The number one CT nightmare question ...

[Martin Weidmann]

Wrong again, Weidman.

(Are you Judge Judy, btw?)

Since Iacoletti had implied that the bad guys, having monitored Oswald closely both before and during the assassination (and thereby noticing that he hadn't gone out of the building so far as to actually get into the sunlight where he could really, really, really be "caught" on film and blow the "op"), decided they wouldn't have to quickly go to "Plan B" and start framing, immediately after-the-fact, Commie Joe Molina, or "Plan C" -- Big Jack Dougherty, or ..... "Plan Z" ... gasp ... that vicious little VICKI ADAMS, after all, and I was wondering how Iacoletti figured the bad guys (the evil, evil, evil DPD and/or the evil, evil, evil CIA and/or the evil, evil, evil FBI) had game-played out all those contingencies, you know, ahead of time, so to speak.

But he evidently didn't want to answer that question, did he.

-- MWT   

Why would he have to answer a silly question based on something you feel John implied?

Perhaps you should read and try to understand what he really said.

[Bill Chapman]

Does it not even occur to you that somebody can be framed after the fact?

Oswald was framed?

[Bill Chapman]

Quite simply, there is no reason to accept the claim that the magic palmprint was lifted from the Carcano rifle as being true.

There was a magic palm print?

[Martin Weidmann]

Oswald was framed?

Couldn't he have been?

[Martin Weidmann]

There was a magic palm print?

Do you know so little about this case that you need to ask?

[Bill Chapman]

Couldn't he have been?

Did he have to be?

[Bill Chapman]

Do you know so little about this case that you need to ask?

Do you mean your interpretation of the case?