JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS
(PART 58)


http://openlettersmonthly.com/issue/he-died

CONSPIRACY THEORIST RALPH AUSENHUS SAID:

>>> "Oswald wasn't guilty. Oswald was set up. There was an element of the CIA (Black Ops) which coordinated the Kennedy assassination. Ruby was tied into the mob. Ruby has always had mob associations. The mob owned Ruby. Bugliosi hasn't done his research or homework on Ruby. What about the umbrella man, Mr. Bugliosi, located in front of the Stemmons Freeway Sign on the side of the grassy knoll? What about the bullet hole in the front windshield, Mr. Bugliosi? What about the fact that [on] Monday morning, the Presidential limousine was in the Ford Rougue [??] plant building getting fitted for a new front windshield on 11/25/1963? You need to do more homework, Mr. Bugliosi, when addressing the Kennedy assassination. I am sorry, but no attention should be placed on Bugliosi's comments or remarks on the Kennedy assassination." <<<


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Ralph needs to do HIS "homework", I fear.

Mr. Bugliosi's mega-book is a masterpiece, and will be for all time to
come.

There's no proof that Oswald was "set up" as the proverbial "patsy".
That's wild speculation, and nothing more (despite the big-screen
efforts of Oliver Stone and others).

And there was no "hole" in the windshield. And the limo was not sent
to Michigan on November 25th for emergency conspiracy-removing covert
repairs, as many CT-Kooks think. It just flat-out did not happen.

From VB's book:

"The limousine was not, as the buffs allege without any supporting authority, immediately rebuilt. The rebuilding of the car did not commence until over a year later in Detroit." -- Vince Bugliosi; Page 1276 of "Reclaiming History"

And the windshield was examined by Robert Frazier of the FBI and was
found to have no "hole" in it. Only a "crack", with a smear of lead on
the INSIDE of the glass. That's the official version, and you'll just
have to live with it.

Per the conspiracy-happy theorists, I guess Frazier must have told one
lie after another during his entire Warren Commission session in '64,
because he said all kinds of things the CTers just hate to hear
regarding the evidence that makes Lee Oswald a double-murderer,
including the stuff about the windshield, and Oswald's bullets, and
Oswald's bullet shells, and Oswald's guns that he used in the two
November 22 murders LHO committed, and on and on.

The JFK conspiracy kooks of the world must really hate the FBI's
Robert A. Frazier with a passion. Because his testimony single-
handedly hangs Lee Harvey Oswald. And there's nothing the CTers can do
about it. And there's no possible way they can prove that he was lying
about any of this testimony that he gave in 1964 (though, Lord knows,
the CTers have tried, and will continue to call Bob a rotten, dirty
liar until the proverbial cows reach the ol' homestead, no doubt):

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/frazr1.htm

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/frazr2.htm

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/frazr3.htm

Also....

Vincent Bugliosi did lots of "Ruby homework" too. To believe that
Vince worked for 20+ years on his massive JFK book WITHOUT having
studied (in depth) one of the KEY figures in the November 22nd saga
(i.e., Mr. Ruby) is just....mind-bogglingly silly.

Vincent worked hard on probing INSIDE JACK RUBY, and that effort shows
(greatly) in VB's 74-page chapter in "Reclaiming History" devoted
solely to Ruby (entitled "Ruby And The Mob"). That chapter is a
fascinating odyssey into the life, and mindset, of Jacob L.
Rubenstein. And that guy named Ruby was no "Mob hit man".

Vince discovered that Ruby was about the last goof in Dallas that the
"mob" would entrust with such an important "hit" as the Oswald "hit"
that so many CTers think was pulled off by the mafia.

For one thing, Ruby was getting up early every morning for weeks
shortly prior to the assassination and going to local Dallas
department stores in order to try and sell his "Twistboard" exerciser
gadget to local merchants.

Do Mob hit men usually have to supplement their salaries in such an
odd fashion?

Or do conspiracy theorists think that that was merely a clever "cover"
being used by Ruby so that nobody would catch on to the massive "plot"
that brewed all around him in late 1963?

Maybe it was similar to the "I'll Take My Dog Downtown To A Killing
And Leave The Pooch In The Car While I Go In The Basement And Shoot
The Patsy" type of ruse, huh?

Try reading Chapter 22 ("Ruby And The Mob") of Bugliosi's JFK book.
It's one of the best chapters in the massive tome -- which surprised
me greatly, in fact, because I was planning on being bored to tears
when reading through that particular chapter of VB's book. But I
wasn't at all. It's a fabulous (and thorough) account of Jack Ruby's
life.

BTW, an inexpensive paperback edition of Bugliosi's JFK book (titled
"FOUR DAYS IN NOVEMBER") is coming out in May 2008 for just $17.95
(before the normal take-home discounts).

David Von Pein
November 2007

LINK TO ORIGINAL POST (NOVEMBER 19, 2007)