WHEN does Oswald crystallize into the patsy?

[Jason Ward]

1 hour ago, George Sawtelle said:

So LBJ, Hoover, and others know before LBJ leaves Parkland how many bullets hit Kennedy and where.

But the shooters don't know because of the misses and because of the complicated Connally wounds.

Jason

Because of the trac, doctors were not sure if the throat wound was entrance or exit. Plus the doctors were puzzled about the back wound because they found no exit and no bullet. And the bullet only entered an inch or two into Kennedy's back. There was no definite conclusion on all the wounds.

If you are a shooter and you use a scope, you will know if you hit or miss your target. Even if you don't use a scope you'll know.

 

George,

Thanks again for the polite conversation. To my set of priorities the whole issue with the Zapruder film is simply a yes or no question. If there was more than a single shooter, then in my opinion the evidentiary value of the Zapruder film is concluded. Despite the preoccupation over 50 years of trying to determine the location of Shooters, the number of wounds, and other tactical details, in my view all of this is irrelevant once it is established that there is more than a single gunman.

It isn't pivotal to prove how the murder happened, it is pivotal to discover who paid for the bullet. The Zapruder film is grossly overvalued. Once we had the testimony of the Dallas doctors and once we saw the Zapruder film - that should be the end of our concern with the photographic evidence, Dealey Plaza witness testimony relating to shots fired, ballistics, Etc. In my opinion.  None of this reveals the hidden agenda nor The Hidden investors.

 

Jason

Edited September 6, 2017 by Jason Ward

[George Sawtelle]

We'll just have to politely agree to disagree on this I guess.  I've shot at deer standing perfectly still with a modern scope and was certain I hit him,  only to see him run away.   I've also been with guys who thought they missed but found a wounded deer a short time later.   Granted we are not professionals, but we also are shooting at a stationary target with good overall conditions.

So with the known misses, with Connally's strange wounds, and the Dallas doctors near total certainty on Kennedy's wounds - I judge it unlikely that the murderers know with much confidence about the position and number of wounds.   So I just can't agree that revealing the alleged editors of the Z film will reveal the assassination CEO because IMO only those who see the body can know with certainty what could/should be covered up.    The cover up group is unaffiliated with the assassination group, the evidence suggests (to me).

Jason

Brugioni said that the men who took the original to him on Saturday night told him to concentrate on two areas of the film as he selected prints for his briefing boards... the area near the corner of Elm and Houston and the area before the limo passed behind the Stemmons freeway sign on Elm. As the limo made the turn onto Elm from Houston Kennedy was shot in the back and as the limo approached the Stemmons sign he was hit in the throat. 

The film given to the Warren Commission did not include frames before Z173 and Z208-Z212. Thus the Warren Commission did not see the effect of the first shot that hit Kennedy in his back nor the second shot that hit Kennedy in his throat.

The plotters knew when Kennedy was hit and where on his body he was hit.

I don't like to tell people what to do so with respect I humbly suggest you do a little more reading on this subject. If you are really interested finding out the truth, you will read DB Thomas, "Hear No Evil", the finest account of the forensic evidence of the case and Douglas Horne, whose articles can be accessed on the internet. 

 

Edited September 7, 2017 by George Sawtelle

[Paul Trejo]

1 hour ago, George Sawtelle said:

 ...read DB Thomas, "Hear No Evil", the finest account of the forensic evidence of the case and Douglas Horne, whose articles can be accessed on the internet. 

George,

The following is my opinion.

I think Douglas Horne is an expert on the forensics, just like David Lifton his ostensible mentor.   But you're still reversing the scenario, and then forcing it to make it fit.

The JFK Cover-Up is all AFTER THE FACT.   All of it.  I realize that David Lifton disagrees with me on this point.  That's OK, because I disagree with him on this single point.

The JFK Kill Team is not only different from the JFK Cover-Up Team -- but these two HATED EACH OTHER (to use the strongest term for clarity).

• The JFK Kill Team wanted to blame the COMMUNISTS.  That's why they sheep-dipped Lee Harvey Oswald as a Red in New Orleans and Mexico City.   (This was the Radical Right.)
• The JFK Cover-up Team wanted to blame NOBODY BUT OSWALD.  The FBI tampered with TONS of evidence to defend the Lone Nutter CT.  (This was the US Government.)

The Lone Nutter CT is baloney.  That may be all that you and I can agree on -- but that's a start.

The only other rational alternatives to the LN CT that I see are this: (1) the Radical Left did it; or (2) the Radical Right did it.

The JFK Kill Team was very clear -- the Radical Left did it.  But the US Government knew this was false; and that (2) was true.

However, the US Government didn't want to go after the Radical Right -- why not?

The only reason I recognize is that it would have started a Civil Dispute inside the USA -- maybe riots -- and there was a Cold War raging.  We could not risk the USSR interferring.

Professor David Wrone (2009) said that in his neighborhood on 11/22/1963, the people he knew "immediately" took hatchets outside to chop down all the John Birch Society billboards on the highway.   There was a lot of suspicion of General Walker in the first hour after the JFK assassination.

Those suspicions were so right.  Nor did the Radical Right propose that Lee Oswald acted ALONE -- but they kept insisting that he acted as part of a Communist PLOT.   Walker told this to the Warren Commission in 1964.  So did Bernie Schwarz.  So did Revilo P. Oliver.   IT'S REAL.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited September 7, 2017 by Paul Trejo
typos

[Jason Ward]

2 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

We'll just have to politely agree to disagree on this I guess.  I've shot at deer standing perfectly still with a modern scope and was certain I hit him,  only to see him run away.   I've also been with guys who thought they missed but found a wounded deer a short time later.   Granted we are not professionals, but we also are shooting at a stationary target with good overall conditions.

So with the known misses, with Connally's strange wounds, and the Dallas doctors near total certainty on Kennedy's wounds - I judge it unlikely that the murderers know with much confidence about the position and number of wounds.   So I just can't agree that revealing the alleged editors of the Z film will reveal the assassination CEO because IMO only those who see the body can know with certainty what could/should be covered up.    The cover up group is unaffiliated with the assassination group, the evidence suggests (to me).

Jason

Brugioni said that the men who took the original to him on Saturday night told him to concentrate on two areas of the film as he selected prints for his briefing boards... the area near the corner of Elm and Houston and the area before the limo passed behind the Stemmons freeway sign on Elm. As the limo made the turn onto Elm from Houston Kennedy was shot in the back and as the limo approached the Stemmons sign he was hit in the throat. 

The film given to the Warren Commission did not include frames before Z173 and Z208-Z212. Thus the Warren Commission did not see the effect of the first shot that hit Kennedy in his back nor the second shot that hit Kennedy in his throat.

The plotters knew when Kennedy was hit and where on his body he was hit.

I don't like to tell people what to do so with respect I humbly suggest you do a little more reading on this subject. If you are really interested finding out the truth, you will read DB Thomas, "Hear No Evil", the finest account of the forensic evidence of the case and Douglas Horne, whose articles can be accessed on the internet. 

 

Ok, George, thanks again for the polite conversation.  I'll consider what you say further.

 

Jason

[Jason Ward]

2 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

We'll just have to politely agree to disagree on this I guess.  I've shot at deer standing perfectly still with a modern scope and was certain I hit him,  only to see him run away.   I've also been with guys who thought they missed but found a wounded deer a short time later.   Granted we are not professionals, but we also are shooting at a stationary target with good overall conditions.

So with the known misses, with Connally's strange wounds, and the Dallas doctors near total certainty on Kennedy's wounds - I judge it unlikely that the murderers know with much confidence about the position and number of wounds.   So I just can't agree that revealing the alleged editors of the Z film will reveal the assassination CEO because IMO only those who see the body can know with certainty what could/should be covered up.    The cover up group is unaffiliated with the assassination group, the evidence suggests (to me).

Jason

Brugioni said that the men who took the original to him on Saturday night told him to concentrate on two areas of the film as he selected prints for his briefing boards... the area near the corner of Elm and Houston and the area before the limo passed behind the Stemmons freeway sign on Elm. As the limo made the turn onto Elm from Houston Kennedy was shot in the back and as the limo approached the Stemmons sign he was hit in the throat. 

The film given to the Warren Commission did not include frames before Z173 and Z208-Z212. Thus the Warren Commission did not see the effect of the first shot that hit Kennedy in his back nor the second shot that hit Kennedy in his throat.

The plotters knew when Kennedy was hit and where on his body he was hit.

I don't like to tell people what to do so with respect I humbly suggest you do a little more reading on this subject. If you are really interested finding out the truth, you will read DB Thomas, "Hear No Evil", the finest account of the forensic evidence of the case and Douglas Horne, whose articles can be accessed on the internet. 

 

George,

I just read what Paul wrote and I feel in simple terms his is a pivotal point: There is no reason to go to such elaborate efforts to make Oswald into a Castro loving communist and then go to such an elaborate effort to sell him as a simple lone nut.  Obviously, then, the people who communized him had a different agenda than the people who took over after 22 November.  

If you just want to kill JFK, that's easily done without wasting the very costly investment of a sheep-dipped Oswald as a patsy with his fake FPCC club and so forth.   OTOH, if you want the public to think that JFK was killed by a Commie-Castro plot so that we invade Cuba or otherwise ratchet up the Cold War, you want the Warren Commission to find conspiracy everywhere to the point of another red-scare or even war.  Don't you agree?

 

Jason

Edited September 7, 2017 by Jason Ward

[Jason Ward]

1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

George,

...

However, the US Government didn't want to go after the Radical Right -- why not?

The only reason I recognize is that it would have started a Civil Dispute inside the USA -- maybe riots -- and there was a Cold War raging.  We could not risk the USSR interferring.

...

 

Paul, 

I agree the risk of another Civil War - which is after all a proxy for the ongoing Left versus Right wars hot and cold - was feared by Hoover and LBJ.    The battle lines were already drawn with the Civil Rights movement; an assassination blamed on the Right could have sparked domestic chaos.  But I discount the USSR risk - much like the CIA, Soviet powers and earth-girdling abilities were very much oversold to the public, and both Hoover and LBJ knew it.  They used their USSR fear mongering to propel the coverup, but in reality they had little fear of the USSR.

However, I think regardless of who pulled the trigger, who bought the bullets, and who organized the assassination, LBJ and Hoover have to go with Lone Nut.  There's quite a few other fears potentially shared by Hoover and LBJ that either folds into the Civil Chaos risk you mention or rivals this risk in terms of political horror:

1.  I think the biggest non-civil-chaos fear on the mind of LBJ is simply that he himself gets blamed for Kennedy's death.   He's not more than one or two degrees of separation from Walker, Hunt, Murchison, Banister, Milteer, and the whole corrupt Dallas municipal establishment.   Many CTs have room for LBJ's advanced knowledge of the assassination, and even if LBJ is totally innocent here, he knows very well that the #1 beneficiary of the murder is apparently LBJ himself.  ANY talk of conspiracy is automatically bad for LBJ in political terms.
2. Hoover cannot have a conspiracy because that makes the FBI incompetent.  I think Hoover would rather suffer a painful war or most anything else than suffer damage to the FBI's reputation.  Banister's role here has Hoover petrified.   LN is the only option.
3. Fear of retaliation = obviously the Right is serious and seriously dangerous.  It doesn't take much for Milteer to kill someone and it doesn't take much to bribe insiders to reveal Washington's dirty little secrets.  LBJ has so many skeletons in his closet and Hoover's sexuality mean they don't want a conflict of accusations with anyone who rivals their power.   They want to foreclose any possibility of going after the Right because the Right can fight back and ruin careers.
4. Blackmail - extortion potential.   Is there anything Hoover loves more than knowing a secret but keeping it secret so that he can extract favors and a lifetime in office?  I think he who knows who the real conspirators are is a very powerful man - it's the reason Nixon agreed to pay off Howard Hunt with a million....

Anyway, some of this arguably is in line with keeping the country united and saving democracy, or keeping the USSR out of it as you say - but I have to believe LBJ and Hoover were also thinking along the very selfish ideas I outline in 4 ways above.  The assassination could have been catastrophic for Hoover and LBJ but easily survived by the country if they didn't manage it very carefully.  I mean the Right could almost have pawned off LBJ as the lone nut if they felt like it.

 

 

Jason

Edited September 7, 2017 by Jason Ward

[Paul Trejo]

12 hours ago, Jason Ward said:

Paul, 

I agree the risk of another Civil War - which is after all a proxy for the ongoing Left versus Right wars hot and cold - was feared by Hoover and LBJ.    The battle lines were already drawn with the Civil Rights movement; an assassination blamed on the Right could have sparked domestic chaos.  

But I discount the USSR risk - much like the CIA, Soviet powers and earth-girdling abilities were very much oversold to the public, and both Hoover and LBJ knew it.  They used their USSR fear mongering to propel the coverup, but in reality they had little fear of the USSR.

<snip>

Jason

Jason,

I agree that in most scenarios the USSR was a very small risk.   However - I can envision one scenario in which the risk of USSR interference could increase dramatically.

In this scenario, the FBI would go after the Radical Right Minutemen, who were known to exist nationwide, coast-to-coast, in probably 48 States.  The FBI had no idea how many there were -- since they only found a very partial membership list.   What if there were thousands?   The FBI knew that the Minutemen were heavily armed.

If the FBI could not round them all up -- then the USA would have to call in the Coast Guard and the National Guard and so forth.

Now -- how would that look in 1964?   Would the Minutemen give up?   No!  Would some among the National Guard switch sides?   Possibly.   Would that not look like a Civil Conflict?   Now -- let me extend the scenario and propose that this Civil Conflict went on for a solid year -- hypothetically -- do you suppose in this scenario that the Communist Party USA would stay out of it?   Not likely.

And if it went on for a solid year, and the CPUSA saw an opening (say the Civil Rights opening) and called for Soviet support -- then would the USSR be tempted to interfere?  I think so.  

If so -- then the Radical Right would have seriously stepped up their accusations of Treason -- and then there really would have been chaos.  Maybe even Civil War leading to World War III.  It wasn't impossible in the early 1960's.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited September 7, 2017 by Paul Trejo
typos

[Paul Trejo]

47 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

Paul, 

<snip>

However, I think regardless of who pulled the trigger, who bought the bullets, and who organized the assassination, LBJ and Hoover have to go with Lone Nut.  There's quite a few other fears potentially shared by Hoover and LBJ that either folds into the Civil Chaos risk you mention or rivals this risk in terms of political horror:

1.  I think the biggest non-civil-chaos fear on the mind of LBJ is simply that he himself gets blamed for Kennedy's death.   He's not more than one or two degrees of separation from Walker, Hunt, Murchison, Banister, Milteer, and the whole corrupt Dallas municipal establishment.   Many CTs have room for LBJ's advanced knowledge of the assassination, and even if LBJ is totally innocent here, he knows very well that the #1 beneficiary of the murder is apparently LBJ himself.  ANY talk of conspiracy is automatically bad for LBJ in political terms.
2. Hoover cannot have a conspiracy because that makes the FBI incompetent.  I think Hoover would rather suffer a painful war or most anything else than suffer damage to the FBI's reputation.
3. Fear of retaliation = obviously the Right is serious and seriously dangerous.  It doesn't take much for Milteer to kill someone and it doesn't take much to bribe insiders to reveal Washington's dirty little secrets.  LBJ has so many skeletons in his closet and Hoover's sexuality mean they don't want a conflict of accusations with anyone who rivals their power.   They want to foreclose any possibility of going after the Right because the Right can fight back and ruin careers.
4. Blackmail - extortion potential.   Is there anything Hoover loves more than knowing a secret but keeping it secret so that he can extract favors and a lifetime in office?  I think he who knows who the real conspirators are is a very powerful man - it's the reason Nixon agreed to pay off Howard Hunt with a million....

Anyway, some of this arguably is in line with keeping the country united and saving democracy, or keeping the USSR out of it as you say - but I have to believe LBJ and Hoover were also thinking along the very selfish ideas I outline in 4 ways above.  The assassination could have been catastrophic for Hoover and LBJ but easily survived by the country if they didn't manage it very carefully.

Jason

Jason,

By the numbers:

1.   How would LBJ get blamed for the death of JFK if somebody named the Communists or the Radical Right as the JFK killers?   I don't see it.   In my perception, LBJ was never associated with Walker, Hunt, Murchison, Banister, Milteer and the Radical Right in Dallas or anywhere else.  LBJ was spat upon in Dallas.    

1.1.  I realize there are many books on the LBJ-did-it CT, and each one is more fictional than the last, IMHO.  Nobody could stop the talk about an LBJ conspiracy -- but the real fear in the USA was the news coming out of Dallas (and Mexico City) on a daily basis -- it was terrifying -- namely, that the Communists were already attacking America.   LBJ had to calm down the USA in December, 1963.

2.  Hoover's FBI looked incompetent from the start.   The CIA is responsible for foreign surveillance -- the FBI is responsible for domestic surveillance.  The JFK killing happened on Hoover's watch.  The Secret Service was overworked -- but it was the Dallas FBI duty to advise the Secret Service PRS about General Walker and Robert Allen Surrey -- and James Hosty (their pal) refused to do this.  Hosty told the PRS that there were "no dangerous persons in Dallas."  The Secret Service believed him.   This was why Hosty was busted down to tracking stolen cars for the rest of his career.   Everybody in the FBI knew Hosty messed up big time -- and Hoover was ultimately the responsible official in charge. 

2.1.  The Warren Commission did not spare the FBI in their criticisms.   Hoover himself was put under a microscope.  He squirmed. 

3.  There is no way that the Radical Right could bribe anybody in Washington DC.  The real fear is that the Radical Right already had powerful friends in Washington DC among the Senators and Representatives from the South, where waving the Confederate Flag was taken for granted.  Yet even these powerful people never came out directly for the Real Radicals among the Right.

3.1.  Nobody serious was going after LBJ or after Hoover's gay private life.   The Radical Right in the USA had no governmental power in 1963.  That's why they resorted to guerrilla tactics.  

3.2.  And if anybody wanted to raise gay lifestyles, then General Walker would be the first to be exposed -- among many others.  (Remember the book, The Pink Swastika (1995)).   George Lincoln Rockwell was allegedly another.  That was off the table.

4.  It wasn't because JFK was killed that Hoover got a lifetime in office -- but it may have been because of the Lone Nut theory -- which is still working today for millions of Americans -- a half century later.  

4.1.  LBJ loved the genius of this tactic to immediately calm down the whole USA.   Even after Earl Warren admitted that it wasn't the whole story!   Amazing!

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited September 7, 2017 by Paul Trejo
typos

[Jason Ward]

3 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

We'll just have to politely agree to disagree on this I guess.  I've shot at deer standing perfectly still with a modern scope and was certain I hit him,  only to see him run away.   I've also been with guys who thought they missed but found a wounded deer a short time later.   Granted we are not professionals, but we also are shooting at a stationary target with good overall conditions.

So with the known misses, with Connally's strange wounds, and the Dallas doctors near total certainty on Kennedy's wounds - I judge it unlikely that the murderers know with much confidence about the position and number of wounds.   So I just can't agree that revealing the alleged editors of the Z film will reveal the assassination CEO because IMO only those who see the body can know with certainty what could/should be covered up.    The cover up group is unaffiliated with the assassination group, the evidence suggests (to me).

Jason

Brugioni said that the men who took the original to him on Saturday night told him to concentrate on two areas of the film as he selected prints for his briefing boards... the area near the corner of Elm and Houston and the area before the limo passed behind the Stemmons freeway sign on Elm. As the limo made the turn onto Elm from Houston Kennedy was shot in the back and as the limo approached the Stemmons sign he was hit in the throat. 

The film given to the Warren Commission did not include frames before Z173 and Z208-Z212. Thus the Warren Commission did not see the effect of the first shot that hit Kennedy in his back nor the second shot that hit Kennedy in his throat.

The plotters knew when Kennedy was hit and where on his body he was hit.

I don't like to tell people what to do so with respect I humbly suggest you do a little more reading on this subject. If you are really interested finding out the truth, you will read DB Thomas, "Hear No Evil", the finest account of the forensic evidence of the case and Douglas Horne, whose articles can be accessed on the internet. 

 

George, 

I read the altered Z film claims years ago and found it implausible; but I've refreshed my memory somewhat because of your posts.

 Zapruder didn't keep the original for himself.   He kept a copy and gave the original to Life.   Life therefore has no way to convince Z to let them borrow his copy since Life has the original and can make copies anytime.   So I have to go back to my original answer which I had decided years ago: any alteration theory fails because there is always a pristine copy in the hands of Zapruder.  Zapruder testifies that the LIFE film is authentic in 1969 at Clay Shaw's trial.   He tells his own family that he stopped filming to save film when the motorcade rounds Elm and Houston.

https://www.jfk.org/the-collections/abraham-zapruder-film/abraham-zapruder-film-timeline/

https://books.google.com/books?id=axGzCwAAQBAJ&pg=PT23&lpg=PT23&dq=zapruder+sAys+stopped+filming+to+save+film&source=bl&ots=cIv82RiAWZ&sig=7nocwRt-vMkslosOcAvcYgLK_Qs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjbmPqgn5LWAhVLllQKHW_eDoUQ6AEIPTAJ#v=onepage&q=zapruder sAys stopped filming to save film&f=false

 

Jason

[George Sawtelle]

Jason

The altered original was given back to Zapruder and Zapruder gave the copy LIFE had given him (when they took control of the original) back to LIFE. 

All copies of the original that were made at Kodac in Dallas were then in the hands of government officials.

Zapruder did have a copy of the original while the original was altered but only for a few days. I'm not privy to the contract, but I'm sure LIFE stipulated that Zapruder would not be allowed to make copies of the copy LIFE left with him.

What transpired at Hawkeye Works and NPIC once the original arrived from Chicago (LIFE) is important simply because the individuals responsible for the alteration are the killers of JFK (since they would want to cover-up their deed).

And since Hawkeye Works was contracted by the CIA for the U2 project, and NPIC is a CIA installation, it's a good guess that those who altered the film were connected to the CIA at the time of the alteration.

I doubt very seriously that Gen Walker or any radical right entity had any connection to the CIA Lab or Hawkeye Works. 

 

[Jason Ward]

40 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said:

...

cause the individuals responsible for the alteration are the killers of JFK (since they would want to cover-up their deed).

...

Hi George,

Many thanks for the polite conversation!

IMO your reasoning includes a chain of assumptions around who would want to hide the identity of the killers and whether altering the Z film actually obscures the conspirators or not.   I don't see any clear reason to choose from the assumptions you've made versus reasonable alternatives, but maybe you'll be kind enough to clarify your reasoning?

1. Why do you believe ONLY the killers want to obscure the killer's identity?  

LBJ, Hoover, Warren, RFK, DPD, the SS and others all have good reasons to obscure the truth and publicly proclaim the LN narrative. It seems to me you're making a certain assumption that only the killers want to hide the killers' identity when this assumption isn't so certain.

2. Why do you believe altering the Z film "covers up their deed?"

It seems to me you're making an assumption that exposing accurately or obscuring the Z film somehow effects the likelihood of exposing the conspirators.   There were numerous cameras in place and hundreds of witnesses, all well anticipated by the conspirators.   Shots from two or more places are in evidence immediately, and the public version of the Z film enhances the evidence of conspiracy.   Once conspiracy is established by the public Z film, all other details in the film are irrelevant in exposing the conspirators or not.

Thanks again for the discussion, I'm interested in your response.

 

Jason

.

Edited September 7, 2017 by Jason Ward

[George Sawtelle]

Jason

1. Why to do believe only the killers want to obscure the identity of the killers?

2. Why do you believe altering the Z film "covers up their deed"?

The answer to one of your questions answers both.

The alteration of the Z film didn't happen in a vacuum. There was another event that occurred on the day Kennedy was killed that is related to the alteration. The event is of course the arrest of Oswald, the lone nut assassin.

Would you agree that the individuals who killed Kennedy would want to hide their deed by placing the blame on a patsy, a lone nut pychopath? Well, the altertion of the Z film is more of the same. It promotes the lone nut assassin theory and masks what really happened.

 

[Jason Ward]

50 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said:

...

Would you agree that the individuals who killed Kennedy would want to hide their deed by placing the blame on a patsy, a lone nut pychopath? Well, the altertion of the Z film is more of the same. It promotes the lone nut assassin theory and masks what really happened.

 

George

Oswald is in 1963 one of perhaps a dozen Americans who have lived in the USSR by defecting from America.  He's made newspaper, TV, and radio appearances talking about the joys of communism.   He's been arrested for pro-Castro pamphleteering.   He subscribes to The Worker and The Militant.  He speaks Russian; he has a Russian wife.  Best of all, he has a paper trail "proving" he ordered the assassination rifle under the same alias he used in his Fair Play for Cuba phase.

All this is quite counter-produvtive if the conspirators hoped for a LN explanation.  If they want lone nut they get Sirhan Sirhan or John Hinckley as the patsy.   They chose the commie because they wanted blame for Kennedy's death attached to the Communists, right?  

Isn't it obvious Oswald's hyper-unique commie identity is the pivotal attribute the murderers wanted from a patsy?   

 

Jason

Edited September 7, 2017 by Jason Ward

[George Sawtelle]

Jason

Yes Oswald has the record of being a commie.

But he can't be at two places at one time. He can't be shooting from the front and at the same time shooting from the back.

I'm outta here. I think I've discussed this thing enough. It's been fun and I've learned a lot. See you at the next topic Jason.