(PART 651)


The mindset of a 22-year-old conspiracy kook on full display:


The link above [which is now only open to invited readers] provides a really good example of the distorted, skewed, and outright nutty "I BELIEVE ALL CONSPIRACY CRAP THAT'S EVER BEEN UNEARTHED SINCE 1963" mindset that so many conspiracy theorists seem to adhere to regarding the JFK murder case.

It's quite remarkable the number of people who have this same type of ultra-cynical "I Can Prove A Conspiracy, Despite The Lack Of Any HARD Evidence" attitude. And every time I hear one of these kooks open his yap, it makes me think how correct Vince Bugliosi was when he said this....

"One of the principal frailties in the thinking processes of the theorists is that they rarely ever carry their suspicions, which are based on some discrepancy, anomaly, or contradiction they find, to their logical conclusion. For them, if something looks suspicious, that's enough. Instead of asking, "Where does this go?"--that is, where does the discrepancy, contradiction, or whatever, lead them?--they immediately give their minds a breather and conclude that what they find is itself proof of a conspiracy (or proof that Oswald is innocent). The discrepancy or contradiction is the ENTIRE story. And being the entire story, it by itself discredits the entire twenty-six volumes of the Warren Commission. Nothing else has to be shown or even argued." -- V. Bugliosi

The 22-year-old person who wrote the blog linked above has the Kong-sized balls (but not a shred of hard evidence, of course) to spout the following hunk of garbage:

"[Bugliosi's] lies are so transparent that I, a 22-year-old on a computer, can refute them immediately. All of this is off the top of my head. I'm not alone either; as he acknowledges, 75% of the American people are having the same thought process as they read his condescending pablum."

The kook goes on to talk about every crazy conspiracy theory imaginable (including the Lifton-esque "body altering" fairy tale, which isn't too big on the "nutty" scale to deter that CTer; he'll go for any theory).

The 22-year-old whiz-CT-kid also says that it's his opinion that "very, very few conspiracy historians claim that Oswald fired any shots." That opinion is positively wrong, as a 2003 National poll shows (only 7% polled on the matter thought Oswald was NOT a shooter in Dealey Plaza).

It's true that a good-sized portion of conspiracy theorists who hang out at Internet forums are members of the "Anybody But Oswald" club. But the vast majority of Americans, as can be seen via the poll linked above, are not so stupid to think that Lee Oswald never fired a shot at Kennedy (or Tippit) in 1963.

I wonder what additional inane, unprovable theories that 22-year-old will believe in by the time he turns 50?

(~Shudders at the possibilities~)

You know you're deep into kook territory when all the proverbial theories are lumped into one small or medium-sized blog post. E.g., Kennedy's body was altered; Oswald was just a patsy and was framed; Oswald never fired a shot; no shots came from the rear (which is really, really crazy, but that's what that kook above proposes); the SBT, therefore, is bunk; the CIA was involved; the Warren Commission and ALL government entities "covered up" the assassination; Ruby rubbed out Oz as part of a plot; etc., etc. to CT infinity.

"Sublime silliness", as VB puts it. Sounds about right to me. Or, to be more blunt -- the kooks who believe ALL that shit are just plain nuts!


I kid you not, but I've heard one kook theory regarding JFK's assassination that says he was killed by the military because he was about to blow the lid on the Roswell Incident and reveal that our government had captured these martians and their craft and had "reverse engineered" some weapons systems we found.


And October 4th, 2007, will represent the 50th anniversary of Sputnik being launched by the Soviets. And Oswald was in the military in '57. And 2 years later he defected to the USSR, which launched Sputnik in '57.

Somebody look into this angle. I smell a Sputnik plot here. Oswald must have given the Russians some kind of "intelligence" so that they could launch the very first satellite before the U.S. could. Damn Soviets. Damn Oswald.

On a lighter note, 10/4/57 also marked the debut of one of the best family TV shows ever aired. Maybe "The Beaver" was in on the Sputnik plot too. Who can tell? He was only a lil' shaver in '57. But little boys can be "used" as patsies too, can't they? ;)

And remember, too, Abe Zapruder was born in Russia.

And the first "Leave It To Beaver" DVD set came out -- are you ready for this? -- on November 22, 2005! No way that's mere "coincidence". Not with the Sputnik/Oct. 4th tie-in in there too.

I'm melting from paranoia. Somebody get me Vince, quick. ;)


DVP, this kid [who wrote the blog linked earlier] can think for himself. You lone nutters have been competely brainwashed by Bugliosi, who has feet made of clay.


And if this is as good as that thinking gets, he needs someone to do his thinking for him.

The kooks are so afraid of Bug's book. If people become more knowledgeable about the case, the kook hold on public opinion will weaken.


Yeah...that's his main problem it would seem -- i.e., WAY too much "thinking for himself". Problem is: None of it is rooted in solid, verifiable evidence. None.

Although I should really qualify that statement to the point of near eradication....because that 22-yr.-old know-it-all CTer really isn't "thinking for himself" at all. He's merely repeating the same tired decades-worn mantra of conspiracy clowns of the past.

Just look at his blog. It's obvious he's fallen into every CT gopher hole ever opened up since '63. Every one. (And probably a lot more he didn't elaborate on in his medium-sized blog posting I linked earlier).

So, no, he's not really thinking for himself at all. He's repeating the skewed, unsupportable thinking of Garrison, Stone, Marrs, Groden, and Lifton, etc.

(Poor sap.)

As far as LNers being "brainwashed by Bugliosi".....

Go back to my hundreds of posts written in the pre-"Reclaiming History" era, and then tell me if Mr. Bugliosi "brainwashed" me.

I was an LNer years prior to Vincent's book being published, and even years prior to ever combing the Internet for pre-book release quotes from Vince regarding the JFK case. I've been "brainwashed" by the hard evidence in this case. That's all.

But...speaking of being brainwashed -- click here.

David Von Pein
July 2007