Can anyone explain why the forensic evidence, lack of gunpowder traces on Oswald's facial cheeks, as Phil Dragoo
has pointed out over the years and confirmed by a US government agency, has not convinced just about everyone
that Oswald did not fire a rifle/carbine at President John Kennedy on November 22, 1963?
Was this evidence never reported anywhere? Can't people read or hear? This should have been headline news
in the 1960s and thereafter. How many news reporters/editors/media owners refused to report this information?
If Oswald had gone to trial, and this information had been introduced, he would have been judged innocent. Does
anyone understand this? The only way I can explain it to myself is that his scapegoat status had to be maintained
to protect the guilty. Therefore, there are a lot of people guilty of obstruction of Justice, and they should be exposed
to the public and punished, along with the murderers for their crimes..
Also, this sort of thing...