Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?

[Bill Chapman]

KOOKY THEORIES HUH?  LOL 

You mean like Oswald firing an unusable gun 3x in 8.31 seconds, acculturate, running 100 feet through obstacles then taking to hide the gun..

WHY HIDE THE GUN? Leaving the shells and hiding the gun makes no sense. What's the point of hiding a gun on the same floor like the police  wouldn't find it? Not even the dumbest of dumbasses would do that!

Then run 5 flights of stairs in 40 seconds, run another 15 feet to the break room, and run in to officer Baker without even being out of breath. Even superman would have a hard time pulling that off. But there's nothing dumbass about that kooky story, right? Of course not. LOL

Here's an idea. Take video of yourself running 5 flights of stairs in 40 seconds for all of us to see, since YOU actually believe, and even defend, that idiocy. No point arguing about it when you can just show all of us how easily that can be done.


In fact, Mr. "Not even the dumbest of dumbasses..." why not shoot a bolt action rifle 3 times accurately in 8 seconds while you're at it! Show us how ridiculous are theories (or common sense) really is, Mr. Talker!

N'uh: Two times in 8.3 seconds. First shot starts the clock, leaving the next two all 8.3 sec
How can it be otherwise, unless one inhabits the far shores of the lunatic fringe (aka CT Central)

Mr Common-Sense, is the gun 'unstable' to you or to Oswald? How would you know that it was necessarily unstable to the little twerp?

Why produce a video of oneself challenging the timeline unless you are his age, height, weight, same fitness level —such as lugging boxes of books around all day — and exact endocrine system that produces the Oswald metabolism and sweat output results?

[Bill Chapman]

WHY HIDE THE GUN? Leaving the shells and hiding the gun makes no sense. What's the point of hiding a gun on the same floor like the police  wouldn't find it? Not even the dumbest of dumbasses would do that!

He needed to bugger off, not crawl around on the floor looking for spent shells. The rifle? 'This is my rifle, this is my gun'* That's the least he could do.

*Marine indoctrination

[Walt Cakebread]

It's your claim that the MC rifle was incapable of being used to assassinate JFK.  If it were true that the MC rifle was incapable of being used to assassinate JFK as you (falsely) claim, then why plant that rifle to implicate Oswald in the assassination instead of a rifle that was capable of the deed?  Were the fantasy conspirators lacking in access to other rifles?  There is no evidence whatsoever as to the condition of the scope at the moment of the assassination.  It is entirely possible that it became "askew" when Oswald dropped it on his way out after the assassination.  It is also possible that the scope was removed and reattached in the search for prints.

If it were true that the MC rifle was incapable of being used to assassinate JFK as you (falsely) claim, then why plant that rifle to implicate Oswald in the assassination instead of a rifle that was capable of the deed?

Because they had a photo of LEE holding a carcano like the one that was hidden beneath the pallet of books on the sixth floor.....And they had the paper trail that revealed that Lee had ordered a carcano from Kleins......   All they needed was to convince the gullible unkowing suckers that the rifle was the murder weapon.  ( They certainly succeeded in your case) 

[Richard Smith]

If it were true that the MC rifle was incapable of being used to assassinate JFK as you (falsely) claim, then why plant that rifle to implicate Oswald in the assassination instead of a rifle that was capable of the deed?

Because they had a photo of LEE holding a carcano like the one that was hidden beneath the pallet of books on the sixth floor.....And they had the paper trail that revealed that Lee had ordered a carcano from Kleins......   All they needed was to convince the gullible unkowing suckers that the rifle was the murder weapon.  ( They certainly succeeded in your case)

So now you are citing the WC's evidence that links Oswald to rifle!  Unreal.  I thought all this evidence was deemed fake or insufficient by CTers to connect Oswald to the MC rifle?  If you accept that Oswald owned the MC rifle found on the 6th floor, how did your fantasy conspirators arrange to plant it in the TSBD?  If Oswald was working with them in Gomer Pyle-like bliss without a clue as to what was going on, they could have arranged for him to pose in photos with any rifle they wanted.  They would just tell him to do so - right?  Hand him a rifle capable of the deed, snap a picture and forge a few documents linking him to that rifle instead.  None of your fantasies adds up to any coherent alternative narrative per the OP.  It is just applying ad hoc reasoning to series of facts to reach a desired outcome.

[Walt Cakebread]

So now you are citing the WC's evidence that links Oswald to rifle!  Unreal.  I thought all this evidence was deemed fake or insufficient by CTers to connect Oswald to the MC rifle?  If you accept that Oswald owned the MC rifle found on the 6th floor, how did your fantasy conspirators arrange to plant it in the TSBD?  If Oswald was working with them in Gomer Pyle-like bliss without a clue as to what was going on, they could have arranged for him to pose in photos with any rifle they wanted.  They would just tell him to do so - right?  Hand him a rifle capable of the deed, snap a picture and forge a few documents linking him to that rifle instead.  None of your fantasies adds up to any coherent alternative narrative per the OP.  It is just applying ad hoc reasoning to series of facts to reach a desired outcome.

So now you are citing the WC's evidence that links Oswald to rifle!

NOW??? What the hell do you mean NOW ??   I've always accepted the evidence presented....     But I certainly don't accept the various interpretations of that evidence.....   The evidence is solid that Captain Fritz had a BY photo in his possession....   He admitted it, and described what appeared in that photo BEFORE the Photo was officially "discovered" in the Paine's garage. 

I thought all this evidence was deemed fake or insufficient by CTers to connect Oswald to the MC rifle? 

If you had a functioning brain you would not attempt to bind all CT's together as an amalgamation ......The one thing that CT's have in common is their refusal to accept that a dog turd ( the Warren Report)is a candy bar....   Unlike the LNers who have bitten off some of that " candy bar" and are contentedly chewing.....while arguing that it's genuine..

[John Mytton]

To sum up "Mytton's" kooky theory:

A "vast conspiracy" (tm) would have planted evidence that was actually convincing.  Therefore we should assume that this unconvincing evidence proves that Oswald did it.

Huh? The physical evidence that links Oswald to the crime has always been rock solid but listen carefully, the OP is all about the CT's multiple unagreed theories that attempt to extrapolate disparate insignificant pieces of evidence into an unexplained contradictory narrative that could never possibly make logical sense, for instance having a triangulated shooter in front of Kennedy when your patsy is behind, has and always will be straight up ridiculous, but undeterred 55+ years later we still have naïve CT's pushing this lunacy.

JohnM

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Huh? The physical evidence that links Oswald to the crime has always been rock solid but listen carefully, the OP is all about the CT's multiple unagreed theories that attempt to extrapolate disparate insignificant pieces of evidence into an unexplained contradictory narrative that could never possibly make logical sense, for instance having a triangulated shooter in front of Kennedy when your patsy is behind, has and always will be straight up ridiculous, but undeterred 55+ years later we still have naïve CT's pushing this lunacy.

JohnM

The questions you asked in the original post reveal a sort of "motivated incuriousness" on the part of the Oswald defenders in general and the conspiracy advocates specifically. Motivated, deliberate, willful lack of curiosity.

As in: if there was a large scale conspiracy done by powerful groups behind the event then "Why didn't they plant witnesses in Dealey Plaza to say they saw Oswald shoot JFK?" Isn't that obvious? Or "Why didn't they make Marina say Oswald hated JFK?"

Wouldn't a curious person about this matter ask those questions? Wouldn't someone looking at the conspiracy claims raise them? Out of curiosity?

There's a motivated and deliberate lack of curiosity about these areas that expose the good faith questioners about the evidence from the bad faith questioners. This is an example of one.

But if one wants to be a sort of Mark Lane here defending Oswald (Lane did it to for ideological and personal reasons; why are others doing it?) then never mind.

[Robert Reeves]

for instance having a triangulated shooter in front of Kennedy when your patsy is behind, has and always will be straight up ridiculous, but undeterred 55+ years later we still have naïve CT's pushing this lunacy.

JohnM

Not if the first shot misses, and the second shot doesn't have the desired effect, JFK appears to be still alive after two shots!

You now have a problem. And one problem a military-style assassination would have already accounted for, and to overcome.Then you go into emergency mode. Issue orders to stop the limo. Leave nothing to chance, just have to kill the target. The cover-up story will hold tight because the people now in charge don't have the motivation to get down the truth.