Lee Harvey Oswald Killed JFK(True or False)

[Tiggeroshii]

[MADem]

1. How about true, or false or shake 'n bake (an' ah HELPED!!) NT

[GreenPartyVoter]

4. i vote shake n bake

[MADem]

6. Me too!!! NT

[MrCoffee]

2. this poll is biased/ambiguous/freeped...

:rofl:

[Tiggeroshii]

3. ?

[Little Wing]

5. The bigger question that will lead to the answer is "Who wanted him dead"

[montanto]

7. He was killed by a death ray

from a secret near earth orbit satelite which can be proved my multiple pulses of electricity detected by a radio station in Walla Walla Washington, which proves the connection between the Soviet Union, The U.S. Gov in Washington D.C., and the Queen of England, the Rockefellars et. al. plus, what do you think www stands for? (Walla Walla . . . ) Oswald was a "patsy."

[cali]

8. I could care less

it's just another excuse for the CTers to engage in their favorite pastime; a circle jerk.

[dionysus]

9. you sure take the time to make a post insulting the OP.

why be nasty for no reason?

[MrCoffee]

12. wait a minute...we need a reason?

this is GD politics, for cryin' out loud!

[dionysus]

14. I just don't see how a drive-by insult post

contributes anything constructive.

I don't buy the "hey, it's politics!" as an excuse to be an asshole, sorry

[acmejack]

17. It was a chance to call an entire group of people weak minded

You have to appreciate the originator of the post.

[MrCoffee]

18. it doesn't

contribute anything constructive, that is.

[acmejack]

16. Snark is always fashionable.

The opportunity to contribute something meaningful to the conversation is not to passed up.

[T Town Jake]

20. Well said - and exactly right.

:thumbsup:

[IntravenousDemilo]

10. Or was it also George W Hickey? Bonar Menninger makes a good case for this theory in his book,

Mortal Error. According to Menninger, Hickey, a G-man standing in the follow-up car of the motorcade, stumbled after Oswald got off the first shot and the motorcade sped up, and his own gun went off, accidentally shooting Kennedy in the back of the head. It would be most interesting if the assassination had for the most part been a ghastly mistake. The blurb on the back of the paperback edition reads: "On November 22, 1963, two men shot the President of the United States. they had never met or heard of each other. They did not work for the same people. They knew nothing of each other's existence. One of them meant to kill the President. The other actually did."

[Tiggeroshii]

15. Woah.

Craziness. Where can I find this source?

[IntravenousDemilo]

26. Both eBay and Amazon have it, starting at a penny.

So even if you end up disagreeing with the theory, the book won't set you back too much. Here's the Amazon link, which has reviews:

http://www.amazon.com/Mortal-Error-Shot-That-Killed/dp/0312080743/sr=8-1/qid=1164314918/ref=pd_bbs_1/105-5574735-8409258?ie=UTF8&s=books

[Retrograde]

19. This is my favorite theory

It explains so much - why the rush investigation, why the reluctance to let the Dallas police investigate, etc. Only problem is I don't believe it.

When I went to Dealy Plaza, the first thing that impressed me was how small the place was: it didn't look like it would be hard to hit a slow-moving target from the upper floors of any of the buildings.

[rman]

27. except that there's evidence that contradicts a shot from the back

[alcibiades_mystery]

32. And evidence to contradict that evidence

And thus it proceeds, endlessly, "to the last syllable of recorded time," as Shakespeare might say...

[rman]

42. The Oswald scenario does not involve irregularities

with the autopsy - but there were irregularities with the autopsy. So there is the possibility that evidence supporting a shot from behind was tampered with - not that it was tampered with to make it look like the shot came from the front.

[leveymg]

11. Yes and no. How about with a little back-up from these charming fellows?:

[RaleighNCDUer]

21. I was half surprised not to see the Cigarette Man amongst this

crew.

[leveymg]

23. That was a hit for Fox. JFK was a hit for the another company.

[RaleighNCDUer]

24. LOL (sadly).

[leveymg]

25. You can still laugh? I gave that up after these

[savemefromdumbya]

13. patsie

[SaveElmer]

22. Yes...

And no matter what evidence is presented to back it up the conspiracy will live on...

Too many people are making too much money on keeping the conspiracy alive for it ever to truly die!!!

[spillthebeans]

31. I bet the MSM makes more of WMD, yellow cake and mushroom cloud conspiracies

[rman]

28. the distribution of opinion on this

is one of few constants in recent history.

[alcibiades_mystery]

30. Together with the popularity of entertainment news and reality TV

The three together might be taken as evidence of a generalized imbecility.

:-)

[rman]

44. Alternatively, a majority of people is correct in not trusting the state

Given that this is not in the interest of the state, it is to be expected that non-believers are ridiculed, as you just did.

[alcibiades_mystery]

45. That is, indeed, the only really positive thing about CTs

They are training, as it were, in analyzing a totality. That they often analyze the wrong totality is unfortunate, but doesn't detract from this positive training.

Far be it from me to represent the interests of the State apparatus. But, I guess if you're paranoid, then you're paranoid. There's not much that can be done about it. That's the downside of the CTs. They are a binary-thinking lot; if you don't agree with their analysis, then you are a stooge of the state apparatus, or a dupe. Either way, it makes one unenlightened. Needless to say, such worldviews are exceedingly dangerous (every totalitarian monster was a conspiracy theorist at heart), but the CTs always believe that they are on the side of the Good. In many ways, we're lucky that some of them don't have power, because they would form a state apparatus as destructive and totalitarian as the one they imagine.

[alcibiades_mystery]

29. We're lucky Squeaky Fromm wasn't successful in her attempt on Ford

Or there would be a million and one websites proclaiming that she could not possibly have done it, and everyone is forgetting about the girl in the polka-dot dress, who really shot Ford from the grassy knoll, etc., etc., etc.

History is weird that way. Some shit just comes in on the freaky flukey, like Oswald's head shot. We don't like to believe it because it is too freaky, and too flukey. So we erect massive edifices that convince us that things are much more orderly than they really are. Some shit just happens. This is the profoundest statement of the last century: Shit happens. It signals the only honesty of our time: Shit happens. Oswald gets off several rounds from that ridiculous gun, and one blows Kennedy's head off. Shit happens. Shit appears inconsistent in retrospect because our minds are trained to see order above all else. Order rather than the shit that just happens. But sometimes, it's just bad luck. It's just shit. JFK was killed by Lee Harvey Oswald and a shotload of bad luck. A shitload. It doesn't compute, of course. But that's what happened.

At the end of the day, I don't begrudge the conspiracy theorists their profound need - desire even - for order. I wouldn't be able to go to the dentist if humans didn't have this desire. But they're playing a parlor game, and nothing more. Some people play sudoku for entertainment. Some play video games. And some play conspiracy theory. That's all. The only thing that's mildly annoying is that the last group think that they are doing something serious, when they're just playing a fun parlor game. But that's a minor complaint.

[beaconess]

49. "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 esthetic 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. (William Manchester, Letter to the Editor, New York Times, February 5, 1992)

[alcibiades_mystery]

50. One correction

The Nazis were a bunch of scrubs and half-wits as well.

[charlyvi]

33. Of course Oswald shot JFK;

But the question is, did he act alone. No, I don't think he did.

[spillthebeans]

35. I wonder if the story told by director of Miller funeral is truth about Oswalds fingerprints

Zack Shelton : I would agree and I?d like to add to that, George, I was able to come across, and of course Jim told me about it months before, but I had to find out myself, and I DID find out. I found an FBI lab report, dated November 23rd, which is the next day of course, on Saturday. All the evidence that was taken by the Dallas Police Department from the sixth floor of the Book Depository, was delivered to the FBI Lab in Washington DC at midnight that night. The tests were run the next morning and the report was written the next day after the evidence was returned, which happened to be (also) the rifle. Well, strangely enough ?. and I?ll read it for you: ?No latent prints of any value were developed on Oswald?s revolver, the cartridge cases, the unfired cartridge, the clip of the rifle or the inner parts of the rifle. The latent prints appearing in the photographs taken of the rifle K-1 by the Dallas Police, are too fragmentary and indistinct to be of any value for identification purposes.?

In other words, George, they didn't find one print of Lee Harvey Oswald on that rifle. On Monday they have a print! But you have to understand that that rifle returned to Dallas on Saturday night. And Jim?, I think you talked to him, I didn?t, why don?t you tell ?em what the director of Miller funeral home says?

Jim Marrs : Right, The director, the then director of Miller funeral home that was handling funeral arrangements for Oswald, I talked to him, but that was only after a written newsaccount in one of the Fort Worth papers that said that the FBI came with a crimelab kit and spent a long time in the morgue. So I asked Mr. Paul Groody about this and he said ?Oh yes!? I said: Where you there when the FBI put Oswald?s hand on the rifle? And he said ?Yes, we had a heck of a time to get the fingerprint ink off of his dead hand in time for the burial.

http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/coast.htm

[rman]

43. Actually the most compelling "not Oswald alone" scenario

has it that Oswald did not fire a shot. He was there, he was involved with the people who did it, he was set up as a patsy, unknown to him until it was to late - people rarely volunteer to be a patsy.

[RaleighNCDUer]

46. His own statement was not "I'm innocent".

It was "I'm a patsy". He was set up, he knew he was set up, and he knew names, which is why Ruby had to shoot him.

Innocent people don't say "I'm a patsy". Guilty people don't say "I'm a patsy." Only a patsy would claim he actually was one.

[THUNDER HANDS]

34. isn't it more important to answer the question of WHY was kennedy killed

rather than who killed him.

Why is a much more important question than who, what, where or when.

[spillthebeans]

36. Here are some speculations

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/JFK_assassination scroll to speculations and click

[MrSlayer]

37. I believe Oswald when he says he was a patsy.

There were a lot bigger powers behind the death of Kennedy than this guy.

[Trajan]

38. Yes : Oswald shot him ....

Yes : It was conspiracy ...

He was a 'patsy' of sorts, but more of a 'useful fool' ... He shot and killed the President, but he wasnt the only one involved ...

I think the same 'group' who killed JFK killed RFK and MLK .... A rather successful organization in it's day ....

[RaleighNCDUer]

47. Still successful today.

Why is it that the only person in the country who doesn't know where he was that day is Pappy Bush?

[NaturalHigh]

39. I personally think it's true...

but I think he had a lot of help in the planning.

[IntravenousDemilo]

40. He was persuaded to do so by Booth, Czolgosz, Guiteau, and all the other ASSASSINS

According to the brilliant musical by Stephen Sondheim and John Weidman.

http://www.sondheim.com/shows/assassins/#OC_info

[Oeditpus Rex]

41. ...

[KAT119]

48. Lone gunman theory has been totally disproven....Patsy for Bush Sr. CIA

[benEzra]

51. I believe Oswald was the only person to shoot Kennedy...

but I am not convinced he acted on his own.

Three paced shots at point-blank range (35 to 88 yards) with scoped rifle, from a rest, with the target moving slowly and directly away from the shooter, are entirely believable; a hypothetical shot from the "grassy knoll" would have been much more difficult.

But I think the "lone nut" idea is probably cover, especially since Oswald was immediately assassinated himself--supposedly by another "lone nut"...

[bigriver]

52. I for one blame the Jews,

Or the Jesuits, the Masons, the Illuminati, LBJ, Nixon, Texas Oilmen, Northeastern Democrats, Racist southerners, militant Blacks, George HW Bush, George W Bush, Reggie Bush, the KGB, the CIA, the Pinkerton Detective Agency, the Chinese, the Vietnamese, Castro, anti-Castro Cubans, the Beatles, the Stones, the Army, General Motors, Queen Elizabeth II, Jackie, Bobby, Joe Sr., League of Women Voters, CBS, the New York Times, Walter Cronkite,

and of course, environmentalists.