Why should I have to "figure it out"? It's your statement we are discussing. So much dodging. It's almost as bad as when Bill called your bluff on debating him and you became hysterical. It's impossible to understand what you are even babbling about here. This is simple. You said the answer is hidden in plain sight. I'm just asking you to clarify what the "answer" is that you are referring to. You don't accept the evidence that Oswald was the assassin. That appears to narrow down the options to being a CTer but you also refuse to come out of the closet and admit you are a CTer. Instead you retain your Inspector Clouseau persona of "suspecting everyone and suspecting no one." Very humorous in how this highlights the dishonest, lazy, and bizarre contrarian approach to this case.
So much venom from an entitled one who doesn't get his way. Pathetic!
A one trick poney sounding like a broken record stuck in a bad quality groove...
It's your statement we are discussing.We are not discussing anything of the kind. You desperately want to discuss it. I am not interested in discussing it. If you want you can figure it out yourself and if you don't want to, that's ok by me as well.
You don't accept the evidence that Oswald was the assassin. Says who? As per usual you're completely missing the mark. I have no problem with the evidence, such as it is. My problem is with the credibility and authentication of that evidence as well as the assumptions made to connect non existing dots and the conclusions that are not supported by that same evidence.
That appears to narrow down the options to being a CTer but you also refuse to come out of the closet and admit you are a CTer. You really can't let this go, can you now? I've already told you where my interests lie and I am not going to tell you again. Deal with it.... or don't. See if I care.
Oh and btw, talking about chickening out, why haven't you accepted my little Europe challenge?
