28-11-2014, 07:24 PM
Personally, I have never liked the "homicidal psychopath" label, it always seems to me like a convenient way to close the case. Even psychopaths have reasons. That said, Oswald's motives, or lack thereof, have never been entirely explained satisfactorily even after 51 years. ( Even Connally is a better target for Oswald's rage, Connally denied Oswald a change of military discharge; what if JFK was just in the way?) Why target Kennedy specifically?
For my money, the only plausible explanation I've seen published is that Oswald was jealous that Marina expressed admiration of JFK, the same evening that she refused to sleep with Oswald. This explanation is what Marina came up with, so of course, it features her. And it still seems pretty thin. There is also the plausible possibility of a "suicide via Secret Service" motive (my own theory of a plausible motive, I don't know if it's been published). However neither of those plausible motives adequately explain other puzzling actions Oswald took, like the trip to Mexico, or leaving the pistol at home.
I am currently reading "Ultimate Sacrifice," which is very long winded, repetitive, and features the worst kind of "cousin's-sister in law's-best friend's-uncle" sort of examination of "connections." However, it occurs to me that the authors may have inadvertently hit upon an entirely plausible motive for Oswald (which is not at all what their book describes - their idea is "Mafia hit") to either act alone or join a group. If it still seems plausible after I finish the book, (more than 1000 pages iirc) I'll post it.
For my money, the only plausible explanation I've seen published is that Oswald was jealous that Marina expressed admiration of JFK, the same evening that she refused to sleep with Oswald. This explanation is what Marina came up with, so of course, it features her. And it still seems pretty thin. There is also the plausible possibility of a "suicide via Secret Service" motive (my own theory of a plausible motive, I don't know if it's been published). However neither of those plausible motives adequately explain other puzzling actions Oswald took, like the trip to Mexico, or leaving the pistol at home.
I am currently reading "Ultimate Sacrifice," which is very long winded, repetitive, and features the worst kind of "cousin's-sister in law's-best friend's-uncle" sort of examination of "connections." However, it occurs to me that the authors may have inadvertently hit upon an entirely plausible motive for Oswald (which is not at all what their book describes - their idea is "Mafia hit") to either act alone or join a group. If it still seems plausible after I finish the book, (more than 1000 pages iirc) I'll post it.
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."