A Topic for LN's: What is a CT?

[Colin Crow]

Do you believe that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in killing President Kennedy, or was there some larger conspiracy at work?

Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone ? 25%.    WC defenders (LNs)
There was some larger conspiracy at work. 51%.    CT's
Not sure ?.... 24%.    This includes me.....sceptical

[Bill Chapman]

On the contrary Bill.......

You can all become more sophisticated by providing a simple definition of what you deem CT'ers to be. A task so far has yet to be reached by your group.

Thanks for proving my point.

To me a CTer is a person who insists, beyond a reasonable standard of proof, that Oswald needed help

[John Iacoletti]

So now we LNers are facsists with a missing testicle. Good one.

 

If the shoe fits!

[John Iacoletti]

From what I have observed so far on this site is, there are no CTers here. There are a bunch of people who want to walk the fence without ever really saying which theory. Colin I have lost track of how many conspiracy theories there are now.

So which is it then?  Either people are coming with so many theories that you can't keep track of them or they are refusing to come up with any theory.  It can't be both.

[John Iacoletti]

If the investigation by the WC was so poor why do you characters misrepresent it

Why do you?

[John Iacoletti]

Good. But it is common for CTers (in regard to the JFK assassination) to be CTers in other fields.

This is poisoning the well.  What somebody believes about some other issue has nothing to do with what they believe about another issue.  They can either support what they believe with evidence or they cannot.

Also, we have posters at this forum who hold Pro CT believes and a belief in other large secret conspiracies. I know of no LN on this forum, or a major LN spokesman, who does.

You keep assuming that a conspiracy is necessarily a "large secret conspiracy".  A conspiracy could be two people.

[John Iacoletti]

The irony here of course is that the "Oswald did it and did it alone" crowd chides the skeptical crowd for not agreeing on a single narrative, when they can't agree on what "conspiracy theorist" means.

Both terms are really not good representations.  Would a person who believed that a lone nut did it, but it wasn't Oswald still be called an LNer?

Would a person who isn't convinced by the available evidence that Oswald was involved, but who also doesn't see any convincing evidence of any other particular person being involved still be considered a CTer?

How about-

1a) Convinced that Oswald did it and did it alone

1b) Not convinced that Oswald did it

2a) Convinced that more than one person was involved before the fact

2b) Not convinced that more than one person was involved before the fact