Time for Truth

[Martin Weidmann]

What a ridiculously biased statement, Even blind Freddy could see that Oswald was guilty and all the evidence supported Oswald's guilt.

it was Oswald's rifle that murdered Kennedy.
it was Oswald's prints on the rifle
it was Oswald's shirt threads that matched the threads on the rifle
it was Oswald's fresh prints in the snipers nest
it was Oswald who fled the scene of the crime
it was Oswald that killed Tippit
it was Oswald's shells at the Tippit crime scene
it was Oswald that left his wedding ring behind that morning.
it was Oswald who left most of his life savings with Marina
it was Oswald who attempted to kill more Police in the Theatre
it was Oswald who lied about owning the rifle
it was Oswald who bought the revolver
it was Oswald who lied about where he placed the rifle in Frazier's car
it was Oswald who made his first mid week visit to retrieve his rifle
it was Oswald lied who about curtain rods
it was Oswald who got out of his cab way past his rooming house
it was Oswald who at the time was identified in the sniper's nest
it was Oswald who lied about where and who he had lunch with
it was Oswald who admitted that he retrieved his revolver from his room because “You know how boys do when they have a gun, they just carry it.”
it was Oswald who ducked into a dark theatre
it was Oswald who made a clenched fist salute.
it was Oswald who denied the backyard photos
And on and on it goes, the mountain of evidence is conclusive!

See Martin the only person who's desperately digging for evidence for anything is you in support of Oswald's innocence and so far you've got nothing.

JohnM

So sad. This is what happens when you live in a bubble and refuse to learn something new once in a while; you keep on repeating the same dishonest, unproven and debunked BS claims.

It convinced only the most feeble minds in 1964 and it hasn't conviced much more people ever since.

the mountain of evidence is conclusive!

The "mountain" is in reality nothing more that a molehole consisting of speculation, flawed assumptions and utterly false claims. There is nothing conclusive about it.

[Alan J. Ford]

Unfair, biased lineups and identifications from a single photo months later are not reliable.

Words of wisdom, Mr. Iacoletti, akin to a top-shelf defense attorney, who knows the difference between "a mountain of parroted-back phantom evidence" amid a hastily contrived script mired in the stench of horse manure to frame an innocent party than the plain simple truth.

[Alan J. Ford]

So sad. This is what happens when you live in a bubble and refuse to learn something new once in a while; you keep on repeating the same dishonest, unproven and debunked BS claims.

It convinced only the most feeble minds in 1964 and it hasn't conviced much more people ever since.

the mountain of evidence is conclusive!

The "mountain" is in reality nothing more that a molehole consisting of speculation, flawed assumptions and utterly false claims. There is nothing conclusive about it.

A spot on exemplary assessment, Mr. Weidmann, about as an excellent summation there ever was and is.

[Richard Smith]

What a ridiculously biased statement, Even blind Freddy could see that Oswald was guilty and all the evidence supported Oswald's guilt.

it was Oswald's rifle that murdered Kennedy.
it was Oswald's prints on the rifle
it was Oswald's shirt threads that matched the threads on the rifle
it was Oswald's fresh prints in the snipers nest
it was Oswald who fled the scene of the crime
it was Oswald that killed Tippit
it was Oswald's shells at the Tippit crime scene
it was Oswald that left his wedding ring behind that morning.
it was Oswald who left most of his life savings with Marina
it was Oswald who attempted to kill more Police in the Theatre
it was Oswald who lied about owning the rifle
it was Oswald who bought the revolver
it was Oswald who lied about where he placed the rifle in Frazier's car
it was Oswald who made his first mid week visit to retrieve his rifle
it was Oswald lied who about curtain rods
it was Oswald who got out of his cab way past his rooming house
it was Oswald who at the time was identified in the sniper's nest
it was Oswald who lied about where and who he had lunch with
it was Oswald who admitted that he retrieved his revolver from his room because “You know how boys do when they have a gun, they just carry it.”
it was Oswald who ducked into a dark theatre
it was Oswald who made a clenched fist salute.
it was Oswald who denied the backyard photos
And on and on it goes, the mountain of evidence is conclusive!

See Martin the only person who's desperately digging for evidence for anything is you in support of Oswald's innocence and so far you've got nothing.

JohnM

The contrarian rebuttal?  "Oswald's rifle - LOL."   It is difficult to even contemplate how there could be more evidence against Oswald than exists.  It is a slam dunk.  Oswald took some measures to cover up his criminal acts and there are certain things that can never be known with certainty (e.g. his exact motivation).   Contrarians cling to these straws in desperation to create any false doubt of his guilt.  But for reasonable people there is no great mystery about this case.  Oswald did it.  There is also no credible evidence of his involvement with any other person or group even after nearly six decades with CTers beating the bushes for any such clue.  It would take a time machine to convince these people.  And some of them would no doubt gouge their own eyes out rather than witness Oswald pulling the trigger.  The only mystery left after all these years is why some feel so emotionally invested in Oswald's innocence.  Only the mental health professionals can sort that out. 

[Alan J. Ford]

Mr. Mytton,

First, explain to the rest of us here reading along how one of the witnesses you cited observed someone he thought was the wrongly-accused emptying his revolver while also, quote, was standing in a raised pistol position akin to a Marine with both arms extended forward in a firing position? You cannot do both at the same time, Mr. Mytton, unless of course the magic-bullet leaped out of Governor Connelly's thigh and somersaulted over to 10th & Patton to aid in defying physics once again...please excuse the eyeroll sir.

It's this kind of  that continues to plague yours and all LNs in general when it comes to your self-professed, quote, " the mountain of evidence is conclusive!" A mountain exists alright...a mountain of "evidence" amid a hastily contrived script mired in the stench of horse manure to frame an innocent party.

Now, a quick question for you, since I noticed you and all the other LNs are cowering away from the obvious truth (the wrongly accused remained in Dealey Plaza well after Mr. Tippit's demise amid an ambush by two assailants, one even drove away from the scene in a grey car in erratic fashion taking down a stop sign in his wake)

Rather than cower away from the obvious, go ahead and dare to shed your parroting back agenda, and explain away the multiple sequences of the wrongly accused still in Dealey Plaza post-assassination time well past 1:12PM CST...

You can't do it, Mr. Mytton, can you?

There's a reason for that...the hastily contrived script mired in the stench of horse manure is unable to stand amid much closer examination. Scripted lies always crumble or need revision unlike the plain simple truth that is more than capable of standing all on its own. Moreover, you like so many other LNs often say the wrongly-accused said this, the wrongly accused said that...but's what's interesting is that none of you have ever shared any 1st person authentic details of anything you folks cite as evidence that he did say this or say that. 

Go ahead and prove me wrong sir...You can't do it, can you? There's a reason for that too ---->

The wrongly-accused did Not shoot anybody. Anybody.

[Alan J. Ford]

Mr. Smith,

Dare to explain away the multiple appearances of the wrongly-accused in several different sequences still in Dealey Plaza post-assassination time well after 1:12PM CST.

Those of us reading along understand if you should cower away from a simple question...

or make a desperate attempt to change the subject or resort to name calling, etc. We get it. LNs have nothing to explain away the plain simple truth hidden in plain sight. The wrongly accused was nowhere near 10th & Patton, let alone one of the two assailants who ambushed Mr. Tippit for whatever nefarious reasons.

[Richard Smith]

Mr. Smith,

Dare to explain away the multiple appearances of the wrongly-accused in several different sequences still in Dealey Plaza post-assassination time well after 1:12PM CST.

Yes, it is a false premise driven by some type of psychological compulsion on your part.  There are a multitude of witnesses who confirm Oswald was elsewhere in the known timeframe that makes your premise impossible.  Claiming some person in a fuzzy picture is Oswald not convincing.  Even if you do it multiple times.   You couldn't identify your own mother in those images.  Not a single one of Oswald's coworkers put him there.