What?s the MINIMUM number of people required for your CT to work?

[Jon Banks]

It's only fair that I state my own opinion; there wasn't a conspiracy as Oswald acted alone.

The only 'doubt' I have (and it's only a very slight one) is that Oswald may have said something to someone that with hindsight should have been reported to authorities. The Silvia Odio story and the visits to the embassies in MC are points of concern though I don't believe that if anyone (hypothetically) heard Oswald say that someone should kill Kennedy that that then makes them a conspirator.

In so far as the actual shooting(s) I have no doubt Oswald acted alone and that there was much arse covering going on after the event that has provided scraps of stuff that has fed 55 years of speculation that's resulted in a dog's breakfast of theories.

BTW yesterday I heard a guy in a pub say that the best thing that could happen in the USA right now is for someone to take a potshot at Trump. I didn't report it. I hope that doesn't make me a conspirator at some point. 

By definition it takes a minimum of two Culprits working together to make a conspiracy.

I personally am about 50/50 or so on the Conspiracy question in the Kennedy assassination.

What I mean is I accept the plausibility of Oswald alone shooting JFK BUT, there?s enough Doubt in the evidence for me to entertain alternative scenarios. I don?t have a Conspiracy Theory. I?m just not convinced that Oswald acted alone.

Given that there?s so much we don?t know and so much circumstantial evidence, I don?t understand why it bothers people that so many aren?t convinced that Oswald acted alone...

[Steve M. Galbraith]

By definition it takes a minimum of two Culprits working together to make a conspiracy.

I personally am about 50/50 or so on the Conspiracy question in the Kennedy assassination.

What I mean is I accept the plausibility of Oswald alone shooting JFK BUT, there?s enough Doubt in the evidence for me to entertain alternative scenarios. I don?t have a Conspiracy Theory. I?m just not convinced that Oswald acted alone.

Given that there?s so much we don?t know and so much circumstantial evidence, I don?t understand why it bothers people that so many aren?t convinced that Oswald acted alone...

If one believes Oswald did kill JFK then it's difficult to see how he had any help. How did this help manifest itself? Where does it show up? Either pre-assassination, during it, or afterwards.

Look at Oswald's post assassination behavior. He leaves the TSBD within three minutes, gets on a bus, leaves the bus, gets in a cab, goes BACK to his rooming house to retrieve his gun. That's someone, it seems to me, who is just winging it, someone in flight with no plan.

Then he leaves his rooming house - on foot since he didn't tell the cab to wait - and going where? He's got about $15 in his pocket.

I just don't see any plan, anyone helping him in this act, any purpose or direction after he shoots JFK.

[Steve Howsley]

If one believes Oswald did kill JFK then it's difficult to see how he had any help. How did this help manifest itself? Where does it show up? Either pre-assassination, during it, or afterwards.

Look at Oswald's post assassination behavior. He leaves the TSBD within three minutes, gets on a bus, leaves the bus, gets in a cab, goes BACK to his rooming house to retrieve his gun. That's someone, it seems to me, who is just winging it, someone in flight with no plan.

Then he leaves his rooming house - on foot since he didn't tell the cab to wait - and going where? He's got about $15 in his pocket.

I just don't see any plan, anyone helping him in this act, any purpose or direction after he shoots JFK.

I agree with much of the above. IMO Oswald acted alone. The mechanics of what he achieved on that day are so very simple; take his rifle to work, hope to have the SE corner of the 6th all to himself, aim and fire.
Even a child would know that if a secret is shared with a large number of people it won't remain a secret for long. For anyone to say "Who cares how big it (the conspiracy) was? Why does that matter?" is on a par with another saying in reference to significant information "I don't care". Both comments as excellent examples of wilful ignorance.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

I agree with much of the above. IMO Oswald acted alone. The mechanics of what he achieved on that day are so very simple; take his rifle to work, hope to have the SE corner of the 6th all to himself, aim and fire.
Even a child would know that if a secret is shared with a large number of people it won't remain a secret for long. For anyone to say "Who cares how big it (the conspiracy) was? Why does that matter?" is on a par with another saying in reference to significant information "I don't care". Both comments as excellent examples of wilful ignorance.

The mechanics are or were indeed simple - as JFK said, if someone wanted to shoot him from a tall building with a rifle and didn't care about being caught there's nothing that can be done about it - but Oswald clearly got lucky.

It's been more than half a century. If there was a larger conspiracy behind the act the evidence for it for me would have been found somewhere at some time. But it hasn't. This has been the most studied event in US history. We've had multiple government investigations, multiple investigations by the news media along with 50+ years of investigations/books/studies by various authors, e.g,. Caro, Weiner et al. into the major figures at that time, e.g., LBJ, Hoover, et cetera. And all of that shows nothing. The conspiracy crowd likes to harp on the failures of the WC and ignore all of these other investigations.

Look at the evidence pointing towards Oswald. And the lack of evidence pointing elsewhere. One can only reasonably conclude that Oswald alone killed JFK. In order to argue otherwise one has to engage in some fanciful thinking. 

[Bill Chapman]

The mechanics are or were indeed simple - as JFK said, if someone wanted to shoot him from a tall building with a rifle and didn't care about being caught there's nothing that can be done about it - but Oswald clearly got lucky.

It's been more than half a century. If there was a larger conspiracy behind the act the evidence for it for me would have been found somewhere at some time. But it hasn't. This has been the most studied event in US history. We've had multiple government investigations, multiple investigations by the news media along with 50+ years of investigations/books/studies by various authors, e.g,. Caro, Weiner et al. into the major figures at that time, e.g., LBJ, Hoover, et cetera. And all of that shows nothing. The conspiracy crowd likes to harp on the failures of the WC and ignore all of these other investigations.

Look at the evidence pointing towards Oswald. And the lack of evidence pointing elsewhere. One can only reasonably conclude that Oswald alone killed JFK. In order to argue otherwise one has to engage in some fanciful thinking.

Kennedy also said an assassin could, on a dark rainy night in a crowd, walk up to him with a gun in a briefcase shoot him, then disappear into the crowd.

And I'm sure that people remember Squeaky Fromme getting to within arm's length of President Ford only to have her weapon jam.

[Jon Banks]

If one believes Oswald did kill JFK then it's difficult to see how he had any help. How did this help manifest itself? Where does it show up? Either pre-assassination, during it, or afterwards.

Look at Oswald's post assassination behavior. He leaves the TSBD within three minutes, gets on a bus, leaves the bus, gets in a cab, goes BACK to his rooming house to retrieve his gun. That's someone, it seems to me, who is just winging it, someone in flight with no plan.

Then he leaves his rooming house - on foot since he didn't tell the cab to wait - and going where? He's got about $15 in his pocket.

I just don't see any plan, anyone helping him in this act, any purpose or direction after he shoots JFK.

Looking at it in isolation you?re right but that?s not the way I look at it.

I take everything into consideration from the weaknesses in the forensic evidence to the strange coincidences throughout Oswald?s life. Also, humans are inherently screw-ups. Oswald and his alleged co-conspirators could just as easily had to abruptly change plans due to some unforseen circumstance.

Again, I would never argue that Oswald couldn?t have done it all alone and I haven?t seen many plausible arguments that he was framed. At a minimum, Oswald was part of a conspiracy which makes him Guilty in my eyes.

There?s a high level of uncertainty in the forensic evidence and lots of legit reasons to speculate that others may have been involved. So it makes sense to me that many are still unconvinced that there was no conspiracy.

[Jon Banks]

The mechanics are or were indeed simple - as JFK said, if someone wanted to shoot him from a tall building with a rifle and didn't care about being caught there's nothing that can be done about it - but Oswald clearly got lucky.

It's been more than half a century. If there was a larger conspiracy behind the act the evidence for it for me would have been found somewhere at some time. But it hasn't. This has been the most studied event in US history.

If someone came forward today claiming to have been part of a conspiracy to kill JFK would you believe the person? Probably not.

At this point, people are pretty Dug into their own theories about what happened. Plus the various law enforcement agencies involved would never admit that they lied or were wrong in their conclusions.

We've had multiple government investigations, multiple investigations by the news media along with 50+ years of investigations/books/studies by various authors, e.g,. Caro, Weiner et al. into the major figures at that time, e.g., LBJ, Hoover, et cetera. And all of that shows nothing. The conspiracy crowd likes to harp on the failures of the WC and ignore all of these other investigations.

The various law enforcement agencies were never completely cooperative and there?s lots of holes in the evidence. Even the CIA no longer denies that there was a Cover-up. We can?t possibly know the whole truth given those circumstances.

Look at the evidence pointing towards Oswald. And the lack of evidence pointing elsewhere. One can only reasonably conclude that Oswald alone killed JFK. In order to argue otherwise one has to engage in some fanciful thinking.

The evidence doesn?t conclusively prove that:

- Only three shots were fired

- all shots were fired from the weapon found in the Book Depository

- Oswald had a motive

- Oswald had no accomplices

It?s fine if you?re satisfied with the evidence that we have but don?t criticize others who are rightfully skeptics about the situation

[Steve Howsley]

... At a minimum, Oswald was part of a conspiracy which makes him Guilty in my eyes.

There?s a high level of uncertainty in the forensic evidence and lots of legit reasons to speculate that others may have been involved. So it makes sense to me that many are still unconvinced that there was no conspiracy.

Kudos for concluding that Oswald was involved. I take it you don't support either an apology from the US government or the erection of a monument to St. Oswald Of Dallas.