Reply #131: Surely, by now, you have learnt like the rest of us here at DU, that

[Joe Chi Minh]

conspiracies, like fraud are tried on the basis of circumstantial evidence! And this isn't even even a formal investigation or trial, which, in any case, has aleady found that conspiracy was the most probable cause - in the second and definitive Commission, which I actually referred to, but which you conveniently ignored.

"(In other words, it refers to more than just misspellings)"... but its sure looked like a Freudian slip. But then it wouldn't to an ostrich.

"Care to share it? Hint: supposition and speculation do not amount to proof."

No, I absolutely would not care to share it! Do you really think I would ever feel the need to spell out to you what an imbecile could recognise, but which you choose not to! I'm furious that I've involved myself in an argument with a half-wit, now. Most people on DU, most people in the US, most people in the world, know beyond all peradventure that there was a bi-artisan, right-wing conspiracy at the highest level to murder JFK. Why would I be interested in adducing evidence to the wilfully ingnorant? All you need do is study the very lengthy compilation, and inevitably implicit synthesis, towards the bottom of the thread, of all the evidence, or almost all of it.

As regards Oswald's rifle, no I didn't keep the relevant newspaper clipping in case I might feel a burning need to convince a numptie who has no intention of acknowledging the truth of what happened that day.

Oh, and by the way, don't call me, I'll call you.