Thomas Graves Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 (edited) Or was he just an innocent victim who was somehow manipulated into being the patsy? Are there any other possibilities (other than "Oswald did it all by himself")? In other words, could his "involvement" have been as an undercover agent who (thought he was) monitoring the conspiracy? --Tommy Edited May 17, 2013 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Blank Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 he was ordered to become a part of the conspiracy to inform/report on it (or so he thought) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 Is it possible for unicorns to exist in caves in the middle of Mt Everest? Possible? most anything is "possible"... Thomas... ever consider the thought that Oswald was pure military and was ORDERED to fall on the sword... claim he's a patsy... play a part.... are you asking for evidence of the thought or just opinions and discussion? Do we understand that "playing an active part" in the conspiracy and "being entangled by it" still get one INVOLVED but at two very different levels. Elmer Todd ordered to get Perry to reverse his position is "playin an active part" Kellerman orchestrating the Bethesda scene... ACTIVE Oswald went home thursday... something he'd never done. He was specifically called out as not there afterward - the first on the list of employees. If he was PART of the conspiracy.... all he had to do was sit there in the corner of the 6th floor, rifle in hand, and wait for them to catch him. Do the witnesses who place Oswald with Ruby and Tippit give us evidence of involvment of set-up? How would you differentiate the evidence to tell the difference? and if he somehow knew it... all he needed to do was be in a photo at the time of the shots.... His behavior suggests either a devious co-conspirator or a man set up... at least how I see it... today. DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted May 17, 2013 Author Share Posted May 17, 2013 (edited) Thomas... ever consider the thought that Oswald was pure military and was ORDERED to fall on the sword... claim he's a patsy... play a part.... Dear Mr. Josephs, That's a pretty wild idea. Ordering Oswald to take the blame for killing the president! I can just imagine the conversation: "Yes, sir. But I really don't want to, sir. Do I have to, sir?" "Son, If you take the rap, we'll make sure them Texas jailers give you anything you want to eat before you walk "the last mile" to visit Old Sparky ! You can even have some fried chicken!" "Gosh, sir! Uhhh.., hmmm.... Promise, sir ??" "Absolutely! But if you won't do it, then by golly we'll have to court martial you again!" Sincerely, --Tommy Edited May 18, 2013 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Mr. Josephs Of course, LHO may have been just as surprised as anyone else when he was confronted with shouldering the blame for the assassination. If he was a conspirator, or an intelligence agent who had infiltrated a conspiracy, he may have been told, "Just sit tight, we'll get you out of this mess in a couple of days" or "As soon as the other conspirators are rounded up you'll be exonerated". For the two days LHO lived following the assassination, it did not hurt him or anyone else to repeatedly profess his innocence. However, to go further and reveal a conspiracy, possibly orchestrated by the government, would have placed LHO in serious jeopardy. Knowing this, LHO chose the safest option, kept his mouth shut and waited things out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted May 17, 2013 Author Share Posted May 17, 2013 (edited) Thomas... ever consider the thought that Oswald was pure military and was ORDERED to fall on the sword... claim he's a patsy... play a part.... Dear Mr. Josephs, That's a pretty wild idea. Ordering Oswald to take the blame for killing the president! I can just imagine the conversation: "Yes, sir. But I really don't want to, sir. Do I have to, sir?" "Son, If you take the rap, we'll make sure them Texas jailers give you anything you want to eat before you walk "the last mile" to visit Old Sparky ! You can even have some fried chicken!" "Gosh, sir! Uhhh.., hmmm.... Promise, sir ??" "Absolutely! But if you won't do it, then by golly we'll have to court martial you again!" LOL Sincerely, --Tommy PS In another part of your post you seem to be saying that Oswald couldn't have been part of the conspiracy because he tried to get away. Edited May 18, 2013 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Jeffries Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Like Martin, I believe the most probable explanation is that LHO was on assignment at the time of the assassination. Jim Garrison was the first to suggest that he was infiltrating a group he was told was plotting to kill the President, by whatever intelligence outfit he was affiliated with. What exactly he was told to do on November 22, 1963 remains a mystery. Since the evidence shows he was framed by someone for the crime, we have to speculate about how he was lured into the role of patsy. Tommy, are you suggesting LHO was a willing participant in the killing of Kennedy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Well actually, we don't have to speculate if you are willing to at least consider two separate sources who completely and independently described the fact that Oswald was approached in New Orleans by Cuban exiles presenting themselves as Castro agents. Their goal was to set Oswald up as a patsy in an attack on the President...the first attack was planned for the DC area, and explains Oswald's sudden letters to the CP and SWP in that area, his mention of going underground and his talk about going up there including mention of getting a gun. That plan aborted in Sept but Oswald remained in touch with the individuals, in his role of an intelligence dangle. The same people contacting him in Dallas, they are the subversives mentioned in Hosty's remarks of Nov. 23. They set him up to leave Dallas that day but their overall plan fell apart when he figured out something had gone wrong upon hearing of the President's actually being shot and realized he couldn't trust anyone. Of course everyone is free to reject all that, my arguement supporting the scenario is in print, in rediculous detail. It is however a consistent explanation of his behavior and his being a patsy, beyond pure speculation and offered to those wanting to explore it. For everyone else, reject it at will...or trash the sources to your own satisfaction, my own justification for accepting them is also in print. -- Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B. A. Copeland Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 (edited) They set him up to leave Dallas that day but their overall plan fell apart... -- Larry So Larry from your theory/analysis, it is implied that the conspirators (in your view) at least originally intended for Oswald to be kept alive? Edited May 17, 2013 by B. A. Copeland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 B.A., based on the information that John Martino heard and related shortly before his death, Oswald was supposed to meet the folks he had been in contact with, and they would have disposed of him in some fashion which would have incriminated him and established a Castro/Cuban sponsorship to the assassination. Martino had no details on that since his role was quite peripheral, all the knew was that Oswald had been set up and was going to end up being part of the plan to frame Castro for Kennedy's murder... Anything beyond that would be speculation on my part, Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted May 18, 2013 Author Share Posted May 18, 2013 (edited) [...] Tommy, are you suggesting LHO was a willing participant in the killing of Kennedy? Not really, Don, although Richard Case Nagell seemed to think that he was. I put it (in the form of a question) in the title mostly to attract attention to the thread and to stimulate debate. I suspect that no one here believes Oswald was a willing participant although IMHO it is logically possible. Everyone here seems to fall into one of four "camps": 1) Oswald was an innocent victim, 2) Oswald was an informant or agent who had penetrated the conspiracy but was manipulated into the patsy role, 3) Oswald was involved in some other operation that got penetrated and "piggybacked" by the conspirators, and 4) Oswald did it all by himself. But, interestingly, no one wants to consider the possibility that Oswald was involved as a willing conspirator. I'm not saying that he was but I'm wondering whether or not you find abhorrent the possibility that was. If so, why? --Tommy Edited May 19, 2013 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now