LHO Not Innocent?

[Norman T. Field]

I highly reccomend the book 'The man who knew too much' for those who believe LHO was anything other than a well placed patsy. 

[Jonathan Cohen]

12 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Quit making stuff up. Hargrove's list has not been debunked.

You are one of those LNers who add nothing useful to the forum, and therefore should be banned.

The fact that he, you or anyone, considers James Wilcott as evidence for Oswald being a CIA employee invalidates his entire list. I must be doing something right if the likes of you are crying about my presence here. That the good Lord above that you were rightfully stripped of your moderator duties.

Edited Monday at 01:47 PM by Jonathan Cohen

[Sandy Larsen]

5 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

The fact that he, you or anyone, considers James Wilcott as evidence for Oswald being a CIA employee invalidates his entire list.

 

Show me the proof that CIA employee James Wilcott was wrong. (When he said that the scuttlebutt in the payroll office was that there was an Oswald Project from which Oswald was paid.)

 

[Sandy Larsen]

7 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

 

Duplicate deleted.

Edited Monday at 09:08 PM by Sandy Larsen

[Jonathan Cohen]

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Show me the proof that CIA employee James Wilcott was wrong. (When he said that the scuttlebutt in the payroll office was that there was an Oswald Project from which Oswald was paid.)

Neither you, me nor anyone else can "prove" what employees in a government office building may have said to one another decades ago.

But since we literally had this same discussion three years ago, I repeat that @W. Tracy Parnell has already offered a perfectly plausible and logical alternative to Wilcott’s completely unsubstantiated claims, which, by the way, had absolutely nothing to do with a laughable and idiotic decades-long doppelganger scheme involving Lee Oswald and his mother.

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/03/james-wilcott.html?m=1

[Ron Bulman]

On 10/12/2024 at 2:27 PM, Nick Bartetzko said:

If the scenario of a fake assassination attempt was really true and Oswald was an FBI and CIA asset/informant, then Oswald would be the perfect character to blame for the real assassination. I suspect he might have been aware of a faked attempt, but maybe not necessarily in the TSBD building. I think he caught on quite quickly and went home to get that pistol and meet at the theater as had been previously agreed upon. This might explain why he also left his wedding ring. 

Hi Nick.  Your words echo my thoughts in part.  I read years ago of speculation, albeit, of a fake assassination by "pro" Castro Cubans to create retaliatory action by JFK.  Oswald fed such by handler(s), told to observe others at the TSBD or some other such thing.  

I don't believe the second-floor encounter anymore thanks to Bart Kamp's work (and of course Uncle Malcom before him).

If Oswald was "out front with Shelly" and first heard from those coming back in JFK had actually been shot what would he have thought?  Get the hell out of here then?  Maybe went back in looking for a contact he was supposed to meet then not seeing him a bell went off in his head.

Then to meet his only hope left, a contact at the Texas Theater if things went wrong?

[Richard Price]

The only thing I  have to add to this conversation is that, as an American, you are presumed innocent UNTIL proven guilty.  Regardless of all the bantering back and forth about whether LHO was in some way working/affiliated with any of the intelligence agencies, it is completely irrelevant.  I do not believe he could have been proven guilty immediately after the act and with the revelations since that time, I am absolutely sure he could not be proven guilty now.  Just my honest opinion, you may feel otherwise, but I think it would be far more satisfying to see hard evidence to the contrary.  Thanks to all who study this obfuscation of truth.