Did Lee Harvey Oswald act alone in killing JFK?

How's the plausibility of this CIA-role scenario?

Oswald didn't act alone, but only with a small group, not governmental. FBI/CIA knew about them but couldn't stop them. Other assassins got away; investigators covered this up, not so much to protect themselves, but to prevent public from realizing one can assassinate a president and get away.

The "conspiracy theories" are actually seeded and pushed by the CIA itself, through its media operatives, to keep the public believing it's hard to do.

Fact: every single known US presidential assassin was an ordinary person with no special training. Even Oswald was a soldier, not an assassin. Two people, one mentally unstable, got through Ford's protection, and another mentally unstable guy got to Reagan point-blank. I think the deep state would be a bit worried about people figuring out those bodyguards aren't really that effective.

C.I.A. Director John McCone behaved post-assassination as if he was in on it. We all understand Warren Commission releasing an edited version of the truth. Likely McCone was not honest with Warren Commission. O.P. asked how J.F.K. film differed from reality. Oliver Stone's movie implied former C.I.A. head, Allen Dulles was involved in assassination. Since, McCone was alive at time of movie release, Stone never mentioned C.I.A. Director John McCone. J.F.K. fired Dulles, 1961 or 1962. November 22nd, 1963, McCone was C.I.A. Director. McCone died, 1991. If there were a small group at C.I.A. who knew, McCone had to be in on it. Placing the long feature article in New Zealand newspapers as soon as Oswald was arrested for killing a Dallas cop, Tippit, McCone had to be in on that. Oswald going to Mexico City, Mexico Embassy to visit Soviets, McCone had to be in the know. No Lone Gunman Advocates can explain the long feature article in New Zealand papers almost immediately after Oswald's arrest. No Lone Gunman Advocates can explain how Oswald's travel to Mexico City, October, 1963. Oswald was sent to Mexico to make a public spectacle. What lone gunman has walked around screaming, "I am a patsy!" Oswald realized at the minute of assassination that he was being set up.

If Oswald was a communist Cuban sympathizer, then wouldn't him whacking the president be grounds for a full scale invasion of Cuba? Instead they pushed the angle that he acted alone, yet he had well documented connections with the USSR and Cuba. They really seemed afraid to blame Cuba. Probably because it was an inside job.

Oswald was also whacked by the mob which was frequently used by the CIA as a tool. CIA was definitely trying to tie off loose ends. That part I think is very believable.

In these cases its important to track the narrative.

Look at the Osama Bin Laden assassination. The narrative was that they found him and sent in helicopters and shot him and extracted. But a lot of things don't add up. The timing (reelection of Obama). Proximity to a military base. Too long time spent on the ground for a secret operation. One crashed helicopter. Unauthorized entry into Pakistan. No capture. Body dumped in the sea. No repercussions from Pakistan and actually their relations with the US improved.

So if you read between the lines, it's obvious Pakistan offered Bin Laden to the US in exchange for lifting of sanctions etc.

So maybe something similar happened with JFK. He almost started a nuclear war so maybe it was politically expedient to get rid of him. Offer his scalp to the Cubans or something.

It was his own government that offed him. You're welcome

updated facts: wrote:

What lone gunman has walked around screaming, "I am a patsy!" Oswald realized at the minute of assassination that he was being set up.

Ye if you just whacked the president you would be pretty proud of yourself or at least use the opportunity to advertise your political beliefs.

gun guy wrote:

A gun-enthusiast magazine looked at the rifle and what kind of skill it would take to do the shooting. Good analysis.

https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/lee-harvey-oswalds-carcano-rifle-shooting-it-today/

The comments were as interesting as the article. I learned a lot. The Carcano rifle was junk, but even among junk rifles, a few are accurate and have no feed problems. The shot was 60-70 yards at an 18% angle moving not quite directly away from the shooter at walking speed. I had always thought it was much longer. Heck, I could make that shot with iron sights. Any decent shooter could do it. Accuracy with the 2nd shot would be more difficult, but again, doable with practice.

Also, I wasn't aware that a SS agent in the car behind JFK accidently fired his weapon when the motorcade accelerated. I wasn't aware that a guy on the sidewalk raised an umbrella (on a sunny day) at the spot the shot took place as JFKs vehicle approached. I wasn't aware that a 2nd rifle (a Mauser) was also found at the building (some say roof, some say 4th floor). I learned that Jack Ruby who claimed to be 5 blocks away, was actually at the scene of the shooting. An FBI informant (see FBI document below) informed the FBI that Ruby had called him on the morning of the assassination and asked him if he would "like to watch the fireworks." An odd phrasing to say the least. Then, immediately after the shooting, Ruby left Vanderslice without saying a word. Again, extremely odd behavior for a person who has just witnessed a landmark event in world history. This would strongly indicate that the mob (along with some government insiders) had JFK assassinated.

Interesting excerpt from the article below.

"It [... the truth...?] might be contained within the final set of classified documents that have yet to be released. In April 2018, President Trump ordered those files be kept from the public until October 26th, 2021, due to 'identifiable national security, law enforcement, and foreign affairs concerns."

Did you read what I posted on page one regarding Carlos Hathcock's inability to duplicate in a simulated effort? I talked to Hathcock in-person, 1990. In interviews with journalists, Hathcock was a bit softer with his tone and language in regard to Oswald's ability (or inability) to make the second shot within Warren Commission time limits. When he was in the company of servicemen, Hathcock was clearer in his language. Especially less likely since Oswald was seen in Texas School Book Depository break room on 2nd floor 2 or 3 minutes prior to shooting. If you are going to simulate, you have to sprint from 2nd floor to 6th floor immediately prior to shooting. At the time of shooting, eye witnesses across the street said a man with bald spot on crown of head was the shooter. Even if Oswald was the shooter, does that mean there was no A gunner (spotter)? Even if Oswald was there alone on 6th floor, who paid to send Oswald to Mexico, October, 1963 and why? There is not one Lone Gunner Advocate who even bothers to try to explain the Mexico trip. As I have stated: I believe C.I.A. sent Oswald to Mexico to make him look bad. The other answer: The person or group who financed trip to Mexico was a co-conspirator. Note: Oswald was not an U.S.M.C. rifleman or infantryman. He would have only gone to rifle range once a year to qualify. While in U.S.M.C., he shot UNK (unqualified), marksman (lowest qualifying level) and sharpshooter (intermediate qualifying level).

Why are you incapable of utilizing white space?

I'm open to the idea of someone/s else being involved but the other theories posted in this thread, when compared with the actual facts, has pushed me further towards believing it was just LHO by himself.

Someone mentioned the “umbrella man”. This was on youtube and gives a little background. There was also apparently a guy with a radio right next to him. The guy with the umbrella can be seen In the Zapruder film, raising the umbrella up Just before Kennedy reacts to being struck by the first shot.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NB-TLTWAh6s

Another interesting figure who witnessed the assassination was the “babushka lady”, who appears in photos and videos by other witnesses, and in the footage of her she appears to be holding a camera. She would have had one of the best angles for filming the shooting but no reliable claims to her identity have been made and no photos or footage from where she was standing had ever been found.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babushka_Lady

updated facts: wrote:

Did you read what I posted on page one regarding Carlos Hathcock's inability to duplicate in a simulated effort? I talked to Hathcock in-person, 1990.

I'm ex-military as well. What did Hathcock say to you about it? I read one of his interviews. I agree now that it sounds like an impossible shot due to the tree and the layout of the room that would have restricted firing angles.

By the way, for all we know, Oswald's might never have even fired the rifle or if he did, his shot might have been the one that bounced off the sidewalk.

There are way, way too many ducks that have to line up just right for Oswald to be the Lone Gunman. Way too many witnesses whose testimonies have to be completely discounted. Way to many pieces of the puzzle that don't make sense as a Lone Gunman, but are easily explained with mob involvement and a few government insiders friendly to the cause.

The only thing that's more obvious is that Vince Foster didn't commit suicide in Fort Marcy Park! :)

Runner10287 wrote:

The Angel of Death wrote:

LOL the message board has been this way since I started visiting in 2004.

If you think this thread is "off topic," did you know the top 3 threads of all time are about Donald Trump, the stock market, and a guy whose wife stopped having sex with him?

True that. And honestly these threads usually better than the actual running related threads. Which are mostly the same losers pretending to know everything regarding training or crying about dopers.

I think cheater threads are the most popular. He forgot to mention the old, very popular Quaker Steak and Lube thread which for some unknown reason has been deleted.

King Tiger wrote:

Look at the Osama Bin Laden assassination. ... Body dumped in the sea.

Alleged body allegedly dumped in the sea.

Big red flag. Legally, a dead body is the way to prove someone's dead. If they really had a body, they'd stick it in a freezer as evidence.

Bad Wigins wrote:

King Tiger wrote:

Look at the Osama Bin Laden assassination. ... Body dumped in the sea.

Alleged body allegedly dumped in the sea.

Big red flag. Legally, a dead body is the way to prove someone's dead. If they really had a body, they'd stick it in a freezer as evidence.

False. Dumping him in the ocean was the BEST thing they could have done. He's dead. If he were alive you'd know about it by now.

King Tiger wrote:

If Oswald was a communist Cuban sympathizer, then wouldn't him whacking the president be grounds for a full scale invasion of Cuba? Instead they pushed the angle that he acted alone, yet he had well documented connections with the USSR and Cuba. They really seemed afraid to blame Cuba. Probably because it was an inside job.

Something to consider - a country (or countries) conspiring and assassinating a the leader of another is full on act of war. If the US proved that the USSR/Cuba were behind it, they would have ground for retaliation, and doing so would no doubt ultimately lead to nuclear deployment. If the US didn't immediately strike first and instead opted for an invasion Cuba, this would probably to Russia launching their nukes. Remember, THIS ALMOST HAPPEN during the Cuban missile crisis, and it certainly would if the US launched a overt invasion of the island.

Assuming the Communist nations were behind the assassination, the US probably thought through end game of retaliating and concluded the end results (nuclear war) was not worth it, considering the functions of the US government were still intact and (mostly) unaffected.

Hathcock and I were hospital in-patients together, for about ten days, August, 1990. It was roughly 30 bed open hospital room. We were the only two Marines who could talk & walk. He told me and a couple Navy Hospital Corpsmen simply, Oswald did not do it. Hathcock did not tell me Oswald was innocent. Hathcock told me Oswald did not and could not make the fatal shot. As I stated on page one, Hathcock told me what he told journalists, S.T.A. men made numerous attempts and set up a mock Daley Plaza site according to Warren Commission. No one could make the shots.

Keep in mind that Oswald only had 3 bullets with him. No clip, even though the Carcano was designed for a clip. And it was never established where/how he got the ammunition as he had no other ammo in his possession. You couldn’t buy that type of round anywhere near him; it was actually from a military shipment that was numbered to disguise its origins on the order form (this was all an internal military thing - you have to understand, the military does things like order weapons without serial numbers, etc.)

Seems a bit odd that you’d go to shoot a president without having shot a rifle in at least four years, having never shot your Carcano at all or adjusted the sights and having only 3 rounds total in your possession. Ammunition of that size just isn’t sold by the piece.

afrul (non registered):

What part do you think is "lunacy"? That Oswald probably didn't shoot Tippet or that LBJ was involved?

I don't see any other comment from you offering another plausible explanation/opinion.

As many other people have commented to the original question:

"Did Lee Harvey Oswald act alone in killing JFK?"

The consensus is NO. Just too many red flags.

Further I don't believe that any other country was involved in the assassination; as has been pointed out, it would constitute an act of war. (Study the origin of WWI.)

If Oswald or Cuba or Russia did it they would have immediately taken credit for it.

Nor do I think the CIA was involved. Too many people that can talk afterward.

Nor do I believe the mafia was involved. They are just not that clever.

It was a highly organized well-planned inside job with very few sympathetic people involved who would not talk.

Tippit was eliminated (hold on to your hat here: he was radioed because he was in the area. Why? to eliminate Oswald (who was miraculously spotted among among the crowds amidst the chaos); Tippitt got cold feet or whatever, was followed by those involved and taken out so he would not talk when he didn't or couldn't do it...he died a brave man with integrity).

Oswald was eliminated by Ruby who was a two-bit mob thug hired to make it look like the mafia was behind it). How in the world did he get right up to Oswald when he was being transported in secret and surrounded by police officers?

Ruby was eliminated.

No loose ends.

Again, Oswald first words when arrested were, "I'm a patsy." He didn't do it. He was the perfect scapegoat with his background.

LBJ gets the presidency he coveted along with Vietnam which he wanted.

Wake up and come up with a better explanation if you can instead of calling my comments "lunacy".

What do you all make of these comments by Ruby? Just being crazy or did he know stuff?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=we2eucWXqjg