FIRST ANNIVERSARY
David Von Pein
"GREATEST KOOK-BASHING HITS REVISITED" (PART 84, or thereabouts):
IN THE ASYLUM....ONE YEAR AGO TODAY....
==========================================================
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/e089ee8b738cad76
>>> "By Saturday afternoon, Lee {AKA: THE SAINT BOYS LOVE TO ADMIRE} had started to come to grips with the fact that his handler and his agency had abandoned him." <<<
Connected with Ringling Brothers perhaps?
And Oswald had his own "agency" now, eh? He was smarter than we all
thought. I always pictured him as a member of a 1-member FPCC chapter.
>>> "He had seen a fake photo that seemed to show him with the alleged murder weapon in his hands." <<<
Oz had a memory problem too (evidently). Seeing as how he SIGNED ("To
George") one of the SAME BATCH of B.Y. photos....they cannot be
"fake", now can they?
The cops forged Ozzie's signature on the DeMohrenschildt pic...right
kook? Right.
>>> "After seeing that photo he realized that he was being framed." <<<
Only AFTER seeing the photo, eh? Then I guess he was checking his
pistol to see if it was in working order on 10th Street, and J.D.
Tippit just accidentally got in the way of the four shots. Otherwise,
why would Oz START killing people BEFORE he even "realized that he was
being framed"?
Think up another lie, Walt. Or just revise this one. Either will do.
Neither will be factual anyway...so what the hay.
>>> "On Saturday evening, he {SAINT O-MAN} placed a long distant phone call to a Mr. Hunt
in (Atlanta?)." <<<
Don't ask me -- this is your made-up conspiracy/patsy plot. So you
tell me. Atlanta? Alright...go with that. (I'd have said Chicago
though. It's that Toddlin' Town, after all.)
>>> "Of course Mr. "Hunt" could have been anywhere in the country, because the intelligence community had the capability to make it appear the call was received in at Atlanta when in reality the the call had actually been received in Langley, Va." <<<
And with the WAYBACK MACHINE, Oswald should have been able to
transport himself quickly back in time to October 1929....just in time
to prevent the Stock Market Crash (similar to his heroic actions of
trying to SAVE THE PRESIDENT in Dallas in '63, you see).
This is fun -- just makin' shit up.
Continue, kook.....
>>> "At anyrate....The Warren Commission painted a picture of Oswald as a tight lipped, unsociable, loner, who talked only in grunts and terse statements..." <<<
Yep. That's our boy. No question about it. Except when he gets talky
with shady lawyers from Atlanta (or Langley, or Walla Walla, or
Kooksville...where was Hunt again?).
>>> "One only has to listen to his debate with Bringuier to know that he was pretty damned smart and could easily carry a conversation and debate." <<<
Yep. He sure could. And one only need to listen to that debate to also
know that Oswald was a total fruitcake/screwball -- just the type of
nut to want to murder JFK on behalf of brilliant Fidel.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/stuck3.htm
>>> "The phone call to Mr."Hunt" lasted about a half hour (that's a long
time for some one who was antisocial)..." <<<
Is this anything like your proven "OSWALD COULDN'T HAVE KILLED TIPPIT"
timeline. You know, full of undefined, shitty parameters that can
never be tied together cohesively?
Yeah, thought so.
Continue, kook...
>>> "...so you can bet that Lee didn't call Mr."Hunt" to discuss the weather." <<<
Junie DID need shoes. Perhaps that was discussed.
>>> "Since it was obvious to Lee that he was being railroaded..." <<<
Oh, obviously. He should have realized that he was being railroaded
when that bitch Ruth Paine and that other fucking whore Linnie Mae did
Oswald that awful favor of recommending him for that Depository job.
>>> "As Whaley described the situation..." <<<
The cab driver? WTF?
Oh, well...maybe the kook can unravel this for the weak-minded LNers.
>>> "...he wanted to know why, "Someone" had not come forward to his defense..." <<<
Of course, a lawyer DID come to the DPD to aid Oswald (without Oz
sending for anybody). Oswald told the man he wasn't needed. Go figure.
>>> "It was obvious to Lee that he was in hot water..." <<<
Yeah, he probably did think that. Normally when you murder 2 people
(esp. a President), they don't start hangin' medals on you. But maybe
Oswald was only worried about not having lawyers banging at his jail
cell to defend his sorry ass, huh?
>>> "...and his agency was doing nothing to help him." <<<
Federal Aviation Agency? Or was it an Agricultural Agency of some ilk?
Or is this the made-up agency you spoke of earlier?
>>> "During that long conversation he must have warned Mr "Hunt" that he
hadn't spilled the beans yet..." <<<
And wasn't about to spill any, even though he now KNOWS he should
(what with his sudden realization that he's been made the "patsy" by
Mr. Eyebrows, David Ferrie (and his goon squad).
(Or did you want to pick out your own Patsy-Framing Crew in this post,
Walt-Kook? By all means...wind up from the rubber, and let rip a good
one.)
>>> "...but if they didn't get off their ass and send some help quickly he was gonna start talking..." <<<
Even though he'd already made his "I'm just a patsy" hallway
declaration by this time. He was just tossing out a few "clues" to the
cops, reporters, and the millions watching on TV. Right? He was gonna
save the big "Ferrie Did It" salvo for 11:22 AM on Sunday. But he was
popped 1 minute before he could talk. Poor patsy.
>>> "This phone call was his death warrant..." <<<
I thought Marrion Baker had Oz's Death Warrant in his pocket (in the
form of Baker's gun) when Baker stormed the TSBD on Friday?
And wasn't it you who also said just yesterday that Gerald Hill ALSO
was supposed to rub out the patsy in the theater?
Question --- How many brain-dead plotters does it take to rub out just
one simple-minded patsy before the bastard can talk??
Answer --- A good-sized number, per the CT-Kooks. Baker failed, Hill
failed, Ruby failed on his first attempt (probably).
The Patsy Crew finally had to go with Plan 9 From Kooksville, and kill
the bum in the police station on LIVE TELEVISION.
THAT did the cover-up a lot of good, huh?
Continue, kook....
>>> "They sealed his lips for good the next morning." <<<
Oh well...he had unattractive "tight lips" anyhow. So, who cares.
Walt's post is CLASSIC kook stuff -- i.e., take a vague reference to a
phone call and build a conspiracy around something that's TOTALLY
UNKNOWN IN NATURE!
You can't beat these kooks. They'll give you a laugh....every time.
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/743413e007678192
>>> "I'm waiting for a logical LNer to explain why there was a Mauser and Springfield on the floor as well." <<<
Great. We're treated to DOUBLE the kookshit regarding the make-believe
rifles now.
So now it seems we've got a kook claiming there was a Mauser AND some
other non-Carcano rifle (a Springfield?) found on the 6th Floor on
11/22/63.
I assume the kook did mean "sixth" floor when he said "on the floor"
in his post. Is that right, Mr. K?
Perhaps Rob would like to take a listen to Seymour Weitzman's words,
as Weitzman explains the whole "Mauser" mistake (via a CBS-TV News
Special in June of 1967):
SEYMOUR WEITZMAN -- "Mr. Boone was climbing on top and I was down on
my knees looking. And I moved a box and he moved a carton, and there
it was. And he, in turn, hollered we had found the rifle."
EDDIE BARKER (CBS NEWS) -- "What kind of gun did you think it was?"
MR. WEITZMAN -- "To my sorrow, I looked at it and it looked like a
Mauser, which I said it was. But I said the wrong one; because just at
a glance, I saw the Mauser action....and, I don't know, it just came
out as words it was a German Mauser. Which it wasn't. It's an Italian
type gun. But from a glance, it's hard to describe; and that's all I
saw, was at a glance. I was mistaken. And it was proven that my
statement was a mistake; but it was an honest mistake."
===============
I guess Weitzman continued to lie on national TV too, right Rob? But,
why would he even agree to appear on that TV special if he knew he'd
have to lie (again) about the "Mauser"? Why not just say "No thanks"
when he was asked to appear? Go figure that.
>>> "They found no fingerprints on the gun {LHO's rifle}." <<<
Bull-shit. And you know what you said is pure Bull-Shit too. But that
won't stop you from saying it...over and over again, will it?
>>> "...If they did find them {LHO's prints} on the bag, it could have been laying around the floor and he could have moved it; he did work there." <<<
LOL break. The kooks will go MILES out of their way to believe the
silliest of things, rather than gaze squarely at Occam's handy Razor,
won't they? A-ma-zing.
I'll repeat this one more time (I like the wording of it, and the
built-in common-sense factor as well).....
"I'm eagerly awaiting the logical and believable CT explanation
that will answer the question of why that 38-inch brown paper sack
(which could house Oswald's 34.8-inch disassembled rifle), with
Oswald's fingerprints on it, was in the place where it was found after
the assassination -- the Sniper's Nest -- and yet still NOT have
Oswald present at the SN window on November 22nd, 1963. I, for one,
cannot think of a single "Oswald's Innocent" explanation for that bag
being where it was found after the shooting, and with Lee Harvey
Oswald's fingerprints on it." -- David V.P.; May 2005
>>> "Now we hear there is a picture and a movie showing that {19-year-old TSBD worker Buell Wesley} Frazier may be in the window himself. He may have lied about the whole curtain rod story." <<<
Oh good! A new pile of made-up CT Kookshit!
What's not to love about this?!
If this post of Robby's that I'm responding to gets any deeper in CT
Crap, I'm going to have to call the fire department's rescue squad to
come and pull me out of it.
>>> "I could show you that photo where two men are in the window and you still won't believe it." <<<
Darn right I won't. And that's because no such photo exists that
provably shows "two men" in the Sniper's-Nest window (or any sixth-
floor window) on November 22, 1963. Period.
(BTW, somebody call 911, quick. It looks like I'm definitely going to
need that rescue squad.)
But, keep the CT dream alive, Rob. After all, your dreams are all
you've got to cling to (along with assorted vanishing bullets and
several disappearing assassins).
Tomorrow on "The Kook Channel":
"RUTH PAINE SEEN IN DAL-TEX BUILDING WITH AK-47 ON DAY OF JACK
KENNEDY'S ASSASSINATION!!"
I look forward to that episode, too. Hopefully, Marina will be accused
of being Ruth's "spotter" in the Dal-Tex, too. That'd be a fun twist.
But you should get some rest now, Mr. Kook. Additional made-up
conspiracy dreck can wait until tomorrow.
David Von Pein
AN ADDITIONAL RE-POST (SHOWING A CONSPIRACY KOOK DOING WHAT HE DOES
THE BEST -- BEING A KOOK)......
=======================================
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/b35bb5ad98f628f2
>>> "This guy {VB} smokes as much stuff as you do." <<<
That's curious....I thought I *WAS* him. (My identity crisis has reach
its zenith.)
~head swirling~
>>> "How was the gun linked to LHO?" <<<
You mean BESIDES the paper trail leading to LHO's P.O. Box in Dallas
and the palmprint and the backyard photos and the Walker shooting
(which involved a bullet that almost certainly came from C2766, and Oz
admitted he shot at Walker...and I kinda doubt he used a spitwad-
thrower to do the job on the retired General)?
Besides those little piddly items, I guess there's nothing. So, I
guess you're right. Oz is in the clear.
>>> "It is claimed he ordered it via mail order." <<<
He did. But you, being in the "ABO" (Anybody But Oswald) Club, have to
reject that verified evidence. It MUST mean that some schnook named
"A.J. Hidell" (who happens to have Lee Harvey Oswald's exact same
handwriting) really ordered the rifle and shipped it to LHO's P.O.
Box.
It's obvious, you dolt! Hidell did it!
>>> "No one ever saw him with the gun at anytime, period." <<<
It sure gets tiresome having to correct your stupid errors every day.
(Maybe Rob-Kook is a "CT Plant", placed here to make even the likes of
Walt and Ben look good.)
Fact is -- Marina saw LHO dry-firing his rifle during the calendar
year of 1963. He covered the rifle with a raincoat, and would then sit
on the porch and practice working the bolt and dry-firing in the
pitch-
darkness of night.
It's a wonder that Marina didn't take the baby and run for the hills
after putting up with some of the shit this kook named Lee did,
including, of course, several wife-beating sessions. What a great guy.
>>> "The photos of him holding the gun have been proven by Scotland Yard to be fake." <<<
LOL. Scotland Yard is in the mix now, eh? Where did that fairy tale
come from? Care to show us?
>>> "The brother and sister tag team don't matter as they are the only two to see LHO with a package that day." <<<
Oh, I see. The fact that Wesley and Linnie Mae were "brother and
sister" somehow disqualifies them as reliable witnesses with respect
to being able to say for certainty whether or not they saw LHO with a
bulky package on November 22.
Nice made-up kook rule you've got there, I must say.
So, I guess if Donny & Marie had each seen Lee with the package,
they'd be disqualified too, huh?
It's also good to know that Linnie's and Wesley's testimony is
worthless...because that means I can now toss out their testimony
about the length of the bag. (Or is THAT part of their observations
still valid, Mr. Kook, because it supports your ABO position?)
>>> "How were the bullets linked to LHO?" <<<
Through Rifle #C2766 which fired them (a rifle owned by LHO).
Time for a "Duh" here.
>>> "They {the bullets} weren't, as they were linked to a gun that was never linked to LHO." <<<
Kook.
>>> "You ever hear the term "frame up"? " <<<
When it comes to the JFK assassination case, that's the only term you
kooks have EVER heard of --- LHO was "framed" for the Walker shooting.
LHO was "framed" for the JFK shooting. LHO was "framed" for the Tippit
shooting.
Care to go for one more? Maybe Oz shot Medgar Evers too.
>>> "Why would LHO need a gun in the first place if he had one to shoot at General Walker?" <<<
Same gun, you stupid fool.
>>> "LNers can't have it both ways. If he {the Saint named Oswald} shot at Walker with a Springfield 30.6, where was that gun on 11/22/63?" <<<
Walker wasn't shot with a 30.06, you kook. The bullet taken out of
Walker's wall was a 6.5mm Carcano bullet, just like Oswald's
ammunition.
>>> "Secondly, he {Sweet LHO} could have purchased a gun at hundreds of places in Texas with cash and left no record." <<<
Shame on Lee for not living up to the standard "He Should Have Done It
This Way" requirements that the kooks demand.
Lee should have been shot for such stupidity. (Oh, yeah, he was.)
>>> "VB forgets to tell the sucker, er, the reader that no fingerprints of LHO's were on the gun or bag he supposedly carried the gun into the TSBD with." <<<
You can't possibly be this ignorant of the basic facts, can you?
Oswald's verified prints were located on BOTH the gun and the paper
bag.
Two prints were on the bag, with one of them (a RIGHT-hand palmprint)
perfectly corroborating Wesley Frazier's testimony of how LHO carried
the bag (cupped in his RIGHT hand).
Next idiotic point please?.....
>>> "How does that happen?" <<<
It didn't. See above.
>>> "Flight from the murder scene? I love this one. He {the "patsy" for all Texas murders, circa 1963: LHO} could have simply left for the day. Like work was going to continue anyway." <<<
Yeah, who gives a damn about all of that chaotic activity going on
outside your workplace's front door at 12:33 when Oswald decides (on
his own) that there won't be any more work done that day (just three
measly MINUTES after the shooting that YOU say Lee Oswald knew nothing
about).
Kooky.
>>> "Unprovable lies after he was arrested. How do you know this?" <<<
You meant to say "provable" lies, idiot.
And many of LHO's lies can easily be proven. But, being an ABO nutjob,
you couldn't see a Boeing 747 if it had just crashed through your
ceiling.
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/ea04b9e6141f0098
>>> "How does VB know this?" <<<
Mainly due to the fact he's not a conspiracy kook.
>>> "Neither one of you was there." <<<
And you were, of course.
>>> "I have laid out what happened." <<<
Stop the presses!! A kook has it all "laid out"!!
Only one problem with it -- you haven't a speck of evidence to support
a single thing you assert.
But that never stopped a kook, did it?
(Embarrassment doesn't run in your family I see.)
>>> "Show how we know the gun is his {Patsy Extraordinaire Oswald's}." <<<
He ordered it.
He paid for it.
His prints are on it. (And on the triggerguard too. CTers like to
ignore those.)
>>> "A card with an alias that was the name used to order it. Please, a good lawyer would shred this." <<<
Even though it was in Oswald's handwriting, huh?
Did "Hidell" just happen to write exactly like Lee Oswald? Is that the
"Magic Coincidental Handwriting Theory"?
But, being a kook, I guess the testimony of the handwriting experts
who said that the order form for the rifle was written in Lee Oswald's
own handwriting is just another of the many pieces of "official"
evidence you kooks can simply ignore. Right?
>>> "Especially when he could subpeona the FBI/CIA for their employee records regarding LHO." <<<
No such records exist, Mr. Kook.
>>> "Wasn't he {Vince Bugliosi} part of the prosecution team in the RFK case?" <<<
No. Vincent got involved in the RFK thing in the mid-1970s. He
investigated the possibility that more than just Sirhan's gun was
involved in RFK's murder. (Based primarily, I think, on the number of
bullet holes in the doors and walls of the hotel's kitchen pantry.)
But I believe that Vince is now content with the idea that Sirhan
Sirhan acted alone.
Steve Barber, who first discovered the "crosstalk" on the Dictabelt
tape that the HSCA claimed proved a JFK conspiracy, has also done
extensive work on the RFK acoustics evidence too. And Steve's work has
established the fact that only one gun was used to murder Senator
Robert Kennedy in June 1968.
>>> "Like there was a doubt Manson would go to jail. Come on, he scared the shit out {of} every juror--it was a slam dunk." <<<
How can you call it a "slam dunk" when Manson himself never killed
anyone in August 1969? Seems to me that would be a very rough road to
hoe for VB (or any prosecutor).
Sure, Manson scared some people with his crazy, whacked-out looks and
actions in the courtroom. But that's a far cry of PROVING he ordered
SEVEN MURDERS.
Vince did a brilliant job in that case. Of course, I'll admit, if it
hadn't been for Linda Kasabian making a deal with the LA DA's office,
it might have been a different story. Linda ratted out the killers
(and Manson).
Plus: Just because Vince got convictions against the Tate-LaBianca
killers (Atkins, Van Houten, and Krenwinkel), that didn't mean the
jury had to ALSO convict Charles Manson of "murder" as well.
If the jury had any reasonable doubt about Manson ordering the
murders, they could have let Charlie off the hook, and he might still
be among the free to this day. But VB, thank goodness, was able to
convince the jury that Charlie was the Grand Master behind the
killings.
BOOK REVIEW -- "HELTER SKELTER":
www.amazon.com/review/RDPQ2O3NXYWA
>>> "He {St. Oswald} didn't kill anyone either. Why doesn't VB use his experience in convicting Manson for conspiracy to commit murder in the LHO case?" <<<
Well...uh...maybe it has something to do with this little fact shown
below (in VB's own words):
"There was no plot, no conspiracy. JFK wasn't murdered by anti-
Castro Cubans, the mob, or rogue CIA agents. In almost 40 years, there
has not been one scintilla of proof tying the assassination to anyone
but Oswald. There have been theories, but no evidence. Oswald had the
motive, the opportunity, and the skill to kill President Kennedy. ....
My conclusion is that I believe beyond ALL doubt that Lee Harvey
Oswald killed Kennedy, and beyond all REASONABLE doubt that he acted
alone." -- Vince Bugliosi; circa 2001
~~~~~
A BONUS VB GEM:
"Though there are some notable exceptions, for the most part the
persistent rantings of the Warren Commission critics remind me of dogs
barking idiotically through endless nights." -- Vince Bugliosi; 1986
>>> "...Because there is more money in defending the crazy official theory." <<<
There is? Is that why the number of pro-conspiracy books outnumbers
the pro-"LN" books by about a 10-to-1 margin (maybe more than that
even)? Because there's "more money in defending the crazy official
theory"??
Sounds like "conspiracy" sells the most books to me.
>>> "Why don't you marry this guy {VB}?" <<<
How can I marry myself??
(Is this the "SST" maybe? I.E.: The "Single Spouse Theory"?)
>>> "Are you president of his {VB's} fan club?" <<<
I wouldn't make myself President of my OWN fan club, you silly-willy.
(I'm merely the Treasurer.)
>>> "Sounds like VB is shoving something up your butt." <<<
Again, I thought I WAS Vince. So how could I perform the above raunchy
act (unless I was a really good contortionist)?
David Von Pein
MORE INSTANT REPLAYS??
OKAY.
Here's another goodie:
===================================
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/381f7c6896d903e6
>>> "Don't buy DVP's propoganda [sic]. For all you know he is a CIA disinformation agent..." <<<
No. An FBI agent. Get it right, kook.
>>> "The JFK assassination was hardly the first LIVE radio event. Come on, DVP. R u dumn [sic] or something?" <<<
And when did I ever say it was?
"Dumn"??
Classic.
>>> "I admit it was the first big TV news event. But since the assassination was not recorded on TV live, since the press bus was out of sight, it made no difference." <<<
Classic idiocy here.
Per this kook, apparently since the press bus was near the end of the
motorcade line, it must have meant that a dozen gunmen could have been
popping away with 35 to 50 bullets in Dealey Plaza and it would have
(per the above kook) "made no difference".
I guess all of those additional shots (anything above the number "3")
would have somehow been inaudible to the many news reporters and
cameramen in the three camera cars (and elsewhere in Dealey Plaza) who
immediately reported what they heard to the world on live television &
radio.
Gosh, these kooks are crazy. Too funny.
>>> "The JFK assassination was the result of a plot, at least 4 shots were fired." <<<
Oh, come on. You can go way higher than 4. Go for 14, or 24.
(Remember, that "press bus" is the key to NOBODY EVER GETTING WORD OF
THE EXTRA 21 GUNSHOTS.)
>>> "Kennedy and Connaly [sic] were hit by seperate [sic] bullets." <<<
Yes, they were. But CE399 hit them both.
>>> "Kennedy was hit in the head twice, one from the front entered his right temple, and one from behind hit him slightly above the occitpial [sic] external protuberance." <<<
Why wasn't the LEFT side of JFK's head damaged at all then, Mr. Kook?
www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/BE1_HI.jpg
>>> "Kennedy was hit in the back, slight{ly} to the right of the spinal cord, and this bullet did not exit." <<<
What stopped this bullet from exiting? And where did the bullet go? If
it "did not exit", it would have certainly been found after the
shooting.
>>> "Kennedy was also hit in the front of the throat. This bullet did not exit as well." <<<
What stopped this bullet from exiting? And where did the bullet go? If
it "did not exit", it would have certainly been found after the
shooting.
BTW, you're a Super-Kook for believing that THREE separate bullets
could have possibly had a sliver of a chance of mirroring a perfect
SINGLE-bullet event.
And then, per you kooks, ALL THREE BULLETS DISAPPEAR.
Do any rabid CT-Kooks have ANY common sense? Any at all?
But, I guess there's a positive side to being a conspiracy-loving
idiot -- because by being one of those, you don't have to worry about
"evidence".
The kooks can simply use their "Everything Was Faked" motto and then
they can make something up (like a three-bullet substitute to the SBT,
with all bullets magically vanishing off the planet), and all kooks in
Kookville are happy and contented.
Must be nice to be a conspiracy-spouting kook, huh?
================================
QUOTING WALTER CRONKITE OF CBS NEWS (JUNE 1967):
"Our own view on the evidence is that it is difficult to believe
the Single-Bullet Theory. But, to believe the other theories is even
MORE difficult. If the Governor's wounds were caused by a separate
bullet, then we must believe that a bullet passed through the
President's neck, emerged at high velocity on a course that was taking
it directly into the middle of the automobile, and then vanished
without a trace.
"Or, we can complicate matters even further--as some do--by
adding a second assassin, who fires almost simultaneously with Oswald
and whose bullet travels miraculously a trajectory identical with
Oswald's and that second assassin, too, vanishes without a trace.
"Difficult to believe as the Single-Bullet Theory may be, it
seems to be the LEAST difficult of all those that are available.
"In the end, like the Commission, we are persuaded that a single
bullet wounded both President Kennedy and Governor Connally."
================================
aeffects
> AN ADDITIONAL RE-POST (SHOWING A CONSPIRACY KOOK DOING WHAT HE DOES
> THE BEST -- BEING A KOOK)......
>
LMFAO.... ole Davey isn't hawking the book any longer..... he's seen
the light -- he is however, still quoting himself.....
and
oh really, Dave this one is for you?
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also
known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods
qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with
unpopular titles such as "kooks", "right-wing", "liberal", "left-
wing", "terrorists", "conspiracy buffs", "radicals", "militia",
"racists", "religious fanatics", "sexual deviates", and so forth. This
makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same
label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
Bob Harris
<741e3eeb-b052-4868...@n58g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
> "GREATEST KOOK-BASHING HITS REVISITED" (PART 84, or thereabouts):
>
>
> IN THE ASYLUM....ONE YEAR AGO TODAY....
>
> ==========================================================
>
>
>
>
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/e089ee8b738cad76
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> "By Saturday afternoon, Lee {AKA: THE SAINT BOYS LOVE TO ADMIRE} had
> >>> started to come to grips with the fact that his handler and his agency
> >>> had abandoned him." <<<
>
> Connected with Ringling Brothers perhaps?
>
> And Oswald had his own "agency" now, eh?
OHMIGOD!!
David, tell me that you really do know what "agency" he was talking
about?
What do you gain by pretending to be ignorant of what every other member
of this newsgroups immediately gets.
> He was smarter than we all
> thought. I always pictured him as a member of a 1-member FPCC chapter.
David, you should spend some time watching the PBS documentary on
Oswald. In spite of using consultants like Posner, they discovered that:
1. Oswald had nowhere near enough money to pay for his trip to Russia.
2. The CIA lied (and continues to lie) about debriefing Oswald when he
returned.
3. The CIA lied, claiming that they retained no photos of Oswald in
Mexico City.
4. The CIA lied, claiming that they retained no wiretap recordings of
Oswald when he was in M.C.
Didn't you ever wonder why Oswald almost broke into tears when he was
told he couldn't have a 4 day visa to Cuba, while on his way to Russia?
Do you think he was just broken hearted about not getting to play
tourist?
Or do you suppose it is a tad more than coincidence that at that same
time, the CIA was frustrated out of their minds over their inability to
kill Castro?
Do you think, after failing at everything from poison cigars to
exploding seashells they just might have been ready to try anything -
even sending in a crazy, wannabe spy and fanatical anti-communist like
Oswald?
And if they approved him going in, do you also suppose they would do
everything in their power to coverup his actions there - especially
after the assassination?
>
> >>> "He had seen a fake photo that seemed to show him with the alleged murder
> >>> weapon in his hands." <<<
>
> Oz had a memory problem too (evidently). Seeing as how he SIGNED ("To
> George") one of the SAME BATCH of B.Y. photos....they cannot be
> "fake", now can they?
Of course Oswald made those photos. At a time when most American
communists kept a low profile Oswald was FLAUNTING his supposed,
communism, everywhere.
He tried to make Robert his publicity agent, David. He practically
begged him to report to the press anything and everything, that painted
him as a commie.
He used that phony legend to literally destroy the FPCC, which was out
of business within 90 days of that phony debate, and he tried to poison
the ACLU the same way, pretending on his PO box application that he was
working for them.
Fortunately, he only checked out the CORE, though there is no doubt what
he and Ferrie had in mind.
Back then, linking any organization to communism was the equivalent of
linking them to Al Quaeda today. It gave the FBI the go-ahead to proceed
with ballbats in hand.
And each of those three groups was at the very top of JEH's hit list,
David.
Oh, btw, do you remember who he called first when he was tossed in jail,
after the Canal St incident that he prophesized to the FPCC, several
days before it happened?
Was it his lawyer, David? His wife??
I won't tell you who it was David, but their name was a three letter
acronym. Any ideas?
To top that off, you should take a trip down memory lane sometime and
look at some of the more than 10,000 posts by mcadams and his fellow
goons, attacking Ray and Mary La Fontaine, who wrote an article for the
Washington Post and a book, on the subject of John Elrod.
Elrod was an alcoholic who briefly shared a cellblock with Oswald on
11/22/63 and overheard him talking to FBI people (he called them
"suits"), about a weapons heist that the feds busted.
Click on the link at my website entitled, "The Fourth Tramp".
Think about some of that David, and then think about those looney "There
is noooo evidence.." rants from your hero:-)
Robert Harris
David Von Pein
>>> "David, you should spend some time watching the PBS documentary on Oswald." <<<
I have. Several times. The 1993 "WHO WAS LEE HARVEY OSWALD?"
documentary is very good indeed.
More:
www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/oswald
>>> "1. Oswald had nowhere near enough money to pay for his trip to Russia." <<<
You are quite obviously dead-wrong about this, since Oswald paid
$220.75 for a one-way trip to Russia on September 17, 1959:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/html/WH_Vol26_0033a.htm
Oswald was a frugal penny-pinching miser (by all accounts). There's no
reason whatsoever why he couldn't have saved up $220.75 during his 3-
year Marine hitch. And, obviously, he did just that.
>>> "2. The CIA lied (and continues to lie) about debriefing Oswald when he returned." <<<
S.O.P. for Central Intelligence, it would appear. Vince Bugliosi
possibly sums up the CIA best in the Endnotes for his JFK book:
"The CIA had nothing to hide in thousands of previous documents
the agency initially refused to release voluntarily but ultimately did
release under court order. The CIA specializes in always acting
guilty, even when it is not, and always being, from a public relations
standpoint, its own worst enemy." -- VB
>>> "3. The CIA lied, claiming that they retained no photos of Oswald in Mexico City." <<<
The following VB quote probably doesn't apply to this point, but I'll
repeat it again anyway:
"The CIA specializes in always acting guilty, even when it is
not, and always being, from a public relations standpoint, its own
worst enemy." -- VB
>>> "4. The CIA lied, claiming that they retained no wiretap recordings of Oswald when he was in M.C." <<<
The following VB quote probably doesn't apply to this point, but I'll
repeat it again anyway:
"The CIA specializes in always acting guilty, even when it is
not, and always being, from a public relations standpoint, its own
worst enemy." -- VB
>>> "Didn't you ever wonder why Oswald almost broke into tears when he was told he couldn't have a 4 day visa to Cuba, while on his way to Russia? Do you think he was just broken hearted about not getting to play tourist?" <<<
Yeah, prob'ly.
Anyway, any explanation for this supposed 'crying jag' of Oswald's put
forth by Bob Harris will undoubtedly be filled with pure speculation
and conjecture and ZERO pieces of hard evidence to back it up.
So, what difference does it really make? You'd never believe any kind
of ordinary or innocuous explanation for ANYTHING Oswald (or the CIA)
did from 1959 through 1963 anyway.
David Von Pein
>>> "Davey isn't hawking the book {"RECLAIMING HISTORY: THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY" BY EX-LAWYER VINCENT T. BUGLIOSI, ESQ.; c.2007; PUBLISHED BY W.W. NORTON & CO., INC.,} any longer." <<<
Like hell I'm not. I plug it every chance I get. It's the best JFK
book ever written (of course).
You don't think I make this kind of money by merely talking to drugged-
out morons like you, do you, Mr. Healy?
Come now my good man! Let's be sensible!
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/3200858-post.html
http://blog.myspace.com/davidvp1961
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4d0e813277d5baa0
http://www.ReclaimingHistory.com
Robert Harris
<97c36dd2-dced-4201...@n75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>> "David, you should spend some time watching the PBS documentary on
> >>> Oswald." <<<
>
>
> I have. Several times. The 1993 "WHO WAS LEE HARVEY OSWALD?"
> documentary is very good indeed.
>
> More:
>
> www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/oswald
>
>
>
> >>> "1. Oswald had nowhere near enough money to pay for his trip to Russia."
> >>> <<<
>
>
> You are quite obviously dead-wrong about this, since Oswald paid
> $220.75 for a one-way trip to Russia on September 17, 1959:
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/html/WH_Vol26_0033a.htm
That was ONLY the initial trip. He went to Europe and then back to
England and then to Finland and then by train to Russia, where he paid
for "deluxe class" accommodations and his own personal guide.
"Oswald's route to Moscow was complicated. He journeyed from New Orleans
to Europe, where he moved quickly from France to England, then to
Finland. Helsinki was one of the few cities in the world where an
American could get a visa to Russia on short notice. From there, Oswald
boarded a train for Moscow.
Where did he get the money for his extensive travels? He later claimed
he had saved over $1,000 while in the Marines, but records show he had
only $200 in his bank account. As a deluxe-class tourist Oswald received
the personal attention of his own Intourist guide, Rimma Shirokova. "
>
>
> Oswald was a frugal penny-pinching miser
You got that right.
He would NEVER have paid for deluxe class and a personal guide and he
would NEVER have went to Europe, then to England and then Finland.
And no-one EVER saw those tickets for the last legs of his trip (prior
to taking the train).
Back in my Navy days, I used to hop military flights now and then David.
You might have to go the long way, but it's hard to beat FREE and you
didn't have to bother with tickets.
So, tell me. How did he make that trip, including all the amenities on
his last $200, David?
> (by all accounts). There's no
> reason whatsoever why he couldn't have saved up $220.75 during his 3-
> year Marine hitch. And, obviously, he did just that.
>
>
>
> >>> "2. The CIA lied (and continues to lie) about debriefing Oswald when he
> >>> returned." <<<
>
>
> S.O.P. for Central Intelligence, it would appear. Vince Bugliosi
> possibly sums up the CIA best in the Endnotes for his JFK book:
>
> "The CIA had nothing to hide in thousands of previous documents
> the agency initially refused to release voluntarily but ultimately did
> release under court order. The CIA specializes in always acting
> guilty, even when it is not, and always being, from a public relations
> standpoint, its own worst enemy." -- VB
Utter nonsense. It was their job to debrief people like that. Why would
they need to hide the fact that they did what they were supposed to do?
>
>
>
> >>> "3. The CIA lied, claiming that they retained no photos of Oswald in
> >>> Mexico City." <<<
>
>
> The following VB quote probably doesn't apply to this point, but I'll
> repeat it again anyway:
>
>
>
> "The CIA specializes in always acting guilty, even when it is
> not, and always being, from a public relations standpoint, its own
> worst enemy." -- VB
Bugliosi is just another lame apologist and his claims are not grounded
in reality.
Yes, they were supposed to maintain high security and keep secrets, but
NOT from their own government.
Withholding critical evidence in a case of this magnitude is considered
obstruction of justice David, and borders on treason, especially if a
foreign government had been involved.
It's just way to pat, say, "Oh them CIA boys, will be boys, hehe".
That doesn't work when the POTUS has been murdered. Tell me David, why
didn't the CIA coverup information about the pilots of the 9/11 planes
and refuse to divulge it to the FBI??
I mean, if that's just the way they are, why didn't they hide THAT
information?
David, can you think of a single case in which the CIA withheld
information from all other govt agency unless they WERE up to no good?
Take your time, David.
>
>
> >>> "4. The CIA lied, claiming that they retained no wiretap recordings of
> >>> Oswald when he was in M.C." <<<
>
> The following VB quote probably doesn't apply to this point,
You got that right:-)
> but I'll
> repeat it again anyway:
>
>
> "The CIA specializes in always acting guilty, even when it is
> not, and always being, from a public relations standpoint, its own
> worst enemy." -- VB
>
>
>
> >>> "Didn't you ever wonder why Oswald almost broke into tears when he was
> >>> told he couldn't have a 4 day visa to Cuba, while on his way to Russia?
> >>> Do you think he was just broken hearted about not getting to play
> >>> tourist?" <<<
>
>
> Yeah, prob'ly.
>
> Anyway, any explanation for this supposed 'crying jag' of Oswald's put
> forth by Bob Harris will undoubtedly be filled with pure speculation
> and conjecture and ZERO pieces of hard evidence to back it up.
I thought you said you saw that documentary, David:-)
"Ms. DURAN : Well, then I explain and then he got, in that moment -- he
couldn't believe what I was saying and he said, "But that's impossible.
I have to go to Cuba right now because I don't -- I only have a
permission of three or four days in Mexico City, so I have to go." I
thought that in a moment he will be crying because his eyes -- he was
very excited. He was very red and his eyes is like with -- well, with
bright, shining, like he was in tears"
Do you get a feeling of deja vu here, David?
Like when Oswald tried to kill himself because he was not going to be
able to apply to the Patrice Lumumba University in Moscow, which was THE
biggest training center in the world at the time, for communist
terrorists and revolutionaries?
Read about that school in Wikipedia, David and you tell me how badly the
CIA and military intelligence would have wanted information about the
place.
>
> So, what difference does it really make? You'd never believe any kind
> of ordinary or innocuous explanation for ANYTHING Oswald (or the CIA)
> did from 1959 through 1963 anyway.
Sure I would, if it made even a shred of sense.
But claiming that it's perfectly normal for the CIA to coverup evidence
about a Presidential assassin is just an insult to our intelligence.
Did you see the part about "I led three lives" David?
That's always been presented as evidence that Oswald was on some kind of
fantasy trip. But what nobody ever mentions is that the show was not at
all, a fantasy. It was billed as based on the real life of Herbert
Philbrick - one of the most fanatical anti-communists who ever lived,
who for NINE years convinced his wife and all his friends that he was a
communist, while he infiltrated a communist group in boston.
Each episode had to be personally approved by J Edgar Hoover, David.
Philbrick was a national hero in 1952, after testifying against those
same commies and helping to get several of them sent to prison.
In 1953, he published a book about his adventures, followed by a hit
movie and the television series that Lee became obsessed with.
1953 is also the year that LHO did something he had never done before.
He went to school and told the teacher that he refused to salute the
American flag - obviously trying to look like a commie - just like
Philbrick.
As Philbrick's fans all knew, he started his career as a teenager,
joining the "Young Communists League".
In '56 Lee wrote a letter to the "Young Socialists League", obviously
mimicking Philbrick and pretending to be a communist, as he would
continue to do for the rest of his short life.
The point?
Just that LHO was a fanatical ANTI-communist David. After he left
Russia, he used his phony legend like a wrecking ball, trying to do in
the FBI's most despised enemies.
I think he used that same tactic to kill two birds with one stone, David
- get that pinko Kennedy and make everybody think Castro was behind it,
so that we finally give Fidel his comeupance.
He intended to martyr himself and he did. He just didn't count on LBJ
wimping out over fears about WWIII.
But he didn't do it alone, David. Perhaps he could have, but he didn't,
though he was very likely, the one who fired the fatal shot.
Robert Harris
David Von Pein
>>> "Where did he {LHO} get the money for his extensive travels? He later claimed he had saved over $1,000 while in the Marines, but records show he had only $200 in his bank account. So, tell me. How did he make that trip, including all the amenities on his last $200, David?" <<<
And if I can't tell you exactly where and how Lee Oswald obtained the
money to travel to Russia (by way of Europe) in 1959, then you get to
believe in crazy, kooky pro-conspiracy stuff -- right Bob?
And then I'm supposed to follow suit and start believing that all of
the "Lone Assassin" evidence that's currently in existence that tells
a reasonable person that Oswald did, in fact, act alone on 11/22/63 is
all wrong, faked, planted, manipulated, or what-have-you? Is that
about it, Robert?
Oswald's extra cash in 1959 (FOUR YEARS PRIOR TO THE ASSASSINATION)
somehow equals "A CIA-Backed Conspiracy To Murder John Kennedy In
November 1963"?
Is that about the size of the situation, Bob?
Sorry, Bob, I'm not going down that road. You can travel down that
murky avenue by yourself (and with the other conspiracy kooks like
you).
>>> "Bugliosi is just another lame apologist and his claims are not grounded in reality." <<<
Yeah, sure. But Jim Garrison, Mark Lane, and their ilk ARE "grounded
in reality"....right Bob?
(Geez.)
>>> "Yes, they {the CIA} were supposed to maintain high security and keep secrets, but NOT from their own government." <<<
Says who? You?
Is that your own CIA rule, Bob?
Americans aren't supposed to shoot their own Presidents either. But
American Oswald did just that.
(Not the perfect analogy. But it's getting late in the day....so it'll
have to do for now.) ;)
>>> "David, can you think of a single case in which the CIA withheld information from all other govt. agencies unless they WERE up to no good? Take your time, David." <<<
Why don't you, Bob, go about the task of PROVING that anything that
was "withheld" by the CIA from Government agencies surrounding the JFK
murder was important and critical information that was absolutely
needed in order to answer the $64,000 inquiry -- "Did LHO Act Alone?"
Can you do that, Bob?
>>> "I thought you said you saw that documentary {"Who Was LHO?"}, David." <<<
I have seen it. Multiple times. I just interpret things a little
differently than you....such as Duran's comments, which mean zilch
when it comes to proving that Oswald was involved with the CIA or was
part of a multi-person plot to kill JFK in '63.
But if you want to make that large-sized leap of faith -- feel free to
make that jump. (But watch out for the hard landing.)
>>> "But claiming that it's perfectly normal for the CIA to coverup evidence about a Presidential assassin is just an insult to our intelligence." <<<
And what things did the CIA "cover up" about Lee Harvey Oswald that,
if fully revealed to the Warren Commission in 1963-1964, would have
completely changed the Commission's "Lone Assassin" conclusion?
Take your time, Bob.
>>> "LHO was a fanatical ANTI-communist, David." <<<
Oh goodie! Another example of a conspiracy kook turning the evidence
upside-down and inside-out!
IOW -- It's the good ol' "NOTHING AND NOBODY ARE EVER WHAT IT/THEY
SEEM TO BE" motto coming to the forefront once again.
E.G.:
1.) Lee Harvey Oswald, by all accounts, certainly seems to be a
Communist sympathizer. So, per Mr. Harris, he's actually exactly the
opposite.
2.) Oswald acted like a lone assassin in every single respect both
before and after 12:30 PM on 11/22/63 (and the physical/ballistics
evidence bears out this fact as well).
So, per most CTers, exactly the opposite is true (i.e., Oswald was
either a completely-innocent patsy or he was working in concert with
other assassins/conspirators).
3.) Jack Ruby's actions on 11/24/63 were obviously the actions of a
man who was not "stalking" his prey (Oswald) and were the actions of a
man who shot LHO on the spur of the moment, being aided by nothing
except garden-variety happenstance, sheer luck, and impeccable
basement-entering timing.
But, per most CTers, exactly the opposite is true, with Ruby working
for the Mob or the DPD in order to "silence" the "patsy".
4.) All of the physical and ballistics and medical evidence in the
case shows (undeniably) that President Kennedy was shot ONLY FROM
BEHIND (and by only TWO bullets).
But the CTers believe something else again....with the conspiracists
saying that JFK had holes in his head and body that totally contradict
the autopsy findings AND the authenticated photographs.
(Go figure.)
Has there EVER been another murder case in the history of mankind
where virtually EVERY single thing and every single hunk of official,
verified evidence has been second-guessed and turned on its head by a
crowd of conspiracy-seekers?
The O.J. trial might come to mind. But even that trial's evidence
hasn't been mangled as badly as the proven-to-be-factual (and LN-
leaning) evidence that has been misrepresented by conspiracy lovers in
the JFK murder case (and the J.D. Tippit case as well, which has had
its evidence completely skewed by CT morons too, without a doubt).
LET'S ALL NOW BASK IN ROBERT HARRIS' POST-ENDING SALVO OF ABSURDITIES
REGARDING LEE H. OSWALD (PLEASE HOLD ALL LAUGHTER UNTIL BOB FINISHES
SPOUTING HIS TRIPE):
>>> "After he {Oswald} left Russia, he used his phony {Communist sympathizer} legend like a wrecking ball, trying to do in the FBI's most despised enemies. I think he used that same tactic to kill two birds with one stone, David - get that pinko Kennedy and make everybody think Castro was behind it, so that we finally give Fidel his comeupance. He intended to martyr himself and he did. He just didn't count on LBJ wimping out over fears about WWIII. But he didn't do it alone, David. Perhaps he could have, but he didn't, though he was very likely, the one who fired the fatal shot." <<<
Okay, we've all held it in long enough --- let the laughter commence.
===========================
===========================
Robert Harris
<ac65160a-c48c-4b7a...@34g2000hsz.googlegroups.com>,
David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/297fe88ba265a595/
> 7acedf50739b5ced?#7acedf50739b5ced
>
>
> >>> "Where did he {LHO} get the money for his extensive travels? He later
> >>> claimed he had saved over $1,000 while in the Marines, but records show
> >>> he had only $200 in his bank account. So, tell me. How did he make that
> >>> trip, including all the amenities on his last $200, David?" <<<
>
>
> And if I can't tell you exactly where and how Lee Oswald obtained the
> money to travel to Russia (by way of Europe) in 1959, then you get to
> believe in crazy, kooky pro-conspiracy stuff -- right Bob?
David, there is no cause and effect between your inability to explain
Oswald's actions and my beliefs.
And why do you call this "crazy, kooky", when you must know that during
the cold war, US intelligence sent a small army of people into Russia to
get information? And ex-military types were ideal candidates for the
job.
You seem to want to make every argument against you into a UFO abduction
case, so that you can ridicule it, David. But the things Oswald did
then, were very, very common.
Why do you think the KGB refused to let him in Lumumba U?
And did you see the part where the KBG examined the records from when
they watched LHO's every move and reported that Oswald NEVER read any
Marxist literature, and NEVER went to the party meetings?
He probably should have to maintain his cover, but he hated communism
and probably couldn't stomach being that close to it.
>
> And then I'm supposed to follow suit and start believing that all of
> the "Lone Assassin" evidence that's currently in existence that tells
> a reasonable person that Oswald did, in fact, act alone on 11/22/63 is
> all wrong, faked, planted, manipulated, or what-have-you? Is that
> about it, Robert?
David, we've been her before.
You know damned well, that there is NO evidence that proves Oswald acted
alone, and truckloads that proves there were other shooters.
I know it's not easy, but LOOK at this video again. Be objective. You
CANNOT remain honest and come up with a plausible alternative
explanation, David. It can't be done.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql6VqZDiC6s
>
> Oswald's extra cash in 1959 (FOUR YEARS PRIOR TO THE ASSASSINATION)
> somehow equals "A CIA-Backed Conspiracy To Murder John Kennedy In
> November 1963"?
Why are you creating a straw man, David?
I did NOT say the CIA was behind JFK's assassination. If you want to
know the truth, I just don't know. But it kinda pisses me off that the
people with the resources to answer that question, bailed out on us.
FWIW, of course I don't think "the CIA" was involved. But individuals
who were in the CIA, might have.
>
> Is that about the size of the situation, Bob?
No, there's quite a bit more to the story, which I'm sure you will be
eager to butcher, when the opportunity presents itself:-)
>
>
>
> Sorry, Bob, I'm not going down that road. You can travel down that
> murky avenue by yourself (and with the other conspiracy kooks like
> you).
Good idea, David. I won't either - unless of course, the evidence drags
me in that direction.
>
>
> >>> "Bugliosi is just another lame apologist and his claims are not grounded
> >>> in reality." <<<
>
>
> Yeah, sure. But Jim Garrison, Mark Lane, and their ilk ARE "grounded
> in reality"....right Bob?
You still aren't getting it, are you David?
If you listed the top 50 areas of contention between you and the typical
conspiracy advocate, I would probably take your side on 40 of them.
In fact, I think that the conspiracy community has done nearly as much
as you guys have, to impede a resolution to this crime - in some ways,
more.
>
> (Geez.)
>
>
>
> >>> "Yes, they {the CIA} were supposed to maintain high security and keep
> >>> secrets, but NOT from their own government." <<<
>
>
> Says who? You?
>
> Is that your own CIA rule, Bob?
David, are you really going to make me cite their charter?
>
>
> Americans aren't supposed to shoot their own Presidents either. But
> American Oswald did just that.
>
>
> (Not the perfect analogy. But it's getting late in the day....so it'll
> have to do for now.) ;)
>
>
>
> >>> "David, can you think of a single case in which the CIA withheld
> >>> information from all other govt. agencies unless they WERE up to no good?
> >>> Take your time, David." <<<
>
>
>
> Why don't you, Bob, go about the task of PROVING that anything that
> was "withheld" by the CIA from Government agencies surrounding the JFK
> murder was important and critical information that was absolutely
> needed in order to answer the $64,000 inquiry -- "Did LHO Act Alone?"
>
> Can you do that, Bob?
Sorry David, you have the burden of proof. The issue on the table is
your/Bugy's claim that it is perfectly normal for the CIA to hide
criminal evidence from all other branches of the federal government.
If you cannot show us even a single example of such a thing, then you
need to admit that Bugsy is FOS.
Robert Harris
Bud
Bob Harris wrote:
> In article
> <741e3eeb-b052-4868...@n58g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
> David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > "GREATEST KOOK-BASHING HITS REVISITED" (PART 84, or thereabouts):
> >
> >
> > IN THE ASYLUM....ONE YEAR AGO TODAY....
> >
> > ==========================================================
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/e089ee8b738cad76
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >>> "By Saturday afternoon, Lee {AKA: THE SAINT BOYS LOVE TO ADMIRE} had
> > >>> started to come to grips with the fact that his handler and his agency
> > >>> had abandoned him." <<<
> >
> > Connected with Ringling Brothers perhaps?
> >
> > And Oswald had his own "agency" now, eh?
>
> OHMIGOD!!
>
> David, tell me that you really do know what "agency" he was talking
> about?
>
> What do you gain by pretending to be ignorant of what every other member
> of this newsgroups immediately gets.
>
>
> > He was smarter than we all
> > thought. I always pictured him as a member of a 1-member FPCC chapter.
>
> David, you should spend some time watching the PBS documentary on
> Oswald. In spite of using consultants like Posner, they discovered that:
>
> 1. Oswald had nowhere near enough money to pay for his trip to Russia.
Yet he had enough money to pay his way to Russia.
> 2. The CIA lied (and continues to lie) about debriefing Oswald when he
> returned.
Depends on who you believe. Can you produce the reports of that
devriefing?
Certainly if we can`t "prove" Oswald was a shooter with the
physical evidence available, we can`t draw conclusion where the
evidence is absent.
> 3. The CIA lied, claiming that they retained no photos of Oswald in
> Mexico City.
Depends on who you believe. Can you produce those photos?
Certainly if we can`t "prove" Oswald was a shooter with the
physical evidence available, we can`t draw conclusions where the
evidence is absent.
> 4. The CIA lied, claiming that they retained no wiretap recordings of
> Oswald when he was in M.C.
Depends on who you believe. Can you produce thiose wiretaps?
Certainly if you can`t "prove" Oswald was a shooter with the
physical evidence available, we can`t draw conclusions where the
physical evidence is absent.
> Didn't you ever wonder why Oswald almost broke into tears when he was
> told he couldn't have a 4 day visa to Cuba, while on his way to Russia?
Read what Nelson Delgado had to say about Oz`s love of Castro and
his revolution.
> Do you think he was just broken hearted about not getting to play
> tourist?
He wanted to see the workers paradise the revolution produced. Like
with Russia, the reality would have been different than he pictured
it.
> Or do you suppose it is a tad more than coincidence that at that same
> time, the CIA was frustrated out of their minds over their inability to
> kill Castro?
Oz loved Castro. Wanted to have his baby.
> Do you think, after failing at everything from poison cigars to
> exploding seashells they just might have been ready to try anything -
How much of that was actually tried?
> even sending in a crazy, wannabe spy and fanatical anti-communist like
> Oswald?
<snicker> Harris uses fallacious thinking to try to make his stupid
idea seem credible. "I wouldn`t put it past them" isn`t going to
establish anything.
> And if they approved him going in, do you also suppose they would do
> everything in their power to coverup his actions there - especially
> after the assassination?
Paranoid delusions. You know what "they" would do because you have
yourself concinved you "know" how they think.
> > >>> "He had seen a fake photo that seemed to show him with the alleged murder
> > >>> weapon in his hands." <<<
> >
> > Oz had a memory problem too (evidently). Seeing as how he SIGNED ("To
> > George") one of the SAME BATCH of B.Y. photos....they cannot be
> > "fake", now can they?
>
>
> Of course Oswald made those photos. At a time when most American
> communists kept a low profile Oswald was FLAUNTING his supposed,
> communism, everywhere.
Typical kook approach, use his expectations to justify his
suspicions. Oswald, acting according to his beliefs and his
personality was an individual, a hard animal to peg. Wouldn`t joining
and attending commie functions establish his commie creditials? Why
didn`t he go this route? Could be that Oz the commie loner wasn`t
interested in that path?
> He tried to make Robert his publicity agent, David. He practically
> begged him to report to the press anything and everything, that painted
> him as a commie.
Yah, he did want his actions publicized, to be seen as useful to
the cause. But to be helpful, not harmful, to Castro and the
revolution.
> He used that phony legend to literally destroy the FPCC, which was out
> of business within 90 days of that phony debate, and he tried to poison
> the ACLU the same way, pretending on his PO box application that he was
> working for them.
Kooks, seperating the wheat from the chaffe, carefuly select all
the chafe as disirable.
> Fortunately, he only checked out the CORE, though there is no doubt what
> he and Ferrie had in mind.
<snicker> "no doubt".
> Back then, linking any organization to communism was the equivalent of
> linking them to Al Quaeda today. It gave the FBI the go-ahead to proceed
> with ballbats in hand.
>
> And each of those three groups was at the very top of JEH's hit list,
> David.
>
> Oh, btw, do you remember who he called first when he was tossed in jail,
> after the Canal St incident that he prophesized to the FPCC, several
> days before it happened?
>
> Was it his lawyer, David? His wife??
>
> I won't tell you who it was David, but their name was a three letter
> acronym. Any ideas?
>
>
> To top that off, you should take a trip down memory lane sometime and
> look at some of the more than 10,000 posts by mcadams and his fellow
> goons, attacking Ray and Mary La Fontaine, who wrote an article for the
> Washington Post and a book, on the subject of John Elrod.
>
> Elrod was an alcoholic who briefly shared a cellblock with Oswald on
> 11/22/63 and overheard him talking to FBI people (he called them
> "suits"), about a weapons heist that the feds busted.
>
> Click on the link at my website entitled, "The Fourth Tramp".
>
> Think about some of that David, and then think about those looney "There
> is noooo evidence.." rants from your hero:-)
After all these years, kooks are still trying to support elephants
with toothpicks.
aeffects
one needs read no further.... you're an idiot Dudster.... even a first
year student of the assassination understands that....
.john where the hell is the Lone Nut varsity...? Simkin's forum?