Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.: Lee Harvey Oswald Did Not Act Alone

He is the one who was pwned as you and he both know full well.

You have been defeated and crushed in this and every other thread

 

Still applauding at your own defeat

 

The Nazi lives for this.

It appears his whole being is wrapped up in trying to refute anyone questioning the events surrounding JFK;s death.

He's got nothing and adds nothing. Refute him and then ignore him

 

That's known as trolling and therefore not worth responding to.

 

you nailed it.What i cant get is WHY would anyone waste their time on a psychotic nutcase who talks to himself all the time? I know when posters put ME on ignore for one reason or the other,i dont continue to talk to them in the first person for several years after they put me on ignore.that right there is evidence of a psychotic nutcase who belongs in a rubber room.thats scary stuff trying to get anybody that will to try and listen to your babble like that.

 

Wrong and you are outright lying.

No one here has QUESTIONED anything you have only made false assertions which have been massively debunked.

You have refuted nothing and ignore nothing you merely get embarrassed and run away for a while

 

No it is known as proving you wrong and you running away

 

Man, people just have a problem with how a random loser like Oswald could kill the most powerful man in the world, it's like they cannot accept it! Why? cause this is like quantum physics - chaotic and disorderly. It's as if people get comfort from knowing only a well orchestrated CIA-MOB-Castro etc... assassination plan could get JFK, how can a random nobody do it? NO, CAN'T BE! LIFE CANNOT BE SO RANDOM!

The facts remain as such - overwhelming evidence points to Oswald, FACT. Using inconsistencies here and there as proof of anything, discrediting hard evidence as 'fabricated', taking statements from people who couldn't produce any proof, simply doesn't cut it guys.

The reality is that it makes a TON of sense as to why some loser like Oswald was the only guy that could pull this off. Why? because a random loser acting alone is much more difficult to stop. See, if the mob, or CIA or Castro tried anything, there are simply too many spies and leakers that would've uncovered it or spoken out later. It is actually MUCH MUCH more difficult for a well orchestrated large scaled assassination to get very far, it involves too many people, too much planning and intelligence would've uncovered it or at the very least, hunted down the culprits later. Oswald? NO-ONE saw it coming, he was the PERFECT MAN to do this. It simply makes so much sense to me, only a random loser, acting alone who was under the radar could've carried this out. The MOB, castro, CIA would've NEVER gotten way with it and most importantly, they would'v feared the consequences. Anyone really think that Castro and MOB would take such a risk? knowing intelligence angencies would've 100% uncovered it? risk getting wiped of the face of the Earth? Castro? really? he would've given US excuse to invade and wipe him out! THINK PEOPLE, THINK. Neither would the FBI our CIA ever even think of doing this, WHY? cause it would've involved too many people, simply too many eyes on them, the truth would've come out quickly! It makes SO MUCH F SENSE that it was OSWALD who did this... it was completely unexpected and no-one saw it coming.

 

There's actually very little real evidence that Oswald was the shooter and almost none that he was the LONE shooter.

It's not that he was a "loser"...it's that he was such a strange character tied so tightly to the more than a few intel agencies...and that odd trip to Russia...

 

I can't speak for anyone else but I don't have a problem with that, I have a major problem with the official narrative. Based on the known evidence, not only because it is far from incontrovertible evidence that Oswald did it but more because it contradicts the official narrative in many ways. Everything about the official narrative stinks, just like 9/11.

If we didn't, this thread wouldn't exist.

 

there is TON of evidence.. a TON, even his f finger prints were on the f rifle!

here's the problem, conspiracy theorists KNOW there is a TON of hard evidence that Oswald did this but what do they resort to? claiming, yes, there is evidence but it's all FABRICATED, PEOPLE WERE COERCED into saying xyz etc... etc... lol

The easiest thing in the planet is to come up with conspiracy theories, this is all you have to do:

1. Oh, al this hard evidence? SORRY, it's all fabricated by intelligence agencies, all made up etc... HOW EASY IS THIS?
2. Look, there are inconsistencies here and there and here... THIS MUST BE EVIDENCE TO THAT IT WAS A CONSPIRACY!

easy... i can come up with many if i want to, it's the easiest thing to do. There are inconsistencies in EVERYTHING we look at, nothing is ever 100% conclusive so it's easy to find inconsistencies but to claim it is counter evidence? It is also easy to simply discredit by claiming HARD evidence is fabricated, fake, made up...

again, people have a problem with life being so random, it bothers them. People want to believe everything is planned, everything is orderly and they cannot accept that some nobody could've killed JFK but only a nobody could've done it! No way the MOB, or CIA or Castro would've #1 dared do something like this knowing consequences and #2 large scale plans are much more susceptible to be intercepted and chances of leaks much greater. It actually makes 0 sense that MOB, or Castro or CIA would've done this, just think. Castro? so US could find excuse to invade Cuba and get rid of him LOL! MOB? So US goes after them like never before and destroys them LOL! CIA? knowing someone would've spoken out and really? kill their own president?

 

yeah if people didnt think,then all americans would have fallen for the warren commission fable hook,line,and sinker.

 

There's only a palm print...discovered days after the arrest . Oddly no finger prints at all.

the evidence...such as it is...is circumstantial. NO hard evidence. NO parafin test showing he had fired a gun (no less two).

 

no, there is a lot of evidence, hard and circumstantial. You are like all the others that claim it's all fabricated, fake, he was scapegoat.

Once again, the likelihood of a large organization planning an assassination with many involved is very small for two key reasons. If MOB or CIA or Castro would've planned this, it would've been impossible to keep it secret, much easier for intelligence to intercept, far more likely of leaks later. Once again, the risks involved are also risks that none of these organizations would've even contemplated. Do you really think that the MOB would've done this knowing that they would've been caught and DESTROYED? Castro? to finally give US an excuse to INVADE AND KILL HIM? CIA? to kill their own president and everyone in CIA covered it up? THINK for a moment...

Oswald? makes so much sense. It was him acting alone and he was some loner/loser so no-one would've expected it, no-one would've uncovered it. He was under the radar and why him being the shooter makes A LOT of sense, YES, it's random, boring but totally plausible and in fact, what makes the most sense.

 

The evidence is powerful conclusive and overwhelming it is not circumstantial.

A palm print is NOT circumstantial.

Paraffin tests were not and are not conclusive.

 

he falls flat on his face with egg on it same as he does in his desperate attempts to convince people oswald did it.lol

 

you nailed it,the understatement of the century.

 

the vegas shooting is the same thing going on that happened back in the 60's with many witnesses that gave version of events different that the goverrnments version of events dying mysterious deaths.same as 9/11 as well.History has a way of repeating itself over and over when the real killers get away with it.
this witness said he saw multiple shooters at vegas and how conveinent for the government same as with JFK,he is dead now dying a very mysterious death.
http://yournewswire.com/las-vegas-witness-gunmen-dead/

 

And thousands of others are still alive.

Just like in the case of JFK where the evidence and the vast majority of witnesses prove Oswald acted alone.

But some fools ignore that in favor of one obsure witness who was drunk or something which is the basis of all of your idiotic claims

 

And the bullet hole in the front of JFK's skull prove Oswald did NOT act alone. Amazing how a couple of hard core trolls can
attempt to derail a discussion and simply insist that black is white.
The House Select Committee on Assassination came to the conclusion that Oswald did not act alone (if he did act at all).

Amazing that a second government body, attempting to prop up the awful job of the Warren Commission, had to at least admit to the fact that there were multiple shooters.

 

CIA black-ops always gets their man. Evidently, it was a national American entity responsible. Otherwise, there would have been a thorough investigation.

 

There's very good proof of multiple shooters (like the kill shot from the front and side of JFK). That's all I know.

There can be no thorough investigation however when the people running the investigation are also the perpetrators.
Hoover, Bush, Dulles, etc. They were all in on the coup.

 

yeah when you got THEM controlling the investigation and one of the co conspirators Johnson able to HANDPICK the team of investigaters on the warren commission,pretty impossible to have a non biased through in depth investigation and Johnsons buddy Hoover controlling the FBI.lol