JFK Assassination Forum 
Logo
HomeThe Robin Unger JFK Assassination GalleryYoutube JFK Assassination Video ChannelSearchNotepadLoginRegister

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 25, 2017, 09:33:02 AM
News: Posts and threads containing swear words, personal insults or crudities, content considered by Admin to be spamming, when reported or observed, may be edited or deleted.
The perpetrator of any offense may receive a posting suspension of a period to be determined by Admin in relation to the considered severity of the offense.
Questions relating to deletions or edits will not be answered by Admin via any communication method here or elsewhere.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 63
Framing a patsy  (Read 38664 times)
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 424


OK, let's say for the sake of argument that Oswald was on the first floor during the shooting and strolled up to the second floor to get a Coke when confronted by Baker. What else must be or is in all probability true?

1. Howard Brennan gave an Oswald-like description of the shooter who was nonetheless not Oswald. (They used an Oswald "double.")
2. No one else saw this Oswald-like character leave the building. (Could have hidden and been ferried out later.)
3. This Oswald-looking character used Oswald's real rifle for the assassination, or alternatively, this rifle was later linked to Oswald by massive fabrication of evidence and the lying of witnesses.
4. The conspirators needed to make sure Oswald remained out of sight during the motorcade. (I suppose you could have lured Oswald there under false pretenses.)

After the assassination, and after going to get a Coke (for whatever reason), Oswald suddenly realizes that he's the patsy. He flees and the rest of the scenario happens basically as the Warren Report says.

OK, you just need to fabricate all the evidence connecting the rifle to Oswald. Well, the backyard photos are real. And Oswald is NOT going to turn over his real rifle to an assassin and then wait on the first floor.

I don't see how you can get Oswald's real rifle on the sixth floor and Oswald on the first floor.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2690


5. Make sure all the false witnesses and planted evidence stays false and planted for 48+ years.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 4476


Re: "I don't see how you can get Oswald's real rifle on the sixth floor and Oswald on the first floor."

... And: do it without smudging Oswald's fresh fingerprints on the trigger-guard housing.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2413



As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 424


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Thanks, David. You thought this through more thoroughly. Yes, you would need to keep Oswald on the sixth floor and either suicide him or kill him outright. Then you just have the issue of getting the real killer out of the building.

Jerry: I suppose you could ... actually, I don't know. Fix the evidence later?

Ron: Good addition. Tks.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 4476


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Thanks, David. You thought this through more thoroughly. Yes, you would need to keep Oswald on the sixth floor and either suicide him or kill him outright. Then you just have the issue of getting the real killer out of the building.

Jerry: I suppose you could ... actually, I don't know. Fix the evidence later?

Ron: Good addition. Tks.

Sorry, Lee. I was being flippant.

Hypothetical, they could have gotten Oswald to demonstrate the bolt-action, putting prints on the housing below, maybe on the pretext of purchasing the rifle. If held hostage, they would have forced him.

They could have detained Oswald below if with one or two people.

Why not let him live and leave? With his record and off-putting demeanor; that's why he was singled out. He was his own worst enemy.

A known liar, Oswald's tale of being set-up wouldn't be believed (except by certain ... well, you know who you are).


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 3334


I'm convinced it was Oswald and Oswald alone based on the totality of evidence.  However, one of the often unstated factors in discussing various alternative scenarios is specifying Oswald's exact role.  Is the premise that Oswald was entirely innocent, involved in a conspiracy only indirectly, or an active member perhaps even as the shooter?  CTers usually are not specific on Oswald himself in discussing the evidence.  They simply defend him against every piece of evidence as though it's all one and the same regardless of his role.  However, the strongest conspiracy scenario is to place Oswald in the 6th window as a shooter.  Maybe the only shooter but recruited and assisted by some unknown entity.  It would avoid the necessity of disputing a mountain of evidence that is consistent with his guilt.  The absurd lengths they go to dispute this evidence undermines any real credibility in a conspiracy that must involve Oswald doubles, Z-film alterations, SS participation, body thefts and other absurdities necessary to support these bizarre conspiracy scenarios. However, if you accept Oswald's participation as a shooter then you have a more plausible conspiracy case.  Although one I still believe is lacking in any credible evidence.  As is stands now, CTers are simply not credible in defending Oswald in a passive or non-participant role.  The evidence and circumstances do not support that interpretation of events.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 424


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm convinced it was Oswald and Oswald alone based on the totality of evidence.  However, one of the often unstated factors in discussing various alternative scenarios is specifying Oswald's exact role.  Is the premise that Oswald was entirely innocent, involved in a conspiracy only indirectly, or an active member perhaps even as the shooter?  CTers usually are not specific on Oswald himself in discussing the evidence.  They simply defend him against every piece of evidence as though it's all one and the same regardless of his role.  However, the strongest conspiracy scenario is to place Oswald in the 6th window as a shooter.  Maybe the only shooter but recruited and assisted by some unknown entity.  It would avoid the necessity of disputing a mountain of evidence that is consistent with his guilt.  The absurd lengths they go to dispute this evidence undermines any real credibility in a conspiracy that must involve Oswald doubles, Z-film alterations, SS participation, body thefts and other absurdities necessary to support these bizarre conspiracy scenarios. However, if you accept Oswald's participation as a shooter then you have a more plausible conspiracy case.  Although one I still believe is lacking in any credible evidence.  As is stands now, CTers are simply not credible in defending Oswald in a passive or non-participant role.  The evidence and circumstances do not support that interpretation of events.

I too have been surprised that CTers go down the road of denying Oswald's culpability as well -- they deny every piece of evidence. I have no idea why they do that, and yes, it undermines their credibility. But their positing these fantastical scenarios has an unintended effect -- CTers make it very difficult to discuss scenarios involving Oswald. That's why I kidded around and suggested that some CTers were actually intelligence plants -- to keep generating these scenarios and muddying the waters so it became impossible to actually get through to conspiracy involving Oswald.

For example, there are some suspicious things going on. George DeM, for example, as well as the Paines' connection to intelligence. It is certainly likely that George was asked to get to know Oswald, and less likely, but possible, that George reported back that Oswald had possibly taken a shot at Walker. If this were so, then someone knew that there was a ready-made Lone Nut in Dallas. You keep an eye on him. It is likely that Oswald got his job at the TSBD innocently, but this was reported back. The Lone Nut is now in place, and nothing was done to help him. Now it's just a question of guiding, not conspiring, the motorcade in front of that workplace and see if the Lone Nut takes a shot. There's an air wall between the conspiracy, which was tiny and perhaps only involved one person, probably a mid-level operative in the CIA or other spooky agency, and Oswald.

Of course, this is speculation, but at least it's somewhat plausible.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 63


Jump to:  

JFK Assassination Forum Assassination of JFK discussion and debate surrounding the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy In Dealey Plaza Texas on November 22nd 1963

JFK Assassination Photographs Gallery

JFK Assassination Forum Assassination of JFK discussion and debate surrounding the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy In Dealey Plaza Texas on November 22nd 1963
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines