Oswald's Motive

[Richard Smith]

Oswald lived in some type of fantasy world.

Really? That would have made him highly susceptible to manipulation, don't you think?

That sounds ridiculous to reasonable people but maybe Oswald entertained that possibility.  James Earl Ray got to Canada and Europe after assassinating MLK.  If Oswald had made it to Mexico perhaps there was a chance in his mind that the Cubans would have given him asylum.  I don't think they would have but in Oswald's demented mind maybe he thought it was a risk he was willing to take.

Wait, what happened to the LN "Oswald did not expect to survive and get out of the building" claim? Want to have you cake and eat it too?

In addition, nothing Oswald would have said could be taken as truthful.  He had a real struggle with veracity even in his ordinary life.  He would have lied as necessary to assist himself in custody as most criminals do after arrest.

Sound like you know the man pretty well   

Oh wait, you don't know him at all of course and are just making up stuff as usual....

Oswald understood that his act was extremely risky and that he might not get out of the building.  Can you understand how he could have believed this but also still have made an effort to escape?  As he did.  This would be obvious to most people, but just because Oswald might have been surprised to get out of the building does not preclude him from making efforts to escape after doing so.  And based upon what we do know about Oswald, including the fact that he was desperately trying to reach Cuba before the assassination and knew the drill about reaching the Cuban embassy in Mexico City, that he might have entertained the possibility of doing so after the assassination.  If Tippit had not encountered him, there were buses available to move Oswald in that direction.   There are no good options for a person who has just assassinated the president but seeking asylum from Castro would have fit perfectly with what we know about Oswald.  He didn't exactly have any other good options.  It would have been the most logical thing for him to try in the circumstance even if the likelihood of success was extremely small.  What do you think Oswald would have done in that circumstance if he were the assassin on the run? 

[Martin Weidmann]

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report

Thank you.

The "the WC said so and I have nothing to add" cop out is the best evidence of the fact that you can not substantiate your claims.

Nothing in the WC report, supports the claim that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and/or that he came down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds after the last shot.

This means of course that there is no evidence whatsoever to support your claims. Well done for confirming that your claims are absolutely bogus and meritless. 

[Jon Banks]

Everything - every person, every institution - that is critical of Oswald, that says or points to his guilt, is corrupt. All of them. Even his family, his brother (his mother gets a pass). The only pure person here is one Lee Harvey Oswald. Every one of his acts is characterized as innocent, as the ordinary behavior of "lots of people."

Speculating that he was framed, that the evidence was planted, that the investigations were rigged, that a conspiracy occurred that set him up, is fine to these neutral observers. But any speculation about Oswald is attacked.

It's like an Amber alert, a bat signal goes off when someone says something critical about Oswald. They rush to rescue him. You can smear and defame everyone else - the Paines for example - and that's fine, you won't be challenged. But don't go after Oswald.

The corruption of Dallas law enforcement under Henry Wade was so bad that many of his cases were overturned by more recent Dallas DAs after Wade left.

The FBI reportedly didn’t trust the Dallas PD.

Of course the corruption of the FBI under Hoover is well documented too. They had their own set of issues.

So there are legit reasons for speculation about evidence and witness manipulation in the Kennedy assassination.

I have no reason to suspect that Robert Oswald lied or has been corrupted. Hence why I’ve quoted him in this thread. But I don’t believe his opinion of his brother’s guilt proves there was “no conspiracy”. It’s just his opinion and doesn’t matter anymore than Marina’s opinion (and she now believes there was a conspiracy).

Lastly, this is an open forum. If you don’t want to see any pushback or different points of view, you’re in the wrong place…

[Martin Weidmann]

LOL.  This is a keeper.  No one here has ever claimed that people like family members like Oswald's own wife Marina Oswald were involved in framing Oswald?  I can't remember how many times I've read CTers like yourself claim that Marina's testimony couldn't be accepted because she was a liar under coercion or actively involved in an effort to frame Oswald.  In this thread, we have also been told that Robert Oswald's account should be disimissed because he was trying to sell a book.  And that doesn't even get into the many ordinary citizens who Oswald encountered including Tippit, Brewer, Paine, Brennan, Postal, Markham and many others who have been mocked and even accused of being complicit in the conspiracy to frame Oswald for the assassination.  But it's "nonsense."  You are just a neutral arbiter of the truth who just happens to believe Oswald "didn't come down the stairs" from the 6th floor after the assassination.  Thereby eliminating him as the 6th floor assassin, but you deny being a CTer.   What a bizarre Inspector Clouseau fantasy world you live in.   You don't believe Oswald was on the 6th floor but also won't acknowledge that you are a CTer.

No one here has ever claimed that people like family members like Oswald's own wife Marina Oswald were involved in framing Oswald?

Oh boy. Framing somebody is something that's done prior to the event.

I can't remember how many times I've read CTers like yourself claim that Marina's testimony couldn't be accepted because she was a liar under coercion or actively involved in an effort to frame Oswald.

Marina's testimony was, IMO, more about self preservation rather than framing Oswald. In any event, she is on record admitting having lied to investigators, and an immigration officer was flown in to tell Marina she was going to be fine as long as she cooperated with the investigators. Anybody who attaches any value to her testimony under those circumstances needs his head examined.

[Martin Weidmann]

Oswald understood that his act was extremely risky and that he might not get out of the building.  Can you understand how he could have believed this but also still have made an effort to escape?  As he did.  This would be obvious to most people, but just because Oswald might have been surprised to get out of the building does not preclude him from making efforts to escape after doing so.  And based upon what we do know about Oswald, including the fact that he was desperately trying to reach Cuba before the assassination and knew the drill about reaching the Cuban embassy in Mexico City, that he might have entertained the possibility of doing so after the assassination.  If Tippit had not encountered him, there were buses available to move Oswald in that direction.   There are no good options for a person who has just assassinated the president but seeking asylum from Castro would have fit perfectly with what we know about Oswald.  He didn't exactly have any other good options.  It would have been the most logical thing for him to try in the circumstance even if the likelihood of success was extremely small.  What do you think Oswald would have done in that circumstance if he were the assassin on the run?

Oswald understood that his act was extremely risky and that he might not get out of the building.  Can you understand how he could have believed this but also still have made an effort to escape?

And when exactly would Oswald have come up with a plan to escape to Mexico? After he left the TSBD (why didn't get on the first bus to take him out of town, right there and then?) or after leaving the roominghouse (why would he walk/run to 10th street where there isn't a bus to be found anywhere?)?

he was desperately trying to reach Cuba before the assassination and knew the drill about reaching the Cuban embassy in Mexico City, that he might have entertained the possibility of doing so after the assassination. If Tippit had not encountered him, there were buses available to move Oswald in that direction.   There are no good options for a person who has just assassinated the president but seeking asylum from Castro would have fit perfectly with what we know about Oswald.

Hilarious stupidity. If Oswald wanted to get out of town, to either Mexico or Cuba, as quickly as he could, he could have taken any bus in the area around the TSBD, that would have taken him out of town, but he didn't. Instead he went to the roominghouse (where he also could have taken any bus) and then to a suburban neighbourhood where there wasn't a bus in sight anywhere. Yet, you somehow seem to believe this makes sense for a guy who wants to get to Mexico.

What do you think Oswald would have done in that circumstance if he were the assassin on the run?

Probably get on the first bus out of town he could find.

[John Iacoletti]

Yes, it's the same tired song and dance from our contrarians.  Someone asks a question that by necessity calls for speculation.  And, of course, a question about Oswald's "motive" by necessity must implicitly assume that Oswald assassinated JFK. Otherwise, there is no motive to speculate about.   They then dismiss the answer because it contains speculation.

The only people who ask the question are people who have already decided that he did it, so what's the point?

Suggesting, of all things, that no one can even speculate about Oswald's motives unless they personally knew him! HA HA HA.  The time machine argument.  Of course, motive is not necessary to prove Oswald's responsibility for the crime.  The evidence does that.

HA HA HA.  Right -- the "evidence" that you never seem to get around to actually citing.

There is no doubt that Oswald assassinated JFK based upon the evidence.

HA HA HA.

We do, however, know a great deal about Oswald himself from his family and acquaintance and there is an amazingly consistent pattern to his life.  He was a malcontent who acted up from childhood on for attention.

Not nearly as much of a malcontent who acts up for attention as "Richard".

[John Iacoletti]

In which we learn that Oswald's own family was in on his frame up to "sell a book."

Strawman "Smith" strikes again. 

Ironically, a conclusion based entirely on "speculation" for which there is no supporting evidence.  How much money did Robert Oswald even make on this book?  I bet he didn't sell many copies.

So what?  You bet on a lot of things you are completely ignorant about.

But he must be a bad guy who betrayed his own brother because he dared to suggest Oswald was guilty.

He can "suggest" whatever he likes, but that doesn't convey some special secret knowledge about the case.

Remember Oswald "didn't come down the stairs" after the assassination.   LOL.

Still waiting for your evidence that he did.  LOL.

[John Iacoletti]

He had a real struggle with veracity even in his ordinary life.

So do you, but nobody accuses you of murder.