As opposed to telling us what LBJ and Hoover and the DPD and Brewer and Postal and Norman and Brennan and Markham and on and on and on.... thought?
This forum is filled with all sorts of claims from the conspiracy crowd as to why "they" had to kill JFK. And how they planned it and carried it out. We have conspiracists telling us all of these bizarre stories about why LBJ did this or Fitz did that or why this was done or that was done.
For you to come along and complain about posters telling us what Oswald thought while all of this above conspiracy fantasies are promoted is not, for me, a "good faith" complaint.
While there are some here who promote certain ( bizarre, unproven, ) " conspiracy" theories, there are plenty of people, including me, who are merely skeptical of the official story and point out inconsistencies, omissions and falsehoods therein. I.e. SBT, associations and motives of Jack Ruby, timeline of Oswald's activities presented, pre ,post, and during the assassination etc.
You are painting with a broad brush, and creating a "strawman" as a defense? I guess, of the Warren Commission. Instead, perhaps you could respond to the actual issues. Specifically, in this case, the rather shoddy and incomplete evidence regarding the "gunsack", and its provenance. We have conflicting stories from Studebaker, Day and Roy Truly. We have no photographs of the bag in situ. We have a photograph allegedly taken when the bag was resting on top of the stack of boxes. When was this taken? Why was the bag just lying there? Had it not already been taken into evidence?
These are just honest questions.
Oswald may well have been the actual assassin, and murderer of Tippit; the official story, at this point, does not support it's own conclusion.
