What Bill and others can do is speculate that the CIA killed JFK. Or the Pentagon. Or the FBI. Or Wall Street bankers. Or Texas oilmen.
We can speculate about all sorts of hairbrained conspiracy theories involving all sorts of institutions and figures and persons and forces. Hell, we can speculate about aliens (that is one theory). It's done here nearly every day. Tens of thousands of such posts. All sort of oddball claims and allegations.
And the skeptics here who lecture against "speculation" will not say a word about this. Not one. But speculating based on facts about Oswald's motives? That's simply not allowed.
And they think they are convincing people that they really aren't conspiracy believers. Yes they do.
Yes, it's the same tired song and dance from our contrarians. Someone asks a question that by necessity calls for speculation. And, of course, a question about Oswald's "motive" by necessity must implicitly assume that Oswald assassinated JFK. Otherwise, there is no motive to speculate about. They then dismiss the answer because it contains speculation. Suggesting, of all things, that no one can even speculate about Oswald's motives unless they personally knew him! HA HA HA. The time machine argument. Of course, motive is not necessary to prove Oswald's responsibility for the crime. The evidence does that. There is no doubt that Oswald assassinated JFK based upon the evidence. We do, however, know a great deal about Oswald himself from his family and acquaintance and there is an amazingly consistent pattern to his life. He was a malcontent who acted up from childhood on for attention. So, the "speculation" here is well grounded in facts that support that speculation. Unlike the nutty contrarian theories that imply all manner of thing that is not only implausible but completely baseless.
