I agree if one questions the official version of events they are

Comment on John F. Kennedy Assassination Conspiracy Theories by pio.

i agree if one questions the official version of events they are called crazy kooks ,crazy kooks whos life is so worthless they need to believe in all these ridiculous theories .

i admit a small amount of people have some weird and outlandish theories and this reflects badly on everyone else .theories aside when one simply looks at the evidence against oswald at close quarters they will see its full of holes and not nearly as iron clad as some would have you believe .this is evidenced when we see the likes of gerald posner (case closed )vincent bugliosi (reclaiming history ) and others like dave von pien etc etc having to twist /omit /distort and atleast in posner and bugliosis case downright lie ,why would these people feel the need to lie if as they say the case is iron clad .

posner tells his readers that at about 11.45 the staff on the 6th floor who were laying a plywood floor (along with their supervisor bill shelly) went down to the 1st floor for lunch leaving oswald alone on the 6th floor. (so far posner is correct but this is where he forgets the truth and invents the lie ) he now says oswald alone stayed on the 6th floor he stayed up there and never went down for lunch and went about constructing the snipers nest and assembling his rifle where he then lay in wait for jfk .well then posner couldnt know that bill shelly saw oswald at 11.50 on the 1st floor ,and that charles given saw oswald on the 1st floor reading a paper ,and that eddie piper saw and spoke to oswald at midday again on the 1st floor ,how could posner who has researched for years not know the above ? the answer is he cant not know it therefore he chose to omit these 3 witnesses and lie . he denies a fourth witness carolyn arnold because her fbi statment says that when asked she said she did not see oswald ,again this is partly true arnold did say she didnt see oswald but she was talking about at 12.30 the time of the shots . theres a a reason why her statment says what it says the fbi agents in dallas were ordered to ask the witnesses a very specific question “did you see oswald at 12.30 the time of the shots” arnold was truthfull and said no she didnt but she had told the fbi that she saw oswald alone in the lunchroom at 12.15 or a little after .

bugliosi tells his readers such things as “oswald claimed he ate with jarmin ,in the hope of getting an alibi ” oswald said no such thing and bugliosi knows this .bugliosi had a choice he had a piece of innacurate testimony from will fritz and he had fritz and bookhouts interrogation notes which both contradict fritz testimony ,but what does he do he chose to use the inaccurate testimony .

bugliosi tells his readers regarding the limo being cleaned at parklands “But on the face of it, it appears highly unlikely that the Secret Service would wash away the “crime scene” before the FBI criminalists could examine the car, and there is no testimony or statement from anyone that this was done.”
bugliosi having done 21 years of research must have missed the photo of a bucket of water by the limo /he must be unaware of atleast 3 journalists that witnessed and wrote about this and who photographed the bucket ,and he must be aware of the statment by the person who brought the bucket of water to clean the limo ,no he is not unaware of all this after 21 years research he chose to omit the information about the witnesses /the photo and instead chose to lie and say they wouldt do such a thing .

so again i ask if the case against oswald was ironclad and people like me are crazy kooks why would the feel the need to omit /distort and lie ?.