Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?

[Walt Cakebread]

Oswald was a complicated guy but as someone of the Left, I don’t see how supporting Marxism equates to disliking the US. One can criticize capitalism and racism (Oswald did both but so too did MLK Jr) while not disliking the US as a whole.

Of course, in the early 1960s it made no difference. Being labeled a “Commie” was almost as bad as being labeled a Nazi.

In other words, the nuances of Oswald’s views didn’t matter at the time when JFK was murdered. The facts that he was a self-identified Marxist and had lived in the USSR looked bad enough in the court of public opinion.

The facts that he was a self-identified Marxist and had lived in the USSR looked bad enough in the court of public opinion.

The court of public opinion.....    Where did the public get the information on which they based their opinion?  News papers radio and TV......  And the reporters got their information from the authorities.....Like Henry Wade who told reporters that they had found Lee Oswald's finger prints on the rifle.....It was a bare faced lie, they had not found any identifiable finger prints on the rifle, but the reporters didn't know that, so they passed that information to the public.   

[Jerry Organ]

The facts that he was a self-identified Marxist and had lived in the USSR looked bad enough in the court of public opinion.

The court of public opinion.....    Where did the public get the information on which they based their opinion?  News papers radio and TV......  And the reporters got their information from the authorities.....Like Henry Wade who told reporters that they had found Lee Oswald's finger prints on the rifle.....It was a bare faced lie, they had not found any identifiable finger prints on the rifle, but the reporters didn't know that, so they passed that information to the public.

Carl Day, Dallas Crime Lab on work done November 22nd ...

    "I took it to the office and tried to bring out the two prints I had seen on
     the side of the gun at the bookstore. They still were rather unclear.
     Due to the roughness of the metal, I photographed them rather than
     try to lift them. I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the
     barrel that extended under the woodstock. I started to take the
     woodstock off and noted traces of a palmprint near the firing end of
     the barrel about 3 inches under the wood-stock when I took the
     woodstock loose."

    "These are prints or pictures, I should say, of the latent—of the traces of
     prints on the side of the magazine housing of the gun No. C-2766 ...
     They appeared to be the right middle and right ring finger of Harvey Lee
     Oswald, Lee Harvey Oswald."

Day's photographs of the trigger-housing prints were confirmed as Oswald's in the 1993 PBS-TV NOVA Frontline program "Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?" (See also: "JFK First Day Evidence" by Gary Savage, p.120 and "Reclaiming History" by Vincent Bugliosi, pp.803-04)



(Yet another example of the exemplary unbiased work contributed by the Dallas Police Department.)

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Oswald was a complicated guy but as someone of the Left, I don’t see how supporting Marxism equates to disliking the US. One can criticize capitalism and racism (Oswald did both but so too did MLK Jr) while not disliking the US as a whole.

Of course, in the early 1960s it made no difference. Being labeled a “Commie” was almost as bad as being labeled a Nazi.

In other words, the nuances of Oswald’s views didn’t matter at the time when JFK was murdered. The facts that he was a self-identified Marxist and had lived in the USSR looked bad enough in the court of public opinion.

Jon: Yes, but he wrote that he disliked the American political and economic systems. He compared them, unfavorably, to the Soviet system. He said both were "slave" systems that needed to be overthrown. Michael Paine said that Oswald told him that the US system was irredeemable and couldn't be changed; that it needed to be replaced.

Here's Oswald: "I have lived under both systems; I have sought the answers and although it would be very easy to dupe myself into believing one system is better than the other, I know they are not.
I despise the representatives of both systems whether they be socialist or Christian democracies, whether they be labor or conservative, they are all products of the two systems. "

So, whether he disliked America or not he certainly didn't care for our economic and political systems. Whether his belief in Marxism was simply an explanation for the world he disliked - and given his childhood it's understandable that he'd be alienated from it - or not can be debated I guess. I think he had a bit more sophisticated understanding of some of its basic concepts than others think, e.g., his views on surplus value for example were pretty solid.

As to his views on JFK: they are a puzzle, aren't they? If he was pretending to be a Marxist, if this was an act I would think part of it would be to denounce JFK. But if he was a sincere Marxist (as he understood it) and an admirer of Castro I would also think he'd be critical of JFK. But we can't find anything other than the Schmidt story.

[Richard Smith]

Complete and utter BS!......   Most rational people recognize the  murder of President Kennedy as the act of a person who despised him.....     And as Mr M stated.....   LHO did not hate JFK.

Even if it were a confirmed fact that "LHO did not hate JFK" that means absolutely nothing in terms of his guilt.  The evidence is used to prove guilt.  There is an abundance that links Oswald to this crime.  But again, JFK was also the President of the United States.  Not just a person.  Someone with a axe to grind with the US might take that out on its most prominent representative.  So even if LHO did not "hate" JFK he still had an obvious motive for targeting him because Oswald was a political nut job.   And you cannot discount the fact that the opportunity fell into Oswald's lap.  JFK's motorcade literally drove by his place of work affording him the chance.  Oswald did not "target" JFK in the sense that he had to seek him out as most assassins have to do.  JFK came to Dallas and drove right into Oswald's line of sight.

[Bill Chapman]

Even if it were a confirmed fact that "LHO did not hate JFK" that means absolutely nothing in terms of his guilt.  The evidence is used to prove guilt.  There is an abundance that links Oswald to this crime.  But again, JFK was also the President of the United States.  Not just a person.  Someone with a axe to grind with the US might take that out on its most prominent representative.  So even if LHO did not "hate" JFK he still had an obvious motive for targeting him because Oswald was a political nut job.   And you cannot discount the fact that the opportunity fell into Oswald's lap.  JFK's motorcade literally drove by his place of work affording him the chance.  Oswald did not "target" JFK in the sense that he had to seek him out as most assassins have to do.  JFK came to Dallas and drove right into Oswald's line of sight.

'JFK came to Dallas and drove right into Oswald's line of sight'
And Oswald ran right into an abundance of witnesses along his line of flight.

Poetic justice-cum-what-goes-around-comes-around, right there.

 

[Walt Cakebread]

Carl Day, Dallas Crime Lab on work done November 22nd ...

    "I took it to the office and tried to bring out the two prints I had seen on
     the side of the gun at the bookstore. They still were rather unclear.
     Due to the roughness of the metal, I photographed them rather than
     try to lift them. I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the
     barrel that extended under the woodstock. I started to take the
     woodstock off and noted traces of a palmprint near the firing end of
     the barrel about 3 inches under the wood-stock when I took the
     woodstock loose."

    "These are prints or pictures, I should say, of the latent—of the traces of
     prints on the side of the magazine housing of the gun No. C-2766 ...
     They appeared to be the right middle and right ring finger of Harvey Lee
     Oswald, Lee Harvey Oswald."

Day's photographs of the trigger-housing prints were confirmed as Oswald's in the 1993 PBS-TV NOVA program "Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?" (See also: "JFK First Day Evidence" by Gary Savage, p.120 and "Reclaiming History" by Vincent Bugliosi, pp.803-04)



(Yet another example of the exemplary unbiased work contributed by the Dallas Police Department.)

"I took it to the office and tried to bring out the two prints I had seen on
     the side of the gun at the bookstore.

They still were rather unclear.

Here Day admits that the prints on the side of the MAGAZINE were UNCLEAR
   
 Due to the roughness of the metal, I photographed them rather than
     try to lift them.

I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock.



I started to take the woodstock off and noted traces of a palmprint near the firing end of the barrel about 3 inches under the wood-stock when I took the  woodstock loose."

This is simply Day lying.....  Anybody who is familiar with the carcano knows that there is no such location on the carcano.

Day elaborated about the place he said he found the palmprint when he testified before the WC. He said that he saw the palm print  on the metal barrel and the print extened beneath the wooden stock.  There is no wooden stock three inches back from the muzzle of the rifle. There is a steel bayonet lug about 3 1/2 inches back from the muzzle and that bayonet lug surrounds the barrel.

    "These are prints or pictures, I should say, of the latent—of the traces of
     prints on the side of the magazine housing of the gun No. C-2766 ...
     They appeared to be the right middle and right ring finger of Harvey Lee
     Oswald, Lee Harvey Oswald."

Day is lying again.....  Nobody ever identified "the unclear" partial prints that Day saw on the rifle's magazine .

[Jerry Organ]

"I took it to the office and tried to bring out the two prints I had seen on
     the side of the gun at the bookstore.

They still were rather unclear.

Here Day admits that the prints on the side of the MAGAZINE were UNCLEAR

It was only with digital technology that the print photos could be seen under varying contrasts to bring out the detail. Now the process didn't add detail and combining the same print from one photo to another is a perfectly legitimate way of evaluating prints in photographs.

 
 Due to the roughness of the metal, I photographed them rather than
     try to lift them.

I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock.

I started to take the woodstock off and noted traces of a palmprint near the firing end of the barrel about 3 inches under the wood-stock when I took the  woodstock loose."

This is simply Day lying.....  Anybody who is familiar with the carcano knows that there is no such location on the carcano. Part of

Day elaborated about the place he said he found the palmprint when he testified before the WC. He said that he saw the palm print  on the metal barrel and the print extened beneath the wooden stock.  There is no wooden stock three inches back from the muzzle of the rifle. There is a steel bayonet lug about 3 1/2 inches back from the muzzle and that bayonet lug surrounds the barrel.

Day said the print was three inches from the forward end of the wooden fore-stock, not three inches from the muzzle. Above that area of the fore-stock, half of the metal barrel remains exposed. That's where the hardworking and sharp-eyed Day saw part of the palm print exposed. ("I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock.")



I have no trouble reconciling where Day found the barrel print.

    "These are prints or pictures, I should say, of the latent—of the traces of
     prints on the side of the magazine housing of the gun No. C-2766 ...
     They appeared to be the right middle and right ring finger of Harvey Lee
     Oswald, Lee Harvey Oswald."

Day is lying again.....  Nobody ever identified "the unclear" partial prints that Day saw on the rifle's magazine .

Even on the day of the assassination, Day thought there was information (but not enough for a legal-standard "match") to tentatively link the prints to those of 'Lil' Lee. Years later, in the PBS-Frontline program, Day's tentative work on the trigger-guard housing fingerprints was re-examined by one of the nation's most prominent Latent Print Examiners, who said they matched positively to Oswald's.

    "As a result of an exacting and detailed examination and comparison under
     varying degrees of magnification and illumination, I have reached the
     conclusion that the developed latent prints are the fingerprints of Lee
     Harvey Oswald's right middle finger (#3) and right ring finger (#4) as
     they appear on the inked fingerprint card [JFK Exhibit F-400 of the HSCA]."

[John Mytton]

Latona (FBI) saw no signs of anyone having even attempted to process the rifle.

Instead of your usual running and obfuscation how about we analyse where this little factoid leads?
Doesn't it logically follow from your above observation that the (FBI) clearly had no connection to the Dallas Police in setting up Oswald?

JohnM