JFK - Why Oswald is guilty.

First topic message reminder :

As I have just spent the last three months reading the most detailed book imaginable on the JFK assassination I thought I would put that reading to some use and outline why it is pretty clear Oswald was guilty and acted alone in the act. As I know we have some subscribers to various conspiracy theories on here would be nice to hear some of the counter views.
 
1 – The ballistics tests carried out on the bullet fragments found in JFK and Governor Connally were found to have been fired from the rifle owned by Oswald, to the exclusion of all other rifles in the world. I should clarify that this is not the model of gun, but the specific rifle found on the sixth floor, which it was proven was owned by Oswald, beyond any reasonable doubt.
 
2 – Oswald had previously made an unsuccessful attempt to assassinate another local politician, General Walker. Obviously not absolute proof he murdered Kennedy but a pretty strong indication that he was more than capable of attempting such a murder.
 
3 – No evidence has ever been found that a bullet was fired from anywhere other than the sixth floor of the Book Depository. No bullet fragments or shells were ever found in or around Dealey Plaza other than those fired by Oswald.
 
4 – The entry and exit wounds found in Kennedy and Connally were consistent with a shot being made from the upper floors of the Book Depository and no other location, as confirmed by the team of pathologists who examined the body.
 
5 - Oswald stayed with his wife the night before the assassination (they lived apart) on a Thursday night. He never stayed with her during the week. The gun used to kill Kennedy was stored at his wife’s address. What possible motivation did he have to break with a long established routine other than to collect the murder weapon.
 
6 – Of all the employees of the Book Depository Oswald was the only employee to leave the building and area after the murder. Would an innocent person act in such a manner.
 
7 – There was no magic bullet. In a presidential limousine the front seat occupied by Governor Connally was what is known as a jump seat and is lowered and set off to the left, thus meaning the bullet that struck both of them acted in a totally consistent manner from the perspective of trajectory.
 
8 – In a related point the idea that the shot was difficult or could not be made with Oswald’s rifle are a myth. Tests were carried out post the assassination where Oswald’s results were not only equalled but even bettered. Should also be remembered during his time in the marines Oswald was at one point classified as a sharpshooter, the second highest grade below expert, and at the risk of stating the obvious the US marine tests are pretty difficult.
 
9 – The only fingerprints found in the snipers nest on the sixth floor in the immediate aftermath of the murder belonged to Oswald, no credible physical evidence has ever emerged that anybody other than him or as well has him has ever emerged.
 
10 – The most popular conspiracy theory, that a shot was made from the grassy knoll does not really stand up to analysis. The grassy knoll is directly across the plaza from the main street where most people had gathered to watch the motorcade, any assassin or shot from there would have been in direct view of up to 80 witnesses, yet no credible witness or physical evidence has ever emerged to support such a proposition.
 
This is a brief run through some of the myriad factors that point to Oswald’s guilt but am always happy to hear the counter views.

It was Oswald what done it. Seriously, 75m shot for a sharpshooter? With a scoped military rifle? At a target moving nice and steady into his reticule? I could probably do it with minimal practice. 75m is nothing. He got 3 shots off pretty quick though but then he had been a Marine sharpshooter. Even the British at Mons in WWI got off an average of 15 rounds per minute. Oswald was a no-one who wanted to be someone - Peter Gabriel said it well in his 'Family Snapshot' song. This was what he chose as his vehicle.

People want to believe it was a conspiracy and, like God, it's hard to disprove something definitively. Why does no-one think John Hinkley Jr.'s attempt to kill Reagan was conspiracy? Or Sirhan Sirhan's killing of Bobby Kennedy?

incontinentia wrote:...Something I'm confused about is the first shot, which should have been the easiest but which somehow missed the car entirely.

A tree was in the way I think - bullet deflected. As car got further away, angle decreased and tree no longer in the way.

Rowley wrote:He did not get his affairs in order, he did admin for his business, completely consistent with what he did most days. The issue with the police communicating with him is what would they communicate to him? Oswald will be moved when the right vehicles have arrived and when the interview is finished? When will that be? No idea. Great, I'll see you then!

If Ruby was really hired to kill Oswald and the police were in on it, it would have made a lot more sense to stick to the original time of 10am, when it would have been easy to ensure Ruby was in the basement. Introducing uncertainty and an element of arbitrariness into the process hardly seems the most efficient planning.

House select committee 1979
---------------------------------

"Ruby's actions were not spontaneuos they involved pre-meditation.....The committee is troubled by the unlocked doors and the removal of security from the garage nearest the stairway just before the shooting"

Jimmy Hoffa - "Ruby was assigned the job of coordinating officers who were loyal to him while Oswald was in their custody...After he botched the job earlier...He was told he had to do the job or forfeit his life".........

Troubled by is one thing, having any evidence to support the complicity of the police or the mob is quite another. The Warren Commission and HCSA investigated this to the point that is beyond detailed and to this date any evidence of Ruby acting in union with anyone else has still not emerged.  After 50 odd years of exhaustive investigation by professionals and pretty much every amateur sleuth alive I can't help but feel if such evidence exists it would have emerged by now.

The Warren Commission findings were overruled with the select committee having access to all their reports and testimonies....

The Kennedy assasssination files are due to be open in 2017...it was locked away under National security by Lyndon.........

The select committee had access to this material with all due respect sleuths and professionals haven't.....

Not saying you're wrong but the main players have been dead for 45 years..

Dare say we'll both still be kicking around on here in 2017 mate. We'll see which one of us has to eat the humble pie!

Rowley wrote:Dare say we'll both still be kicking around on here in 2017 mate. We'll see which one of us has to eat the humble pie!

Well it's due out then anyway.....Don't hold your breath..

Ten bucks has it that they get unclassified like the MKultra files, and it resembles chicken scratches, with key info scratched out. The rest of time will then be spent trying to piece the puzzle together like the Dead Sea scrolls.
"Lee Harvey Oswald ----------- a patsy"
"The Murder of JFK was --------- the work of a lone madman"
"Jackie O looked mighty -------- that day"

I'm a little surprised you're a theorist on this one, Truss. I remember you mentioning the JFK assassination and saying people just don't want to believe one random person can do something so big.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Rowley wrote:Dare say we'll both still be kicking around on here in 2017 mate. We'll see which one of us has to eat the humble pie!

Well it's due out then anyway.....Don't hold your breath..

Apparently the CIA have no intention of blocking it's release.

Oswald was a patsy its pretty obvious.

There were more then 1 shooter involved and the reason was to stop JFK from exposing the bravarian illuminati who were trying to take over government completly at the time but JFK saw them coming.

Have to admit I'm a bit in the dark about the illuminati.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Have to admit I'm a bit in the dark about the illuminati.

Just where they want you.

The illuminati seem to be in the spotlight at the moment.

I had a mate who tried to get a job with the Illuminati, but unfortunately he wasnt the brightest...

All very well joking about this, but they are not an organisation to be taken lightly.

Jeff wrote:|All very well joking about this, but they are not an organisation to be taken lightly.

They can't hold a candle to the masons Jeff.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Have to admit I'm a bit in the dark about the illuminati.

Watt are you on about?

The thing about JFK is that although he was a beacon in his time, that feeling has taper-ed off somewhat over time, and his legacy has lost some of it's lustre in the glare of negative revelations about him. Americans don't quite carry a torch for him the way they used to.

SO what you are saying is that the illuminati are quite switched on? I need to know - dont leave me in the dark over this.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Have to admit I'm a bit in the dark about the illuminati.

That was good. obvious. But good.

YOU GUYS THINK THIS IS FUNNY?????

LAUGH NOW...............


........CRY LATER.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

There were more then 1 shooter involved

Absolutely no evidence to support this theory. As I have said seemingly countless times on this thread, the only bullet fragments found in Kennedy or Connally were fired from Oswald's gun, and no other. If there were other shooters it does raise the question where did their bullets land, they were not found in the limo or anyone within said limo, which is a pretty big target. Who was the other shooter who was so incompetent they could not even hit a slow moving limo?

Rowley wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

There were more then 1 shooter involved

Absolutely no evidence to support this theory. As I have said seemingly countless times on this thread, the only bullet fragments found in Kennedy or Connally were fired from Oswald's gun, and no other. If there were other shooters it does raise the question where did their bullets land, they were not found in the limo or anyone within said limo, which is a pretty big target. Who was the other shooter who was so incompetent they could not even hit a slow moving limo?

decoy Rowley

What does that mean? Am happy to have this conversation but give me something to actually respond to rather than vague comments that could mean any number of things.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

Rowley wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

There were more then 1 shooter involved

Absolutely no evidence to support this theory. As I have said seemingly countless times on this thread, the only bullet fragments found in Kennedy or Connally were fired from Oswald's gun, and no other. If there were other shooters it does raise the question where did their bullets land, they were not found in the limo or anyone within said limo, which is a pretty big target. Who was the other shooter who was so incompetent they could not even hit a slow moving limo?

decoy Rowley

You got told Rowley. Tuck your tail between your legs and go home.

Decoy - lure or entice (a person or animal) away from their intended course,
typically into a trap.

Rowley - a name pronounced "Row" as in "Row", but never "Row" as in "Row". Glad to be of assistance.

Rowley wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

There were more then 1 shooter involved

Absolutely no evidence to support this theory. As I have said seemingly countless times on this thread, the only bullet fragments found in Kennedy or Connally were fired from Oswald's gun, and no other. If there were other shooters it does raise the question where did their bullets land, they were not found in the limo or anyone within said limo, which is a pretty big target. Who was the other shooter who was so incompetent they could not even hit a slow moving limo?

Chris Waddle?

Although you mustn't besmirch the name Kennedy in our household........I think some good came out of the murder........Kennedy never had the clout to crack heads to bring in anything as radical as LBJ's great society...........Lyndon's great society framework "Head start"............Pumped money into... underfunded schools in poor areas....welfare programs.... into work programs..Medicare....

Also the civil rights bill.............

Probably my favorite President who's biggest mistake was listening to his Generals.....

Shame he's only known as the Vietnam President.........Lyndon transformed America and all those who think Vietnam wouldn't have happened under Kennedy are dreamers...

What we know wouldn't have happened are the things I've listed above as LBJ had the power and JFK didn't..

Wouldn't tell my folks this though !!

JFK warned us about the illuminati in his final speech to the nation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1smgz-px1Q

Rowley

Oswald was set up using a number of shooters as back up if the real shooter missed.

I never believed oswald did it and i think LBJ was a great President

What is interesting about the conspiracy theories and believers in the idea that Oswald is not guilty or acted in union with other people is if are saying you believe either of these two things you are essentially saying you don’t believe the official version of events. The official version of events is the Warren Commission so you are in effect saying you don’t believe the findings of the Warren Commission. How many people, globally, have actually read the Warren Commission, not the edited highlights Oliver Stone or the various conspiracy authors choose to present, but the actual full nine volumes they published?
 
When you think about it sensibly saying I don’t believe something despite never having read it is a pretty odd position to take.

Well, yes. But to believe the official story, you have to believe there was nothing to gain by lying about the assassination.

Not really Raf, truth is when any high profile person is killed you can find a reason to lie about what happened or why countless other people would have had a motive to carry out the assassination. Just because you can do this does not mean those theories automatically have validity despite a lack of evidence to support them.

The conspiracy theorists  have done a wonderful job in painting the Warren Commission as some half arsed second rate investigation. I'll admit I have not read it either but from having read what I have it appears to me they did a pretty remarkable job in the time they had, all the major players were interviewed, credible leads were chased and explored and the investigation of the events and evidence seems to have been about as thorough as you could sensibly have hoped it to be.

There's a hilarious conspiracy that the driver of the limo shot JFK!! Videos on youtube etc

When Kennedy assumed the presidency in 1961, the world was becoming a tumultuous place. The Cold War was at its height and Cuba had just declared its allegiance to the Soviet Union. Everything was falling into place for World War III to break out. All that was needed was a crisis to act as a catalyst. During his first year in office, JFK stepped to the tune of the Illuminati. He ordered the Bay of Pigs invasion that was designed only to exacerbate tensions and began to organize a hit against Fidel Castro. In exchange, the Illuminati awarded him with women such as Marilyn Monroe as well as promises to make a political dynasty out of his family. Then Attorney General Robert Kennedy was also tapped to become president and would win in 1972 if all went according to plan, but events did not fall into line as the NWO desired.

In October 1962, American U-2 spy planes began photographing ballistic missile sites in Cuba. What followed was the tensest period and possibly the climax of the Cold War. For thirteen horrifying days, the U.S. and Soviet Union faced-off over the fate of those missiles in the Caribbean. In the end, war was averted and the missiles were withdrawn. Instead of World War III starting, a cooling of tensions began as more emphasis on diplomacy emerged which led to peace strategies such as détente and SALT. The likelihood that a nuclear exchange would ever happen quickly subsided after both sides realized how close they had come.

The Cuban Missile Crisis was a big win for U.S. diplomacy and the Kennedys, but it was a big loss for the Illuminati. To the secret order, a nuclear war was essential to creating a single global power. With the Soviet Union eliminated by America's technical and geographic superiority, a single economic power would remain to rebuild the world. That would be NATO. With much of the world in ruins, the Illuminati would remold the countries hit hardest through banking and finance. That would tie the world together under one economy and thus one power.

Unfortunately for the NWO, it did not happen. Kennedy broke ranks with those who placed him in power when he pursued peace with Nikita Khrushchev, even to the point when war seemed virtually inevitable. What he was supposed to do was order an invasion of Cuba, and he didn't. When this happened, the Illuminati needed to dispose of him quickly and hoped for better luck with Lyndon B. Johnson (someone who advocated a military strike against Cuba's missile sites). With Kennedy's successor already chosen, the secret order made its move.

On November 22, 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated JFK in Dallas, Texas. Because Oswald had been recruited through NWO channels during his time in the Soviet Union and Mexico, he knew too much and also had to be eliminated. In the attempt to clean up the mess, the Illuminati arranged for President Johnson to establish the Warren Commission in order to discourage notions of conspiracies. It failed miserably.

Fortunately for the NWO, the abundance of theories about who killed Kennedy helped mask their involvement and gave them new ideas about how to cover up future misdeeds. As for the Kennedys, their punishment continued well after JFK's assassination. The Illuminati made its point loud and clear to other families who had pledged their allegiance. Never again would a Kennedy become president. Robert Kennedy attempted to run and was gunned down for it and others in the Kennedy clan have died in "accidents." Only Caroline Kennedy seems to have avoided the so-called bad luck of her family, but she has also stayed away from politics. As for the lesson learned, take the Bushes for example. They have produced two presidents and have wreaked chaos on the world as well as have ushered in a financial meltdown combined with destabilizing the Middle East. They did not dare go against their Illuminati masters, and they have been rewarded with power and money on a vast level. Their loyalty may even result in the reward of a third president in the family. Only time will tell on that one.

With the assassination of JFK, future presidents learned not to go against the will of the Illuminati. In a fluke of history, Kennedy decided that what was right was more important than serving his satanic masters. He prevented nuclear war and paid the price as a result.

And that's the bottom line.....

Rowley wrote:Not really Raf, truth is when any high profile person is killed you can find a reason to lie about what happened or why countless other people would have had a motive to carry out the assassination. Just because you can do this does not mean those theories automatically have validity despite a lack of evidence to support them.

The conspiracy theorists  have done a wonderful job in painting the Warren Commission as some half arsed second rate investigation. I'll admit I have not read it either but from having read what I have it appears to me they did a pretty remarkable job in the time they had, all the major players were interviewed, credible leads were chased and explored and the investigation of the events and evidence seems to have been about as thorough as you could sensibly have hoped it to be.

Rowley,

Have you read anything about the HCSA Investigation? And how it's evidence against the Warren Commission was thrown out by the NSA, only for their findings to be dismissed as well?

The book I have just read covers both the Warren Commission and the HCSA investigation. Personally I put more stock in the conclusions of the Warren Commission. The reason I say this is their interviews were pretty much in the immediate aftermath of the assassination, whereas the HCSA was some 15 years after. Stands to reason that the former is likely to be more reliable. Think about it sensibly. I don't know if you're married Ali, but if so this would represent a pretty significant event in your life. Was I to ask you a few months after the wedding day what you had for your meal or your guest list I would guess you would be able to answer pretty accurately. I have been married 13 years, ask me the same questions now I would not answer with half the accuracy. Why would we assume those questioned by the Warren Commission and the HCSA would do differently?

Also by the time the HCSA met the conspiracy industry was well up and running, the idea that Oswald was not guilty or did not act individually were ingrained in the American psyche, inevitable this will have an influence on the responses given. The HCSA was a thorough investigation but no more so than the Warren Commission and also suffered from the passing of time.

So, why was his brother killed? Was it the masons, the illuminati or the increasingly dangerous stonecutters?

You have a lot of faith in a commission where out of the two guys that spearheaded it....One was humiliating sacked by Kennedy and the other  LBJ said was "So dumb he couldn't fart and chew gum at the same time..

Wow..

Interesting fact, Lynn 'Buck' Compton, the lead prosecutor in the Sirhan Sirhan case (Man who killed Bobby) was THE 'Buck' Compton from Band of Brothers.

I did not know that.

I do Truss, the campaign to besmirch the reputation of the Warren commission is shameful in my opinion. They were professional, experienced people who did a thorough and decent job. Is telling that nearly fifty years on not one shred of credible evidence has emerged to counter anything they said. By evidence I mean it in the legal sense as something that would stand up in court.

Geez Rowley it's not like you to be so one eyed about this...

Besides the Warren commission never concluded Oswald killed JFK....just that one gunman was involved and he shot from the book depository..

You know documents from the Warren report have been released and heavily blacked out in places..We also know

1. Several members of the Warren commission have gone on record expressing doubts about the Commission's findings..

2. They didn't examine the Cuban angle in any great depth...

3. Witnesses in Dallas weren't interviewed until Garrison's investigation....

4. The Oswald - FBI angle wasn't investigated in depth......

5. They were political sensitive times...........With the uSA on the brink with USSR and Cuba...So political pressure ws no doubt enforced..

6. LBJ and RFK both thought it was bollox...

7. Why the crusade to destroy Garrison by making up falsehoods and bugging his office...

Think you've read one book and made up your mind....

Huge problems in the warren investigation......You're behaving like Haz on this......

Seeing the side you want and fitting the jigsaw to your spec..

Rowley wrote:I do Truss, the campaign to besmirch the reputation of the Warren commission is shameful in my opinion. They were professional, experienced people who did a thorough and decent job. Is telling that nearly fifty years on not one shred of credible evidence has emerged to counter anything they said. By evidence I mean it in the legal sense as something that would stand up in court.

Sorry, i appreciate opinions etc, but to say it did a thorough and decent job are a tad far fetched. As Trussman alluded to, their are more than a few inconsistencies they failed to acknowledge. Where was the legitimate explanation for the lack of an autopsy when Texas State Law insisted that the coroner alone was the only one to release the body.

There were question marks over the behaviour of the FBI agents in the immediate aftermath of Kennedy's arrival at the hospital.

As for evidence, the FBI made sure it was a closed shop. You're never going to find any evidence to the contrary. I suspect this is why the CIA has no interest in withholding the release of the evidence in 2017 as what would it change? Nothing. It's 52 years since he was shot (almost) anyone connected or involved is probably dead.

If the argument to the counter is hinging on Garrison you really are struggling. Do you know how long the jury in the Shaw trial took to come to their conclusion that Shaw was innocent? 45 minutes. A trial for someone accused of conspiracy to murder the president of the USA and the jury take 45 minutes to find him not guilty. I have spent longer than that discussing and deciding what to have for lunch at work in the past. Think this is a decent indication of the strength of Garrison's "evidence"

Alistair the autopsy should have been carried out in Dallas and the medical staff fought long and hard for it to be done there. It was not done there as Jackie insisted she was not boarding air force one without JFK's body. Given this they had two choices, insisting on it still being done there, putting Jackie through the extra trauma and risking her remaining in Dallas without knowing whether there was still a threat to her there, as nobody knew in the immediate aftermath, or releasing the body without an autopsy being carried out. In those circumstances they made the only sensible decision they had available.

Rowley wrote:
Alistair the autopsy should have been carried out in Dallas and the medical staff fought long and hard for it to be done there. It was not done there as Jackie insisted she was not boarding air force one without JFK's body. Given this they had two choices, insisting on it still being done there, putting Jackie through the extra trauma and risking her remaining in Dallas without knowing whether there was still a threat to her there, as nobody knew in the immediate aftermath, or releasing the body without an autopsy being carried out. In those circumstances they made the only sensible decision they had available.

She was heavily guarded and not exactly at risk inside a hospital. The autopsy 'could've' taken place. Objectively it's easy to say that it's a great excuse that Jackie wouldn't leave without his body. I forget, had his brain been removed and disappeared by this point....??

At the time nobody knew the extent of the threat, who was involved or otherwise, whilst she almost certainly would have been safe at the hospital the general consensus, which would seem to be common sense was she would be a damned sight safer back at the White House. His brain was perfectly present at this point, it was turned over to the care of his brother at a later date if memory serves, after it had been examined and the bullet fragments had been removed.

Alistair wrote:Interesting fact, Lynn 'Buck' Compton, the lead prosecutor in the Sirhan Sirhan case (Man who killed Bobby) was THE 'Buck' Compton from Band of Brothers.

I did not know that.

I knew that. Buck was never the same after seeing Toye and Guarnere shelled at Bastogne

It was never handed over to Robert, Rowley. It was stored in the National Archives and went missing, presumed stolen by Robert.

seanmichaels wrote:

Alistair wrote:Interesting fact, Lynn 'Buck' Compton, the lead prosecutor in the Sirhan Sirhan case (Man who killed Bobby) was THE 'Buck' Compton from Band of Brothers.

I did not know that.

I knew that. Buck was never the same after seeing Toye and Guarnere shelled at Bastogne

Ahh, Bill Guarnere, he died last year, sadly.

One of my favourite programs, that. I can't remember, when they do the run round of where people ended up during the Baseball match, do they mention it?

Fair enough, in my defence the book was 1600+ pages, can't expect me to remember every page!