See my post with the pretty pictures. That, and several witnesses saw LHO in that very window and identified him, plus the three men in the room under him heard him take the three shots and rack the bolt action twice between them (and made statements BEFORE the rifle was publicly identified as a bolt-action). There's your clear and unambiguous evidence -- three shots fired from that window, the injuries to JFK and Connally are mathematically consistent with shots from that window (and few other places, none of the plausible), and the great majority of "earwitnesses" stated that they heard three shots. QED right there, although there's even more evidence.
The biggest bunch of lies in any book I have read about this (dozens of them) was in Case Closed which has had its accuracy challenged and corrected in Case Reopened.
LOL! I've read Case Reopened, it's an exercise in hand-waving, loony claims long discredited, false claims about what Posner actually says, and a failure to address most of the evidence in the book.
But I understand why conspiracy nuts try so hard to dismiss Posner's book: before I read it, I had NO IDEA of the *vast* and *overwhelming* amount of evidence for the "Oswald did it" conclusion, and had no idea how badly the conspiracy theorists twisted truth, ignored indisputable evidence torpedoing their theories, or based their conclusions on isolated things taken out of context (or the self-contradictory statements of a few of the more "imaginative" people who were in the Plaza that day -- or implausibly claimed they had been).
Any alternate conspiracy theory has to, a minimum, account for the encyclopedic amount of primary evidence that Posner brings together in his book, and not just dismiss it in toto by screaming, "lies, all lies!"
You cannot show me ONE statement by any person that claims they saw LHO shooting that gun EVER unless it is the time that an "Oswald" was shooting at someone else's targets at a gun range.
For pete's sake, just how ignorant (or brainwashed by the conspiracy books) are you? There were *several* witnesses who testified in that regard, including Howard Brennan's testimony. Brennan saw Oswald in that window, firing a rifle, provided many details which proved accurately (including the presence of the black men in the window directly below Oswald's), and identified Oswald in a police lineup as the man he had seen in the window. Are you unaware of all this, are you just having selective amnesia about inconvenient facts for your conspiracy theory, or are you just trying to mislead everyone on this thread?
Nor one shred of evidence that he EVER bought ANY ammo for it or any firearm.
Oswald went hunting frequently -- is it your contention he stole all his ammo, or just that it magically materialized?
Those pictures show nothing of the sort. Nor do the extremely dubious eyewitnesses of LHO being in the window nor do any pictures of the scene show anything of the sort.
Granting that he was shooting from the window does not exclude his participation in a conspiracy at any rate.
I believe the Warren Commission used a technique which gathers a huge amount of data much of which is irrelevent to the issue. Since you have read many of the interviews of witnesses I don't believe you can deny that much of the time was wasted through delving into areas of insignificant information while leaving important veins of questioning unexplored. This I found very disturbing.
It is also disgeneous to claim that because I don't believe this theory I have to be able to provide an alternative theory as though I have millions of dollars and hundreds of people to do the legwork and investigation.
I will change my terminology and drop the hundreds of lies claim. Posner did not have to lie to accomplish his purpose
it is easy enough to deceive with half truths. Watching MOOre's movie shows clearly that you can stack hundreds of half-truths without getting to one truth.
Do I believe Brennan saw someone shooting from that window? Yes. Do I believe him capable of seeing WHO that someone was? No. His testimony is unconvincing particularly since his initial answer was only that Oswald in the lineup "most resembled" the man he saw in window compared to the others in the lineup. Then, after being reassured that he would not be killed by the Communist Conspiracy, he decided that he could make a positive id. This is pretty weak stuff.
Oswald did not go hunting frequently or even occasionally. The is no proof that he used that gun. His hunting trips in the USSR were apparently so unproductive that (with a shotgun) that his companions felt bad enough for him that they gave him game.