Was Lee Harvey Oswald a complete moron?

When one considers Lee Harvey Oswald’s alleged actions and the aftermath of his arrest, following the assassination of the President, it begs the question: Was Oswald a complete moron? Just consider the following:

What kind of a moron allegedly shoots the President of the United states from a window in front of the TSBD (without using a silencer), and then walks straight out the front door where he can be recognised? Let’s bear in mind the Warren commission determined Oswald left the TSBD just 3 minutes after allegedly shooting the President. Surely Oswald would have known that witnesses, such as Howard Brennan, could have pointed him out to the police as he exited the building. Now if Oswald was innocent (as I am 100% convinced he was), he naturally wouldn’t hesitate to walk out the front door, right? Unless of course, he was a complete moron.

Another question is this: what kind of a moron stops to buy a bottle of coke instead of trying to get the hell out of building through the back door after shooting the President. Now, Oswald could have gone to the second floor lunchroom in order to establish himself an alibi. However, why would have his back turned to the door and be walking away instead of standing directly behind the door and looking through the window to make sure he could be seen? Lone gunman kooks have naturally challenged whether or not Oswald actually had a coke when he was allegedly confronted by Officer Marion Baker, since his buying the coke from the soda machine adds to the problem of him getting from the 6^th floor to the 2^nd floor lunchroom on time. In my opinion, it is far more conceivable that Oswald would get the hell out of the TSBD almost immediately after the assassination, instead of waiting for the cops to seal off the building (if he actually was the assassin).

(Please note:  I said alleged encounter with Baker, because in his first day affidavit, Baker claims to have encountered a man walking away from the stairwell on the 3^rd or 4^th floor! There is also no mention of the lunchroom, and the description of the man he encountered does not match Oswald! Be sure to check out the work by ace researcher, Greg Parker here, or see this thread by ace researcher, Lee Farley, on John Simkin’s education forum.)

There are also the so-called backyard photographs of “Oswald” holding the Mannlicher Carcano and revolver, he allegedly owned and used to shoot the President and officer JD Tippit. Just what kind of a moron doesn’t destroy incriminating photographs which would be used against him? As is the case with the majority of researchers, I have come to believe the photos are fakes. Arguments have been put forth concerning the appearance of the chin, and the same photo of the head being pasted into the photos, with the facial expressions altered by an airbrush etc. Let’s also bear in mind that neither the dark shirt nor pants the “Oswald” figure is wearing, was ever found amongst his belongings (Robert Oswald claimed the shirt was not the style LHO wore). The watch worn by the “Oswald” figure (seen in Ce 133- B) was also never found amongst Oswald’s belongings. The imperial reflex camera allegedly used by Marina Oswald to take the photos was not discovered on the 23^rd of November like the photos, but was “discovered” by Ruth Paine on the 8^th of December and given to Robert Oswald.

However, what I find especially intriguing is the fact the De Mohrenschildt copy of the Ce 133- A photo is a much clearer copy of the Ce 133- A photo found in the home of Ruth Paine (who very conveniently turned up a lot of evidence against Oswald). Also, unlike the copy found in the Paine household, the De Mohrenschildt copy didn’t contain the markings of the imperial reflex camera! What this proves to me is that someone pasted Oswald’s face onto the original photos, and then used the Imperial reflex camera to take photos of the altered images in order to incriminate Oswald. Let’s also take into account the extraordinary work done by researchers such as John Armstrong and Gil Jesus - proving Oswald didn’t have possession of the rifle. Gil’s website (here) is an absolute must see for all those interested in the truth (this naturally excludes lone gunman kooks).

So what about the alleged money orders for the rifle and revolver? What kind of a moron uses an alias to order the weapons (obviously so they can’t be traced back to him), but puts his actual name on the post office box, where the weapons would be delivered? Better yet, what kind of moron carries that alias in his wallet on the day he allegedly used the rifle to murder the President? According to lone gunman kooks, such as Dale Myers and David Von Pein, that’s precisely what we have to believe Oswald did.

Most students of the assassination are aware of the allegation by FBI agent, Robert Barrett. For those who aren’t, Barrett claimed a wallet containing ID for both Oswald and “his” alias, Alek J. Hidell, was discovered by the Dallas police officers at the scene of Officer JD Tippit’s murder. The wallet was captured by WFAA cameraman, Ron Reiland (shown below). The footage shows a uniformed police officer (believed to be Sgt Calvin “Bud” Owens) showing a wallet to two plain clothed officers, believed to be Captain George Doughty, and Captain W.R Westbrook.

Former FBI agent, James P. Hosty (who was investigating Oswald’s activities upon his return from the Soviet Union), wrote about Barrett’s account of the Wallet in his book, Assignment Oswald. Barrett informed Hosty that as he arrived at the Tippit murder scene, Captain Westbrook called him over and asked him if he knew who Lee Harvey Oswald and Alek J. Hidell was, to which Barrett responded he didn’t.

Lone gunman kooks have naturally tried to Weasel their way out of Barrett’s claims of the Wallet containing ID for Oswald and Hidell. Arguments have ranged from Barrett having simply misremembered where he was when asked about the IDs, to the Wallet belonging to Tippit. Unfortunately for the kooks, Tippit’s wallet was accounted for by Officer W.R Bardin at the Methodist Hospital, where Tippit’s body was taken. Furthermore, DPD officer Leonard Jez who was also at the Tippit murder scene, told researcher Martha Moyer the wallet contained ID for Oswald.

According to the official story, the Hidell ID was found in Oswald’s wallet by officers as he was being driven down to police headquarters - following his arrest at the Texas theatre. The problem is, not one of the arresting officers mentioned the Hidell ID in their arrest reports! Paul Bentley, the detective who removed Oswald’s wallet from his left pant pocket as he was driven down to police headquarters, was interviewed the following day by WFAA -TV concerning Oswald’s arrest. Bentley mentioned having obtained Oswald’s ID from a public library card, a driver’s licence and credit cards. There was no mention of the Hidell ID! One of the other arresting officers, DPD Sergeant Gerald Hill, was interviewed by reporters on the day of the assassination. He also made no mention of the Hidell ID!

Dallas District Attorney, Henry Wade, was interviewed by reporters on the 22^nd. He identified Oswald as “Lee Harvey Oswald”. There was no mention of Hidell! Captain Will Fritz, and chief of Dallas police, Jesse Curry, also made no mention of the Hidell ID in their interviews on the 22^nd! Gee, kind of important isn’t it? A man is arrested under suspicion of murdering a policeman, he allegedly has a fake ID on him, yet no one is going to mention it in their interviews? Complete garbage! In fact, the first mention of Hidell was on the 23^rd when the money order Oswald purportedly used to buy the rifle using the Hidell Alias was discovered. The implications of the Oswald and Hidell Id’s in the wallet are obvious – Oswald was framed! Researchers have also pointed out that the only time Oswald allegedly used the Hidell alias, was for the weapon orders.

For more information concerning the Tippit murder scene wallet, be sure to read through this highly informative thread on the Spartacus education forum. Researchers Jim DiEugenio and Lee Farley took on warren commission zealot, David Von Pein, and destroyed all of his ridiculous arguments concerning the wallet and the Tippit murder.

The one other issue concerning Oswald’s alleged guilt is this: If Oswald was the lone assassin, then why didn’t he use a silencer? Now, I think we know why the conspirators who were trying to frame Oswald wouldn’t use a silencer. They would want to deliberately draw attention to the 6^th floor window of the TSBD, and away from other locations where back-up shooters were located. Wouldn’t they? In his overblown mess of a book, reclaiming history, Vincent Bugliosi argues that he doesn’t believe Oswald was some type of hit man, because a hit man would use a silencer. Ah, but surely he would also use one if he was a lone deranged assassin who didn’t want to draw attention to the window he was firing from. Of course, Oswald may have not been able to purchase a suitable silencer for the Carcano. However, it’s still an issue that should be considered.

In my opinion, none of these alleged actions by Oswald following the assassination are those of a guilty man. Lone gunman theorists use Oswald’s scared appearance as “observed” by Johnny Brewer and his struggle with the police inside the Texas Theatre as “proof” of Oswald’s guilt. Yet incredibly, Brewer’s first affidavit was made on the 6^th of December (two weeks following the assassination!). Countless researchers have pointed out the problems with Brewer’s observations, and I don’t attend to address them here. I also don’t wish to address the evidence against Oswald in either the President’s assassination or the Tippit murder here. I will do so in future posts.

Let me just add that conspiracy theorists such as Greg Parker, believe Officer Nick McDonald tried to plant the revolver on Oswald in the theatre, and this is why Oswald assaulted him. I think this is certainly a viable scenario. Let’s bear in mind, there is no actually proof Oswald owned the revolver, or that he purchased the ammo for it! Other researchers have pointed to Gerald Hill’s involvement in the frame up. I will save any further discussion of these matters for a later post.