On The Trail Of Delusion

[Jon Banks]

The problem with the photos is not that they showed a unstable crackpot posing like this - look at this guy! - no the problem is that news magazines ran the photos and poisoned opinion against him.

Suggestion: if you don't want people to think you're an unstable person then don't pose for photos that make you look like an unstable person.

How unusual or unstable is it for someone who lives in Texas to take a picture posing with guns? I would think that sort of thing is normal down there given how rifles and hunting are a big part of their culture.

It only looks incriminating after Oswald is accused of shooting the President. Short of that, there's nothing inherently bad about the backyard photos.

[Richard Smith]

How unusual or unstable is it for someone who lives in Texas to take a picture posing with guns? I would think that sort of thing is normal down there given how rifles and hunting are a big part of their culture.

It only looks incriminating after Oswald is accused of shooting the President. Short of that, there's nothing inherently bad about the backyard photos.

You believe that it was "normal" for people in Texas during the 1960s to have pictures taken of themselves holding guns while displaying Commie literature?  While dressed in all black.

[Jon Banks]

You believe that it was "normal" for people in Texas during the 1960s to have pictures taken of themselves holding guns while displaying Commie literature?  While dressed in all black.

The Commie literature thing is unique for someone from the South (Marxists were extremely rare in the Jim Crow South)but not incriminating.

The only way something like that becomes incriminating relevant is if the person in the photos is accused of a violent crime.

[Richard Smith]

The Commie literature thing is unique for someone from the South (Marxists were extremely rare in the Jim Crow South)but not incriminating.

The only way something like that becomes incriminating relevant is if the person in the photos is accused of a violent crime.

I'm not exactly sure what other context something could ever be deemed incriminating unless someone is accused of a crime.  The BY photos are incriminating in the context of the JFK assassination.  They are not normal photos like other sane people in Texas would take.  Of course no one would ever have any cause to see them had Oswald not committed a high-profile crime.  He would just be another anonymous oddball in the world (of which there are many) but I'm not sure what relevance that has in this context. 

[Jon Banks]

I'm not exactly sure what other context something could ever be deemed incriminating unless someone is accused of a crime.  The BY photos are incriminating in the context of the JFK assassination.  They are not normal photos like other sane people in Texas would take. Of course no one would ever have any cause to see them had Oswald not committed a high-profile crime.  He would just be another anonymous oddball in the world (of which there are many) but I'm not sure what relevance that has in this context.

Taking pictures with rifles is "normal" in Texas. No one would think the photos are strange or incriminating if he wasn't accused of shooting the President. There are also photos of Oswald posing with a shotgun in Russia by the way.

Oswald was never diagnosed with any sort of mental illness. Dismissing everything he did as an example of "insanity" is just intellectual laziness on your part.

He did it for a reason. Just admit that you don't know why he did it. Almost no one knows why...

[Richard Smith]

Taking pictures with rifles is "normal" in Texas. No one would think the photos are strange or incriminating if he wasn't accused of shooting the President. There are also photos of Oswald posing with a shotgun in Russia by the way.

Oswald was never diagnosed with any sort of mental illness. Dismissing everything he did as an example of "insanity" is just intellectual laziness on your part.

He did it for a reason. Just admit that you don't know why he did it. Almost no one knows why...

You keep suggesting it is somehow "normal" for Oswald to have pictures taken of himself holding weapons and displaying Commie literature.  There is nothing normal about that.  It is downright bizarre.  In the 1960s, it would have been even more atypical.  I thought even CTers agreed with that obvious conclusion since they often allege the photos were faked to incriminate Oswald as some type of kook.  But if this is "normal" can you show us other such examples of Texas citizens engaging in this behavior?  I'm not sure what you are asking me to admit.  Only Oswald knows why he posed for these pictures and assassinated JFK.  The rest of us can only speculate on that based upon what we do know about his nutty background.  The evidence confirms, however, that he did both.  If you are asking why he posed for such a bizarre picture, my guess is that he had some type of fantasy that he was going to be a kind of revolutionary hero.  And the BY pictures were meant to document that for history.  Which, in a way, they have done but in a different way than he anticipated.

[Martin Weidmann]

You keep suggesting it is somehow "normal" for Oswald to have pictures taken of himself holding weapons and displaying Commie literature.  There is nothing normal about that.  It is downright bizarre.  In the 1960s, it would have been even more atypical.  I thought even CTers agreed with that obvious conclusion since they often allege the photos were faked to incriminate Oswald as some type of kook.  But if this is "normal" can you show us other such examples of Texas citizens engaging in this behavior?  I'm not sure what you are asking me to admit.  Only Oswald knows why he posed for these pictures and assassinated JFK.  The rest of us can only speculate on that based upon what we do know about his nutty background.  The evidence confirms, however, that he did both.  If you are asking why he posed for such a bizarre picture, my guess is that he had some type of fantasy that he was going to be a kind of revolutionary hero.  And the BY pictures were meant to document that for history.  Which, in a way, they have done but in a different way than he anticipated.

You keep suggesting it is somehow "normal" for Oswald to have pictures taken of himself holding weapons and displaying Commie literature.  There is nothing normal about that.  It is downright bizarre.

Yes, it would be for a superficial person who does not know the actual reasons for those pictures being taken.

I'm not sure what you are asking me to admit.

Wow, now there's a surprise

Only Oswald knows why he posed for these pictures and assassinated JFK.  The rest of us can only speculate on that based upon what we do know about his nutty background.

What "nutty background" would that be? You know something we don't or are you just swallowing the stuff they are feeding you?

If you are asking why he posed for such a bizarre picture, my guess is that he had some type of fantasy that he was going to be a kind of revolutionary hero.  And the BY pictures were meant to document that for history.

Let's see if I understand this.... Oswald had these photos taken, months before he knew Kennedy was coming to Dallas and without knowing he would be in a position to take a shot to kill him, to be portrayed as a "revolutionary hero"?

It seems your imagination is running away with you.....