The trouble with the media . . . they are human. It's very hard to decipher what actually happened at times, due to the fact that they are not perfect.
Quite naturally, mystery surrounds the events of the JFK Assassination. Some things will never be truly known.
One of the books that intrigued me from the beginning was Jim Marrs's "Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy."
If anything, Oswald obviously was involved with the murder of the President. Whether or not he shot the President is a different story.
Take for instance, the recent Not Guilty verdict of Robert Durst.
This is a guy who claimed to act in self defense against a neighbor, killing him, and following the incident, dismembering the victim in an attempt to hide the truth.
The guy is a habitual liar. His whole life doesn't make sense.
He was reading a children's book during part of this whole Court TV event.
Obviously, this guy's not right in the head. I suppose the verdict is fair, considering there isn't 100% proof of 1st degree . . . however, who accidentally kills someone, then tries to cover it up, if they're not guilty of murder? He may be crazy, but the dismemberment points to wrongdoing in my mind.
It's dishonest. Obviously, the man is a bit dangerous.
You could look at Oswald in a similar fashion.
Obviously, Oswald was a little creepy. He had all sorts of opinions. During the spring of one year, he was working for anti-Castro people. Then, suddenly in the summer, he's working on his own accord for pro-Castro beliefs.
He went to Communist Russia in the middle of the toughest days of the Cold War, by his own accord. What's shocking is that he returned to the United States.
His whole life doesn't make sense. Some say that he's a sharpshooter, but I'm convinced that guys like the recent D.C. Sniper incident, Muhammad in particular, had more training than he did. The sniper team wasn't perfect on every shooting . . . and they did such things from arguably the same firing range.
To accuse Oswald, so soon, RIGHT after the shooting. How did they know?
Seriously, how come, right after the event took place, Dallas police, unconcerned with the President's safety, later to bungle the transfer of Oswald from the prison, really KNOW anything about the incident? Who tipped them off?
Nothing makes sense in this crime. The people that Oswald associated with . . . David Ferrie, Clay Shaw . . . these were all men who were very secretive. They lived strange lives. They had equally strange, sometimes dangerous, connections to others.
Lack of a proper autopsy on the President, cleaning and refurbishing EVIDENCE, like the motorcade vehicle that the President used . . . it sits, without all the actual upholstery and other necessary crime evidence . . . it's actually in Michigan, at the Henry Ford Museum. Yet, they did the refurbishment in a short period of time AFTER the assassination, thus disrupting the evidence that the car is.
There's so much debate . . .
I like the website that the recently released movie has:http://www.interviewwiththeassassin.com/index1.htmlInterview with the Assassin
is done well, along the lines of The Blair Witch Project.http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/oswald.htm
This is a site I just found about Oswald. It's quite detailed.
The best way I can look at it is like an investigator. When you have so much evidence that just isn't 'normal,' suddenly you start to see that the people involved around the event had some sort of combined effect, so much to the point that the President probably shouldn't have travelled to Texas for his re-election campaign. There were too many nefarious and dangerous members of the population down there without enough security to contain threats.