Did the Cubans assassinate Kennedy?

Marina tied him in very nicely to the Walker attack, something she had not changed her testimony on, by the way. Throw in the shooting of Tippett, witnessed by about 10 people, many who made a positive ID of Oswald, the fact that when he was about to be arrested he pulled the same gun out and tried to shoot the cops clearly indicates a man prone to violence with guns.

As to his capability with rifles. Latimer owns Oswald's rifle book when he was in the Marines. His review of it, some of which is in his book, indicates he was a decent shooter and in the method used to shoot JFK (using boxes of books to support the rifle) he was good. Still a tough shot but there is always the element of luck in any event.

I don't think Oswald thought beyond shooting JFK. He was a rather twisted individual who saw himself as someone destined to be historically significant - which he is, unfortunately.

As to the reports of Oswald or someone else impersonating him I would point out that in any monumental event people come out of the woodwork saying they had beers with such and such, or I saw this guy walking his dog. The FBI received thousands of reports from people about the 9/11 hijackers and 99.9 percent were worthless.

The WC discussed the mistake identifying the gun as a Mauser. I'm still curious on why these brilliant conspirators who could pull this off did not plant a great, world renown sniper rifle rather than what you call a 'crappy rifle.' Does'nt make sense to me.

The hospital doctors have been questioned over the years, and even were allowed access to the photos/xrays and they state they support the WC commission's findings. I believe PBS had a show where was doctor was allowed access. The mysterious autopsy was nothing of the kind. It may not have not have been as thorough as it deserved but blame RFK and Jackie who did not want it getting out that JFK was a dying man. I certainly don't believe JFK's body was altered and the photos and xrays were switched. All of that was reinvestigated by the House Committee. No evidence.

A lot of people corrected the DA when he made that mistake, not just Ruby. That news had already been on TV and the radio for hours. Ruby was a nobody. He was never a made member of the mob, or a hitman. Of course, why didn't he nail Oswald when he was being moved around that first night. He had a clear shot. Of course why did'nt the Mob kill Ruby? In many respects he was a lot like Oswald, a little man who wanted to be a big man. He totally cracked while in prison claiming he was injected with cancer cells and LBJ wanted Israel to be destroyed.

Witnesses to the Walker shooting state that the shooter escaped via car and Oswald did not drive. Nor was there any ballistic evidence linking the gun and the attempt.

I don't believe a thing Lattimer says, sorry. And he cannot change the fact that Oswald's gun was not properly sightable until after the US Army Ordinance Lab worked on it.

Oswald historic significance was countered by his claim to be a patsy. Had he truly had that goal he would have admitted he did it and why.

Those Oswald sightings have never been properly explained or invalidated unlike the example you use. Or the claim that he was in front of the TBD building when the shoots were fired. That has been clarified by identifying the individual in the picture.

An identification of the rifle as a Mauser was inconsistent with the paper trail created by the purchase of the MC. One could not tie a Mauser to Oswald as the MC was. One must rely upon yet another "mistake" to change the statement of an alleged firearms expert that conflicts with the WC report.

The autopsy was controlled by a military officer (unknown?) who directed what to examine. The shallow wound in the back was never explained or properly examined merely noted. Several of the pictures appear to be as fake as a Dan Rather (huge WC Report supporter) memo.

Ruby could never have been "made" because he was Jewish and I never claimed he had been. He was an ASSOCIATE used for various minor jobs during the past: running strip clubs, union extortion, gun running to Cuba, keeping the Dallas PD happy. And the explanation for all the inconsistencies in the official story being reduced to "crazy" individuals and luck gets a little tiresome.

Marina tied Oswald to the Walker shooting. Testimony she has never refuted.

You don't believe Latimer - why - he doesn't support your conclusions. Not convincing.

As I wrote when he met with his mother, wife and brother he never claimed to be a patsy, innocent or a victim. He was cool and cocky.

He was not in front of the TBD. That photo was debunked decades ago.

Again we have photographic evidence he owned the gun. Marina took 3 pictures of him with it - photos verified by experts in the WC and House investigations. She has never refuted that fact.

The story of the military officer controlling the autopsy is total crap put forth by Oliver Stone. Please don't tell me you believe anything that idiot says. That was one of the funniest scenes in that unintentionally funny movie.

Luck, chance, whatever, play a enormous role in every major event. For example, if Oswald had not requested a change of clothes prior to being moved Ruby would never have had a chance to shoot him. It delayed his departure by twenty minutes, a time by the way when Ruby was witnessed sending money to a stripper at a currency exchange. But then maybe Oswald was in on his own murder.

The military officer at the autopsy was not the invention of Oliver Stone but had been in circulation for over a decade before he even thought of making a movie. Stone just dramatized it. He didn't use his own ideas for much of the movie only those of others.

I do not assume that Ruby would have stopped trying to kill Oswald had it not been possible to do so when it was. From all appearances he had been stalking him and was kicked out of places in the police station where he would have had access to Oswald before the 24th.

I made the point that the debunking of the "Oswald in front" theory was something that had NOT been done in the other sightings.

Lattimer is not credible because his theory is nonsense from top to bottom. Dan Rather has more credibility.

Where did I ever dispute Oswald owning the rifle? Merely that IT was not capable of doing the job as found.

Unlike the conspiracy theorists who merely claim certain things Latimer actually did ballistic tests. You can deny that but the tests were done and support a single gunman. Stating something is nonsense is not an argument.

Ruby was not kicked out when Oswald was being moved. He had the opportunity and for whatever reason passed. As I wrote earlier if Oswald had not requested a change of clothes Ruby would never have had a chance at him.

Answer a couple questions for me, out of curiosity. 1)Did Oswald bring the rifle to work or curtain rods? 2)Did he shoot anyone that day (JFK or Tippett or both) 3) If he was set up why would the conspirators set up Oswald with a crappy rifle? 4) Why didn't these brilliant conspirators arrange for Oswald to be killed immediately rather than a couple days later when he could have spilled the beans to the press, the secret service, the Dallas PD, the FBI, a lawyer (his choice was John Abt, a communist supporter) or his own family?

There is no conclusive proof that Oswald brought the rifle to work. The "bag" that was claimed to have contained it seems to be of the wrong dimensions. The people who saw him carrying it in state that he carried it in a way which is inconsistent with it holding a dissassembled rifle. Though the gun was said to have been well oiled there was no oil stains on the paper. He was not seen carrying the paper to the Paines house. No one has identified where he could have hidden the gun before use.

Then of course having to re-assemble a rifle makes it even more improbable that it was ready to fire accurately without calibration of the sights.

I do not believe he fired the fatal shot that killed JFK. There are conflicting testimonies wrt the person who shot Tippet and some of the descriptions do not match Oswald or his clothes. Shells were found at the scene though Oswald had a revolver. This raises the question of why they would be deliberately left there by the killer.

Since I do not believe Oswald's role was to kill the president his rifle was unimportant to the killers. Though initially a rifle identified as a Mauser was claimed to be the assassination rifle.

Some believe that Tippet was supposed to kill Oswald and that was why he was out of his district. I am not convinced of that but there was no reason for him to be where he was or to have stopped Oswald in any case. As to the possible spilling of the beans don't forget that we have no idea what was said during the interviews since (contrary to all standard or rational procedure) all notes from the interview were destroyed. That alone should raise red flags galore.

The rifle was kept in the Paine garage. That afternoon when the police came it was gone. He brought a package to work that day, he said were curtain rods for the room he was renting (a room that already had curtain rods), the rifle was found on the 6th floor. The paper had fibers matching those of the cloth that was in the Paine garage. Pretty conclusive to me. As to the Mauser observation there is a film shot at the TBD of a law enforcement officer holding the MC rifle.

There is no conflicting testimony with regards to Tippet that are believable. A number of people witnessed the shooting and Oswald running away. Several identified him in a line up. The gun he had on his person had bullets matched to the exclusiion of all other weapons to the one that killed Tippett. There is not one shred of evidence that Tippet was anything other than an honest cop but conspiracy people just have to do character assassination to prove their crackpot theories.

To say his rifle was unimportant is absurd. The whole plot was to frame Oswald and his rifle as the killer/weapon. Again, why would they give him a 'crappy rifle.' Makes no sense.

Oswald was witnessed by several people emptying the revolver as he ran away. He was arrested with the weapon in the act of shooting another police officer. I believe that is called resisting arrest and attempted murder.

In fact no notes were taken during the initial interviews with Oswald. But later the participants all filed reports. This includes, Dallas Police, FBI, Secret Service and later a Postal Inspector. That may raise red flags to you but the alternative is all of these people were in on the conspiracy/cover up of which there is no evidence to support.

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.