Have you just not read any of the scholarly research that refutes the case against Oswald? Are you not aware of the gaping holes in the so-called "evidence" that the Dallas police collected?
Are you aware that we have known for over a decade now, thanks mainly to ARRB disclosures, that on the night of the autopsy, the autopsy doctors determined for an absolute, observable fact that JFK's back wound had no exit point, and that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about a bullet exiting the throat?
Are you just not aware of any of this evidence?
If you think the case against Oswald is solid, I invite you to read my article "Faulty Evidence: Problems with the Case Against Lee Harvey Oswald":
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1R1CZaCZfLA5QFjTCHNINcKxTH4cBiPfw/view
Might I suggest that you go back to the post you've quoted from and pay attention? You will find that the words in bold are a quote from the text I was replying to and thus not my own words.
My response was that it is silly to say that Oswald couldn't have posed for the BY photos holding a rifle if he had not purchased or received a rifle from Klein's. You don't have to buy or own a rifle to be photographed with one.
You may also find that I don't think the case against Oswald is solid.
