Why did Oswald kill JFK?

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Hilarious mind-reading nonsense.
"We can know he had thoughts of shooting JFK as early as Thursday morning..."
"Obviously, he must have had a motive for wanting to kill the President even before riding to Irving with Wesley Frazier on Thursday afternoon."
"But Lee Harvey's assassination plan was not yet finalized in his mind or fixed in stone as late as Thursday night."

Also, if he was transporting the disassembled rifle (highly debated already here) that doensn't prove him to be the shooter. It could also prove that he was... part of a conspiracy. Particularly as there is no evidence that proves he was the shooter  (highly debated already here!!).

Jim: Lone assassin believers hear all sorts of mind reading explanations from conspiracy believers about why the conspirators killed JFK. My favorite: Ruth Paine was a lesbian who framed Oswald because she wanted to steal Marina from him. Ruth Paine as a lesbian CIA assassin?

We see conspiracist mind-reading about the motives and thinking of: LBJ, Hoover, the CIA, Allen Dulles, the Pentagon, the Mob, Marcello, anti-Castro Cubans, the Mossad, Ruby and on and on and on. There's lots of mind reading about Oswald's post assassination actions too, right? "He knew he was going to be framed and that's why he left" sort of thing. Seems to me that lone assassin believers are amateurs at mind reading compared to the conspiracy crowd. True, not all speculation is equal; but it comes from all sides on this event.

As to the shooting itself: If you think a complete stranger walked unnoticed into the TSBD, then went unnoticed to the sixth floor, then waited unnoticed by people inside (but seen by people outside), then shot JFK, then left unnoticed....if you believe this rather than Oswald as then shooter then who is really engaging in strained speculation?

[John Iacoletti]

As to the shooting itself: If you think a complete stranger walked unnoticed into the TSBD, then went unnoticed to the sixth floor, then waited unnoticed by people inside (but seen by people outside), then shot JFK, then left unnoticed....if you believe this rather than Oswald as then shooter then who is really engaging in strained speculation?

Why would it have to be a "complete stranger"?  And don't you believe that Oswald left unnoticed?

[Tom Graves]

Ruth Paine as a lesbian CIA assassin?

More likely a KGB agent helping KGB-agent Marina.

[David Von Pein]

Hilarious mind-reading nonsense.
"We can know he had thoughts of shooting JFK as early as Thursday morning..."
"Obviously, he must have had a motive for wanting to kill the President even before riding to Irving with Wesley Frazier on Thursday afternoon."
"But Lee Harvey's assassination plan was not yet finalized in his mind or fixed in stone as late as Thursday night."

Every single thing I said in THIS POST resides squarely in the "Reasonable Inferences" category, and all sensible people know it.

I wonder why so many conspiracy theorists are so afraid of facing up to reasonable inferences?

And why are Internet CTers so anxious to have LHO completely innocent of doing any shooting on 11/22/63?

Very curious indeed.

For many more reasonable inferences, go here:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/oswald-timeline-part-1.html

[Martin Weidmann]

Every single thing I said in THIS POST resides squarely in the "Reasonable Inferences" category, and all sensible people know it.

I wonder why so many conspiracy theorists are so afraid of facing up to reasonable inferences?

And why are Internet CTers so anxious to have LHO completely innocent of doing any shooting on 11/22/63?

Very curious indeed.

For many more reasonable inferences, go here:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/oswald-timeline-part-1.html

David, are you the one who decides what inference is "reasonable"?

[David Von Pein]

David, are you the one who decides what inference is "reasonable"?

Each person, of course, decides for himself what he thinks qualifies as "reasonable".

Most conspiracy theorists, naturally, think all (or most) of my "reasonable inferences" are unreasonable. Just as I think all (or most) of a CTer's inferences are unreasonable (with many of them being downright preposterous and silly).

And the JFKA merry-go-round continues to spin. And it always will.

"Reason does not always appeal to unreasonable men."
-- John F. Kennedy; November 16, 1961

[Martin Weidmann]

Each person, of course, decides for himself what he thinks qualifies as "reasonable".

Most conspiracy theorists, naturally, think all (or most) of my "reasonable inferences" are unreasonable. Just as I think all (or most) of a CTer's inferences are unreasonable (with many of them being downright preposterous and silly).

And the JFKA merry-go-round continues to spin. And it always will.

"Reason does not always appeal to unreasonable men."
-- John F. Kennedy; November 16, 1961

So, what's the point of having a discussion that goes nowhere?