Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

The official story of the JFK assassination is shot with so many holes, and so many totally implausible and impossible claims, that only those who really WANT to believe it do. They have reasons why they WANT it to be true, why they NEED it to be true, and they just don't care about anything else. 

And, they have a connect-the-dots way of talking about it which sidesteps all the problems and incongruities. They just go through their litany of talking points, the things that sounds good to them. Didn't he own the rifle that was used to kill Kennedy? (No, he didn't. He was framed for owning the rifle, just as he was framed for killing Kennedy.) Didn't Oswald leave work early and without permission? (Others left early as well, and Oswald was correct; normal work was not resumed that day). Didn't Howard Brennan identify Oswald? (Are you serious? Have you never heard of the Innocence Project? How do you think all those innocent men got convicted in the first place and sent to Death Row? It was because someone falsely identified them as the perpetrator.) Didn't Marina take the Backyard photos in which Oswald brandished a rifle and pistol? (No, the Backyard photos were faked, and Oswald's face was moved to the body of another man, probably Roscoe White) Wasn't Oswald seen on the 6th floor that morning? (Yes, but by people on the 6th floor. So, how could Oswald hide the rifle, retrieve the rifle, rebuild the rifle, construct the Sniper's Nest, etc. when he was never alone on the 6th floor?)  Didn't Frazier see him with a package which was the disassembled rifle, and didn't Oswald tell him the rifle was curtain rods? (No. All are false. Oswald emphatically denied saying any such thing. The time has come to start viewing Buell Frazier as a MK-Ultra patsy like Sirhan Sirhan or Mark David Chapman. He was 19 years old and being threatened with arrest and prosecution. He said what they wanted him to say - betraying Oswald - and he has been caught in a mental prison for 52 years.) Isn't it true that Oswald's room needed no curtain rods, and no curtain rods were found in the TSBD? (Yes, but, Oswald denied the whole story about the curtain rods. Frazier also said Oswald brought no lunch when Oswald detailed the lunch he brought: cheese sandwiches and an apple.) Didn't he order a rifle from Klein Hardware? (No, he didn't, and even if he had, he never could have gotten it because A. Hidell's rifle was sent to the PO Box of Lee Harvey Oswald. That doesn't work. It doesn't get delivered. It's a roadblock; it's impassable.) Wasn't his palm print found on the rifle? (Only after he was dead. And he passed the paraffin test.) Wasn't it all his bullets used in the shooting? (No. The fatal head shot involved a frangible bullet.) 

Etc. Etc. Etc. The attempt to build a case against Oswald only results in a demonstration of the extent to which he was framed and set up. It was no piddling thing. Every single bit of the physical evidence against him was planted. 

Look at these images. They are all supposed to be Oswald in Mexico City. Obviously, none of them are. 

So, it means that before the assassination, Oswald was being impersonated, and THAT, IN ITSELF, PROVES THAT HE WAS INNOCENT. It's not normal to have people impersonating you. It means that he was being framed and targeted even before the assassination. 

Are we supposed to believe that someone who was being framed, targeted, set up, who was definitely the object of a sinister plot went on to become a lone nut assassin in a strange coincidence?

The vilifying of Lee Harvey Oswald is just a patriotic duty, a patriotic ritual, entirely lacking in rationality and coherence. It is pure denialism. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denialism