Case Closed: a letter to Gerald Posner (re: Kennedy assassination)

AMNation.com ^ | 11/23/03 | Lawrence Auster

[per loin]

I'm not asking what Posner speculates or postulates. I'm asking what Oswald's motive was. Are you saying that this bit of psychochat by Posner was, in fact, Oswald's motive?

[hchutch]

Interesting items. Of course, the fact that JFK was trying to take out Castro would have endeared him to Fidel a little as well...

The facts point to Oswald as the lone shooter. He'd practiced shooting in Russia, AND one interesting item that came up in the March/April 1993 American Handgunner - Massad Ayoob noted that Oswald may have been left-eye dominant.

The rifle in question was a right-handed Mannlicher-Carcano M1891 carbine. If Oswald were left-eye dominant, he might have used his LEFT hand to pull the trigger, the right hand manipulating the bolt. Ayoob reported that TWO shooters using this technique were able to fire shots within the 1.6-second interval that was the shortest interval between shots.

Oswald went after Kennedy so he could live in Cuba. The only POSSIBLE conspiracy would be if the Cubans had made a commitment that if Oswald killed JFK and made it out, he'd get asylum in Cuba.

Massad Ayoob's done a lot of writing on this. Conspiracy angles were effectively debunked by Tom Clancy in an essay.

Between Posner, Ayoob, and Clancy, I do not see how any conspiracy other than a basic murder-for-hire writ large (the Cubans promising asylum to Oswald in exchange for whacking JFK) can be sustained by the evidence.

I suppose some folks are trying to find some way to dismiss the facts: A loser got a cheap rifle and blew Camelot to smithereens so he could live in Cuba.

[GaryL]

Have you never heard of "15 minutes of fame?" What was John Hinckley's motivation? Or Squeaky Frum (who attempted to assassinate Ford)?

[_Jim]

VERY well put.

[_Jim]

I'm asking what Oswald's motive was.

I'm taking it that per loin is completely unfamiliar with Oswald's history ...

[Tares]

I'm not asking what Posner speculates or postulates. I'm asking what Oswald's motive was.

Oswald is dead. Anything anyone says about his motivation is speculation. Only best guesses can be made. That, however, does not mean he had no motivation.

[Az Joe]

My middle finger is raised towards you.

[per loin]

I suggest that both of you learn to distinguish between the terms "motive" and "motivation".

[per loin]

I'm taking it that per loin is completely unfamiliar with Oswald's history ...

And I'd guess that not to be your first mistaken assumption.

[Shooter 2.5]

I wasn't sure so I erred on the conservative side. I really can't imagine a badly wounded person moving two to three inches in 1/18TH of a second.

[GaryL]

Ok...Oswald was a nutcase whose "motive" was "15 minutes of fame," like John Hinckley and Squeaky Frumm and other nutcases who have workded their way into history. Is that better for you?

[GaryL]

On this same point: Can anyone please tell me why is it that we have to go into these elaborate psychological contortions trying to figure out what exactly was the motivation...Oops, sorry, per loin! I meant "motive"... for this nutcase Oswald?

Nobody seems to care why John Hinckley tried to assassinate Reagan, other than the guy was an obvious nutcase. But Oswald! We must know exactly what was going through his mind!!

If Hinckley had succeeded, would we be doing this same elaborate psychological analysis on him? Somehow, I doubt it.

Could it possibly be that we do this because Kennedy was a liberal media darling, and Reagan?...well, he was just a lowlife Republican. Just a rightwing reactionary. No need to analyze why someone would try to take him out. Or so it seems.

[per loin]

That's a bit better. Now, looking at Oswald on November 15, 1963, would a person, reasonably informed of the public events of Oswald's life, likely say that he had a motive to kill Kennedy?

[Junior_G]

As I'm sure you know, ALL the doctors who actually worked on JFK in a vain attempt to save his life all were allowed years later to view the autopsy photos in the national archives. Each and EVERY one agreed that the wounds were the same as what they saw that day in Dallas.

Interesting that you should mention that. I assume you were watching the same Nova special I saw. All of those same doctors, when asked where the head wound was, indicated that the back of his head was blown out. I'd be curious to see those autopsy photos that corroborated those statements.

[GaryL]

O Lord!...I give up! Someone else please pick this up! I give up!

[per loin]

You're too easy. Next!

[Az Joe]

After a full week of non-stop debate on this I am worn out. It seems that every and any theory anyone comes up with somehow does not fit the available evidence enough to close the case.

There is a truth there but I don't know for sure what it is. I think that Oswald did it alone from the TSBD. I think that fits most of the evidence. Doesn't mean I am not open to new evidence or new technologies examining new evidence and coming up with new conclusions.

Is there a stranger case in all the annals of crime? I don't think so.

[norraad]

No stranger case...

That's why I like it, like an ongoing chess game that everyone can play with new way the players can move as time goes on.

i.e. I'm new to the Oswald gets to be a hero in Cuba thing.

How's that go?

Did some handler promise him a ride?

Somebody from the George DeMorsechild (sp?) oil/CIA camp?

[breakem]

There are so many theories and even people confessing, I don't think we'll ever know the truth to any certainty.