BUD (SPEAKING TO A CONSPIRACY THEORIST NAMED DON WILLIS) SAID:
Unless you can get evidential support from the actual people, you are wasting your time trying to support a fantastic idea like "everyone was out to get Oswald" using the kook approach you, Walt and Gil try.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
And, Bud, unfortunately (and somewhat incredibly), such retarded and idiotic "The World Vs. The Patsy" thinking isn't just limited to the fabulously stupid batch of conspiracy kooks we deal with daily here in this acj asylum. No. That type of unbelievably silly thinking has been adopted by people in higher places than here at the acj warehouse -- such as the late D.A. in New Orleans, Mr. Garrison.
Plus, there are people like influential filmmaker Oliver Stone. He has to fall into the "The World Was Out To Get Oswald" category too. Plus many authors of best-selling conspiracy books as well.
Jim Garrison, late in his life in 1988, actually had the monster-sized balls to utter the following bullshit on the cable-TV mini-series that all CT-Kooks just seem to love -- the putrid "The Men Who Killed Kennedy":
"Lee Oswald was totally, unequivocally, completely innocent of the assassination...and the fact that history, or in the re-writing of history, disinformation has made a villain out of this young man who wanted nothing more than to be a fine Marine...is in some ways the greatest injustice of all." -- Jim Garrison
After reading such tripe coming from a person who should certainly have known better, I can only shake my head as I reach for the barf bag.
Addendum.....
I had a thought cross my mind just yesterday that I don't think had ever really occurred to me before (at least not in this exact context). I was thinking how virtually impossible it would be for Lee Harvey Oswald to be the kind of innocent "patsy" that so many conspiracy theorists paint Oswald to be....from the following standpoint:
If Lee Oswald was truly the completely innocent patsy that many CTers think he actually was in November 1963 (i.e., he didn't fire any shots at JFK, and he also didn't shoot Officer J.D. Tippit), then this would also have to mean (by definition) that BOTH of the official U.S. Government organizations that were specifically assigned the task of getting to the bottom of the assassination and finding out who killed JFK and Officer Tippit (the Warren Commission and the HSCA)--incredibly--BOTH blew it!
Via such an "Innocent Patsy" TRUTH, we'd have to actually buy into the notion that not only did the Warren Commission come to a completely WRONG conclusion about Oswald's guilt in both of those murders, but we'd also have to believe that a SECOND Government committee (the HSCA) came to the VERY SAME DEAD-WRONG CONCLUSION regarding Oswald's guilt in TWO murders!
Any idea what the odds might be of having both the WC and the HSCA (15 years apart) screwing up in such a bold, horrendous, and blatantly incorrect manner?
Does anybody here (except me) think that the chances of both of those organizations getting things ALL WRONG with respect to whether Oswald was guilty or innocent are probably pretty doggone small?
Will the CT retort be --- "The WC and the HSCA were filled with nothing but liars"?
Well, if that's the retort, it might be wise to ask a secondary question then:
What are the "They Were All Liars" odds?
David Von Pein
December 14, 2008
