16-06-2013, 10:09 PM
http://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/2007/06/lho.html
Oswald was a believing Marxist, and his motive was to strike the deadliest blow he could imagine at capitalism in the United States. Oswald had been headed that way most of his sentient life.
I was a reporter for the North American Newspaper Alliance in search of a human interest story and he had just marked his twentieth birthday.
Everything in Oswald's life proclaims that this was a man prepared to take dangerous and dramatic action for the sake of his political beliefs.
But to Oswald the believing Marxist, it did not matter much whether the president was liberal or conservative. What mattered was that he was leader of the greatest capitalist nation on earth. Oswald wanted to decapitate capitalism as he, almost literally, decapitated the president of the United States. Seen in this light, an observation by Marina, the person closest to him at this period of his life, makes perfect sense. Had her husband survived to be tried for the president's murder, Marina believed, not only would he have confessedhe would have boasted about what he had done and proclaimed that it was all for the Socialist cause.
Oswald did not succeed, of course, in bringing down American capitalism, any more than Timothy McVeigh succeeded in sparking a national uprising when he bombed the federal building in Oklahoma City. But Oswald's act of violence indisputably ushered in an era of unease and suspicion in American life that was not there prior to the Kennedy assassination.
Oswald was not responsible for all of the damage that has befallen American society since 1963, much as he would have wished to be. Some of that damage is the result of events related only tangentially to the assassination of President Kennedy. But some of the injury can, with justice, be attributed to conspiracy theorists who have gone to superhuman lengths to avoid facing the truth.
They have constructed wildly-implausible scenarios, far-out, fictitious "conspirators," and have scandalously maligned the motives of Kennedy's successor, rather than take a hard look at the man who actually did it. They have, ironically, done more to poison American political life than Lee Oswaldwith the most terrible of intentionswas able to do.
In 2007 after all the research showing Oswald was an intelligence operative variously serving ONI, FBI, CIA; the sighting by Veciana of Phillips with Oswald in Dallas, the unrelenting proofs Oswald fired no weapon that day, killed no one, and made his last call to John Hurt in Raleigh North Carolina per Victor Marchetti a clean contact to his ONI handler--and of course Richard Case Nagell said Oswald was trained at Nags Head in 1957--
--we have Priscilla Johnson McMillan still writing the articles they want, in the extant piece, emulating Posner, Bugliosi, and Buckley.
Barry Ernest provides the latest, with the excellent foreward by David Lifton, showing Oswald was the man who wasn't there. . . .
. . . except in the Langley demonology so articulated by Priscilla the Useful.
Does she in her dotage realize she's said believing Marxist twice. Does she like Sirhan hypnotize herself.
A dog is a cat. A dog is a cat.
I smell a rat.
The believing Marxist was a tool of Banister and Phillips, not Khrushchev and Castro, nor Lenin and Marx.
Yet Chiquita the NANA insists Che had nothing on Commandante Alek.
<strong>
Oswald was a believing Marxist, and his motive was to strike the deadliest blow he could imagine at capitalism in the United States. Oswald had been headed that way most of his sentient life.
~ ~ ~
I was a reporter for the North American Newspaper Alliance in search of a human interest story and he had just marked his twentieth birthday.
~ ~ ~
Everything in Oswald's life proclaims that this was a man prepared to take dangerous and dramatic action for the sake of his political beliefs.
~ ~ ~
But to Oswald the believing Marxist, it did not matter much whether the president was liberal or conservative. What mattered was that he was leader of the greatest capitalist nation on earth. Oswald wanted to decapitate capitalism as he, almost literally, decapitated the president of the United States. Seen in this light, an observation by Marina, the person closest to him at this period of his life, makes perfect sense. Had her husband survived to be tried for the president's murder, Marina believed, not only would he have confessedhe would have boasted about what he had done and proclaimed that it was all for the Socialist cause.
Oswald did not succeed, of course, in bringing down American capitalism, any more than Timothy McVeigh succeeded in sparking a national uprising when he bombed the federal building in Oklahoma City. But Oswald's act of violence indisputably ushered in an era of unease and suspicion in American life that was not there prior to the Kennedy assassination.
Oswald was not responsible for all of the damage that has befallen American society since 1963, much as he would have wished to be. Some of that damage is the result of events related only tangentially to the assassination of President Kennedy. But some of the injury can, with justice, be attributed to conspiracy theorists who have gone to superhuman lengths to avoid facing the truth.
They have constructed wildly-implausible scenarios, far-out, fictitious "conspirators," and have scandalously maligned the motives of Kennedy's successor, rather than take a hard look at the man who actually did it. They have, ironically, done more to poison American political life than Lee Oswaldwith the most terrible of intentionswas able to do.
~ ~ ~
In 2007 after all the research showing Oswald was an intelligence operative variously serving ONI, FBI, CIA; the sighting by Veciana of Phillips with Oswald in Dallas, the unrelenting proofs Oswald fired no weapon that day, killed no one, and made his last call to John Hurt in Raleigh North Carolina per Victor Marchetti a clean contact to his ONI handler--and of course Richard Case Nagell said Oswald was trained at Nags Head in 1957--
--we have Priscilla Johnson McMillan still writing the articles they want, in the extant piece, emulating Posner, Bugliosi, and Buckley.
Barry Ernest provides the latest, with the excellent foreward by David Lifton, showing Oswald was the man who wasn't there. . . .
. . . except in the Langley demonology so articulated by Priscilla the Useful.
Does she in her dotage realize she's said believing Marxist twice. Does she like Sirhan hypnotize herself.
A dog is a cat. A dog is a cat.
I smell a rat.
The believing Marxist was a tool of Banister and Phillips, not Khrushchev and Castro, nor Lenin and Marx.
Yet Chiquita the NANA insists Che had nothing on Commandante Alek.
<strong>