felt across the decades.)

He had a somewhat fragmented childhood being dragged from place to place by his mother, Marguerite, and went to a succession of schools. From what I can see he was rarely anywhere long enough to make friends and that may explain why so few have been found by researchers of the assassination. One thing is undeniable. He was a voracious reader and at 15 he apparently began reading things like Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto and announced himself to anyone who’d listen as a Marxist. Why within a couple of years this youngster whose professed political belief felt that a capitalist society exploited its people, would sign up to serve a capitalist country, potentially laying down his life in defence of that capitalist economy absolutely beggars belief and confuses the life out of me. Of course the conspiracy theorists state unequivocally that it was during his time in the Marines that he became under the influence of the CIA and that’s why he signed up – having memorized the Marine manual from his brother Rober. That doesn’t fly for me. Consider this, were that true, it would almost certainly mean that a poorly educated boy from New Orleans who was interested in Communism was spotted as a potential agent from 15 years of age. Erm, no. Can’t see it.

In my view Lee Harvey Oswald was a naive boy who would and could parrot out what he’d read without truly understanding what he was talking about. He went to the Soviet Union in October 1959 after leaving the Marines and tried to tout himself as a Radar Operative with secrets to share. He failed, miserably. Lt. Col. Yuri Nosenko was a KGB defector who handled the Lee Harvey Oswald’s “defection.” He insisted that after interviewing Oswald it was decided that he was not intelligent enough and a “nut”, and therefore unsuitable for intelligence work. Nosenko also stated that the KGB had never questioned Oswald about information he might have gained as a U.S. Marine, including work as an aviation electronics operator at Naval Air Facility Atsugi in Japan. To me that begs the question that if the KGB thought that Lee Harvey Oswald was a “nut” then he would never have even been looked at by the CIA.

When you consider this information Oswald could have been the “Lone Nut”

I told Sarah that I’ve read something like 50 assassination books and watched every documentary that I’ve known about. I wasn’t lying, exaggerating a little maybe. In almost all of these books there is the second gunman, the one responsible for the fatal shot that struck JFK’s head. Located behind the picket fence on the “Grassy Knoll,” he was the front shooter that caused the “back and to the left” motion seen clearly in Abraham Zapruder’s film. There have been enhancements of Mary Moorman’s Polaroid photograph taking a picture of the Knoll at the exact moment of the headshot purporting to show “Badgeman” and to be honest I can see bugger all. That’s not to say that there was no one there, just that the Moorman photograph fails to show me anything. Of course right now a new home movie of the assassination has just emerged. It purports to show a figure in the bushes on the Knoll. We’ll have to wait and see on that one.

At one time I was totally convinced of the existence of a Grassy Knoll gunman. Now, to be honest, I’m skeptical. Very skeptical. I had my own pet theory about the assassination and that was just a massive coincidence. Briefly I believed that for whatever reason (I never thought about reason) Lee Harvey Oswald decided to have a pot shot at JFK. Being a rubbish shot, he missed with the first and managed to hit JFK in the back with his second. Then the second shooter on the Knoll, someone unbeknown to Oswald and acting on behalf of “dark forces” delivered the *Coup de Gras.* Oh yes, and Jack Ruby was a  Mafia type sent as a hit-man to silence Oswald as he knew about a second gunman even if he didn’t know who he was.

That theory sucks, I know, but there have been worse.

I’ve seen more stupid theories to be honest. These will require you to do some of your own research (if you can be bother.)

1. JFK was killed because of his interest in aliens (Yeah right)
2. Jackie Kennedy did it (Why?)
3. The Coca-Cola Theory (Oswald addicted to sugary drinks)
4. JFK Was Killed by the Federal Reserve Banks (Yawn)
5. Joe DiMaggio did it. (Because he thought the Kennedys killed Marilyn Monroe)
6. Lyndon Johnson did it (Evidence?)
7. The Freemasons did it (See above)
8. The Umbrella Man ( Was a bloke with a umbrella that’s all)
9. JFK was accidentally shot by a secret service agent ( The AR 15 makes a hell of a bang and at the distance from the Presidential car….well the effects on JFK would have been even worse than was inflicted….and there was no silencer on the gun as evidenced by photographs)
10.The driver did it. (How?)

Now, I’m taking this Norman Mailer quote out of context and editing the first part off altogether but think on…….

“…….The event, if bogus, was as great a creation in mass hoodwinking, deception, and legerdemain as the true ascent was in discipline and technology. Indeed, conceive of the genius of such a conspiracy. It would take criminals and confidence men mightier, more trustworthy and more resourceful than anything in this century or the ones before. Merely to conceive of such men was the surest way to know the event was not staged.”

Forgive my artistic licence with that quote but I hope it illustrates where I’m coming from with my conclusions here.

The Warren Commission took things at face value and wrote a lot of words that concluded that on the basis of the evidence…the Commission has found that Lee Harvey Oswald

(1) owned and possessed the rifle used to kill President Kennedy and wound Governor Connally,
(2) bought this rifle into the Depository Building on the morning of the assassination,
(3) was present, at the time of the assassination, at the window from which the shots were fired
(4) killed Dallas Police Officer J. D. Tippit in an apparent attempt to escape,
(5) resisted arrest by drawing a fully loaded pistol and attempting to shoot another police officer,
(6) lied to the police after his arrest concerning important substantive matters
(7) (and) possessed the capability with a rifle which would have enabled him to commit the assassination.

Almost from the day of publication conspiracy theorists have been bouncing up and down criticizing the Report especially after Sylvia Meagher compiled and published an index. As I’ve implied there has been cries of conspiracy and cover up from the beginning and complaints that the Warren Commission made any evidence fit the conclusion that they wished to reach. A succession of conspiracy theorists did the same with books being sold by the truckload so both ends of the spectrum here can be accused of editing the available evidence fit with what they wanted to say.

So why did President Johnson want this Commission to investigate JFK’s death? Well, if you think that Johnson wanted to find the truth then my view is that you’re mistaken. Given the precarious political climate of 1963 is was crucial that there was no conspiracy – certainly no conspiracy that could involve Cuba or Russia or even the Mob. What was required was a neatly packaged conclusion tied nice and tight with bows and ribbons. That’s exactly what Earl Warren and Co. presented. From the 7 points above the matter was resolved.

The problem has been that, like 9/11, we cannot accept the facts. We find it so hard to believe that a nobody (or nobodies) with fanatical views can have such an impact of the world. No, the assassination and 9/11 must involve conspiracies, Governments, secrets that hidden from the public. There must be complex ulterior motives. 1 bloke on his own can’t kill the President can he? The Twin Towers were brought down by explosives? Drones hit the Pentagon to allow the USA to go to war in the middle east? That’s right, we’ll just kill 3500 citizens – collateral damage, so what? You’ve heard it, you may have even seen Dylan Avery’s execrable film “Loose Change.” Conspiracies everywhere. But here is not the time or place to talk of 9/11.

But just think about David Icke if you can. Makes a lot of money by talking 100% crap.

Could Lee Harvey Oswald have fired those 3 shots that killed JFK and wounded Governor Connally? Several researchers have put forward several hypotheses about the timings of the shots and how difficult it would be to get shots off in the estimated time using a bolt action rifle, let alone hit anyone.

So that little video show you can get shots off pretty quickly with the same gun that was found in the Texas School Book Depository and in the hands of a decent shooter hitting JFK doesn’t seem to be within the realms of fantasy. Whether Lee Harvey Oswald was a good enough shot has been often disputed. I’m just an ordinary chap with no experience of handling guns so I’m going to say as someone who was trained to shoot in the Marines it’s likely that he could have carried out the assassination.

The question is did he?

Did he at 12:30 pm aim 3 shots at the Presidential Motorcade as it moved down Elm Street on Dealy Plaza?

I’ll try to answer that by explaining what I think and why I think that way. I’m not going to simply repeat verbatim what the Warren Commission decided, but I intend looking at it from the way I’ve gathered evidence and information to form my opinion.

Denbow’s Conclusion

Lee Harvey Oswald had the means and opportunity to carry out the assassination. Until reasonably recently I had not considered any motive that he may have had. I don’t believe he was part of a conspiracy, he wasn’t a patsy, he wasn’t in the wrong place at the wrong time. He murdered the President.

He certainly had the opportunity, he worked in a high building along the motorcade route. What is often overlooked is the simple fact is that he got the job on October 16. He was interviewed for the job by supervisor Roy Truly, who said that Oswald “did a good day’s work” and was an above average employee.Incidentally Ruth Paine said that her neighbor told her, on October 14, that there was a job opening at the book depository where her neighbor’s brother, Wesley Frazier, worked. They can’t all be in on it can they to engineer a job on a Motorcade Route that wasn’t finalized at that point in time? Some conspiracy theorists overlook this as irrelevant and say that Ruth Paine was a CIA agent as well.

Lee Harvey Oswald had the means. He owned a rifle – a 6.5 mm Carcano Model 91/38 carbine manufactured in 1940 – complete with a scope. Why this old rifle? Simply because it was cheap. He paid $19.95 for it, a real bargain bucket weapon. Much has been made by critics of the fact that he was a “lousy” shot. He may not have been the best shot in the US Marines, but he certainly was good enough to have committed the assassination.

The area that always gave me the the biggest problem if you go for Oswald as a nutjob sole assassin was motive. Why do it? He clearly wasn’t insane, “nuts” certainly but in no way insane. I do believe, however, that he had delusions of grandeur. He felt that he was a man of destiny, someone, somehow important. A lot more important than he actually was. For example, when he was in the Soviet Union he kept what he referred to as his “Historic Diary.” Who the hell was going to find his Diary historic? The excerpts that I’ve read make him come across not unlike a humourless pompous Adrian Mole. At 20 Lee Harvey Oswald was certainly beginning to display some odd characteristics. After his return to the USA, the CIA and FBI weren’t interested. My view is that they got on the phone to their men in Moscow and asked what the score was and were simply told that he’d spent 3 years on a lathe and that he wasn’t worth the effort. They knew he wasn’t one of their own, so why waste resources on him?

I would imagine that lack of interest from the USA’s security services was a blow to Oswald. I’m only speculating, but having gone to the Soviet Union and failed to do anything more than menial labour perhaps he felt that he could ingratiate himself with the CIA or FBI. Having decided the Soviet Union wasn’t for him and he was evidently dissatisfied with the USA – he wasn’t even a marked man – so Lee Harvey Oswald set his hopes on Cuba for salvation. He made a trip to Mexico and visited both the Cuban and Russian Embassies to try to get a Visa. Unfortunately for him, no Visa was forthcoming. Although there are conspiracy theorists who say a doppelganger visited the Embassies there were a few witnesses who remember him from the bus trip.

Did the 3 shots come from the Texas School Book Depository?

In the past couple of years technology has facilitated the digital reconstruction of the assassination in ways that were previously within the realms of science fiction. With the use of lasers and high speed photography tests that can can view and accurately track bullet trajectory have made analysis of what happened on that fateful day factual and less open to interpretation. We are now able to concentrate on just the facts. Models can be constructed that duplicate a person so that the effects of gunfire can be accurately examined. Yes, I did watch TV, but I am capable of making my own mind up and weighing the possibilities and likelihoods.

I’ve read, I’ve watched, I’ve thought, I’ve pondered, cogitated and spoken to ex-servicemen. All of my reading has led me to some kind of conclusion. 3 shots were fired from the rear of the Presidential Motorcade. The 1st shot missed the target completely and ricocheting off down Dealey Plaza where it hit a curb and a fragment cut James Tague. The 2nd shot (the so called *magic bullet*) entered JFK’s back, exited at the front and then wounded Gov Connally. The 3rd was the fatal shot that struck JFK’s head. The *magic bullet* was nothing of the kind. 

A man of the Grassy Knoll? Sorry folks that doesn’t work for me. From that distance it is likely that JFK’s head would have been totally destroyed and it’s likely that Jacqueline Kennedy would have met the same fate as her husband. Re-examination of the autopsy X Rays of the skull show hairline fractures consistent with a shot from the rear and “back and to the left” is what happens in the movies. This wasn’t the movies, this was real.

So was the gunman Lee Harvey Oswald?

I believe that Oswald was the assassin. This was a virtual spur of the moment plan. No planning went into this at all. It was just a horrible sequence of events that put him in a position to shoot the President. If Lee Harvey Oswald had the chance as the Motorcade then he was going to take it, if not I’m sure he would have just taken his “curtain rods” back to Ruth Paine’s garage. I would contend that Oswald saw this as a chance to make himself a hero to Fidel Castro and the people of Cuba and they would engineer his freedom. He must have been aware of the report of a Castro interview in September of 1963. In this interview Castro denounced US-prompted raids on Cuban soil stating:
“We are prepared to fight them and answer in kind. The United States leaders should think that if they are aiding terrorist plans to eliminate Cuban leaders, they themselves will not be safe.”

Do you think the gunman was Lee Harvey Oswald?

As Kevin Costner said, “It’s up to you.”

Ciao For Now,

Denbow

P.S.

From Penn And Teller’s Website

Bullshit!: Conspiracy Theory – 3/21/05

“We’re shooting the last batch of “Bullshit!s” for Showtime. It’s on Conspiracy Theories, and we’re using the research Penn did for “How to Play with your Food,” about Dr. Luis Alvarez’s explanation of why Kennedy’s head moved towards origin of the shot instead of away from it.

Alvarez proved it was counterintuitive physics. Roughly: the movement imparted by the goop pouring out the exit wound created a sort of jet stream that was stronger than that of the tiny hole made by the entrance wound. So the head moved back towards the shooter. Alvarez tested his theory by taking a melon, to represent brain, and wrapping it in fiberglass tape, to represent skull. He shot his melon and, as he predicted, it rocketed right back towards the source of the gunfire.

We wanted to reproduce this experiment ourselves, full action, highspeed camera. So I went with the crew to a gun shop with a firing range. The place was packed with people. More employees than Wal-Mart at xmas and several customers for every salesperson. And this was a Monday afternoon. On weekends there’s a line out the door.

I met my instructor, Tony, a silver-haired, tan, 20 year veteran of the police force (where he taught firearms skills). Since retiring from the police, Tony has been teaching marksmanship and gun safety to hobbyists for fifteen years.

He’s disgusted and incredulous at the sheer ignorance of anybody who doubts Oswald could have killed Kennedy.

“It was easy shot. Stevie Wonder could have made it,” he said and reeled off the exact distances of Oswald’s three shots. “I took my gun club out on the desert. We used the exact same make and model of rifle. We set up all the same distances and elevations. Nineteen of the guys hit all three shots, and the other four guys couldn’t hit a bull in the ass with a coal shovel. And don’t forget, Oswald only hit two out of three.”

While the crew set up, Tony took me into another range for some practice. The Mannlicher Carcano rifle was a duplicate of Oswald’s, except that it didn’t have a telescopic sight; I was holding in my hands, not on a stand, which makes aiming harder. I shot the target smack through the heart three times. “Okay, that’s enough practice,” said Tony.

I went into the gun safety classroom to don wardrobe and makeup. The classroom walls were covered with diagrams showing how bullets fire and how to ensure safe handling, and with credentials, certificates of appreciation, and awards from police organizations.

Dressed, I was ready to shoot, in both senses. The crew and I set up two melons on stands. The one representing JFK was wrapped in fiberglass tape; the one representing Jackie was wearing a pink pillbox hat. We photographed me loading the gun, then took an “art” shot of me shooting from the point of view of the melon (using blanks, of course). Finally it was time really to shoot the melon.

“This gun shoots a little high, so aim the sights about an inch below where you want it,” said Tony. I aimed and squeezed the trigger. A perfect hit. As Alvarez said it would, the melon goop “brain” blew out the front and shot the melon backwards. As an added bonus, the goop knocked off Jackie Melon Kennedy’s pillbox hat. I shot again, hit a little off center, but even then, the melon came towards me and the pillbox blew off. I shot one final time. Dead center, melon back at me, the most perfect shot of all. Our director/producer Star Price asked if I wanted to shoot some more. I asked him if he had the shot he needed. He did. So I thanked everybody and left.

It’s hard to digest the idea that a pallid loser, Lee Harvey Oswald could annihilate radiant John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the most powerful and glamorous man on the earth. But after talking to Tony and blasting the brains out of a tape-wrapped melon, I’m triply convinced that the Kennedy assassination can be best described like this:

Oswald and Kennedy were men of flesh and blood. One of them pointed a gun at the other and shot.”

Teller

Responses

  1. OK. A quick-ish reply. I have no idea who killed JFK or why. I have no idea who Jack The Ripper was and I don’t know if the 9/11 disaster was home grown smokescreen to start a war. I have no idea what landed at Roswell either.

    Therefore I can’t say you are wrong.

    I don’t think Oswald was a lone gunman for a couple of reasons.

    Reason 1) How did a single rifle, fire 2 different types of bullets. The killer 3rd shot was an exploding bullet which wouldn’t fit into his gun.

    Reason 2) The ensuing cover up.

    I have seen the JFK film numerous times. The film is part fiction and part fact. In an interview, Oliver Stone said, it is up to you to decide which is true, and which is fiction.
    The speech which you use, Kevin Costner’s trial speech, never really happened in real life, so to quote it, is just to quote film dialogue, made up by Stone.

    I will ask some questions which are important.

    1) If Oswald was a lone gunman, why was all the evidence destroyed? Surely the powers that be would want all the evidence to be collected to prove he did it. instead, they destroyed almost all the evidence and buried the rest.

    2) Why were witnesses threatened. Many witnesses gave evidence about seeing gunmen, and hearing gun fire from the grassy knoll. Yet they were told to keep quiet and their stories/evidence was changed.

    3) Why was the Dallas coroner told to keep quiet and threatened with jail?

    4) Why were the press tipped off about Oswald’s route from the Police station.
    5) How did Jack Ruby know Oswald was being moved?

    6) Those two events allowed Ruby’s shooting of Oswald to be filmed for all to see… Was that co-incidence? and why would Ruby, a night club owner want to shoot Oswald?

    7) Was Oswald killed so he would never see a trail. Was his evidence at a trial so sensitive that the Secret Service needed him dead?

    8) Why was the secret service guy who picked up the gun in the following car never questioned?

    8) Why would the secret service destroy evidence, if they weren’t involved? They went to great lengths to protect a lone “nut” gunman?

    Sarah

  2. Over the years, I’ve read so many different theories that I ultimately came to the conclusion they were all wrong…and yeah, maybe the Warren Commission did get it right, after all. But then came the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations and their conclusion that Kennedy’s death was likely the result of a conspiracy.

    Having studied presidential history for many years, I’ve often said that it I could study the life of only one president, it would be Lyndon Johnson. The man was a monster. He was vile, disgusting, an outright bully, and more than capable of murder for political gain.

    I’m not saying he was behind the events in Dealey Plaza, but then again, he probably stood to gain the most from Kennedy’s death. He also stood to lose the most if Kennedy lived, as the plan was to remove him from the ticket in the 1964 election.

    You ask…where’s the evidence? I can’t answer that, nor can I connect the dots between LBJ and Oswald, or Hoover, the CIA, the Mob.

    But I think those connections were definitely there. So, what’s your opinion of LBJ?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: