Posted on 12/17/2022 5:49:30 AM PST by C210N
Like I said I don’t believe in coincidences, such as a lone gunman getting into police headquarters with a gun to kill the most wanted man in the world live on TV.
The part that fascinates me during this period, was the lengthy film interview with Oswald. It’s very professionally done and Oswald is quite articulate but he doesn’t seem to believe in what he’s saying. He seems to be enjoying spoofing the interviewer and he is a good deal smarter than we have been told in the narrative of the “lone, crazed communist killer”.
It’s wildly incongruous that a supposed future assassin has this long interview on the record.
Hence, the assassination, but in a broader scenario so provocative that it would inspire an official cover up because it would correctly alarm the wider intelligence and national security community. If there was evidence of Cuban and Soviet complicity in the murder of JFK, it would be a classic act of war. The American public would demand retribution, which would lead to a nuclear confrontation. Lyndon Johnson was known to warn of that if the secret of the assassination was revealed, that "Kennedy tried getting Castro, but Castro got him first."
Yet that claim raises the question if Oswald would really be so stupid as to think that he could kill JFK or even just shoot and miss and then be traded and sent to Cuba as if he were a middling Soviet spy who had earned a sunny retirement away from a dodgy Russian wife who would have been allowed to separately go home. To accept that as what Oswald wanted in turn poses issues as to Oswald's improbability as the assassin. He had at best a limited ability as a rifleman and no clear record of recent practice at even stationary targets.
Worse, there is no basis to think that Oswald had the necessary training or experience in hitting moving targets on a downward trajectory through the cover of intermittent leaves and branches. And the official story from the Warren Commission is that Oswald brought the rifle to the Texas School Book Depository on the day of the assassination dissembled and then put it back together shortly before shooting. That alone would tend to degrade the accuracy of Oswald's putative rifle as far as using the scope, leaving him to rely on the iron sights alone. I have never seen a recreation of the shooting that incorporated the scenario of a lightly trained shooter using iron sights on a rifle that had not been test fired after being disassembled.
It is possible that Oswald was a patsy as he claimed, having intended only the discovery of his rifle as a warning to Kennedy. In the event though, the assassination unfolds around Oswald, setting him to a panicked and unplanned flight from the scene.
I could go on, and on, but you get the point: Oswald as the assassin of JFK does not quite add up as to motive or the details of the shooting, with a similar pattern of doubt across almost every important element of the official story. My experience as a lawyer reviewing and arguing for the correctness of criminal convictions on appeal makes me deeply uncomfortable with that.
In valid convictions, the uncertainties diminish on close examination and a solid case emerges, doubts do not multiply as they do with the Kennedy assassination. Under today's standards, the withholding of documents and the poor chain of custody for key pieces of evidence would bar a conviction of Oswald on such a record. There is simply not proof against Oswald beyond a reasonable doubt.
“He had at best a limited ability as a rifleman and no clear record of recent practice at even stationary targets.”
Well, he was a marine, and there actually is testimony that he was practicing at a firing range less than a week before the assassination. Plus there was the General Walker shooting, which I suppose counts as practice as well.
Showed what one motivated Marine and his rifle can do.
the curb sewer grate is one of the stupider theories, misinformation to make other theories seem stupid too
The head shot clearly came from the grassy knoll, if you watch the zapruder film
They say Oswald could have done this from the window, because a sharpshooter was able to replicate it, but they fail to mention that out of 7 (I think) sharpshooters that tried, only ONE was able to do it- and that was after 17 previous unsuccessful attempts.
The zapruder film, ‘missing’ shots (bullet hitting curb, bullet through the front window), AND the eyewitness who heard the shot go past his head, are absolute proof of more than one shooter
There was also a SECOND ‘warren commission’ report that concluded there was probably a conspiracy and at least one other shooter... why is that never mentioned?
Plots of this magnitude have to have back-up plans for the back-up plans.
It has also been suggested that Oswald practiced his marksmanship in a nearby riverbed, which was apparently often done at the time. The problem though is that shooting at a moving target is a much harder proposition and was beyond Oswald’s training.
Indeed, the lone nut assassin story line is so effective that it worked as the official story as to not just Oswald, but also Jack Ruby in killing Oswald. And it was used again as to the murders of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King.
“The problem though is that shooting at a moving target is a much harder proposition and was beyond Oswald’s training.”
Says who? You know Oswald was training with a rifle from age 15 at least, right? How many guys from Louisiana do you think have never gone hunting and couldn’t shoot a moving target?
When one of Oswald's superior officers in the Marines learned of his supposed role in the JFK assassination, he was shocked and disbelieved it because he thought that Oswald lacked the skill and training for such difficult shots.
Similarly, in 1987, former U.S. Marine Corps sniper Craig Roberts, a Vietnam war veteran, went to the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository and looked from the putative sniper position. He knew immediately that the Warren Commission's findings were implausible. Roberts regarded it as impossible that Oswald, acting alone, could have fired from that position three shots in 5.6 seconds with an old, obsolete, and poorly fitted bolt-action rifle.
Paraffin tests administered in Dallas soon after Oswald was arrested showed metallic residues associated with firing a gun on Oswald's hands but not on his cheek, even when subjected to a sophisticated analysis that required a nuclear reactor. The best explanation for this is contamination on Oswald's hands or that, as claimed, he fired his revolver and killed Officer Tippet.
No matter what Oswald's level of skill with a rifle was, the lack of metallic residues on Oswald's cheek is strong forensic evidence that he did not fire a rifle on the day of the assassination. Notably, it took a lawsuit to pry the negative results from the FBI, which had not forwarded the written report to the Warren Commission.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.