Careful. There's only one correct answer.

Maxwell and Mushroom: three, two, one, go.

No. If Lee Harvey really did act alone they wouldn't be keeping stuff classified 43 years later! Too many powerful people wanted JFK D-E-A-D!

Come on, there was no Burger Commission researching the attempt on Reagan.

Though I still wonder really why John Hinckley's brother, Scott, cancelled a dinner date with Neil Bush for the same night. Hmmm....
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/nixweiss.gif

"From what I know and have heard they (the Hinckleys) are a very nice family and have given a lot of money to the Bush campaign."
--Sharon Bush (Mrs. Neil Bush)
http://www.whitheouse.org/news/2004/033004.asp

No, of course he didn't.

The real question here is who was involved, not was anybody involved.

The mafia are an obvious candidate.
Jack Ruby (the man who killed Oswald) was a well known Mafia associate, he in fact visited Joe Campisi's restaurant the day before Kennedy was killed, Campisi also visited him in prison a few days after he killed Oswald.
The only logical reason for Ruby killing Oswald is that somebody forced him to do it, plus the facts present themselves. He was able to gain access to a heavily secured police building with a concealed firearm on his person. This isn't something one man could do, he obviously had help and with the Mafia's well known 'ownership' of certain police officers, that wouldn't be too difficult.

I think the Russian link is a red herring. Oswald was a confused individual and his dealings with the Russians were a mess to begin with. Moscow had no reason to kill Kennedy, he was soft on Communism.

I don't think Oswald even hit JKF. I think the deadly bullet came from a sewer on the street. That bullet came up to basically take off part of his skull. If you look at those stills from that film, you can see that it did not come from above (like where Oswald was)-it came from below. And the single bullet theory? GIVE ME A BREAK!!! 





Cat

I'm 97% sure Oswald acted alone. There's a bunch of links on the net, debunking just about every facet of the conspiracy. So 97% sure, he acted alone. 100% sure, he was one of the shooters.

After reading many books on the subject and watching many documentries, I have built up the opinion he was not alone, but exactly who with intrigues me.

I don't think Oswald even hit JKF. I think the deadly bullet came from a sewer on the street. That bullet came up to basically take off part of his skull. If you look at those stills from that film, you can see that it did not come from above (like where Oswald was)-it came from below. And the single bullet theory? GIVE ME A BREAK!!! 


There had to be more than one bullet because the driver was hit at such an angle that it did not line up with the entry/exit wounds on JFK's head.  The entry wound was confirmed to be at the top of his skull and the exit wound at his throat, though.  Even though his head snapped back, it's still consistent with getting slammed in the back of the head with a sniper bullet...it literally snaps your head back if it hits the posterior of the skull.  Pretty wacky.  The way the convoy was set up and the way JFK was situated in the convertible, someone trying to take aim from ground level would not have had the angle for the shot.

Oswald was not alone, he was the red herring thrown to the people.  I lean more to the CIA either knowing, or being a part of it, what with the Warren Commission and its "single bullet theory", and the botched autopsy.

The Warren Commission was the governments exhaustive study of the events and they came up with the single bullet that should tell everyone that there are major questions involved with the governments knowledge of what exactly transpired. There was a Seinfeld episode about Keith Hernandez spitting on Kramer and Jerry recreating the event, for anyone who has seen it, that is actually a very good synopsis of the single bullet theory as it was presented at the time, right down to the stop in mid-air and change directions.

There had to be more than one bullet because the driver was hit at such an angle that it did not line up with the entry/exit wounds on JFK's head.  The entry wound was confirmed to be at the top of his skull and the exit wound at his throat, though.  Even though his head snapped back, it's still consistent with getting slammed in the back of the head with a sniper bullet...it literally snaps your head back if it hits the posterior of the skull.  Pretty wacky.  The way the convoy was set up and the way JFK was situated in the convertible, someone trying to take aim from ground level would not have had the angle for the shot.



The driver?  The only two people shot in that limo were Connolly and Kennedy and neither of them were driving the car. 

No he did not. Odd's are there were more than one person involved in the shooting. I'm not saying its impossible that he was a lone gunman but  there's just too much compelling evidence to accept the offical ruiling IMO.

First off, the extremely relaxed secret service presence is mysterious to me.I'm Not really speaking of the less than spectacular performence of the s.s agents that day because everyone knows they had stayed out late drinking the night before(but this still does not justify the driver slamming on brakes in the middle of the shooting), but I'm talking about the lack of agents in the area of the shooting and the city as a whole. It's just weird to me that so many high windows  overlooking the motorcade route were left open the floors left totally unocupied. An empty office building with windows overlooking the parade route and nothing obstructing the view? Sounds like a good snipers nest to me.

And, Oswald himself was a very strange charcter. Too many fake Oswalds and strange occurances surrounding the man in late 1963 for me to believe that he acted alone. I also still don't understand why Ruby killed him. He said he did it "To save Jackie Kennedy the trauma of a murder trail" but I just dont buy it. If he hated Oswald enough to kill him, why not just let him be tried and convicted. In Texas for killing the President AND a cop he would've most certainly been executed so he would have wound up dead without Ruby having to go to jail in the process.

I was watching a documentary about the assassination and Peter Jennings made an interesting point/analogy.  Think of the scales of justice.  Not what they represent, just what they look like.  Now on one end place the Holocaust, history's greatest crime.  On the other end place the Nazis, history's greatest criminals.  The scales even out; one is equally as heavy as the other. 

Now clear the scales and put the assassination of a President at one end and Lee Harvey Oswald on the other.  They aren't equal.  Conspiracy theorists keep throwing people onto that end of the scale (CIA, FBI, LBJ, the mob, Castro) in an attempt to even out the weight.....but they never can because there's no proof and there probably never will be.  If anyone knew anything more than we know right now, they are either senile or dead. 

I think the Russian link is a red herring. Oswald was a confused individual and his dealings with the Russians were a mess to begin with. Moscow had no reason to kill Kennedy, he was soft on Communism.


  Didn't LBJ once tell his mistress that it was the CIA oil barons that whacked him?  Well, so she says...

  Most of the head honchos in the CIA are/were oil barons, heh..?

The driver?  The only two people shot in that limo were Connolly and Kennedy and neither of them were driving the car. 


Whoops, they were both sitting on the passenger side, my bad.

Every conspiracy theory has been debunked because every conspiracy must be debunked. Warren Commissioners never revealed what went on behind closed doors, but a few of them said under their breath, "If the truth ever got out, it would rip this country apart!"

I don't think the Bush family was in on it, but I think they were behind the attempt on Reagan. The Bushes didn't try to kill Clinton, why make him a martyr? It looked like Clinton was gonna get retired in disgrace!

Oswald shot the President and Governor Connally, and he acted alone.  There is nobody else involved.

For one, the facts prove that Oswald was the shooter.  He was not a "patsy", he was not an innocent man who was being held.  And there is a simple way to prove it.

Why did Oswald shoot and kill Officer Tippit?

There were no actual witnesses of Oswald shooting the President.  But there were several witnesses who saw him shoot and kill Officer Tippit.  He shot the Officer 4 times with a .38 revolver.  He then reloaded the pistol and went into a theater.  The witnesses called the police and arrested him in the theater.  And in fact, he was not in jail for shooting the President.  He was only being held on the charge of killing Officer Tippit.  Oswald was never charged with shooting the President.  And in the questioning, he denied shooting the officer just as much as he denied shooting the President, no matter that there were several witnesses to it.

Then there is the attempted assasination of General Walker.  General Edwin Walker was an outspoken critic of Communism, and Oswald stalked him for weeks.  On 10 April 1963, somebody took a shot at Walker through his dining room window.  A single bullet was recovered, which was a 6.5mm bullet.  While it was damaged and there was no rifiling that could be used for comparison, it was proved through metalogical tests to have come from the same lot that the bullets used to kill Kennedy and wound Connally.

Myself, I believe that he was trying to kill President Kennedy and Governor Connally.  For years leading up to the assasination, Oswald had been writing increasingly threatening letters to John Connally.  They started in 1961, when Connally was the Secretary of the Navy.  Even after Connally resigned to run for Governor of Texas, Oswald continued to write him, urging him to use his influence to upgrade his discharge.  This is because Oswald recieved a Bad Conduct Discharge from the Marine Corps.  During the 2 years prior to the assasination, he had been trying to upgrade this.

In fact, in a letter dated 30 January 1962, Oswald wrote to Connally stating he would "employ all means to right this gross mistake or injustice."  The letters continued until July 1963, when Oswald's petition to have his discharge changed was denied by the Naval Discharge Review Board.

In fact, if a background check had been done on Oswald he never would have been given the job at the School Book Depository.  Because of his Discharge, Oswald was prohibited from holding a job with any government connection.  However, background checks were rarely done at that time for such low ended jobs as warehouse man.

And there are many films and takes of the assasination, not just the Zapruder film.  THere are photos and film that show it from all angles, including several that are aimed directly at the "grassy knoll".  And none of them show any sign of a muzzle flash from that direction.  And there is no forensic evidence showing a shot from any other angle.

Every claim of "conspiracy" simply adds more and more incredible conjecture, each one more implausible then the last.  We have had everybody from the Mob, the CIA, Castro, FBI, Military, Soviet Union, White Supremists, John Birch Society, and every other group attributed to it.

To me, they are all stupid.  Neither Castro nor the Soviet Union would have done this.  Doing so would have been an unquestionable act of war, and would have resulted in a thermonucelar war.  Neither of these suspects is suicidal.

As for the other groups, I simply can't believe that even 40 years later, nobody directly involved has come forward.  If Mark Felt could come forward only a short time after such a minor incident as Watergate, I simply can't believe that you would not have anybody come forward from a crime as great as the assasination of the President.

Historically, assasinations are done by individuals.  Almost every modern assasination (or attempted assasination) is done by one person.  The 2 attempts on Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, John Lennon, Huey Long, Yitzhak Rabin, William McKinley, James Garfield, the list goes on and on.

In the event of an actual conspiracy, it is quickly broken and the others involved either captured, killed, or known.  This is the case with Abraham Lincoln, Alan Berg, Ahmed Massoud, Mohandas Gandhi, Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi, Benigno Aquino, Leon Trotsky, Anwar Sadat, Lord Mountbatten, Franz Ferdinand, and the list goes on and on and on.

I no more believe in a conspiracy around this then I do in a conspiracy about the death of Curt Cobain, Diana Spencer, or Paul Wellstone.

Conspiracy may be fun, but for the most part they require a person to believe that every little thing has to go perfect, nothing can go wrong, and nobody involved can ever talk.  And that simply never happens.

Oswald was not alone, he was the red herring thrown to the people.  I lean more to the CIA either knowing, or being a part of it, what with the Warren Commission and its "single bullet theory", and the botched autopsy.

The Warren Commission was the governments exhaustive study of the events and they came up with the single bullet that should tell everyone that there are major questions involved with the governments knowledge of what exactly transpired. There was a Seinfeld episode about Keith Hernandez spitting on Kramer and Jerry recreating the event, for anyone who has seen it, that is actually a very good synopsis of the single bullet theory as it was presented at the time, right down to the stop in mid-air and change directions.





Yeah, that was a parody of the Oliver Stone film, which I thought was intriguing, albeit a tad too long :)

If Oswald acted alone and shot the President from that high a perch, I don't know if the angles would have matched...there was apparently a wound on JFK that entered through his back and out his throat, which suggests that someone shot him from a completely different vantage point than Oswald  :o

Yeah, that was a parody of the Oliver Stone film, which I thought was intriguing, albeit a tad too long :)

If Oswald acted alone and shot the President from that high a perch, I don't know if the angles would have matched...there was apparently a wound on JFK that entered through his back and out his throat, which suggests that someone shot him from a completely different vantage point than Oswald  :o
but isn't part of the problem that they say the autopsy evidence was so tampered with you really can't tell WHAT happened to him, the forensics are all hinky. same thing with the zapruder film, there are folks saying frames were taken out, respliced out of order, etc., and once that happens it's impossible to make sense out of anything, pretty much.

but isn't part of the problem that they say the autopsy evidence was so tampered with you really can't tell WHAT happened to him, the forensics are all hinky. same thing with the zapruder film, there are folks saying frames were taken out, respliced out of order, etc., and once that happens it's impossible to make sense out of anything, pretty much.


I was reading the Wiki article (not sure if it is completely accurate but it is detailed) and they were talking about how one of the exit wounds was basically destroyed because of a botched tracheoctomy.  My feeling is that there was someone besides Oswald just because of the discrepancy in shot angles...

i was all into the JFK assassination for a long time. i voted "no" on this poll (that is, i voted there was a conspiracy) but the more i read about it, the more i just wanted to throw up my hands and say, wow, i just don't know WHAT to think. it's possible oswald acted alone, i think, but not very likely.

See, in grade school we were taught that the assassin WAS Oswald, and that he was the only culprit.  But when I first saw JFK by Oliver Stone, he did such a good job with it that he almost convinced me that Oswald was just a pawn.  However, there is an obvious downward shot at JFK (head-to-neck wound) and another shot that seemed to have come straight at his back (back-to-neck wound).  Another special on either Discovery or the National Geographic Channel confirmed that a sniper bullet that slams into the back of the head will snap the head backwards.  And the rifle that they found that was supposed to have done the shooting was one where you had to load a shot every time the last shot was spent, so Oswald would have to have acted superquick if he were the only guy...it is possible, but like you said, I too have no idea what went on.  I wasn't there, though :D

There was a program on the Discovery Channel not too long ago where they tried to prove (or disprove) the theory that one bullet went through Kennedy's back, out his throat and into Gov. Connolly.....using the same kind of gun and the same distance from the car. 


They were able to prove that it could happen.  I thought it was remarkable because I didn't think they could do it. 

Another special on either Discovery or the National Geographic Channel confirmed that a sniper bullet that slams into the back of the head will snap the head backwards.  And the rifle that they found that was supposed to have done the shooting was one where you had to load a shot every time the last shot was spent, so Oswald would have to have acted superquick if he were the only guy...it is possible, but like you said, I too have no idea what went on.  I wasn't there, though :D


That was actually covered many times, and I remember first seeing it on an episode of "Nova" in the early 1980's.  History Channel has a great show about it they repeat at least once a month or so.

And the rate of fire?  Nonsense!  He fired 3 shots in just over 8 seconds.  That is childsplay to somebody with training.

And people also often go on and on about the distances fired, like it would be a miracle to hit somebody from that distance.  Oswald used a 4x scope, and was firing at a slow moving target from a range of under 100 yards.

Remember, Oswald was trained in Marksmanship by the US Marines.  The minimum distance Marines shoot for qualification is 200 yards, the maximum is 500 yards (in the early 1960's, it was 600 yards).  Having fired in competition myself with bolt action rifles, I can say it is not hard to fire a round every 2 seconds with the proper training.  And hitting a target moving towards or away from you is no real challenge.  You do not have to "lead" the target like you would if it was moving sideways to your position.

The rifle used in the assasination was an M-91 Mannlicher-Carcano, a popular Italian made military rifle.  It was designed in 1891, and saw active service in the Italian military until 1950.  It was reguarded as being highly accurate, and had a 6 round internal magazine.  It had an effective range of 600 meters, making it more accurate then the M-16 (with a range of 500 meters).  In fact, this was a popular rifle for Italian snipers in both world wars, because of it's smooth handling and the ease of adding a scope.

The mere fact that this rifle had a life of almost 60 years is a statement to it's accuracy and speed of fire.  Most other militaries scrapped their bolt action weapons before or during the Second World War.  And the Italians had access to German weapons and designs.  The fact that it continued to see service for over 10 years after the beginning of the war is a statement to the trust the government and troops had in the weapon.

Massimo Polidoro---report from a skeptic, The Fifth World Skeptic's Conference.

http://www.csicop.org/si/2005-01/strange-world.html

This report questions the assumption of a "magic bullet." I have not researched Polidoro's research, but Polidoro claims the "single bullet theory" is plausible if you look at the actual positions of President Kennedy and Governor Connally in the limousine.  

Attorney Vincent Bugliosi (of Manson trial/Helter Skelter fame) who published a withering denunciation of the 200 Bush v. Gore case, "None Dare Call it Treason" (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20010205/bugliosi) also believes Oswald acted alone. Bugliosi says basically, "I have read the entire Warren Commission report, have you?" As he sees it, few people who believe in a conspiracy and a coverup have actually read the Warren Commission.

I am not sold. I still suspect there was a conspiracy and the CIA was involved. However, I cannot rule out the claim that Oswald acted alone.

LBJ ordered the Warren Commission documentations to be sealed against public availability for 75 years (until 2039) prior to the 1964 Presidential election. Why?
Chances are a baby born a year after JFK was assassinated would not live to see the records declassified. Why the secrecy? If Oswald really was the lone gunman, as conspiracy cynics such as Mr. Bugliosi contend, what is there to hide?
When I was in school, they taught us Lee Harvey Oswald was a sniveling pathetic little f**k who couldn't do anything right. Never mind the fact that Oswald was fluent in Russian and had lived and worked in the Soviet Union. I won't bother detailing Oswald here, but if Oswald was just a lone wolf dissenter like Leon Czolgosz (who assassinated President McKinley), would't it be more expedient to let the public in on it?

Less than 30 years later, the government reversed Johnson's orders and made the Warren Commission's findings available to the public....except for 3% of them! Come on now! The Cold War is over, Communism is caput, what "national security" issue can the government argue? The remaining documents are due to be released in 2017, but the way things are going in this benighted country, the fascist government will keep them sealed all the same.

Even if Oswald was the lone gunman, it does not mean there was no conspiracy.

LBJ ordered the Warren Commission documentations to be sealed against public availability for 75 years (until 2039) prior to the 1964 Presidential election. Why?

Less than 30 years later, the government reversed Johnson's orders and made the Warren Commission's findings available to the public....except for 3% of them! Come on now!


The reason is probably the same as we see many other things held back for so long: the need to keep some sources confidential.

A good example of this is Venona.  Venona was a project that lasted from 1946 until 1980, and was as tight of a secret as MAGIC and ULTRA in World War II.  And even as well known as those projects are today, they were classified and not made public until the 1970's.  That is over over 30 years after the end of the war.

One of the things released in the mid 1990's was that anylists had extensively gone through Venona intercepts to see if there was any reference in them to Oswald, or anybody else that might have been involved in the JFK assasination.  There was no evidence in Venona that the Soviets even knew who Oswald was, but they could not disclose that, since it would have compromised Venona.

Odds are that most of what is in the "remaining 3%" is either people who are/were working in intelligence positions, or systems that are still in use, or where their public knowledge would compromise other operations.  Remember, Oswald had extensive contacts with the Cuban government, and had visited the Cuban Embassy in Mexico just weeks before the assasination.  I would bet that part of the "3%" concerns intelligence operations in Cuba.

And if the CIA was trying to use Oswald in any form, that would be insanity.  You do not involve a known Soviet and Cuban sympathizer with an assassination plot!  If the information leaked wrongly about it, it could have triggered World War III!  As it was, both the US and Soviet Governments worked hard to defuse any speculation that the Soviets were behind it.

In fact, the Soviet Union did the unprecidented action of turning over the the US Government all information they had relating to Lee Harvey Oswald and his wife Marina.  And I would not be surprised if some of the "3%" was also being held back under an agreement with the KGB, to protect some of their own sources in use at the time.

To keep sources confidential, eh? Let's give Bob Novak a crack at it and look the other way!

It's been 43 years, nearly two generations! I don't think they are trying to protect anything but their own azzes. The Soviet Union doesn't exist anymore. Come on! The CIA is still around. The military-industrial complex is still around. Castro is still around. The mafia...not really. What would come to light would embarrass and discredit power structures that still exist today. That's why they won't spit out what we all wanna know!
:-X