ANTHONY MARSH SAID:
Please, whatever you do, don't dare to watch Belin in a TV interview where he complains about the fact that the CIA withheld so much vital information from the Warren Commission. Keep your blinders on tightly.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Well, I know one thing, Tony -- the CIA couldn't possibly have "withheld vital information" concerning the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE that proves Lee Harvey Oswald to be the murderer of both JFK and Officer Tippit.
And I also know that any CIA information that might have been "withheld" from the Warren Commission couldn't possibly change the facts and circumstances regarding Jack Ruby's LAST-MINUTE entry into the police basement just before he shot Oswald.
As David Belin says in this March 1992 video, in order for ANY conspiracy to exist in the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald at the hands of Jack Ruby, Postal Inspector Harry Holmes MUST have been a key element of that conspiracy.
Because without Holmes asking Oswald additional questions on the morning of November 24th (delaying LHO's transfer to the County Jail for possibly up to 30 extra minutes), there would have been no possible way for Ruby to have shot Oswald, because LHO would have been long gone from City Hall by the time Ruby got downtown.
Plus: 20-year-old stripper Karen Carlin almost certainly must be considered an integral part of the plot, if conspiracy theorists want to believe that Oswald was rubbed out by Ruby as part of a conspiracy.
In short, the CIA had no "control" over the events in Texas on November 21-24, 1963. And the spontaneous way things happened during those days proves that the CIA was not controlling the destiny of men named Kennedy, Tippit, Oswald, and Ruby.
Or do conspiracy theorists now want to believe that the Central Intelligence Agency was in the habit of employing 19-year-old Book Depository workers (like Buell Wesley Frazier) and postal inspectors (like Harry Holmes) and ordinary housewives in Irving, Texas (like Linnie Mae Randle and Ruth Paine) and 20-year-old exotic dancers (like Karen Carlin, who had no money to pay her rent in November 1963)?
Plus, as Vincent Bugliosi said [in the quote below], it's very likely that the CIA had a desire to internally safeguard a lot of their documents and information, even when there was absolutely no "conspiratorial" reason for them to do so:
"The CIA had nothing to hide in thousands of previous documents the agency initially refused to release voluntarily but ultimately did release under court order. The CIA specializes in always acting guilty, even when it is not, and always being, from a public relations standpoint, its own worst enemy.
[...]
It's as if these [conspiracy] authors believe there's no need to connect Oswald to the CIA or the mob, or show that they got him to kill Kennedy for them. If...they can prove that one of these groups had a motive to kill Kennedy, then, IF Oswald was the assassin, he MUST have killed Kennedy FOR them. This crazy, incredibly childlike reasoning is the mentality that has driven and informed virtually all of the pro-conspiracy sentiment in the Kennedy assassination from the very beginning." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Via "Reclaiming History"
David Von Pein
January 30, 2010
