Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

Here is a question about the JFK assassination that I think is important:

They shot Kennedy in the throat from the front, right?

But, if they did that, how were they planning to reconcile it with there being only one gunman from the rear?

As I see it, there are only two possibilities:

1) They were not planning all along to make it a lone gunman story, that they were going to say that there was another gunman, an accomplice of Oswald's, who got away. And it's not far-fetched because it is Government Story #2, spewed by the HSCA in 1979. Nobody took it seriously. Nobody started looking for the other gunman. No law enforcement entity reopened the case. But still, that is what they claimed. 

2) They were planning all along to go with the Single Bullet Theory. 

Can you think of any other possibilities? Because: I can't. And which of the two do you think is more likely? David Talbot in The Devil's Chessboard makes the case that the plot to kill JFK arose in the anti-Castro CIA community as a false flag operation that could be used to blame Castro and justify an overt U.S. invasion of Cuba. But, that obviously got scuttled. Who scuttled it? I think it was Lyndon Johnson. So, perhaps the idea of Oswald having an accomplice was built into that scenario. After all, they planned that whole phony trip to Mexico City for Oswald to link him to Cuba. It also linked him to Russia, but they didn't want war with Russia. They wanted war with Cuba. 

I don't know who was the top dog in the early stages, but when the day came, Johnson was surely the top dog, and for obvious reasons. He was going to be the President, the most powerful man in the world, and the one on whom the suppression of the truth and the protection of the guilty depended. So, if he said "no link to Castro and no war on Cuba" that was it, and all that Mexico City nonsense was for naught. 

But, on the other hand, having a second gunman left a loose end, and they were trying to close the whole thing out that weekend. They wanted to get Oswald dead ASAP, that weekend, so that by Monday morning, it was all over, where every i was dotted and every t was crossed, and the country could move on. So, that would argue against having a missing, unidentified second gunman. 

So, which do you think it is? Do you think the lone gunman scenario was a last minute change of Johnson's, that up until then, they were going to have a shot from the front by another gunman? Or do you think they were planning all along to go with the Single Bullet Theory?