Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?

[John Iacoletti]

So the MC rifle that was found on the 6th floor belonged to LHO?  And the WC evidence linking him to this particular rifle is authentic?  Wow that will come as a shock to your fellow contrarians with their "Oswald's rifle - LOL."

Not at all.  Anybody who has been paying attention for the last 13 years instead of making up one strawman argument after another is very familiar with Walt's fabrications.

[Walt Cakebread]

Not at all.  Anybody who has been paying attention for the last 13 years instead of making up one strawman argument after another is very familiar with Walt's fabrications.

The title for this thread asks....."where does my theory go?"

My theory ( based on solid evidence)  Leads to the inescapable  conclusion that Lee Oswald was simply the patsy that he told us he was.

[Richard Smith]

The title for this thread asks....."where does my theory go?"

My theory ( based on solid evidence)  Leads to the inescapable  conclusion that Lee Oswald was simply the patsy that he told us he was.

Nut on nut debate is very entertaining.  It's like watching UFO believers argue about whether the aliens who abducted them are grey or green. 

[John Mytton]

The logical fallacy of your post is the assumption that there is consensus around one single conspiracy theory.

In reality, there is only consensus around the idea of JFK being killed by a conspiracy plot. The "who" and "how" depends on whom you talk to.

But I've also found over the years that Lone-nut narrative folks don't agree on everything as well. There's no consensus on "how" Oswald alone killed JFK or what his motive was.

The logical fallacy of your post is the assumption that there is consensus around one single conspiracy theory.

Seriously, your incorrect usage of my apparent "logical fallacy" has zero connection between the rest of your sentence and what I wrote in the OP. Let me make this clear, my thread title is the very antithesis of what you claim you see, I ask CT's to ask "yourself" where "my" theory goes, where do I even remotely indicate that there is any "consensus" between the widely disparate CT theories?
Let me repeat the words I used in the opening sentence and please this time take careful note, "I see Kooky "theories" that go absolutely nowhere, are "contradictory" and as a narrative make zero logical sense.", so in a nutshell I mention "theories" not theory and to reinforce this disparity I subtly introduce the concept that the "theories" are "contradictory".

In reality, there is only consensus around the idea of JFK being killed by a conspiracy plot. The "who" and "how" depends on whom you talk to.

No kidding, Einstein.

There's no consensus on "how" Oswald alone killed JFK...

As far as I can see, the consensus from the "WC/HSCA endorsers" is that Oswald took his rifle to work and killed the President with the same rifle but I am open to your further analysis.

or what his motive was.

Motive is not always necessary to prove a crime, as other evidence may be sufficient. Further, even when there is reasonable motive for why a person would have committed a crime, a motive alone is not sufficient, absent some other evidence as to why a particular defendant is guilty.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/motive

JohnM

[Charles Collins]

Nut on nut debate is very entertaining.  It's like watching UFO believers argue about whether the aliens who abducted them are grey or green.

Yes, or:

[Bill Chapman]

If you're a conspiracy-monger, high school drop-out, or Oswald arse-kisser, you might be a redneck.

Since I have none of those afflictions/mutations and continue to thrive with the LNer brand, my ask will be couched in true LNer spirit with the term 'where do CTer conspiracy theories go to when they die'

Firstly, these lazy CTer theories, once heard by people who have at least a high-school diploma, fall apart immediately by way of their own dead-weight paranoia.

Secondly, they go back to from whence they came: The far shores of the lunatic fringe.

[Walt Cakebread]

Nut on nut debate is very entertaining.  It's like watching UFO believers argue about whether the aliens who abducted them are grey or green.

The LNer contingent is very much like the holocaust deniers.....  No matter how much evidence is presented that the murder of JFK was simply an old fashion coup d' e'tat  and Lee Oswald was the scape goat....   The Lner's will deny .......

[Walt Cakebread]

Mi no comprende.

There's a paper and verbal trail of the Nazis wanting the Jews to be exterminated or "removed". There's a trail of Oswald defecting, hating the United States and buying the weapons used on November 22nd.

The concentration camps that were freed and had gas chambers and crematoriums were run by Nazis. The day of the assassination, Oswald had no alibi, his rifle is found on the sixth floor and he killed Officer Tippit.

So there's no film of a SS guard flipping the switch; there's no film of Oswald pulling the trigger.

There's a trail of Oswald defecting, hating the United States and buying the weapons used on November 22nd.

As I said....  No matter how much evidence is presented .....The Lner's like the holocaust deniers will not open their eyes to the facts, and they will continue to believe the big lie....

How do you know what was in Lee's heart???.....  Did he hate the US?? ...or was that stated to fool  the Russians into accepting him as a genuine defector??   If he truly was a defector ....Then, Why did the US government send him a draft card ( when he was in a country from which he could not be drafted) that classified him as A-! and the card was signed "Gut Schieffer' ( German --- Good Mariner )



There's a trail of Oswald defecting, hating the United States and buying the weapons used on November 22nd.