If you argue as John does that the evidence of Oswald's ownership of the rifle is not convincing and does not prove that he owned that rifle, then what other explanation can there be for that evidence (documents, testimony, photos etc) that links Oswald to that rifle other than it was faked to frame Oswald for the crime?
Here we see "Richard's" dishonesty in action. There is no testimony or photos that link Oswald to that rifle.
There are documents that confirm a rifle with a specific serial number was sent to his PO Box.
No, actually, there are not.
Because much of that evidence predated the assassination and comes from a variety of sources, it is genuine or the product of a conspiracy to frame Oswald.
Or somebody is falsely representing the evidence that there is. That's your third option.
I haven't said a single thing that is dishonest. You're just mad because I expose your false claims every time you make them.
