Why Was Oswald Killed?

[Bill Chapman]

Please even demonstrate that Oswald had a 2.5" "bald spot" on his head.
>>> Euins described what he saw.. in his own way.

True to form, you're moving the goalposts.  But I'll remind you of your original false claim about the knoll witnesses:
>>> What happened to your 'witnesses-are-unreliable' stance? Did anyone in your Gang of 4 actually see their 'shooters' aim at something/anything and watch them pull the trigger? That seems to be one of your requirements of SN witnesses.

You're all about what's "suggestive" to you.  Do you have any evidence that Brennan's manuscript was altered after his death?
>>> Do you have any evidence that the manuscript Brennan signed off on (if indeed he did) contained the description of the head shot seen in the published version of the book?
>>> Are you under the impression that I'm claiming the ghost writer actually went ahead and altered the manuscript?

[John Iacoletti]

Please even demonstrate that Oswald had a 2.5" "bald spot" on his head.
>>> Euins described what he saw.. in his own way.

And you're twisting it to fit it to Oswald.. in your own way.

True to form, you're moving the goalposts.  But I'll remind you of your original false claim about the knoll witnesses:
>>> What happened to your 'witnesses-are-unreliable' stance? Did anyone in your Gang of 4 actually see their 'shooters' aim at something/anything and watch them pull the trigger? That seems to be one of your requirements of SN witnesses.

You claimed there were zero knoll shooters seen.  That's a false claim, regardless of how reliable anyone thinks witnesses are.  And if your stance is that TSBD witnesses are reliable and knoll witnesses are not, then you're just being hypocritical.

>>> Are you under the impression that I'm claiming the ghost writer actually went ahead and altered the manuscript?

You're "suggesting" that he could have in order to overlook Brennan's inconsistencies as to what he witnessed.  Just like you "suggested" that Frazier could have lied about the bag to cover his ass.

But Brennan's accounts were inconsistent between Nov 22 and a few days later.  And inconsistent again with his WC testimony.  Are you going to "suggest" the ghost writer was responsible for that too?  Any excuse to salvage the only person to ever (sort of) place Oswald in that window, right?

[Bill Chapman]

And you're twisting it to fit it to Oswald.. in your own way.
>>> LOL. Twisting what? Oswald's hair? Sorry... try as you might, you can't pin Oswald's balding head on me. Nor can you tag me or anyone else with Euins' choice of words in describing what he saw on the head of AnyBodyButOswald in that window.



Mr. SPECTER. What did you see in the building?
Mr. EUINS. I seen a bald spot on this man's head, trying to look out the window. He had a bald spot on his head. I was looking at the bald spot.
(...)
Mr. SPECTER. Now, what kind of a look, if any, did you have at the man who was there?
Mr. EUINS. All I got to see was the man with a spot in his head, because he had his head something like this.
Mr. SPECTER. Indicating his face down, looking down the rifle?
Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir: and I could see the spot on his head.
(...)
Mr. SPECTER. How far back did the bald spot on his head go?
Mr. EUINS. I would say about right along in here.
Mr. SPECTER. Indicating about 2 1/2 inches above where you hairline is. Is that about what you are saying?
Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir; right along in here.

You claimed there were zero knoll shooters seen.  That's a false claim, regardless of how reliable anyone thinks witnesses are.  And if your stance is that TSBD witnesses are reliable and knoll witnesses are not, then you're just being hypocritical.
>>> I still haven't seen you post any details about what your 'shooter' witnesses saw. On the other hand, it's well-known that a shooter was seen in the sn window.

You're "suggesting" that he 'could have in order to overlook Brennan's inconsistencies as to what he witnessed.  Just like you "suggested" that Frazier could have lied about the bag to cover his ass.
>>> There you go again; assuming what I meant: Where did I say that 'he could have in order to overlook Brennan's inconsistencies'?

Frazier? Suggested, not 'suggested'... no matter what your fantasies require.

But Brennan's accounts were inconsistent between Nov 22 and a few days later.  And inconsistent again with his WC testimony.  Are you going to "suggest" the ghost writer was responsible for that too?  Any excuse to salvage the only person to ever (sort of) place Oswald in that window, right?
>>> Any excuse (in an attempt) to trash everything the only guy to place Oswald in the window ever said, right? Any excuse to protect Oswald, right? And show us these 'inconsistent between Nov 22 and a few days later' inconsistencies of yours.

[John Iacoletti]

And you're twisting it to fit it to Oswald.. in your own way.
>>> LOL. Twisting what? Oswald's hair? Sorry... try as you might, you can't pin Oswald's balding head on me. Nor can you tag me or anyone else with Euins' choice of words in describing what he saw on the head of AnyBodyButOswald in that window.

No, but you're the one trying to make Euins' "bald spot" fit Oswald's receding hairline.

>>> I still haven't seen you post any details about what your 'shooter' witnesses saw. On the other hand, it's well-known that a shooter was seen in the sn window.

Is this your way of admitting that you were wrong about "zero shooters seen"?

>>> There you go again; assuming what I meant: Where did I say that 'he could have in order to overlook Brennan's inconsistencies'?

Stop being coy and spit it out.  What's your point about the co-author?

>>> Any excuse (in an attempt) to trash everything the only guy to place Oswald in the window ever said, right? Any excuse to protect Oswald, right? And show us these 'inconsistent between Nov 22 and a few days later' inconsistencies of yours.

Seriously Chapman?

[Jerry Freeman]

If Jack Ruby had failed to kill Oswald [the cops bungled it at the Texas Theater] Lee would have 'committed suicide' a la Jeffery Epstein.
Any way it swung...Oswald would not have ever gone to trial.

[Richard Smith]

If Jack Ruby had failed to kill Oswald [the cops bungled it at the Texas Theater] Lee would have 'committed suicide' a la Jeffery Epstein.
Any way it swung...Oswald would not have ever gone to trial.

So long as you are making things up why wouldn't "suicide" have been the second option instead of recruiting Ruby to murder Oswald and then hope he remained silent for the rest of his life.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

So long as you are making things up why wouldn't "suicide" have been the second option instead of recruiting Ruby to murder Oswald and then hope he remained silent for the rest of his life.

Yes, and plant a note confessing to the crimes. Et cetera, et cetera.

As you've noted before (to the anger of the "Oswald was framed!" crowd), there's a long list of things the (alleged) conspirators could have done to cement his guilt. The fact that they didn't tells us something; something the Oswald defenders simply don't want to think about.

[Jerry Freeman]

So long as you are making things up why wouldn't "suicide" have been the second option instead of recruiting Ruby to murder Oswald and then hope he remained silent for the rest of his life.

So, would there be any reason that Oswald would not remain silent after Ruby took care of him? Why not think that one over? Oh..that's right--you can't