Rather, I'm a convinced believer in the imperfectability of human nature and a student of history. That's all that one requires to be open to the possibility (likelihood, in fact) of conspiracy.
True, a student of Human Nature, Natural Law, and History would indeed be open to the likelihood of conspiracies. They are a fact of life.
The problem is that you're not a very good student of history. As history has laid out the facts about this event, over and over and over again. Each time the conclusion is clear, Oswald acted alone.
Since the facts are dismissed, you are left with a theory. Thus, you are in fact a conspiracy theorist, when it comes to this topic. In fairness, I will isolate this topic from others, and apply the title "conspiracy theorist" to where it fits.
Read Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. It is a cover to cover account of an endless trail of conspiratorial assassinations of heads of state, most of which were proposed by the establishment to the Roman public as cases of "lone assassins." Read it for this reason, but also read it for pleasure. It's an excellent book.
