The number one CT nightmare question ...

[Martin Weidmann]

What exactly is "dramatic" about noting that any conspiracy that went to the lengths of framing Oswald would not leave his movements to chance at the moment of the assassination?  And you don't believe it would be an issue for your fantasy conspirators if Oswald had been on the street at the moment of the assassination?  LOL.  Yes, all the conspirators had to do was confiscate and/or manipulate every single photo and film taken in DP.  No wonder you are a CTer.

What exactly is "dramatic" about noting that any conspiracy that went to the lengths of framing Oswald would not leave his movements to chance at the moment of the assassination?

You simply don't get any of it. A force powerful enough to pull of something like the murder of a President is powerful enough to control the evidence after the fact.


And you don't believe it would be an issue for your fantasy conspirators if Oswald had been on the street at the moment of the assassination?

Nope… the "investigators" would simply say that anybody who said they saw him was wrong..... Carolyn Arnold comes to mind.

Yes, all the conspirators had to do was confiscate and/or manipulate every single photo and film taken in DP.

What happened to the photos that were indeed confiscated and either never returned or returned "damaged"?

Aren't you embarrassed to peddle this nonsense?  Oswald's movements "wouldn't have mattered one bit"!  LOL.  What if he hadn't gone to work that day and took a long weekend at the Paine residence?  Your fantasy conspirators go to all manner of outlandish lengths to manipulate evidence and coerce random citizens to lie but they can't keep track of Oswald at the crucial moment of the assassination?   Instead he is allowed to wonder about where anyone might encounter him and give him an alibi instead of doing the obvious and simple thing of just sequestering him for a couple of minutes.  You can't be for real.

What if he hadn't gone to work that day and took a long weekend at the Paine residence? 

Pathetic! If Oswald was being manipulated, he would have been manipulated in such a way that he would do what the conspirators wanted. There would never have been any risk.... if there was a conspiracy and it all went south because of what Oswald did, they could simply have aborded the scheme and try again later.

Instead he is allowed to wonder about where anyone might encounter him and give him an alibi instead of doing the obvious and simple thing of just sequestering him for a couple of minutes. 

Let's examine this crappy claim for a bit. Brennan said later he did not identify Oswald because he was afraid and you accept his word for it, but at the same time you seem to feel that nobody else would have been afraid and thus willing to come forward to say that the guy that the media had already painted guilty wasn't really guilty because he was seen elsewhere......  And even if anybody came forward, they would just be mistaken..... that seems to be the main strategy of the WC anyway!

[Richard Smith]

What exactly is "dramatic" about noting that any conspiracy that went to the lengths of framing Oswald would not leave his movements to chance at the moment of the assassination?

You simply don't get any of it. A force powerful enough to pull of something like the murder of a President is powerful enough to control the evidence after the fact.


And you don't believe it would be an issue for your fantasy conspirators if Oswald had been on the street at the moment of the assassination?

Nope… the "investigators" would simply say that anybody who said they saw him was wrong..... Carolyn Arnold comes to mind.

Yes, all the conspirators had to do was confiscate and/or manipulate every single photo and film taken in DP.

What happened to the photos that were indeed confiscated and either never returned or returned "damaged"?


What if he hadn't gone to work that day and took a long weekend at the Paine residence? 

Pathetic! If Oswald was being manipulated, he would have been manipulated in such a way that he would do what the conspirators wanted. There would never have been any risk.... if there was a conspiracy and it all went south because of what Oswald did, they could simply have aborded the scheme and try again later.

Instead he is allowed to wonder about where anyone might encounter him and give him an alibi instead of doing the obvious and simple thing of just sequestering him for a couple of minutes. 

Let's examine this crappy claim for a bit. Brennan said later he did not identify Oswald because he was afraid and you accept his word for it, but at the same time you seem to feel that nobody else would have been afraid and thus willing to come forward to say that the guy that the media had already painted guilty wasn't really guilty because he was seen elsewhere......  And even if anybody came forward, they would just be mistaken..... that seems to be the main strategy of the WC anyway!

We have finally come to the end of the discussion!  No evidence can ever convince you of Oswald's guilt because all evidence could be manipulated (even though there is no evidence that actually happened).  It is the impossible Catch-22 standard of proof which allows you to ignore any evidence of Oswald's guilt and propose false, contrarian doubt to entertain an otherwise baseless fantasy. 

[Bill Chapman]

John, Osdlwad could have been under orders to meet a contact in the cinema. You may recall that he was seen moving around the theatre costing various people. Why would he do this?
A very naive point of view, IMO.

Yes, an alternative theory could be that he was acting under instructions and became the fall guy, thus he could easily have been totally innocent.

Problem: A need to get off the street pronto
Solution: Pick up one of TT customers and get the hell out of Dodge
Or at least temporary off the street

You're not much of a problem solver

[Ray Mitcham]

Problem: A need to get off the street pronto
Solution: Pick up one of TT customers and get the hell out of Dodge
Or at least temporary off the street

You're not much of a problem solver

Says a Warren Commission believer.

[Martin Weidmann]

We have finally come to the end of the discussion!  No evidence can ever convince you of Oswald's guilt because all evidence could be manipulated (even though there is no evidence that actually happened).  It is the impossible Catch-22 standard of proof which allows you to ignore any evidence of Oswald's guilt and propose false, contrarian doubt to entertain an otherwise baseless fantasy.

We have finally come to the end of the discussion!

What discussion? There never was a discussion. All you have been doing is sounding like a broken record repeating the same rubbish all the time.

No evidence can ever convince you of Oswald's guilt because all evidence could be manipulated (even though there is no evidence that actually happened).

BS. This is just your classic "I can't convince you with my special kind of logic, but that is your fault" crap

It is the impossible Catch-22 standard of proof which allows you to ignore any evidence of Oswald's guilt and propose false, contrarian doubt to entertain an otherwise baseless fantasy. 

What evidence of Oswald's guilt have I ever ignored? Could it be you equate questioning evidence with ignoring it? And since when is having doubts about something contrarian?

You still don't get that I am trying to discuss all possibilities without having a predetermined opinion, like you have.

[Bill Chapman]

CT's in general believe that Oswald was totally innocent and was set up as a patsy by a large scale conspiracy. The planning included taking him off the watchlist for subversive elements and planting all kind of evidence against him.

If you believe this you also have to believe that this costly big scale conspiracy would willingly take the risk that Oswald could be literally anywhere in company with anybody in such a way that he could not be set up.

He could have been on the grassy knoll steps in company with Lovelady  or simply not having turned up to work that day. Even if he would have been urged to go to work that day and and been told to carry out certain activities somewhere in the building, would not guarantee him doing it in the exact moment of time considering also that the limo may be late.

Therefore, if  you do not believe that a conspiracy would take such risks, you will have to present an alternative theory.

(Some of you may reconsider believing that Oswald was actually at the steps of the TSBD)

'Nightmare', huh.. are you sure the conspirator species even sleeps?

More like daydreams...

[Bill Chapman]

You are simply not getting this, are you?

Oswald's actual movements wouldn't have mattered one bit if the force behind the conspiracy (if there was one) was able to control the evidence and the narrative.

Once Oswald was killed, who was going to deny anything they claimed about him?

You are simply not getting this, are you?
>>> Lord Haughty the Condescender still running his mouth, I see...