GIANMARCO MANZIONE SAID:
>>> "Your adamant refusal to consider the alternative perspectives
of sources other than your one "bible" [i.e., Vincent Bugliosi's
"Reclaiming History"]..." <<<
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Oh, I've considered several other "sources". And they all pale by comparison to Bugliosi's tome; or to Gerald Posner's; or to Larry Sturdivan's excellent book,
"The JFK Myths"; or to Dale Myers' equally-as-compelling "With Malice".
All of these publications I've mentioned are rooted in one very important thing -- the REAL EVIDENCE in the JFK and J.D. Tippit murder cases. And the 888-page Warren Commission Report is rooted firmly on that same turf. Like it or not.
GIANMARCO MANZIONE SAID:
>>> "...relegates you to the realm of the jesters who see only black or white about what happened that day in Dallas--whether a conspiracy or the SBT--and flaunt their feathers like peacocks in heat at anyone who dares to consider the potential for a gray area." <<<
DAVID VON PEIN THEN UTTERED:
Nice prose. But it's not changing the fact that every scrap of evidence leads to one wife-beating Marxist loner named "Lee".
And to believe that all (or ANY) of the evidence on the table has been covertly "planted" or manufactured is an extraordinary belief that requires some equally extraordinary proof. (Wouldn't you agree?)
And that proof is.....?
(I won't hold my breath waiting for it.)
GIANMARCO MANZIONE SAID:
>>> "To say that the WCR is rife with fiction is not to wholly endorse the theories of the so-called conspiracy crowd; it is merely to open your eyes, and this report is worthless as a credible explanation of the events of 11/22/63." <<<
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Come up with anything else that's more credible (and, just as important, more reasonable). To date, not a thing has come even remotely close.
In fact, the silly unsupportable theories being spewed 24/7 by the conspiracy theorists of the world have made the "Lone Nut" conclusion seem all the more valid, reasonable, doable, and plausible....due to the sheer absurdity of nearly all of the "plots" that have been tossed up against the wall (including Oliver Stone's and Jim Garrison's "3-Gun, 1-Patsy" laughfest).
The only conspiracy plot that's even remotely possible (given the evidence) is one that has Lee Harvey Oswald as a lone gunman in Dealey Plaza (and on Tenth Street for Tippit's murder) and an unseen, non-shooting "plotter(s)" that we currently have no knowledge of (and never will after 44 years, that's pretty much a certainty).
But even that kind of smaller "Oswald And One Other Guy Who Never Fired A Shot" conspiracy scenario is very unlikely, given the type of person Lee Oswald was. He was very much a loner. He shot at General Walker by himself, with no outside conspirators aiding him. And he very likely did the same on November 22nd, 1963.
Plus: If Oswald had had help from a friend, then where the heck was this friend when Lee Harvey needed him the most -- at 12:33 PM on 11/22/63 when Oswald was leaving the Book Depository after having just shot the President?
In that type of hypothetical smaller plot, are we to believe that the other plotter(s) just simply got cold feet and abandoned their pal named Lee when the big moment arrived on November 22nd? That's possible, I suppose....but I'd rather stick with the facts. And those facts (including Oswald's own post-assassination actions, which reek with guilt) undeniably spell out "OSWALD'S ON HIS OWN".
David Von Pein
November 2007
LINK TO ORIGINAL POST (NOVEMBER 16, 2007)
