(PART 198)


>>> "Actually there is No (none, zero) physical evidence that shows Oswald to be guilty. There are a couple of items of physical evidence that SEEM to be incriminating....but NONE that show him to be guilty." <<<


That's because Walt looks at this case through Kook Glasses.

Anybody who has looked at this case thoroughly who can utter the
absurd comment Walt just spewed should start looking into another
murder case...because it's pretty obvious that he's getting noplace
(fast) with his JFK "investigation".

>>> "The ONLY thing that comes to mind as incriminating is his staying in the lunchroom while 99% of the people in the building went outside to see the President pass by. As far as I've been able to determine Oswald was one of two men who claimed he did not see the President pass by and showed no interest in watching the President pass by. (The Altgen's [sic] photo "may" show that Oswald was lying about having no interest in seeing JFK pass by)." <<<

~~LOL uproar~~

Out of all the many items on the huge laundry list of stuff that Walt
could have chosen (such as the bullets, the gun, the shells, the
fingerprints, the paper bag, the fibers, the Thursday trip to Irving,
the Tippit "encounter", the Texas Theater scuffle and attempted murder
of more policemen, etc.)...Walt decides that the ONLY thing that even
remotely points (in any way!) to Lee Oswald's guilt is the fact that
LHO (per Walt's skewed CT version of things, which, of course, is
being based on Oswald's own lies) didn't have any desire to go outside
and see JFK on November 22.

~~Additional LOL uproar required here~~

And then we get a tired, worn-out theory being propped up (at least
partially) by Walt The Idiot -- The Doorway Man crappola once more.

Keep going Walt....you'll probably have Oswald 500 miles from Dealey
Plaza pretty soon. Such is your fantasy-prone mind.

>>> "If Oswald did NOT go to the step to the front door for 30 seconds when JFK passed by and did in fact remain in the lunchroom, then that action is unnatural and somewhat suspictious [sic]." <<<

But the fact that Oswald was SEEN pulling the trigger from the sixth
floor isn't to be considered "suspicious", is it Walt?

Not to mention the later murder that Oz committed on Tenth Street,
which SHOULD make anybody think twice about wanting to exonerate
LHO for JFK's slaying...but to kooks like Walt, THAT murder too must
not have ANY evidence linking Oswald to it at all. Right, Mr. Kook?

And the fact that the sixth floor was literally littered with "OSWALD
type of evidence isn't to be considered a clue
as to who did it either. Is it, Walter?

Is it any wonder why Walt has been stuck in the mud for decades when
it comes to figuring out who committed these crimes?

BTW, Walt, if Oswald was on the steps at 12:30, what's your
explanation for him going BACK INTO the Depository and up one flight
to the second floor to buy a Coke within 2 minutes of just having
witnessed the President being shot (with Oswald being "Doorway Man"
per this nutsville theory that even Mr. Garrison was still trying to
push as late as 1967, three years after the whole matter was cleared
up by Billy Lovelady's Warren Commission testimony)?

Doesn't it seem a tad odd to want to leave the scene of this murder
(which occurred literally just a few seconds earlier) and go back
inside to get a Coke at that precise moment in time? Or maybe some
CTers now want to invent another theory and say that LHO wasn't
encountered on the second floor by Baker, Truly, and Reid at all on
November 22nd.

Maybe a CTer has purported such a fantasy theory, I'm not sure. But it
sure sounds like something Walt might be able to embrace too. After
all, when you live in a world of fairy tales and never-could-have-
happened "Patsy Plots" all your adult life, it's probably fairly easy
to adjust to pretty much ANY additional hunk of CT tripe that comes
along (like John Armstrong's "multiple Oswalds", for example).

>>> "However the other man, Jack Dougherty, who claimed he didn't see JFK as he passed by was much nearer the sixth floor when Baker and Truly encountered him just seconds after the shooting. Why wasn't Dougherty considered equally suspect?" <<<

Could it possibly be because it wasn't Dougherty's gun and shells
found on the sixth floor?

And it wasn't Dougherty's prints that were all over stuff in the SN
(bag, boxes) where the killer was located.

And it wasn't Dougherty who was SEEN pulling the trigger at 12:30.

It was Oswald who fits into all those above niches....the same "patsy"
whom Walt The Mega-Kook just made this asinine statement about ---
"There is no physical evidence that shows Oswald to be guilty."

Sounds like Walt and Robby [Caprio] have been comparing kook notes.

David Von Pein
April 20, 2008