A framework for analyzing JFKA conspiracy theories (really!)

[Guest]

Hi

Edited February 15, 2023 by Lance Payette

[Charles Blackmon]

2 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

 

6. When an unbelievably shocking and unanticipated event occurs in a crowded public plaza during the noon hour in a major American city, it’s inevitable there will be complete chaos, conflicting and inconsistent eyewitness and earwitness accounts, and wild scrambling and many mistakes on the part of the responding authorities.

It’s unreasonable and unrealistic to overemphasize the inconsistencies and attribute all the inconsistencies and mistakes to sinister intent.

 

If not "sinister intent" then what pray tell is the reason the Warren Commission would not interview the many witnesses (Skinny Holland among others) who saw with their own eyes and heard with their own ears evidence of shots coming from the fence/knoll area? "Sinister intent" being a subjective term for the motive for engaging in a coverup at the very least.

Edited January 29, 2023 by Charles Blackmon
sic

[Michaleen Kilroy]

The railroad men’s stories refute any of the above for me. And the fact the WC/FBI ignored them and/or revised their accounts is all I need to know what the USG was capable of in covering up the facts in this case.

 

And a news photographer caught the smoke on film so many of the railroad men had mentioned.

Game, set, match on this evidence alone confirming conspiracy.

Edited January 29, 2023 by Michaleen Kilroy

[Benjamin Cole]

Lance-

Certainly you entitled to you views, and I welcome debate. 

But at his late date and remove, determining who is "the real Oswald" takes inter-generational mental telepathy with the dead, no? 

Was LHO a dedicated Marxist? A government asset? A young man, lacking a formal education, wandering among ideologies? An opportunist who needed money? A cold-blooded murderer? A guy who could barely aim a rifle? I have been reading about LHO since 1963. I am not sure. Why are you so sure? 

Ponder this: The circumspect Robert Blakely believes there was a conspiracy to murder JFK. He was head of the HSCA. Surely he knows his stuff. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juyYn9eDSHg&t=8s

This video is a couple of hours long, and my apols, but in there Blakey ID's Eladio Del Valle and Hermininio Diaz as possible triggermen. But it is not who fired the gun, but who paid for the bullets. 

https://defector.com/decades-later-the-jfk-assassination-still-keeps-some-secrets?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

This was just posted by Douglas Caddy. Blakey reiterates his views, with suspicions on Johnny Roselli and William Harvey. 

The number of highly intelligent, well-informed and skeptical people who suspect a conspiracy to murder JFK is remarkable. 

When you say you know the real LHO---a knowledge that has eluded the rest of us---I wonder if you are moving into hubris. 

I have been married twice. Sometimes I wonder if I ever really knew either one of my wives. 

You know LHO? A little divine inspiration, perhaps? 

 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

Lance- do you realize that "plausible" is a very low standard of proof. It is lower than possible or probable. Of course, the government's failure to timely conduct a proper investigation and the inability of private researchers to compel testimony makes your challenge a bit unfair.    

That being said, Carlos Marcello confessed to planning the assassination during the CAMTEX sting operation. his confession was recorded by his cellmate who was an FBI informant. Likewise, Trafficante told his attorney Ragano shortly before he died that Carlos had made a mistake and should have gone after RFK instead of "geovanni". then there are the statements reported by Aleman, Becker and Partin to the FBI about threats made to JFK. John Davis also developed other evidence as well. These accounts more than satisfy your "plausible" standard and likely approach the probable standard as well.   And we also know that Marcello had a history of assassinating public figures, using a patsy and getting away with the murder. He had the means and motive to kill the president and the mafia knew Hoover would not pursue them since they had him by the shorthairs with his horse racing problem (Costello was giving him tips on fixed races). 

and you also require posters to accept the caricature that was painted of Lee Oswald. Lee Oswald's hiring at the TSBD made a Dallas assassination possible. Motorcades historically went down Main Street. Once they learned LHO was hired to work on a building along the parade route, Dallas became the preferred location.

And there was indeed reasonable doubt as demonstrated by the 7 mock trials conducted since 1967 by law schools and bar associations. Six of the 7 mock trials have resulted in acquittals or hung juries (full disclosure- Bill Simpich and I served as defense counsel in the last mock trial in 2017 at the South Texas College of Law that resulted in a hung jury). And these mock trials allowed all the evidence to be admitted. There are severe issues with much of the evidence used to link Oswald to the assassination. Some of it might have been excluded and other key evidence would have had an instruction for the jury to consider the challenges to the veracity of the evidence when determining how much weight to give it.      

[Michaleen Kilroy]

2 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

But it is not who fired the gun, but who paid for the bullets

This statement reminded me of this less-known story about the origin of the bullets:

https://www.nytimes.com/1977/12/02/archives/fbirecords-trace-oswald-and-bullets-newlyreleased-files-describe.html

Key excerpt:

Perplexing Piece of Evidence

Agents initially were perplexed by a piece. of evidence they found. The bullets were 6.5‐millimeter Mannlicher‐Carcano ammunition. Agents determined that the manufacturer was the Western Cartridge Corporation of East Alton, Ill.

Agents in Illinois examined the company's production records and found that the concern had produced four million rounds of this type of ammunition for the U.S. Marine Corps in 1954.

The interesting thing about this order is that it is for ammtmion which does not fit and cannot be fired in any of the. USMC weapons,’ said an F.B.I. memorandum dated Dec. 2, 1963.

“This gives rise to the obvious speculation that it is a contract for ammunition placed by C.I.A. with Western under a USMC cover for concealment purposes.”

in other words, bureau officials speculated that the Central Intelligence Agency .11,d used the Marine Corps as a cover to purchase ammunition in secret.

End of excerpt

The story goes on to say that half the four million bullets were purchased by a company for commercial sale in 1962. That means to me that there’s a 50% chance the bullets allegedly used by LHO in the assassination were quite possibly directly from the CIA’s secret stockpile.

 

Edited January 30, 2023 by Michaleen Kilroy

[Benjamin Cole]

3 hours ago, Michaleen Kilroy said:

This statement reminded me of this less-known story about the origin of the bullets:

https://www.nytimes.com/1977/12/02/archives/fbirecords-trace-oswald-and-bullets-newlyreleased-files-describe.html

Key excerpt:

Perplexing Piece of Evidence

Agents initially were perplexed by a piece. of evidence they found. The bullets were 6.5‐millimeter Mannlicher‐Carcano ammunition. Agents determined that the manufacturer was the Western Cartridge Corporation of East Alton, Ill.

Agents in Illinois examined the company's production records and found that the concern had produced four million rounds of this type of ammunition for the U.S. Marine Corps in 1954.

The interesting thing about this order is that it is for ammtmion which does not fit and cannot be fired in any of the. USMC weapons,’ said an F.B.I. memorandum dated Dec. 2, 1963.

“This gives rise to the obvious speculation that it is a contract for ammunition placed by C.I.A. with Western under a USMC cover for concealment purposes.”

in other words, bureau officials speculated that the Central Intelligence Agency .11,d used the Marine Corps as a cover to purchase ammunition in secret.

End of excerpt

The story goes on to say that half the four million bullets were purchased by a company for commercial sale in 1962. That means to me that there’s a 50% chance the bullets allegedly used by LHO in the assassination were quite possibly directly from the CIA’s secret stockpile.

 

MK---

Yes, like every other aspect of the JFKA, even the ammo has a curious back story that is a little off or a lot odd.

Among the many, many unanswered questions about the JFKA and that era is why were four millions rounds of Western ammo 6.5 mm produced for the USMC, when the USMC had no weapons to fire the ammo.

Was there a plan to cheaply acquire WWII weapons, to provide to anti-communist forces in the Western Hemisphere? The weapons would not be traceable back to the US? 

 

 

[James DiEugenio]

But remember, Oswald only bought four bullets.

From where, no one knows.

I thin Lance just threw another boomerang.

[Mark Ulrik]

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

But remember, Oswald only bought four bullets.

From where, no one knows.

I thin Lance just threw another boomerang.

What is your theory about the cartridges? And how can you be sure he didn't buy (or steal) more than four?

[Andrej Stancak]

Several of Lance's points are useful and may stimulate an interesting debate. However, the onus is on the defendants of the official version as outlined in the Warren Commission report to prove unequivocally that Oswald killed the President including explaining in credible fashion his motives for his alleged crime. This has not been accomplished thus far. Even such a seemingly simple thing as Lee Oswald's whereabouts from 12noon till he left the building has not been explained using persuasive evidence. 

I may try to follow Lance's points in the future; for now I can only apologise for not giving it a try as I do not have enough time and focus at the moment to elaborate a succint account.

Edited January 30, 2023 by Andrej Stancak

[Charles Blackmon]

11 minutes ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Several of Lance's points are useful and may stimulate an interesting debate. However, the onus is on the defendants of the official version as outlined in the Warren Commission report to prove unequivocally that Oswald killed the President including explaining in credible fashion his motives for his alleged crime.

The only motive I have ever heard opined is that he wanted to be famous. I don't recall that any family member or L.E. or anyone else say he actually said that.

It is true that perps have been convicted without the motive being established, but there really needs to be a motive in this case to be convinced he pulled the trigger.

[Ron Ege]

10 minutes ago, Charles Blackmon said:

The only motive I have ever heard opined is that he wanted to be famous. I don't recall that any family member or L.E. or anyone else say he actually said that.

It is true that perps have been convicted without the motive being established, but there really needs to be a motive in this case to be convinced he pulled the trigger.

Charles, thanks.

Agree.  A 100 percent agreed to (proven), beyond a shadow of a doubt) LHO motive for the JFKA, would be great place to begin - to eventually reach the final conclusion, answering the "whodunit" of the JFKA.

As you seem to have implied, Oswald's motive has really never been 100 percent established.

And all I have ever read - seems to have boiled down to, in the end, relative thereto, are suspicions, suppositions, hypotheticals, theories, and the like; some with seemingly good circumstantial evidence and some not so much.

It would be wonderfully illustrative/instructive if we just had a "LHO's life brain memory tape" to view, so we could conclusively prove everything that has been proffered as to "who "really was" - especially, the exact moment in his rather short life, when he (if he did) decided to kill JFK   Otherwise, me thinks it is just "guess work" on the part of whomever, who may proffering an alleged motive for him.

That, of course is a non-starter, so where are we, and where do we go - for lack thereof?

Probably just me, but if Oswald's motive was as simple as one day, on the spur of the moment (for whatever reason) he "went off his nut" and decided to shoot JFK, or he coldly/calculatingly (psychopathically?) planned it much ahead (days, weeks, months, years?) - IOW, just an "Average Joe", with nothing in his 24 years, other than maybe some form of undeniably causal mental illness, pointing to him being just and only, that - why is there so much controversy, relative to his guilt, e.g., LNer vs CTer - almost 60 years later?

People in either camp (or both) cannot possibly be totally responsible for such a prolonged controversy.  Caveat; sure, the waters could be muddied somewhat by one side or the other, given their view of the totality of the "evidence". 

Ma-a-ybe, if every government agency just released every record that is "still classified for national security reasons" (not buying that excuse), then the controversy might just go away?

Wonder how many, over the years, how many of those records have already found their way into the "circular file/file 13"?

In any case, with ALL the records available for scrutiny, me thinks Oswald's "motive" might just become apparent, helping us ultimately reach the answer (unequivocally) to the "whodunit" question.

Ponder this: If some TRULY "Average Joe", even in '63, or during the intervening years, or just recently - assassinated a POTUS and then killed a police officer, and then, in police custody, was himself killed by just an "ordinary citizen" who allegedly just, out of the goodness of his heart, did not want to see the president's wife suffer the publicity of a trial of the accused - how long would it take to determine, beyond a shadow if ANY doubt, that that "Average Joe" in question, truly, acted independently?

Among others, I thank Mr. Bauer for, in his enviably inimitable fashion, alluding in the past (as I remember it, anyway), to some of the above, which prompted this post.  Joe, it's a compliment! 

 

 

remember it, anyway!
 

 

 

[Guest]

On 1/29/2023 at 11:40 AM, Charles Blackmon said:

If not "sinister intent" then what pray tell is the reason the Warren Commission would not interview the many witnesses (Skinny Holland among others) who saw with their own eyes and heard with their own ears evidence of shots coming from the fence/knoll area? "Sinister intent" being a subjective term for the motive for engaging in a coverup at the very least.

Bye

Edited February 15, 2023 by Lance Payette

[Guest]

On 1/29/2023 at 7:09 PM, Benjamin Cole said:

But at his late date and remove, determining who is "the real Oswald" takes inter-generational mental telepathy with the dead, no? 

Bye

Edited February 15, 2023 by Lance Payette

[Guest]

On 1/29/2023 at 8:52 PM, Lawrence Schnapf said:

Lance- do you realize that "plausible" is a very low standard of proof. It is lower than possible or probable. Of course, the government's failure to timely conduct a proper investigation and the inability of private researchers to compel testimony makes your challenge a bit unfair. 

Hi

Edited February 15, 2023 by Lance Payette