You couldn't be more wrong. True or False: Oswald joined the Marines and then was stationed in Japan at a base where espionage missions took place.
True or False: Oswald was able to get into the Soviet Union.
True or False: Oswald was able to get himself *and his wife* out of the Soviet Union when it was almost unheard of to do so.
True or False: Oswald began showing up in New Orleans working in front groups that were either doing the bidding of Castro or trying to pose as such for ex-FBI Guy Bannister?
True or False: While in Dallas, Oswald became fast friends with Russian emigrees, some with KGB connections.
True or False: Oswald is killed mob-style by a club owners with ties to the Chicago mob.
That's far more than "zero" credible evidence to me. Whether it all adds up to
I bought and read Posner's book and while I respect his research, his answer to every piece of evidence that disagreed with his conclusion is either a) the witness is lying or b) the witness is crazy. I'm sorry but when you get to 100 or so witnesses that must either be lying or crazy for your version to be true, you have to wonder who it really is that is lying or crazy.
Certainly, some of these witnesses are mistaken or publicity hounds or want to cash in on history somehow but I felt his book was a classic illustration of writing the conclusion before doing the research.
If you actually read Posners book you would know the answers to these questions.
1. It took Oswald numerous tries to visit the Soviet Union. He misrepresented himself and after the KBG interview him he was REJECTED in his request to stay. Oswald then tried suicide. I don’t have time to type the rest of the story, Russians had different worries, etc. about Oswald, but they knew he was worthless as anything but a propaganda tool. He didn’t have any information that the Russians didn’t know. He wasn’t viewed as important.
2. You would know the story from Posner’s book
3. You’re suggesting Oswald wasn’t a Marxist/Commie now? He surely was, he wasn’t a double agent.
4. Again, you would know the answers to this question if you read Posner’s book instead of pretending that Oswald had some nefarious KGB connections which he most assuredly DID NOT.
5. Ruby was NOT a mobster. Ruby was a fruticake, as everyone who knew him readily attested to.
No one who knew him was even surprised when he killed Oswald. Ruby thought he was going to be an American Hero for killing Kennedy’s assasin.
Their reaction to Ruby killing Oswald was similar to my reaction to someone who I knew quite well who was a walking time bomb. In a well publicized case in NJ an idiot I knew was drunk driving in the middle of the day and killed a mother of 3. He wound up with about the longest sentence in history at the time for killing someone while DUI. I, and other were not shocked, but thought it was inevitable that he would do something that stupid and irresponsible.
In the same way, the people who knew Ruby knew him as a braggart, an exaggerator, a poser, a loose cannon, a total wanna be, there are plenty of wanna-be gangsters here in NJ, 99% of them aren’t “real” gangsters or have any “real” connections, nor would they be trusted to.
Ruby was a flake with a big mouth who couldn’t be trusted to keep ANYTHING quiet, he was the last person the Mafia would use to do ANYTHING.
Again, if you actually read Posner’s book, you would know this too.
Yes, I maintain steadfast to my claim that there is ZERO credible evidence to what you assert, just the repeating of tired, old, already disputed theories and wild speculation run rampant.
Ruby, the loudmouth flake, is actually a Mafioso trusted with the biggest hit in Mafia history.
Oswald, dubbed “Oswaldovitch” by his fellow Marines, a pathetic loser with delusions of grandeur is part of the biggest conspiracy in history with deep, dark KGB and CIA connections going to the highest levels.
It would be funny if so many people didn’t believe this nonsense.
As for your assertion that Posner came to his conclusion before writing his book. Are you calling him a liar? Are you saying he created evidence to support his assertion that Oswald acted alone? Is it not possible that his research into the assasination started much earlier and everything he researched led him to believe that Oswald acted alone?
Try and apply that same “standard” to all the conspiracy books who’s FIRST AND ONLY assumption is that Oswald DID NOT act alone. All conspiracy books assume Oswald did not act alone, so by your standards, they all suffer from the same fatal flaw as Posner’s book.
Logic, it’s a bitch.
OrangeHoof, you said to word_warrior_bob — You couldn’t be more wrong.
—
Well, I’m not entirely sure what all you are saying with the assassination theory you’re presenting — but the part that I do know is true — is this character — word_warrior_bob — who thinks he’s the final authority on the matter, when the American public saw that they got a “snow job” with the Warren Commission — is definitely wrong.
I don’t see anything convincing, at all, with word_warrior_bob and his statements. That’s all they are, simply “statements” and not even persuasive ones, at that — only ones where he “insists* they are true, no matter what anyone else says... LOL...
Well, all I can say is that this character must have worked for the government at one time, because that sounds just like how the government works with the American people... :-)