Gil Jesus

Well said Gil,  I enjoyed your post on Greg's forum and more importantly on the whole idea of trying to draw everything we don't understand into a conspiracy.  I've become really annoyed at accusing people of killing the President simply because of presumed motive - like the Dulles thread on the forum now.

I've stopped reading most posts because they are of that nature, more in the way of "world views" than investigation.

And the more I try to get detailed, as I did in Tipping Point, the move people seem to want to back off and not engage in that but continue with the same grand plots and suspects we have had for decades.

While I do think that certain aspects of Tippet's behavior are strange or even suspicious, I don't think that is what got him killed and I really like the track you are own - bad things do happen and if he stopped the wrong guy his luck might just have been bad. Your view makes a whole lot more sense of the remark about seeing someone in the neighborhood all the time in regard to the shooter, not Tippet.

Its interesting that Martino said that the second half of the whole plan got blown away because Tippet got shot and Oswald got taken into custody alive, he didn't say Oswald shot him.

David Boylan are working on another research paper that will offer a different view of Oswald's actions over the 90 days before the assassination and even floats a new idea as to why he went back to the apartment to get his pistol....its totally new to me as I always bought into a more traditional scenario.  But we really should try to break out of our box, which is why I really like where you are going and will be most interested to see Part 2.