Well the work on the new Oswald piece continues, in an effort to call out issues with both the Warren Commission positioning of Oswald, and the skeptical communities’ counter views its taking a lot of work to pursue some balance – and be as transparent as possible as to what is fact and what is speculation.
Its also necessary to revisit most all the major points of controversy that have emerged over the years – this is definitely one of those “where angels fear to tread, fools walk in” endeavors.
Along the way I’m taking a good deal of time with peer review and fact checking, but also in conversations about the standard views which have become almost ‘foundational’ in the skeptical community – that generally means if you don’t agree with them some may consider you to be naive, uninformed or possibly a tool of the establishment (if not worse).
Fortunately I had the chance to engage in an extended dialog and some friendly point counterpoint on Oswald in on one of Robbie’s recent “Out of the Blank” podcasts. It was fun and a good exercise and a very real part of working though and sometimes out of the box in regard to views of Lee Harvey Oswald. You can check it out here:
Larry Hancock 
After listening to the conversation, your take on the “Oswald myths” are proven true by the fact that the other two panelists on occasion do voice them. The biggest one that they seem to push is of Oswald being some kind of Intel operative, which is something the other side is also doing.
While there were indeed a number of defections of US military personnel at the time, after much research I have as of yet found no evidence of a false defector operation. For instance, there is the story that the defector program was run out of Nags Head, North Carolina. At the time the only military facility there was a Coast Guard base. And while there indeed was a CIA training facility on the Carolina coast, it was far on the other end of Albemarle Sound at the former Harvey Point Naval Air Station, and is still in use today.
The Magic Bullet believers also have their Oswald myths.
There is the crazed lone nut of course, but among others that have recently sprung up are of Oswald as a double agent. Former Intel Chiefs Michael Hayden and James Woolsey and also author Phillip Shenon have recently spoken of Oswald being some sort of Soviet Manchurian candidate. There are also some who believe that he was a rogue CIA operative who killed JFK out of disillusionment, ala’ the Clint Eastwood movie “Line of Fire”.
I recently heard a talk by former CBS correspondent Cheryl Atkisson, who spoke of how the media has over time become even more obsessed with high ratings rather than objective journalism. The same thing can be said for the JFK research community. Certain myths are pushed on both sides because they sound sensational and will get that site or journalist attention and possible revenue. Real research is sacrificed for hype, and the more fantastic the myth the more its pushed.