Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 03:29 AM Nov 2013

10 Facts About Lee Oswald That 70% of Americans Must Not Understand

These items are condensed from Vincent Bugliosi's Reclaiming History.

1. Lee Oswald killed Officer J.D. Tippit.
Witnesses saw him do this. Other witnesses saw him immediately before and after the shooting in a way that only he could have shot Tippit. Witnesses watched him flee the scene. His jacket was discovered on the path he used in flight. Witnesses watched him avoid police sirens and duck into the Texas Theater. When approached there by police, Oswald tried to pull out the same revolver he had just used to kill Tippit in order to kill another police officer. Oswald was the sole owner and possessor of the revolver used to kill J.D. Tippit.

2. Lee Oswald was the sole owner and possessor of the rifle used to assassinate President Kennedy.
The receipt for its purchase was found in his possession. Pictures of him holding the rifle were taken by his wife, some of which he had distributed and written upon. His method of transporting that rifle from its storage place in Irving to the School Book Depository is well attested to by witnesses. That rifle along with three bullet cartridges were recovered on the sixth floor after Oswald fled. There were only three shots fired that day, and a witness on the fifth floor right below the shooter heard all three shots and all three cartridges hit the floor above.

3. Oswald’s trip to Irving on Thursday night went completely against his normal routine.
In all other cases, Oswald caught a ride back to Irving on Friday and returned to Dallas on Monday morning. His reason for returning – curtain rods – was a lie: his furnished room in Dallas already had curtains. He would not speak to Marina about Kennedy, something they would always do. A noted tightwad, Oswald left over one hundred dollars and his wedding ring with Marina. Oswald told his ride, Frazier, that he would not be returning with him on Friday.

4. The so-called “magic bullet” and other large recovered fragments were all fired from Oswald’s rifle.
CE 399, also referred to as the "pristine" or "magic" bullet, and two of the large fragments, CE 567 and CE 569, were large enough to be identified as being fired from Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all others. This was not on the basis of the faulty CBLA test, but on a comparison to the striations found on them and on a bullet fired from Oswald's rifle. Whatever path CE 399 took to get to that Parkland stretcher, it started its journey from Lee Oswald’s Carcano.

5. Oswald’s prints were discovered in the sniper’s nest on the sixth floor and on his rifle, also found hidden on the sixth floor.
His left palm and right index finger prints were found on the box that appears to have been set up to be a gun rest. Both pointed southwest, the direction the motorcade took heading down Elm. His right palm print was found on another box just behind the gunrest carton. The rifle was virtually clean of prints as if it had been wiped off, but Oswald's palm print was found on the underside of the gun barrel in a place where another part of the rifle kept it from being wiped off.

6. During interrogations, Oswald lied repeatedly to police.
Oswald lied about owning a rifle, and about owning the Mannlicher-Carcano specifically. Oswald lied about being in the backyard photo where he was holding his rifle. Oswald lied about having seen the picture before (his handwriting was found on a copy of the photo among the personal effects of a friend of his). Oswald lied about living at the place where the picture with the rifle was taken. Oswald lied about telling Wesley Frazier the curtain rod story. Oswald lied about putting a long package into Frazier's car that morning. Oswald told police the only thing he'd brought to work that morning was his lunch. Oswald lied about having lunch on the first floor with two other employees (the only one he named, James Jarman, said that he had eaten with no one). Oswald lied about where he'd bought his revolver.

7. Oswald’s verifiable conduct in the month before the assassination precludes any conspiracy.
Oswald was taking driving lessons and had applied for a learner’s permit. He’d rented a post office box for two months on November 1. He’d joined the local chapter of the ACLU. And during his trip to Irving the night before the assassination, he begged his wife to come back and live with him in Dallas. None of this speaks to his being hired as a hit man. Besides this, Oswald wasn’t the kind of person anyone would hire to commit this crime.

8. Oswald’s rifle, the one he used to kill Kennedy, was not the kind of rifle any organization would pick to commit this crime.
It was a $19 mail order rifle that only shot FMJ bullets. In contrast, James Earl Ray had a brand-new $700 rifle ($2000 in today’s money) that used soft-point bullets that would expand on impact and better assure a death shot – it’s a good reason to suspect an actual conspiracy behind MLK’s assassination. In addition, if Oswald had had a silencer on the rifle, the rifle shots may not even have been heard over the crowd noise. This would have helped him escape and thus evade interrogation which could possibly lead police back to the organization conspiring with him. This crime was committed by someone using the only weapon he had available to him.

9. Oswald’s job at the Texas School Book Depository precludes conspiracy in several ways.
Oswald had applied to several jobs, with only the TSBD on the eventual route JFK took through Dallas. Being hired at any of them would have meant no attempt would be possible. When Oswald reported for his first day at work, it was only chance that he was not assigned to an open job in another warehouse which also would have been off the route. In early November, Oswald was expecting this temporary job to soon end and applied for another position well off the eventual parade route. Only an extended fall rush and regular employees being used to put down new flooring kept Oswald at the TSBD through November 22.

10. Oswald not bringing his revolver to work on Thursday morning shows this was an impulsive move he did of his own volition.
If this had been a planned job, why would he not have gotten his revolver to the TSBD and secreted it in a place he could retrieve it from after the shooting? Instead, he had to chance that he could make it back to his rented room and get the revolver then. That shows that the decision to make the attempt on Kennedy’s life was made Thursday, but to get his rifle Oswald had to leave with Frazier that evening. There was no time to prepare for his escape. He had to go to Irving to get his rifle that night or never.

And two bonus arguments for Jack Ruby:

1. If the idea was to silence Oswald so he couldn’t give any evidence that might lead back to the conspiracy, why didn’t he take the first shot he had – Friday evening, when he was in the room with Oswald in possession of his revolver? Instead, he doesn’t shoot and lets Oswald be interrogated for two more days. How could he know he would ever get another chance to shoot Oswald?

2. If Ruby shot Oswald to keep him quiet, why did he shoot him in such a way that guaranteed his arrest – thereby creating EXACTLY the same problem he’d been hired to fix, someone under arrest who could give evidence leading back to the conspiracy?

Lee Oswald was the only shooter in Dealey Plaza that day and no one put him up to it but himself.

If you want more, I've done two threads on this topic back in Creative Speculation. They are more complete summaries of Bugliosi's summary of his argument against Oswald and a conspiracy. The first is Bugliosi: 53 Reasons It Was Lee Harvey Oswald (link) and the second is 32 Reasons and Arguments There Was No Conspiracy Behind Oswald Killing Kennedy (link).
99 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
10 Facts About Lee Oswald That 70% of Americans Must Not Understand (Original Post) Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 OP
Facts? What difference do facts make? longship Nov 2013 #1
What I love is that no one can even settle on what conspiracy is real... Drunken Irishman Nov 2013 #4
D'ya know that Ruby was a Mafia wannabe? longship Nov 2013 #5
Less !! and more facts MIGHT make a cogent post HangOnKids Nov 2013 #8
You forgot Nixon and the Illuminati Bucky Nov 2013 #13
Sort of true billhicks76 Nov 2013 #14
Very well stated. Did you ever read Stephen King's book 11/22/63? Drunken Irishman Nov 2013 #2
Stephen King once wrote Berlin Expat Nov 2013 #16
That's the same reason for 9/11 conspiracies. Dash87 Nov 2013 #23
Yes, I did. Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #17
Gee, you did give it a grand ole try.......not interested HangOnKids Nov 2013 #3
Thank you for your time. n/t Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #15
It's not that they can't understand... zappaman Nov 2013 #34
lol nt BootinUp Nov 2013 #91
You're wrong... SidDithers Nov 2013 #25
EVERY respect. n/t zappaman Nov 2013 #30
Too bad she won't see my reply tho... SidDithers Nov 2013 #31
!!! zappaman Nov 2013 #32
LOL Scurrilous Nov 2013 #35
You must be so proud. Kingofalldems Nov 2013 #52
To be ignored by MaryT / Binka / HangonKids? Abso-fucking-lutely...nt SidDithers Nov 2013 #60
Gee Sid How Is That Vendetta Working Out For You? HangOnKids Nov 2013 #83
Deny it. Go on... SidDithers Nov 2013 #84
Deny What Sid? HangOnKids Nov 2013 #85
You've given documentary evidence that you have an unhealthy stalking fetish. DisgustipatedinCA Nov 2013 #86
An Unhealthy Stalking Fetish HangOnKids Nov 2013 #87
Tell it to the twice banned zombie... SidDithers Nov 2013 #88
Maybe you could take that concern to the ATA? HangOnKids Nov 2013 #95
Sid, you have to be THE inspector gadget of all time on DU. Whisp Apr 2014 #98
Heheh... SidDithers Apr 2014 #99
LOL, make believe is fun! n-t Logical Nov 2013 #58
unbelievable putitinD Nov 2013 #6
I think, simply, the biggest issue is The Straight Story Nov 2013 #7
Government secrecy is a cancer on our society, no doubt. Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #18
I guess I never knew Kennedy read that BootinUp Nov 2013 #93
I don't know that Kennedy did, but it's possible he was the first. Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #94
I think you are right. Much of the conspiracy theory around the JKF assassination that comes from Douglas Carpenter Nov 2013 #9
Got a problem with "the left" Doug? HangOnKids Nov 2013 #10
I would suggest you take a quick look at my journal and my previous posts - over the past several Douglas Carpenter Nov 2013 #11
That's kind of bullying tone you're striking there. Bucky Nov 2013 #12
Bullying? McCarthy? HangOnKids Nov 2013 #21
JFK was no dove's dove, but he was no hawk's hawk either. Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #19
I pretty much agree. He was pretty close to the middle of the cold war bipartisan pre-Vietnam, Douglas Carpenter Nov 2013 #20
Amen! Springslips Nov 2013 #22
DU rec... SidDithers Nov 2013 #24
Fact Botany Nov 2013 #26
The fragments of bullet found in Kennedy's brain Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #36
I tend to believe the late Sen. Ralph Yarborough who was a WW II combat vet. Botany Nov 2013 #37
Handwaving the physical evidence doesn't make it go away. Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #43
That depends on whether you interpret Zapruder frame 313 nyquil_man Nov 2013 #42
Fact: it did Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #89
I don't remember if it was Pierre Sallnger or Arthur Schlesinger Jr. DemocratSinceBirth Nov 2013 #27
That is likely true of the believers of the faith. HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #77
It was William Manchester. Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #92
People can't handle the truth. Herbacious Nov 2013 #28
thanks to you reddread Nov 2013 #54
Kick and Rec! zappaman Nov 2013 #29
You left out who really did it... zappaman Nov 2013 #33
You know it was really aliens. REP Nov 2013 #38
zappaman: 'I don't find JFK's assassination or anything about it a ''source of amusement''' Octafish Nov 2013 #40
Once again putting words into my mouth, Octafish? zappaman Nov 2013 #41
I've read a buncha these threads, Benton D Struckcheon Nov 2013 #59
It seems like the BFEE is responsible for everything that goes wrong in the world. zappaman Nov 2013 #62
But, but, what does it stand for??? n/t Benton D Struckcheon Nov 2013 #64
Bush Family Evil Empire. Warren Stupidity Nov 2013 #71
Thanks!!! Whew! n/t Benton D Struckcheon Nov 2013 #74
The BFEE are guilty of so much... HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #78
Just went through some of the old threads, Benton D Struckcheon Nov 2013 #79
An oilman in Texas? Thats VERY suspicious. HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #80
You seem to be obsessed too. notadmblnd Nov 2013 #76
Thank you for truth and common sense. duffyduff Nov 2013 #39
They're not facts..."precludes any conspiracy theories"...at best it's interpretation...nt joeybee12 Nov 2013 #44
All of the statements under those items are facts. Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #45
No, it's not a fact...sorry... joeybee12 Nov 2013 #48
Feel free to substitute one of the several facts under each item to make up the count. Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #67
I was in the 7th grade in November 1963-here are some facts to which I haven't found answers to this bobthedrummer Nov 2013 #46
Would you accept the answers, even if they were substantive? nyquil_man Nov 2013 #49
I have substantive answers to all of those points but grantcart Nov 2013 #51
Here's the thing, bobthedrummer: none of those change the facts about the assassination. Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #55
I wonder... nyquil_man Nov 2013 #47
If only the head shot had missed... Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #65
I've always wondered, too, nyquil_man Nov 2013 #81
Very Good Observation frank1fm Jan 2014 #97
The fact remains.... Ken Burch Nov 2013 #50
... nyquil_man Nov 2013 #53
Oh I did the search, I found this: Warren Stupidity Nov 2013 #61
Isn't it interesting that he never said anything like that during his lifetime? nyquil_man Nov 2013 #63
You mean the 5 years before he was assassinated by the improbable Sirhan? Warren Stupidity Nov 2013 #66
But he was 'offed' anyway. nyquil_man Nov 2013 #68
They didn't kill Ted, they wrecked his career. Warren Stupidity Nov 2013 #70
Who are they? nyquil_man Nov 2013 #72
You are completely wrong about the head wound. Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #75
The shooters on the grassy knoll were male models. uppityperson Nov 2013 #56
Thanks for the great post!! n-t Logical Nov 2013 #57
I think just about everyone over the age of perhaps 10 in 1963 Warren Stupidity Nov 2013 #69
Bugliosi's volume might be too long and too detailed for some. duffyduff Nov 2013 #73
Jim Moore's book was one of the worst pieces of disinformation I've ever spent 5 minutes over. Zen Democrat Nov 2013 #82
Nicely presented. nt BootinUp Nov 2013 #90
Warren Commission a cover up yet no one has ever read it. frank1fm Jan 2014 #96


(40,416 posts)
1. Facts? What difference do facts make?
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 04:46 AM
Nov 2013

We've got a grand conspiracy going on here where all facts become just another part of the grand conspiracy. (The grand conspirators are omnipotent, no doubt.) You've got a mere ten facts. Do you know how many anomalies there are in the JFK case? Surely the mysteries that are mongered trump all facts, which after all are just part of the coverup.



Drunken Irishman

(34,857 posts)
4. What I love is that no one can even settle on what conspiracy is real...
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 04:59 AM
Nov 2013

Was it the CIA? Was it the CIA and George Bush? Was it Johnson? Nixon? Castro? Or hey, maybe it was the mafia?!


(40,416 posts)
5. D'ya know that Ruby was a Mafia wannabe?
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:13 AM
Nov 2013

Proof right there, I tell you. And Oswald went to Russia!! So there's that. And he tried to go to Cuba!! So Castro had to be involved.

So it was a Mafia/Russian/Cuban/CIA conspiracy! (After all, all grand conspiracies have to include the omnipotent, all seeing CIA.)




(5,082 posts)
14. Sort of true
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:06 AM
Nov 2013

Congessman Loius Stokes said in the 75 reinvestigation there definitely was a conspiracy involving intelligence agencies and other characters and couldn't pin it on someone specifically. Republican operative E Howard Hunt who served time for watergate recorded himself outlining the chain of command to his son in the 2000s. He specifically said the oil men and CIA were in on it because they all hated JFK but it occurred because LBJ was at the top and J Edgar Hoover was 2nd in command. LBJ felt he deserved to win nomination in 1960 as Senate Majority Leader and his mistresses said he confessed to the assassination. He was already a known killer during his rise in Texas in the 50s. E Howard Hunt was a die hard who only admitted he was involved when he became bitter and alienated as he faced death in old age. The above article has so many counter arguments it's bizarre that Vincent didn't see it.


Drunken Irishman

(34,857 posts)
2. Very well stated. Did you ever read Stephen King's book 11/22/63?
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 04:55 AM
Nov 2013

He said he at one point didn't believe Oswald acted alone but during the research concluded he did. Much is fiction, but it paints a very vivid image of Oswald's life leading up to his assassinating Kennedy.

Berlin Expat

(946 posts)
16. Stephen King once wrote
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:17 AM
Nov 2013

in "Danse Macabre" that the reason we like to believe in some grand conspiracy theory to assassinate President Kennedy is because that's easier to accept than it is for us to imagine that a loser, eating greasy, cold fried chicken, a man who'd never accomplished much of anything in his life, could assassinate the most powerful man in the world with a cheap, mail-order rifle.

If a deranged loony with a cheap firearm (under $60 in 2013 dollars) could blow away the President of the United States, what possible chance do any of us regular folks have?

It's a horrifying thought, and we find it far more comforting to suspect a massive, overarching conspiracy rather than imagine that some disturbed individual could shoot us dead with a .25 Raven - or even a crude homemade zip gun - one morning on our way to work. The assassination of President Kennedy remains the defining act of random (political) violence.


(3,220 posts)
23. That's the same reason for 9/11 conspiracies.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 11:38 AM
Nov 2013

The ease by which it was done, and the damage it caused - nobody wanted to believe a bunch of losers who had hung out at the local strip club the night before could hijack 4 planes and use them to kill thousands of people.

There's nothing people hate more than a lack of control or order. The randomness of life drives us crazy.

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
17. Yes, I did.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:19 AM
Nov 2013

It was nice to see that King changed his mind. I used to be a Constant Reader, but I think Bag of Bones was the last one I read until 11/22/63, and then I just read Doctor Sleep. (It looked to me that he "cast" Charlie Hunnam as grown-up Danny Torrance! That would be interesting...)

I do know that Oswald moved a rock and a lot of evil, nasty things that go BFEE in the night went scurrying. But time and chance happen to us all, and that's what brought Kennedy and Oswald together.



(4,291 posts)
3. Gee, you did give it a grand ole try.......not interested
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 04:58 AM
Nov 2013

Octa has debunked all of your top 10 and your bonus 2. I trust Octafish, sorry Bolo.



(4,291 posts)
83. Gee Sid How Is That Vendetta Working Out For You?
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 10:59 PM
Nov 2013

Here let me post this.... because you are so fond of it. And again...... How is that vendetta working for ya?....



(4,291 posts)
85. Deny What Sid?
Thu Nov 14, 2013, 12:05 AM
Nov 2013

That you got shot down in ATA? Now that was fucking priceless, a smack down of epic proportions. Keep the vendetta going Sid, it appears it is all you have. I am laughing my ass off, please have a really great night. You have made mine most enjoyable.



(12,530 posts)
86. You've given documentary evidence that you have an unhealthy stalking fetish.
Thu Nov 14, 2013, 12:12 AM
Nov 2013

Congratulations on being such a well-adjusted individual. You do remember that this thread isn't about your latest target, don't you? It's about Lee Oswald and whether or not he was part of a conspiracy. He was.



(4,291 posts)
87. An Unhealthy Stalking Fetish
Thu Nov 14, 2013, 12:22 AM
Nov 2013

Because everyone just posts threads from 7 years ago. Gee, Binka must have pissed him off somehow.



(24,096 posts)
98. Sid, you have to be THE inspector gadget of all time on DU.
Thu Apr 17, 2014, 05:57 PM
Apr 2014

I don't know how you do it, but you do!

The Straight Story

(48,121 posts)
7. I think, simply, the biggest issue is
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:31 AM
Nov 2013

Our government back then was about as dishonest as one can get, so folks have no way to verify what they say other than to just believe them.

Case in point these days - we drone strike people and simply tell people to believe us, we know they were going to attack the US any moment now, so we had to kill them. No evidence is allowed because of security reasons.

We invaded a country based on lies that we sold the UN and the rest of the world, including our own citizens. We had radio free Iraq set up broadcasting lies mixed with truth (especially on things like camel pox/etc).

How many people were involved in the Iraq conspiracy? We may never know because some believed the lies and hopped on board and helped spread such lies without any malice (ie, they didn't know the truth but had no desire to find it so ignored it and attacked those who did).

9/11 is the same way, there is an official story, and then there are holes in it. Those on the right want to ignore any real investigations (unlike what they desire for Benghazi) because it might make their side look bad in a political way. People who didn't like Kennedy or his politics could easily be manipulated and duped and play into the story unintentionally.

I don't know, I don't generally get involved in this particular issue (though I am covering JFK on the show this week and we are doing a tribute to him) but I can certainly see why so many have problems believing what the few in power push so hard for us to believe.

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
18. Government secrecy is a cancer on our society, no doubt.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:30 AM
Nov 2013

Someone reproduced a quote or definition or something, can't remember who, but it came up in the course of my looking at all this JFK stuff again in the last few weeks. But basically it said that what else was governmental secrets but tyranny? And on the whole, I'd have to agree. Another book I read in the last couple of years called LBJ the first JFK conspiracy theorist, and I'd agree with that, too.

When it comes to things like 9/11 or JFK's assassination, I think they push so hard on the "official stories" because it's a liar seizing the truth and trying to pretend that's been them all along. And the extent of my concern here is the basic facts on the ground: Oswald acting alone, 19 Al-Qaeda members hijacking the planes and crashing them, etc. But Allen Dulles was a crooked son of a bitch, and so is Dick Cheney and George Bush. Dulles tried so hard to get Kennedy to start a war in Cuba, he got his ass fired.

You know, if you've read Asimov, and I'm sure you have, Kennedy seemed to be the kind of guy that waited for a Seldon crisis. When I look at all the evidence the "hawk" side and the "dove" side like to present, it just seems he was playing it down the middle and waiting until he had to take the next step. When were the Foundation novels published? I'll bet Kennedy was the first president who had ever read Asimov in American history...

I think I'm rambling.


(46,636 posts)
93. I guess I never knew Kennedy read that
Thu Nov 14, 2013, 08:49 AM
Nov 2013

so did you know that Krugman is a Foundation freak? Says it lead to his career choice. Asimov is one of the best ever for sci fi.

Douglas Carpenter

(20,226 posts)
9. I think you are right. Much of the conspiracy theory around the JKF assassination that comes from
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:41 AM
Nov 2013

some on the left is based on a romanticized and completely untrue mythology of John F Kennedy as some kind of left-wing dove. This is simply not historically accurate.

Douglas Carpenter

(20,226 posts)
11. I would suggest you take a quick look at my journal and my previous posts - over the past several
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:56 AM
Nov 2013

years and you will see just how nutty it is to question my leftwing credentials. There is nothing left-wing about conspiracy theory. But there are left-wing conspiracy theorist.


(53,557 posts)
12. That's kind of bullying tone you're striking there.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:03 AM
Nov 2013

Don't go all McCarthy on people just cause they disagree with your point of view.

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
19. JFK was no dove's dove, but he was no hawk's hawk either.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 09:07 AM
Nov 2013

Everything I see points to JFK playing both hands as long as he possibly could - keeping all options open. And though I do not agree with others that JFK had decided to withdraw unconditionally from Vietnam right before he was killed, the option was on the table.

Douglas Carpenter

(20,226 posts)
20. I pretty much agree. He was pretty close to the middle of the cold war bipartisan pre-Vietnam,
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 09:39 AM
Nov 2013

post World War II - cold war consensus of the the time which would have been pretty hawkish and supported at that time by the overwhelming majority of Americans of both major parties. It would been unthinkable and politically implausible in the atmosphere of that time with recent memories of having "lost China to the Communist" and forced to a draw in Korea with the Communist for any Commander and Chief to have been seen as surrendering Vietnam to the Communist. People don't realize it today - but aside from a few noble voices and the ravings of a handful of radical academics - the Vietnam War at that point in the early 60's was supported by almost all Americans and certainly backed by virtually the entire media. Any President at that time would have been under overwhelming pressure from almost universal public opinion, the media and the leadership of both parties to prosecute the war in Vietnam aggressively. There would have been few voices to urge otherwise. As with President Obama who like JFK was a centrist by the standards of their era - many on the far right saw JFK as a radical left-wing extremist while many on the left wanted to believe that in spite of all evidence to the contrary JFK was really at least in his heart one of them. Many of the supporters of JFK assassination conspiracy theories hold that same romantic by completely inaccurate view.


(533 posts)
22. Amen!
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 11:37 AM
Nov 2013

I was a believer in JFK conspiracy for a long time. Once you believe in a conspiracy it is hard to escape; pride and cognitive dissidence are powerful masters, therefor many here will not be persuaded, as I was not for a long time.

For me though, eventually logic won out.

Here is hoping.

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
36. The fragments of bullet found in Kennedy's brain
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 02:48 PM
Nov 2013

unmistakably expanded in a path from back to front. The head shot came from behind.


(70,112 posts)
37. I tend to believe the late Sen. Ralph Yarborough who was a WW II combat vet.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 04:06 PM
Nov 2013

He was in an open car behind JFK's car and was on record that he heard
incoming rounds on that awful day 50 years ago.


(1,443 posts)
42. That depends on whether you interpret Zapruder frame 313
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 04:53 PM
Nov 2013

as an entrance wound or an exit wound.

If it's an entrance wound, yes. The bullet could be said to be moving Kennedy's head back in subsequent frames.

If it's an exit wound, no. The bullet's already out and can't cause any movement in any direction.

On edit: I don't know of any lone gunman theorist who thinks that shot is an entrance wound. That argument seems to be exclusively the province of second gunman theorists.


Spider Jerusalem

(21,786 posts)
89. Fact: it did
Thu Nov 14, 2013, 08:34 AM
Nov 2013

See Z-film frame 312 and 313 (313 is the frame of impact of the headshot); Kennedy's head goes FORWARD relative to the frame before. Also observe the direction of spray of brain matter; it's all going forward, not back.


(99,680 posts)
27. I don't remember if it was Pierre Sallnger or Arthur Schlesinger Jr.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 11:51 AM
Nov 2013

But one of those gentlemen wrote that most people can't believe that a loner and a loser like Lee Harvey Oswald could bring down a man as great as John Kennedy and need for it to be a grand conspiracy so it will have some larger meaning but that is exactly what happened.



(17,064 posts)
77. That is likely true of the believers of the faith.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:49 PM
Nov 2013

They want Kennedy's death to be symbolic of something greater than a nut with a $19 gun.
OTOH, I think the preachers of the faith are motivated purely by money and attention.


Spider Jerusalem

(21,786 posts)
92. It was William Manchester.
Thu Nov 14, 2013, 08:42 AM
Nov 2013
Those who desperately want to believe that President Kennedy was the victim of a conspiracy have my sympathy. I share their yearning. To employ what may seem an odd metaphor, there is an aesthetic principle here. If you put six million dead Jews on one side of a scale and on the other side put the Nazi regime — the greatest gang of criminals ever to seize control of a modern state — you have a rough balance: greatest crime, greatest criminals.

But if you put the murdered President of the United States on one side of a scale and that wretched waif Oswald on the other side, it doesn't balance. You want to add something weightier to Oswald. It would invest the President's death with meaning, endowing him with martyrdom. He would have died for something.

A conspiracy would, of course, do the job nicely. Unfortunately, there is no evidence whatever that there was one.


(9 posts)
28. People can't handle the truth.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 01:08 PM
Nov 2013

King, Evers, JFK, RFK, Franz Ferdinand, Lennon, X, Lincoln, Gandi

What do these men have in common?

That's right, being killed my some regular Joe, rather than some Tom Clancy-esque black-ops commando.

We don't like to think about it because it shatters our illusions of invulnerability in leaders.

Fact is, the next guy to kill a president/premier/whoever will likely also just be some regular old schlub, just as it usually is.



(6,896 posts)
54. thanks to you
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:45 PM
Nov 2013

they wont have to.
Definitely no way that "X" was killed by a conspiracy.
who would be crazy enough to think that?
bless your heart.


(20,603 posts)
29. Kick and Rec!
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 01:22 PM
Nov 2013

I used to believe in a conspiracy until I read Bugliosi's incredibly researched book that is 100% based on evidence that was presented by the Warren Commission.

I realized that there were sooo many things I had read in conspiracy books that were just flat out lies. Not to mention the evidence they would leave out since it didn't fit whatever theory they had.

Since I actually looked into something that didn't already fit the view I had, I suppose this would be evidence that I am close-minded...as CTers like to say.

It's shocking to me, that there are actually democrats who think Oswald may have been a hero.

"As for Oswald, I don't know if he was a hero in all this or not."


(55,745 posts)
40. zappaman: 'I don't find JFK's assassination or anything about it a ''source of amusement'''
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 04:31 PM
Nov 2013

Except, when you do.

Anyway: Here's where the Bush Family Evil Empire come in:

Poppy Bush brought up JFK Assassination and ''Conspiracy Theorists'' at Ford Funeral


And the clip where Poppy chuckles at the mention of a "deluded gunman assassinated President Kennedy":

It's at the :17 sec mark.


(20,603 posts)
41. Once again putting words into my mouth, Octafish?
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 04:32 PM
Nov 2013

Are you monitoring every word I write, Octafish?

I find your obsession amusing, not the assassination.
I wonder why you can't get that clear...maybe too obsessed?

This is for you.

Benton D Struckcheon

(2,347 posts)
59. I've read a buncha these threads,
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:57 PM
Nov 2013

and I still don't know, who is the BFEE??? Just asked around my house, no one here seems to know either.

Well, the dog might, but she's not talking...


(20,603 posts)
62. It seems like the BFEE is responsible for everything that goes wrong in the world.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:00 PM
Nov 2013

Kinda like the "not me" ghost...

Benton D Struckcheon

(2,347 posts)
74. Thanks!!! Whew! n/t
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:25 PM
Nov 2013

Tried Google, all it came up with was FREE. Didn't even try to figure out what BFEE was.

So, if I have this right, the Bushes are the choice du jour for the conspiracy behind killing JFK? Is that what is seriously being argued by the folks who think this was a conspiracy?



(17,064 posts)
78. The BFEE are guilty of so much...
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:57 PM
Nov 2013

....they are a convienient target for stuff they probably aren't guilty of. Same goes for the CIA, the Mafia, Cuban exiles, Russians, and all the other baddies.

Benton D Struckcheon

(2,347 posts)
79. Just went through some of the old threads,
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 07:02 PM
Nov 2013

seems the main point is that a Texas oilman - in this case H Dubya - might have been in Dallas on Nov 22, 1963.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around how that's supposed to prove a conspiracy. It's just so, so….

Forget it.



(3,251 posts)
39. Thank you for truth and common sense.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 04:22 PM
Nov 2013

Once one looks at the facts of the JFK and Tippit killings, there's no other conclusion that Oswald was a lone nut who was killed by a lone nut.

The fact several witnesses saw Oswald kill Officer Tippit and at least one person saw Oswald fire the gun from the Book Depository should make it abundantly clear. Oswald killed Tippit because he was on the run from some awful deed. Oswald had a history of violent behavior which includes his attempted assassination of General Edwin Walker.

People want to put some significance in the JFK killing when there is none.

I really get impatient with people who still cling to nutball conspiracy theories.

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
45. All of the statements under those items are facts.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:05 PM
Nov 2013

Both of those have several facts listed to support the interpretation. So really I've not presented ten facts. I've presented quite a lot more.



(56,177 posts)
48. No, it's not a fact...sorry...
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:15 PM
Nov 2013

You can just say X, x, and x happened and then CONCLUDE y must be true, when other FACTS could lead to a different conclusion...sorry...you said 10 facts, those aren't facts.

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
67. Feel free to substitute one of the several facts under each item to make up the count.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:10 PM
Nov 2013

I would hate to have you disappointed.



(26,083 posts)
46. I was in the 7th grade in November 1963-here are some facts to which I haven't found answers to this
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:10 PM
Nov 2013

very day.
#1 Lee Harvey Oswald, a "former" US Marine, winds up in the USSR during the height of the Cold War
#2 He marries a "niece" of a USSR military intelligence officer
#3 Both of them are permitted to come to the USA
#4 They find "support" in a White Russian community filled with intelligence operatives
#5 Oswald is involved in the opposition to the extreme RW Cuban exile community
#6 Oswald, a "defector" gets employment that required some type of security clearance via the White Russian community (Jaggars, Chiles, Stovall)
Even back then kids my age questioned HOW could these things be possible. Our teachers, many of them veterans of WWII and Korea (GI Bill) had some logical ideas they shared about several "intelligence" communities operating during the Cold War. What you cite as facts are disputable.

Do you have substantive answers as to how some of what I have never been able to find out could possibly have happened, something beyond your "no conspiracies" formula of denial?


(1,443 posts)
49. Would you accept the answers, even if they were substantive?
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:17 PM
Nov 2013

You, like all of us, set your own standards for what constitutes substance.


(53,061 posts)
51. I have substantive answers to all of those points but
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:31 PM
Nov 2013

the list in itself raises a point against a conspiracy:

Who in their right mind would choose such a mercurial unstable person like Oswald to be the point man in a conspiracy.

and the follow up is:

Ruby was a well known gadfly, gossip and 'hanger on'. There are responsible neutral people in Dallas who say that if you were to go through all of the people you know personally Ruby would be the last one you would pick for a conspiracy, he just couldn't keep his mouth shut about anything.

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
55. Here's the thing, bobthedrummer: none of those change the facts about the assassination.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:52 PM
Nov 2013

Although Oswald's job at Jaggars didn't require a security clearance.

Are there weird things in Oswald's history? Yes, there are. None of that changes his being the only shooter in Dealey Plaza. All of the things you say there would support the idea of a conspiracy if there was any actual evidence of a conspiracy. I'm talking things like Oswald getting the gun from someone on such and such a date, unexplained money Oswald suddenly has access to, his practicing with the rifle at all in even the week before the most important hit job in his life. Since he was the only shooter, any conspiracy would have to have hired him. But who would have? He couldn't get a job at a lumber yard! Well, maybe the requirements for presidential assassin are a bit different than wood stacker.

Here's the other thing: Oswald being the only shooter of his own volition doesn't mean the right wing fascists weren't and aren't a cancer on our society. It only means that this is one thing they did not do.


(1,443 posts)
47. I wonder...
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:12 PM
Nov 2013

If Kennedy had survived, would the lone gunman theory be so dismissed? Of course, it would have been impossible for the President to survive that head wound, but what if the driver had reacted faster or the shooter's aim had been less certain?

People generally seem quite willing to accept the notion that a lone nut with a gun would shoot at a president because he had seen a Scorsese picture once too often and had a crush on one of its stars. Is the evidence in that case so much more compelling? Or is it only because that president survived?

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
65. If only the head shot had missed...
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:08 PM
Nov 2013

Oswald's flight would have played out much the same, although he might not have been as certain he'd killed Kennedy (if that would have affected his decision making). But Kennedy alive at Parkland - it would have been a while before he could speak, but he could have communicated before and after his surgeries.

Ruby may still have shot Oswald on impulse, though. That to my mind is the biggest part of people thinking there was more to it than just Oswald. Oswald alive for a trial (as opposed to Hinckley) would have been more important than Kennedy alive. Oswald wouldn't have been able to resist digging his own grave. His last interrogation, Oswald had put himself on the sixth floor during the assassination, contrary to his story before about eating lunch on the first floor. He would have hung himself.


(1,443 posts)
81. I've always wondered, too,
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 07:51 PM
Nov 2013

if Oswald would have fled the building were it not for that encounter with Marrion Baker on the second floor. Running away the way he did only implicated him further. His decision making in general strikes me as very ad hoc; having decided on the central action, he simply improvised the rest. That's why he couldn't keep his stories straight.

Certainly, Ruby's shooting of Oswald throws everything into chaos. I think it was Jim Leavelle who said that Ruby did nobody any favors that morning, which is the epitome of understatement. I can't see it as anything but a spontaneous act, though. Ruby fancied himself an insider and liked to dish; he even told one of his acquaintances that Oswald looked a little like Paul Newman, which strikes me as a fairly impassive opinion of the man he's going to kill in less than 36 hours. He may have had generic thoughts ("somebody ought to kill that bastard&quot , but something clicked in that moment in the basement.


(2 posts)
97. Very Good Observation
Wed Jan 22, 2014, 08:58 PM
Jan 2014

You're one of the very few people I know that has made the the same observation that I have about Oswald.Oswald wasn't dumb but he was an idiot.If this was a conspiracy then the conspirators who plotted Oswald's get away were either from the "Gang that couldn't shoot straight" or "The Keystone Cops".He kills JFK and then takes a taxi back to where he lives.BRILLIANT!Then he starts walking on the streets of Dallas where all law enforcement has his description.He encounters Officer Tippit and shoots him dead.Then he sneaks into the movie theater where he is finally caught.The conspirators must have been up all night to come up with such a brilliant plan for Oswald's escape.


Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
50. The fact remains....
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:24 PM
Nov 2013

a large chunk of skull would not be blown out of the head of a person in the direction from which the bullet that supposedly blew it out HAD BEEN FIRED. The skull would only have been blown out like that in an exit wound. And the only direction from which that shot could have been an exit wound was from the grassy knoll.

Oswald wasn't in the right position to shoot John F. Kennedy in the head in the way Kennedy was shot. It really is that simple.

Why are you carrying water for the center-right political establishment position on the assassination, anyway?


(1,443 posts)
53. ...
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:40 PM
Nov 2013
My family has been aware of various theories concerning the death of President Kennedy, just as it has been aware of many speculative accounts which have arisen from the death of Robert Kennedy. I am sure that it is understood that the continual speculation is painful for members of my family. We have always accepted the findings of the Warren Commission report and have no reason to question the quality and the effort of those who investigated the fatal shooting of Robert Kennedy.

A quick Google search should reveal the name of this water carrier to you.

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)
61. Oh I did the search, I found this:
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 05:59 PM
Nov 2013

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is convinced that a lone gunman wasn't solely responsible for the assassination of his uncle, President John F. Kennedy, and said his father believed the Warren Commission report was a "shoddy piece of craftsmanship."

Kennedy and his sister, Rory, spoke about their family Friday night while being interviewed in front of an audience by Charlie Rose at the Winspear Opera House in Dallas. The event comes as a year of observances begins for the 50th anniversary of the president's death.


the Kennedy family thinks the Warren Commission report is shit. Unlike you I provided the link.

He said his father had investigators do research into the assassination and found that phone records of Oswald and nightclub owner Jack Ruby, who killed Oswald two days after the president's assassination, "were like an inventory" of mafia leaders the government had been investigating.

He said his father, later elected U.S. senator in New York, was "fairly convinced" that others were involved.


on edit: your quote is from Ted Kennedy circa 1975. At that point in time the sole surviving Kennedy brother was not going to rock any boats at all. Would you? After your two brothers had been assassinated under very peculiar circumstances?


(1,443 posts)
63. Isn't it interesting that he never said anything like that during his lifetime?
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:03 PM
Nov 2013

Was he carrying water along with Ted?


Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)
66. You mean the 5 years before he was assassinated by the improbable Sirhan?
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:09 PM
Nov 2013

I'll just guess on Bobby's motives for keeping quiet: not wanting to be offed being the primary one.


(1,443 posts)
68. But he was 'offed' anyway.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:13 PM
Nov 2013

Ted lived for another 40 years after that and, even in his posthumously-published memoir, he supports the Warren Commission's findings.

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
75. You are completely wrong about the head wound.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:31 PM
Nov 2013

Number one, I think you meant to say entrance wound. That is what most proponents of a grassy knoll shooter say.

Number two, the fragments of bullet left in Kennedy's brain expand out from back to front. From posterior to anterior. The head shot came from the back, from where Oswald was shooting.

No buckets in these hands. Please dispose of your smears in the appropriate receptacle.

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)
69. I think just about everyone over the age of perhaps 10 in 1963
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:13 PM
Nov 2013

thinks the warren commission report was bullshit and that the kennedy assassinations were both covered up. '68 pretty much convinced those of us paying attention that there was more going on than the Official Story.

What really happened? I have no clue, but I'm sure that the Warren Report was crap.



(3,251 posts)
73. Bugliosi's volume might be too long and too detailed for some.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 06:19 PM
Nov 2013

The best book debunking the whole conspiracy nonsense is Jim Moore's short book, "Conspiracy of One." He used to be a conspiracy believer, but he ditched the nonsense. In the book he rebuts every single conspiracy theory with the greatest of ease.

Zen Democrat

(5,901 posts)
82. Jim Moore's book was one of the worst pieces of disinformation I've ever spent 5 minutes over.
Wed Nov 13, 2013, 08:16 PM
Nov 2013

That he denounced it, which I didn't know, proves it to me.

The assassination was directed by a triumvirate: LeMay, Dulles, Hoover" in other words JCOS, CIA, FBI. That's the best information available, and we know tons more than we've ever known before as information continues to be revealed from the AARB. This case won't rest until the truth is understood. I believe no other crappy little conspiracies, like the stuff driven by Alex Nutjob Whateverhisnameis to push the BFEE BS.

I also don't believe Bugliosi's book. He wastes a lot of pages saying nasty things about researchers of the Kennedy Assassination, when he did no research at all. There is about as much scholarship in Bugliosi's book as in Bill O'Reilly's, none. Bugsy used a brief for the prosecution from the BBC produced "Trial of Lee Harvey Oswald" in the 1980s. He used a lot of information from Failure Analysis which turned out to be failed information. And he just fleshed that out, and fleshed some more, and then claimed that everybody else is just in it for the money, or are crackpots, while he purposefully omitted exculpatory material that would disprove his prosecutorial brief, as any prosecutor would if he could get away with it. That's what his book's biggest failure was ... it wasn't even as fair and balanced as Fox News. It was one-sided and pathetically out of date with reality.

Cavalier deniers that the global coup-plotting CIA, a rabidly anti-Communist, nuclear bomb-loving military, and the psychopathic Kennedy-hater Hoover could have anything to do with overthowing a President. Read Arthur Krok's NYTimes column of October 3, 1963, that says outright that if the government is overthrown it be by an out of control CIA. Kennedy apparently fed that to Krok, and JFK also requested that films be made of Seven Days in May and Dr. Strangelove, which should give you a big hint.


(2 posts)
96. Warren Commission a cover up yet no one has ever read it.
Wed Jan 22, 2014, 08:28 PM
Jan 2014

I was 12 years old when JFK was killed.Now I don't know if there was a conspiracy or wasn't a conspiracy.During the years following JFK's death all I ever heard was that the Warren Commission was a cover up.In his book,"Reclaiming History",Vincent Bugliosi tells of an instance where he was speaking to a group of lawyers.He asked everyone there to raise their hands if they thought the Warren Commission was a cover up.Over 90% raised their hands.Then he asked how many read the Warren Commission.Nobody raised their hand.You get the point.If the Warren Commission was a cover up,that means everyone in the WC was part of a conspiracy.That also means they knew who the other conspirators were that carried out the assassination.Now I want somebody to explain to me in what manner those serving on the Warren Commission were involved in the conspiracy to kill JFK.Did someone tell each member of the WC to cover up who really was involved?If your're going to cover up something,you must have knowledge of why you're covering it up.So that also means conspirators hand picked each member of the WC,and Chief Justice Earl Warren was the ring leader.So let me get this straight.Those who served on the WC were involved in the conspiracy in some manner with Chief Justice Earl Warren as the ring leader.They all knew JFK was going to be assassinated and now had to cover up who the real conspirators were and were all hand selected by the conspirators to do their bidding as to covering up the truth.I think people should stop watching re-runs of the X-Files and come back to planet earth.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»10 Facts About Lee Oswal...