Allow, then, that most "LNers" would accept a conspiracy if reliable evidence was forthcoming. You long ago took Oswald as lone-assassin off the table.
LNers don't "promote" anything.
Except for a pathetic official narrative
Spoken like a true CT.
Your "scrutiny" isn't "slight". As lawyers Mason and Bugliosi point out, it's an impossible standard that CTs impose. As well the totality of the evidence is downplayed by CTs.
That would be you (promoting conspiracy) with Adams and Garner.
Allow, then, that most "LNers" would accept a conspiracy if reliable evidence was forthcoming. After a great number of years, I still have to meet the first LN who is prepared to even consider the possibility of a conspiracy.
You long ago took Oswald as lone-assassin off the table.Only in your dreams (or should I say; nightmares?). I have always left open the possibility of Oswald being a lone gunman but the lack of reliable conclusive evidence does not make it easy to continue to do so.
LNers don't "promote" anything.
Except for a pathetic official narrative
Spoken like a true CT.
You don't have to be a CT to conclude that the WC narrative is superficial and full of assumptions not supported by the evidence.
Your "scrutiny" isn't "slight". As lawyers Mason and Bugliosi point out, it's an impossible standard that CTs impose. As well the totality of the evidence is downplayed by CTs.A pathetic and misguided appeal to authority. Any lawyer who knows anything about this case understands it's apparent weaknesses. One way to deflect away from that is complain that their unconvincing evidence can not persuade people because they have an impossible standard of proof. It is in fact no more than an outright admission of the lack of credible, conclusive evidence.
Richard Smith claims that Oswald was on the 6th floor at 12:30 when the shots were fired and that he somehow must have managed to go down the stairs unnoticed with roughly 75 seconds after the last shot.
The so-called "impossible standard of proof" you and your ilk are complaining about is the completely reasonable request for evidence that actually shows Oswald was indeed on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and an explanation of how he could have gone down the stairs without being noticed.
This is how pathetic this "impossible standard of proof" BS truly is.
That would be you (promoting conspiracy) with Adams and Garner.Looking honestly at the evidence about Adams and Garner has nothing to do with a conspiracy. The Adams/Garner scenario is far more plausible and conclusive than that "Oswald coming down the stairs unseen by anybody" fairytale for which there is not a shred of evidence at all.
But if you want to discuss the Adams/Garner scenario in detail, please go ahead and provide me with an alternative scenario that fits all the known facts, or would that be another request for an "impossible standard of proof"?
The LN complaint in a nutshell;
“If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell” ―
Carl Sandburg
