who was lee harvey oswald?
homeforumtwenty four yearsconspiracydiscussion
oswald and marina leaving minskjoin the discussion...How would you answer the question, Who was Lee Harvey Oswald? Do you believe he acted alone?

Dear FRONTLINE,

I was just riveted to my chair last night watching "Who was Lee Harvey Oswald" with complete fascination. I too believe that it is now a "case closed". Not only did you convinced me that LHO was indeed the killer, but that he acted alone. I think you did an amazing job at demonstrating the state of his mind, and made a very strong case to the effect that that man was trying to give meaning to his life. He did, in the most sordid and obscene way...

In fact, the strongest impression left on me by your report is the absolute desperation of his life. Even though one is still young at 24, it is absolutely clear that if he hadn't shot Kennedy, he would have turned the gun upon himself.

If one thinks of what the security measures were at that time (and what they are now. cf. President Bush's visit to England), it WAS very possible to act alone. And it is troubling and worrying to think that a single man could create such mayhem.

Conspiracy theories seem so much more comforting after all...

Jacques Warren
Montreal, Canada

Dear FRONTLINE,

Thank you for your broadcast on Oswald. This is the best treatment of the subject I have ever seen (and I've seen most of them.) I have been convinced (for 35 years) that the Warren Commission was wrong, that there was a conspiracy, and that LHO was, indeed, a patsy. Your program reviewed Oswald's life from beginning to end, and, in my mind, I am now convinced that he did shoot the President and Officer Tippett. This has restored much of my faith in government (and Democracy) which has been shaken for all these years.

There are still disturbing contacts between Oswald and Ruby, Bannister and Ferry which point toward conspiracy--and these will always be there. However, for the first time, I see the plausibility that Oswald and Ruby essentially acting separately--and I tend to believe it barring more hard evidence to the contrary.

This program clarified, for the first time, Oswald's Marxist leanings. None of this had been sufficiently explained previously, and I never believed it. I always believed he must have been a government agent sent to Russia as a spy. It was fascinating to see the former Soviet agents interviewed on this account.

There will always be questions and the nagging doubts of conspiracy. In my mind, after 35 years, most of this has been laid to rest--and I emphatically thank you again for that!

Al Burgooon
Columbia, Maryland

Dear FRONTLINE,


I want to thank you for an excellent program.It is possible that we will never know what the truth is about Lee Harvey Oswald.There are so many theories that we,as the American people do not know what to believe any more.As far as we know,there is a cover-up.I feel that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone.He had to be working with others.

Lee Harvey Oswald was unknown,until he was pushed into the limelight.The Government needed a scapegoat,and he was the one who was chosen to take the fall.

Ivy Medina
Brooklyn, New York

Dear FRONTLINE,

the great mass of americans believe that the Warren Report was a whitewash. they will always believe that. your show did little to change that opinion. once the US goverment lied to the people, everything was suspect. the CIA,FBI.Congress, and the media are not trusted......people feel they were all, part of the cover up. we will never know the truth, not in our lifetime. the media including, i am sorry to say , PBS, is not trusted. it may not be the truth,but it is the truth ,that the people of the USA, believe.

ronnie mervis

Dear FRONTLINE,

I watched this program in hopes of learning something. No matter how one feels about the assination of JFK, how could anyone learn anything with what you presented. You left out so many things. You slanted everything in such a way, there was no chance for the truth to be told.

Perhaps the whitewash, back in the day when they said that the American people won't know the truth for 75 years from the time of the Warren Commission, was more in terms of time to fool everyone than needed. It's only been 40 years and those who didn't want the truth to be told, now have nothing to worry about in this day and age of MTV, Michael Jackson/Scott Peterson, Kobie and OJ we live in.

JC Terrence
Clovis, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,

I enjoyed the great quality of the documentary, "Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald" very much. I only hope that the truth of the conspiracy comes out before my death. I am now 51. I have high hopes the truth will come out.

Nita Amar
Pasadena, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,

While there is not necessarily anything wrong with the conclusions presented in your presentation, neither was there anything particularly compelling about them. You presented the OPINIONS of your experts, as fact, without any question.

There are plenty of other experts who dispute these positions and you did not include a single one of these in your show. Like the WARREN COMISSION and later investigations, you presented a prosecution with no effort to present a defense.

For those who want to feel comfortable that Lee Oswald was a lone assassin, you performed a valuable service. For those who wish a better understanding of what happened in Dallas, your show was a waste of time.

chris mohr
san jose, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,

I haven't seen the Frontline doco, which hasn't been screened on Australian TV yet, so I can't comment, but I must say that this whole website about Oswald is a lot of BS. The experts invited to talk about Oswald are all lone nut theorists rehashing the same old garbage they've been spouting in return for a fat CIA or FBI paycheck for decades. Not ONE conspiracy theorist among them, which leaves your journalistic credibility in ruins.

If PBS even had the least pretension to objectivity, it would aim to reflect the views of at least 75% of the American people, and probably even a higher percentage outside the USA (where fortunately we haven't been subjected to nearly quite as much propaganda).

If PBS had the least pretension to objectivity you would have interviewed conspiracy researchers of the calibre of Mark Lane, David Lifton, Douglas Horne, Jim Fetzer, or John Armstrong.

You might also have mentioned that among the conspiracy theorists are Bertrand Russell, Charles De Gaulle, Evelyn Lincoln, Richard Nixon (who called the Warren Commission 'the greatest hoax of the century'), Colonel Fletcher L. Prouty, Peter Dale Scott and countless others of no inconsiderable intellectual ability (and, in the case of De Gaulle, access to intelligence).

It's time you came clean, PBS. Why the lies? Is it a condition of funding you receive from some government source that you use every opportunity you get to ram lone nut theories down the throats of the American people?

Carl Wernerhoff
Sydney, Australia

Dear FRONTLINE,

Viewers of your Oswald program as well as other "news shows" must remember that the "first-day evidence" often gets misinterpreted and reassembled through the media, as well as naturally distorted over time through public and private heresay. A major, internationally-important event like the JFK assassination is prime grounds for the truth to be jumbled with outright lies that are created by various entities for a variety of reasons. With the assassination so far removed from modern times it is nearly impossible to report the truth about the days surrounding the fall of 1963 without someone producing some form of evidence to counter your claims.

40 years after Kennedy's assassination we are still searching in vain for the "truth" within a scattered puzzle who's pieces no longer, and probably will never, connect.

Roger Deforest
Fresno, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,

I believe that Frontline did a real disservice in airing a piece that pretended to objectivity, but in fact chose to ignore most of what is significantly missing in "proof" of Oswald's acting alone. There's no question of Oswald's guilt and eccentricity; framing the question around him and the "lone bullet" wizadry is a 'red herring', as this was not the fatal shot. Among other things, recovery of one or more bullets was highly suspect, and medical proof of the fatal shot made impossible by a 'bungled' autopsy, while clear evidence of persons who had been behind the picket fence area of the "grassy knoll" (footprints, cigarette butts, smoke and gunfire) was transitory, though noted by many witnesses. For those who want to inquire more seriously, a most informative and detailed compilation of evidence is given by David Scheim in "Contract on America", published by Argyle Press in 1983.

william weimholt
Chicago, , IL.

Dear FRONTLINE,


Thank you for a wonderful program. Most of all thank you for all the information available online.

In college I did not in any way shape or form believe that there was one shooter.
However; over the years and with new technology I do know believe that Oswald was the gunman.
I do still believe that there is much more to the story and am very interested, disturbed, and concerned with Oswalds Mexico visits and the possible connection with the Soviet Union and the KGB operative.
I want to know what was going on and eagerly await more information. The apparent cover up to avert a nuclear war and thereby let the co-conspirators off the hook is very interesting and the motives of LBJ are very intriguing.
I just hope that we all don't have to wait for forty more years to pass before all the information will ever come out. What is the government still afaird of? As you noted in the program, "the truth will come out and the American people can handle it." So I say Loudly, BRING IT ON!!!

Eddie Bone
Park Hills, Missouri

Dear FRONTLINE,

The show is a fraud and PBS ought to be ashamed of itself. Forty years later and powerful interests continue to obscure the reasons for Kennedy's murder by ascribing it to a lone nut.

Oswald, as any competent researcher knows, was a U.S. government agent; he was moved into position to be framed. Dealey Plaza was a military operation. The Warren Report was a lie. Anyone who really looks at the mountain of evidence under the veneer of lies can figure out what really happened, and why.

Richard Raznikov
Fairfax, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,

The comments of your viewers would be much more interesting if they would also post their age! I have a notion that anyone under 40 is more likely to buy into the conspiracy theory than anyone who was an adult at the time of the asassination.

I was nearly 40 at that time, immersed myself in most of the available documents and literature and have no trouble in seeing this deed as one by a very disturbed individual. His only satisfaction in life came of having been accepted in the USMC and received recognition as a Marksman(?) the lowest rating for a shooter. He obviously did not like the Marine Corps which practiced rigid indoctrination in anti-Communism then, so he decided to "emigrate' to the Soviet Union -- insane! Plus marrying a young Russian girl whom he could impress with just being "Amerikanski"! In principle he belongs into the same category as Hinkley who tried to kill President Reagan and who is now in a nuthouse.

Besides who can beleive that in Washington this kind of "secret" can be kept for 40 years? Every fart in the White House gets scrutinzed by the media -- vide Clinton but also Nixon before him -- and now Bush/Iraq. Watching LHO on your program, his cowardly manner after the foul deed is almost palpably evident. Thank you for your program.

Pierre Secher
Memphis, TN

Dear FRONTLINE,

If a presidential assassination occured today, would our government attempt to close up the investigation and hide evidence in order to avoid possible questions of foregin governmental influence? Also, I believe that Oswald is probably the lone assassin but I will never be able to understand why the head and upper body of JFK jolted backward from a bullet shot from the back.

bill katz
hartford, ct

Dear FRONTLINE,

The evidence is overwhelming that Lee Oswald killed JFK, and very persuasive that he acted alone.

However, I have come to the conclusion that public opinion on the assassination has little to do with the facts of the case. Conspiracy theories have thrived for decades because belief, often, is more strongly infuenced by emotion than reality. Seemingly rationale, intelligent people will continue to ignore the indisputable evidence implicating Oswald in favor of unsubstantiated theories that meet some personal need, such as a condemnation of a government they distrust.

John Junginger
Reisterstown, md

more

 

home + introduction + interviews + forum + twenty-four years + conspiracy
discussion + glimpse of a life + links & readings + teacher's guide
tapes & transcripts + credits + privacy policy
FRONTLINE + wgbh + pbsi

posted november 20, 2003

web site copyright 1995-2014 WGBH educational foundation

 

SUPPORT PROVIDED BY

NEXT ON FRONTLINE

Omarina's StoryJuly 15th

FRONTLINE on

ShopPBS