Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald? | FRONTLINE

[Martin Weidmann]

Except the CTers will hate hate hate the Mexico City segment because his handwriting is on the hotel register and the Russians confirmed that they met and spoke with the real LHO.

Yeah, sure... and the CIA photos showed.....  uh, hang on a second.... never mind.

Btw there is nothing to love or hate concerning the Mexico City segment. It's utterly insignificant for the anwser to the question who killed Kennedy.

[Sean Kneringer]

Yeah, sure... and the CIA photos showed

A person of interest they misidentified as Oswald. There's no proof that the man in question ever tried to impersonate Oswald.

Btw there is nothing to love or hate concerning the Mexico City segment. It's utterly insignificant for the anwser to the question who killed Kennedy.

It didn't speak to Oswald's desperation at the time? You think he was down there for sightseeing? Rejected by the consulates and therefore stuck in the US, he took it out on Kennedy.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

A person of interest they misidentified as Oswald. There's no proof that the man in question ever tried to impersonate Oswald.

It didn't speak to Oswald's desperation at the time? You think he was down there for sightseeing? Rejected by the consulates and therefore stuck in the US, he took it out on Kennedy.

1. An erratic behaving, unstable acting person shows up at the Soviet Embassy claiming to be persecuted by the US government. He brings out a loaded revolver and says he needs it to protect himself. He further says things will end terribly - "They'll kill me..." - if he's not allowed into the USSR.

2. He is later accused of the assassination of the president.

But the evidence in #1 tells us nothing about #2? Nothing about the person? His willingness to act in desperation?

The man is disturbed, he's paranoid, he's having emotional problems. He thinks the US government is out to get him.

[Martin Weidmann]

A person of interest they misidentified as Oswald. There's no proof that the man in question ever tried to impersonate Oswald.

It didn't speak to Oswald's desperation at the time? You think he was down there for sightseeing? Rejected by the consulates and therefore stuck in the US, he took it out on Kennedy.

It didn't speak to Oswald's desperation at the time?

Says who? What desperation are you talking about?

You think he was down there for sightseeing?

I don't think he was there. The "evidence" that he was is ambivalent at best

Rejected by the consulates and therefore stuck in the US, he took it out on Kennedy.

There it is again; a story is told for the purpose of letting people jump to conclusions not supported by the evidence.

The simple truth is that you don't know the first time about Oswald's actual mind set, nor do you know for sure what, if anything, about the Mexico story is actually true, but you're quite happy to let yourself be fooled by a highly questionable story into believing that the Mexico trip could be, or even was, the motive for Kennedy's murder. When you become more rational, get back to me.

[Martin Weidmann]

Yep. And twenty years ago or so the same people who insist he was impersonated would have been saying, "Interview the Soviet embassy people! They'll expose the impersonation." So the Embassy people are interviewed and say the man they met was Oswald. Is that now accepted? Of course not. It's still not enough. For some, it's never enough.

The three KGB agents - senior agents - met him over two days and for several hours. They were shown the photo of the supposed impostor and all said that that was not the man who identified himself as Oswald.
On the second meeting, a Saturday, he is, they say, acting very erratically and nervously and at one point pulls out a revolver. They are stunned and are studying him very carefully. "Who is this guy?"

One of the agents, Oleg Nechiporenko, wrote this (from his book "Passport to Assassination"):



So an impostor does this? Draws very close attention to himself? Sorry, that makes no sense to me.

I'll also suggest that a person in this condition, who believes he is being persecuted by the US government, who believes his life is in danger just might do something drastic. With a rifle. And with a revolver. The revolver he said he needed to protect himself.

So an impostor does this? Draws very close attention to himself? Sorry, that makes no sense to me.

Very silly. The entire purpose of an impostor would be to draw attention to himself so that people will remember. Keeping a low profile would be self-defeating.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Another part of the Saturday meeting (the second meeting after the Friday one; Why would an impostor goes back twice? Isn't once enough to "connect" him with the Soviets?). Again this is from the Nechiporenko/KGB account in his book:



He said he was afraid to return to the US - "where he would be killed" - but that he was "going to defend myself."

This is not a rational person. Not by any standard.

[Martin Weidmann]

1. An erratic behaving, unstable acting person shows up at the Soviet Embassy claiming to be persecuted by the US government. He brings out a loaded revolver and says he needs it to protect himself. He further says things will end terribly - "They'll kill me..." - if he's not allowed into the USSR.

2. He is later accused of the assassination of the president.

But the evidence in #1 tells us nothing about #2? Nothing about the person? His willingness to act in desperation?

The man is disturbed, he's paranoid, he's having emotional problems. He thinks the US government is out to get him.

All this is evidence of is the fact that any story, no matter how questionable, will ensure that some gullible person will jump to the desired conclusion, regardless if that conclusion is correct or not.