Hoover’s effort to “convince the public that Oswald” was lone assassin…

[John Iacoletti]

There were legitimate reasons to convince the public of Oswald's guilt.  First, LHO was the assassin.  The evidence is overwhelming.

Once again, “Richard” illustrates how easily overwhelmed he is.

Thank goodness the authorities responsible for the investigation of this matter promptly uncovered and disclosed the truth.

LOL

[Jerry Freeman]

Once again, “Richard” illustrates how easily overwhelmed he is.

We have heard about preaching to the choir.
In that guys case folks...you are preaching to the dead.

[Richard Smith]

There were legitimate reasons to convince the public of Oswald's guilt.

Cool, will you tell us this time?

First, LHO was the assassin.

Any clown can accuse somebody of something, so?

The evidence is overwhelming underwhelming.

Error fixed.

Even after nearly 60 years there is no credible evidence of the involvement of anyone else Oswald.

Error fixed.

Second, given Oswald's bizarre political background, there was a legitimate concern that some nutty conspiracy theory might have prompted WWIII by falsely convincing the public that the Russians or Cubans were behind the assassination.

"Background" -- LOL

Thank goodness the authorities responsible for the investigation of this matter promptly uncovered and disclosed the truth.

Correction: 888 pages of lies and deception.

Remember the Maine!  Bring on WWIII because some commie nut killed the president.  LOL.  Thankfully the United States had responsible leaders at that time to avoid being pressured into war by crazy conspiracy theorists. 

[Martin Weidmann]

Remember the Maine!  Bring on WWIII because some commie nut killed the president.  LOL.  Thankfully the United States had responsible leaders at that time to avoid being pressured into war by crazy conspiracy theorists.

Name the "crazy conspiracy theorists" who were pressuring for war?

And while you're at it, why don't you tell us precisely, how those "responsible leaders" of the US would get the country into WWIII because of the murder of Kennedy, regardless whether a lone nut or a conspiracy was behind it?

[Richard Smith]

Name the "crazy conspiracy theorists" who were pressuring for war?

And while you're at it, why don't you tell us precisely, how those "responsible leaders" of the US would get the country into WWIII because of the murder of Kennedy, regardless whether a lone nut or a conspiracy was behind it?

It seems obvious.  If the public were convinced that the Russians or Cubans were behind the assassination of the US President, that would be deemed an act of war.  Necessitating a military response.  In fact, some CTers alleged the involvement of Russia/Cuba was actually covered up and the blame placed solely on LHO to avoid a war.  Any CTer (such as Mark Lane) who was attempting to convince the public of a fake conspiracy risked causing WWIII. 

[Jerry Freeman]

It seems obvious. If the public were convinced that the Russians or Cubans were behind the assassination of the US President, that would be deemed an act of war.  Necessitating a military response.  In fact, some CTers alleged the involvement of Russia/Cuba was actually covered up and the blame placed solely on LHO to avoid a war.  Any CTer (such as Mark Lane) who was attempting to convince the public of a fake conspiracy risked causing WWIII.

What have you been smoking now?
The topic based on that cornjecture should then be--- 'Hoover's effort to convince the public that Cuba or the Soviets were not involved'
Your spookulations permeates the entire forum.
     
         

It seems obvious.

What is obvious to you is comical to everyone else here with any inkling of skepticism.

[Walt Cakebread]

What have you been smoking now?
The topic based on that cornjecture should then be--- 'Hoover's effort to convince the public that Cuba or the Soviets were not involved'
Your spookulations permeates the entire forum.
     
         
What is obvious to you is comical to everyone else here with any inkling of skepticism.

What is obvious to you is comical to everyone else here with any inkling of skepticism.

Richard's ideas  would be "comical".... if they weren't so pathetic. 

[Richard Smith]

What have you been smoking now?
The topic based on that cornjecture should then be--- 'Hoover's effort to convince the public that Cuba or the Soviets were not involved'
Your spookulations permeates the entire forum.
     
         
What is obvious to you is comical to everyone else here with any inkling of skepticism.

Read the title of this thread and try to understand the implication.  Why was it necessary to "convince" the public of Oswald's guilt?  One interpretation is that Hoover and members of the US government placed the blame for the assassination on LHO to cover up the involvement of others.  Right?  You believe something along those lines.  So who are the typical suspects behind the assassination?  Granted CTers are all over the place but Oswald's nutty political background including defecting to the USSR and making trips to the Cuban embassy just months before the assassination lends itself to Russia and Cuba as being involved in the assassination.  In fact, CTers like Walt have suggested that blame was placed on Oswald to avoid war.  Meaning that the Hoover and LBJ knew the Cubans or Russians were really behind the assassination, and rather than go to war, they made a patsy of Oswald.  The lunacy of that kind of thinking is on your side, however.  It's comical not to understanding that you are mocking the basic premise of your own theory.  There was a legitimate basis to conclude: 1) Oswald was the assassin; and 2) there was a risk that the public might falsely be convinced of the involvement of Russia or Cuba based on Oswald's background and the dishonesty of CTers such as Mark Lane that could result in WWIII.  Thankfully sane people were in charge at that time.