JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS
Date: 11/4/2009 2:04:11 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard Corcoran
To: David Von Pein
I would like to thank you for the many articles, videos, etc. that you have contributed to making certain that truthful and objective materials relating to the murder of JFK are freely available on the internet.
I am an amateur historian and although JFK and his assassination is not my area of expertise (in fact, I learned so much from your blogs and links to other sites, I don't claim any extensive prior knowledge other than being convinced the WC [Warren Commission] had it right), I thoroughly enjoyed the videos you posted, especially the "real-time" CBS/NBC/ABC footage.
The videos, particularly watched in real time (and as you had stated in one of your blogs), are so compelling as to how much was correct initially (number and direction of shots, description of gunman, wounds the president suffered), from so many witnesses even before anyone knew who Oswald was, that it defies reason that anyone could suppose an actual multi-gun, frame-the-patsy scenario could be set up in real time.
As a matter of fact, comparing how much information was conveyed and had actually held up (because it was true) in the brief period of time after the event, before it was even certain the President was dead, and in the technical limitations of 1963, to some of the errors reported in the first hour of the
9/11 attacks is quite remarkable to me.
This crime and the evidence was not "cooked up, planted and solved" in the bowels of the Dallas PD with the conspirators connivance, there literally was too much accurate information collected and reported in the first hour for a vast and omnipotent fakery campaign.
In fact, short of some "men-in-black" characters employing some kind of mind control device not only on the large number of witnesses interviewed in the first few minutes, but also employing that same device through the airwaves of all three networks to erase the memory of everyone who saw the first couple of hours of TV coverage (again before Oswald came to light, although he was by this time in custody), there is no way a monumental fakery campaign could work.
Nor could such a campaign survive even one of the fakers deciding at some point in time to "cash in" with an "I was involved in planting the pristine bullet" tell-all book to supplement their retirement (or better yet on their deathbed). Or were all the "fakers" subsequently iced?
When you put together the voluminous physical evidence linking Oswald (and only Oswald, or at least someone who was in the TSBD at the exact moment, and looked just like him, whom no one ever saw entering or leaving the building, and using the rifle delivered to Oswald's PO box) to Kennedy's murder, such a spectacular "frame up" is just not possible.
In fact, CT'ers who claim Oswald did not murder JD Tippit might as well just go on and claim Jack Ruby did not kill Oswald, as the amount of physical evidence in the two murders are roughly comparable, Ruby's crime just happened in front of TV cameras. In fact, you don't actually see Ruby's shot...you hear it.... the AP picture could have been faked placing the revolver in Ruby's hand... LOL. That scenario is just as plausible as the multiple killers of Tippit scenario placed in Stone's shameful fantasy tale.
Anyway David, I just wanted to thank you for your efforts and I very much enjoyed the living history materials you have made available to anyone with a desire to find out the truth. There are too many panderers out there peddling some nonsensical drivel to support financially an unsupportable thesis.
Subject: Thank YOU
Date: 11/4/2009 6:11:40 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard Corcoran
Thank you so much for your exceptionally well-written e-mail that you sent me today. I enjoyed reading it very much. .... [It] is one of the best messages about the JFK case I have ever received.
Thanks again, and take care.
David Von Pein
Subject: RE: Thank YOU
Date: 11/4/2009 10:39:19 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard Corcoran
To: David Von Pein
I can appreciate that your posting of the evidence of the case is not designed to sway the usual CT'ers, but to reach the people (an incredible number now, thanks to Oliver Stone and co.) who have been bombarded with so-called "evidence" that is anything but and have been confused by the continual misdirection and fabrications proferred by the CT industry. Your logical arguments cut through the bullshit most effectively.
I count myself among those who over the years were confused by unsubstantiated drivel and outright lies (our own congress did no favors with this "acoustical evidence" bs, and Oliver Stone did incalculable damage with his irresponsible fantasy picture), to think that perhaps there was something not right about the WC and that the Dallas PD rivaled the keystone cops for comedic value.
But when you actually get down to the bald facts of this case, and plow through the actual detailed evidence (and anyone who thinks the WC did a slipshod whitewash does not know what they are talking about, the murder of JFK has to be the most documented and detailed evidentiary disclosure ever made available to the public), there really is very little reason for a critically thinking person to conclude that anyone other than LHO killed the president (and officer Tippit).
There is also no evidence that anyone was in league with LHO and indeed the mountain of physical evidence as well as circumstantial and behavioral evidence (such as fleeing the scene, going home to get a handgun, murdering the first police officer that questions him, ducking into a dark movie theatre to get out of sight, and attempting to shoot the arresting officer) points only to Oswald as the killer.
The sheer weight of additional physical and testimonial evidence that not only exists, but also was uncovered by law enforcement and reported by the media very quickly (before Oswald was even apprehended or his name was even known in most cases) precludes anyone else taking an active part in the assassination or that any subsequent large-scale frame-up existed.
It's interesting that many CT's (not just JFK ones) often rely on an omnipotent and malevolent power short-circuiting established rules and procedures and rest frequently on the fatalistic feeling of powerlessness of believers (elections don't matter, economic power is concentrated in some cabal) and in a set of received wisdom and insight into a mystery that "initiates" (who buy the book, natch) feel the removal of powerlessness by being privy to the almighty secret.
CT's also overestimate both the competence and power of the conspirators as well as the close-mouthedness of the same. Why is it that CT proponents assume all sorts of nefarious motives, supreme cunning, and superhuman competence in carrying out some criminal sleight-of-hand, yet the conspirators themselves honorably keep the secret to the grave, even when it would be financially a bonus to "reveal the great secret", even from some beyond-the-grave tome?
Even the mafia had trouble keeping secrets that involved more than a few individuals and many of those eventually got out. And anyway it was financially a benefit for a mafioso to keep quiet (especially in the good old days), it was only when a mafia member was faced with a potential benefit for spilling the beans (usually when they were facing death anyways) that they did. There was really no romantic adherence to a code.
Any large-scale conspiracy cannot hold up for very long and even if it could, human beings are simply not supremely competent in arranging things. This is a fact that law enforcement relies upon. Actual criminals (even pros) do make mistakes even when everything is on the line. How much less likely is a conspirator acting under orders with limited skin in the game able to perform demonstrably criminal acts with perfect precision without mistakes?
This is why I believe CT's rely on some supremely compelling motivation for the perpetrator (even some of the more way-out ones even dispense with this) but fall completely apart with any critical scrutiny in direct proportion to both scope and complexity. Because human beings are not perfectly competent and cannot perfectly (and permanently) keep secrets and human omnipotence (in this day anyways) does not exist.
Yet scope, complexity, and inherent powerlessness is exactly what CT's generally sell. As I believe Hitler said, the bigger and the more complex the lie, the more the masses will believe it.
Anyway, It appears you've seen nearly every crackpot CT on JFK, so I'm certain you know more about it than I do. I haven't got around to reading the one where aliens perpetrate the JFK assassination, but I must confess that one sounds more plausible than most other CT's. I mean assuming an alien race with more or less omnipotent powers and assuming they buggered off of earth (with their abducted human co-conspirators) after the deed, they certainly would fulfill the requirements needed for perpetrating a wide-ranging, complex, and secretive conspiracy. It would be rather weak on motive though. (Although I'm sure some super CT guru could come up with one - Aliens wanting to suppress knowledge of area 51 and Roswell perhaps?)
Actually I better stop, I might concoct a story someone might actually believe - given the stuff floating around the CT community, that would not be hard.
Subject: The JFK Assassination
Date: 11/4/2009 11:09:36 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard Corcoran
Wow. That was quite a response, Richard. Thanks.
Your articulations regarding "conspiracy" are very interesting and illuminating (and a breath of always-welcome fresh air concerning the assassination of President John F. Kennedy).
One of the silliest things associated with the type of conspiracy plot that many, many conspiracy theorists in the world today currently seem to believe (i.e., the "Oswald Was Being Set Up As A Lone Patsy In Advance Of The Assassination" theory) is that those CTers apparently have no problem at all with the pre-November 22 plotters/conspirators placing assassins in FRONT of President Kennedy's vehicle (supposedly on the Grassy Knoll), even though a big part of this perceived plot was to frame ONLY LEE HARVEY OSWALD, who was located in the TSBD, which was to the REAR of the President during the entire time of the shooting.
I've repeatedly asked conspiracy theorists on the Internet to explain the LOGIC of such a pre-planned shooting scenario. But I have yet to hear a reasonable and believable explanation for WHY the plotters would have wanted to place assassins in locations that could not possibly in a million years be traced back to the one and only so-called "patsy" if ANY of those frontal gunmen were to strike John F. Kennedy with ANY of the bullets that conspiracists insist were being fired from the Grassy Knoll (or any other frontal shooting location).
But, since Oliver Stone and Jim Garrison have said that such an insane MULTI-GUN, MULTI-DIRECTIONAL, ONE-PATSY plot was afoot in Dallas in November of 1963, I guess a lot of gullible people must have just tossed their hands in the air and said, "I guess Ollie Stone must be right; after all, he made a movie about such a one-patsy, multi-shooter plot, didn't he?"
But if the conspiracy theorists who are currently in bed with Mr. Stone and the late Mr. Garrison would just STOP AND THINK about the inherent illogic that is built-in to such a crazy assassination plan, surely at least a few of those conspiracists would awaken from their Oliver Stone-induced slumber and realize that they've been brainwashed by the slickness of a Hollywood movie. (Wouldn't they?)
Thanks again for writing. I appreciate it. Write again anytime.
David Von Pein
Posted By: David Von Pein