Oswald's Motive

[Jon Banks]

What Bill and others can do is speculate that the CIA killed JFK. Or the Pentagon. Or the FBI. Or Wall Street bankers. Or Texas oilmen.

We can speculate about all sorts of hairbrained conspiracy theories involving all sorts of institutions and figures and persons and forces. Hell, we can speculate about aliens (that is one theory). It's done here nearly every day. Tens of thousands of such posts. All sort of oddball claims and allegations.

And the skeptics here who lecture against "speculation" will not say a word about this. Not one. But speculating based on facts about Oswald's motives? That's simply not allowed.

And they think they are convincing people that they really aren't conspiracy believers. Yes they do.

Speculation about historic events is perfectly normal. Individuals can observe the same historic facts and reach different conclusions or interpretations of the facts. There are few historic events that have 100% consensus among historians and researchers.

Only the LN crowd within the JFK research community tries to discourage people from speculation about the JFK assassination.

I think it's perfectly fine to debate Oswald's motives but at the end of the day, only Oswald knows what he was thinking or feeling on 11/22/63 and all we can do is speculate because he was killed soon after.

I'm of the opinion that there was likely a conspiracy but I'm undecided on what role Oswald played in it. If he was involved, I admit that I don't know what would've motivated him.

[John Iacoletti]

Context also matters.  Walker was targeted by Oswald from all the other public figures because of his high-profile anti-Communist views.  JFK was largely a target of opportunity because his motorcade went by Oswald's place of employment by chance.  I doubt Oswald would otherwise have ever targeted JFK absent the chance falling into his lap.  In other words, Walker was clearly targeted for his political views while JFK was targeted more by opportunity. 

So the specific motivations vary a bit but do come back to Oswald's leftist, anti-American political views.  He certainly was ahead of his time by a few decades in that respect.  In Walker's case, the assassination attempt was clearly a direct political act based on Walker's right-wing views.  Oswald selected and went to his target in that case.  In JFK's case, it was a symbolic act against the US based upon the opportunity that presented itself to Oswald.  The target came to Oswald.

What a long-winded way to say “I don’t know, but here’s something I completely made up”.

[John Iacoletti]

A person who subscribes to/reads fascist publications, praises fascism, praises fascist figures, call himself a fascist is a fascist whether he openly associates with other fascists or not.

When did Oswald call himself a fascist?

[John Iacoletti]

This was his final protest to a world that had ignored him, sometimes mocked him, always failed to acknowledge his superiority.


Robert Oswald, page 214 of “Lee, a Portrait of Lee Harvey Oswald”


And I believe that a large part of his motive had to do with the last part (underlined by me) of Robert’s statement. Robert also indicates that a pattern was apparent to him regarding LHO’s behavior. I will post Robert’s exact words about that pattern when I locate them in the above referenced book.

Robert, like other WC believers decided first that Lee did it, then went hunting for a motive.

[John Iacoletti]

But speculating based on facts about Oswald's motives? That's simply not allowed.

Of course it’s “allowed”. Just don’t pretend it means anything.

And they think they are convincing people that they really aren't conspiracy believers. Yes they do.

It’s not complicated, Steve. A “conspiracy believer” is one who believes in a conspiracy.

[John Iacoletti]

Only the LN crowd within the JFK research community tries to discourage people from speculation about the JFK assassination.

Ironic, given that their entire belief system is built on a speculation bus.

[Charles Collins]

Robert, like other WC believers decided first that Lee did it, then went hunting for a motive.

Another insignificant remark from the peanut gallery. And it couldn’t be more wrong.


Actually, according to Robert Oswald, in his book, he was already discussing and searching for possible motives while LHO was still alive.

One example from page 146:


If I had been allowed to spend half an hour with Lee that Saturday, and then continue our talk over the next day or two, I believe I would have been able to arrive at final answers to two questions: Was Lee guilty? If he was guilty, what were his motives?

Also, on pages 139-140 Robert Oswald writes about discussing possible motives with Secret Service agent Mike Howard (while Robert was waiting to see LHO).

[John Iacoletti]

Bull. Robert was estranged and hadn’t see his brother in over a year. He just wanted to sell a book after the fact.