Why in the World would anyone believe Jim Garrison?

[Dean Hagerman]

I was just saying that, in most of the online JFK discussion groups, there are a lot of people with uncompromising positions for or against Garrison, which makes it hard to opine that Garrison was a smart and sincere guy who deeply believed in his case and who peeked under rocks not yet examined, but that he made a few mistakes.

we can opine re Garrison till doomsday, Blackburst... what IS clear is this, lone nuts see the WCR slipping away from them. It ceased being a "report," now it's a contested, flimsy article of blind faith.

"Blackburst"?

Its Roy's real last name

[Greg Parker]

I was just saying that, in most of the online JFK discussion groups, there are a lot of people with uncompromising positions for or against Garrison, which makes it hard to opine that Garrison was a smart and sincere guy who deeply believed in his case and who peeked under rocks not yet examined, but that he made a few mistakes.

we can opine re Garrison till doomsday, Blackburst... what IS clear is this, lone nuts see the WCR slipping away from them. It ceased being a "report," now it's a contested, flimsy article of blind faith.

"Blackburst"?

Its Roy's real last name

Well, maybe it is -- but according to the man himself, it was an alias taken from an obscure term used in television technology.

[Greg Parker]

I was just saying that, in most of the online JFK discussion groups, there are a lot of people with uncompromising positions for or against Garrison, which makes it hard to opine that Garrison was a smart and sincere guy who deeply believed in his case and who peeked under rocks not yet examined, but that he made a few mistakes.

Stephen,

Do you, as the person who lays claim to having "turned" one of the main polarizing culprits, Reitzes,against Garrison, see any irony in what you now claim is your difficulty in expressing your beliefs in such an environment?

In what way do other opinions make yours harder to express?

Isn't it true that the polarization is really, in the main, only on the anti-Garrison side?

Doesn't pretending that their are an army of Garrison supporters who see no wrong in the man, just help validate the propaganda spewed out with every shout of "Garrisonite!" by McAdams et al?

[Dean Hagerman]

Garrison made mistakes no doubt about it

I dont think there is any CT on this forum that supports what Garrison did that would say that he was perfect

That would be absurd

[Bernice Moore]

http://www.prouty.org/closing.html the closing summation.

DEAN GET A LOAD OF THIS CRAP....I HAD FORGOTTEN.... :lol:

We presented eyewitnesses who told you of the shots coming from the grassy knoll. A plane landed from Washington, and out came ballistics expert Frazier for the defense. Mr. Frazier's explanation of the sound of the shots coming from the front, which was heard by eyewitness after eyewitness, was that Lee Oswald created a sonic boom in his firing. Not only did Oswald break all of the world's records for marksmanship, but he broke the sound barrier as well.

I suggest to you, that if any of you have shot on a firing range--and most of you probably have in the service--you were shooting rifles in which the bullet traveled faster than the speed of sound. I ask you to recall if you ever heard a sonic boom. If you remember when you were on the firing line, and they would say, "Ready on the left; ready on the right; ready on the firing line; commence firing," you heard the shots coming from the firing line--to the left of you and to the right of you. If you had heard, as a result of Frazier's fictional sonic boom, firing coming at you from the pits, you would have had a reaction which you would still remember.

Mr. Frazier's sonic boom simply doesn't exist. It's part of the fraud-- a part of the continuing government fraud.

Edited September 14, 2011 by Bernice Moore

[Greg Burnham]

Those who reject the Warren Commission's Report not only believe that Garrison was HUMAN and therefore imperfect, they also believe that the same holds true of Kennedy himself! However, many LN's claim that those who believe JFK was the victim of a conspiracy also believe that the man was perfect. I have heard this countless times from the "Oswald done it all by his lonesome" crowd. Yet, I know of not a single conspiracy researcher who would agree that JFK was perfect. JFK was a man...a human being, and he was therefore imperfect just like the rest of us. He was imperfect as a human being just like Garrison was. These claims by LN's are a version of the straw man argument and are therefore fallacious.

[Bernice Moore]

Those who reject the Warren Commission's Report not only believe that Garrison was HUMAN and therefore imperfect, they also believe that the same holds true of Kennedy himself! However, many LN's claim that those who believe JFK was the victim of a conspiracy also believe that the man was perfect. I have heard this countless times from the "Oswald done it all by his lonesome" crowd. Yet, I know of not a single conspiracy researcher who would agree that JFK was perfect. JFK was a man...a human being, and he was therefore imperfect just like the rest of us. He was imperfect as a human being just like Garrison was. These claims by LN's are a version of the straw man argument and are therefore fallacious.

As they say Right On Greg.......even L/Ns are human.......lol.....

a post that gil jesus made

Documents released by the Assassination Records Review Board show that a =

conspiracy existed to destroy New Orleans District Attorney Jim =

Garrison's JFK murder investigation and that conspiracy was the work of =

the CIA and its allies in the American media.=20

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Dz0jsGP8_tio=20

__________________

Gil Jesus' JFK Channel on Youtube

http://www.youtube.com/GJJdude=20

[Bernice Moore]

the document....shoot him down..b

Edited September 14, 2011 by Bernice Moore

[Richard Hocking]

Those who reject the Warren Commission's Report not only believe that Garrison was HUMAN and therefore imperfect, they also believe that the same holds true of Kennedy himself! However, many LN's claim that those who believe JFK was the victim of a conspiracy also believe that the man was perfect. I have heard this countless times from the "Oswald done it all by his lonesome" crowd. Yet, I know of not a single conspiracy researcher who would agree that JFK was perfect. JFK was a man...a human being, and he was therefore imperfect just like the rest of us. He was imperfect as a human being just like Garrison was. These claims by LN's are a version of the straw man argument and are therefore fallacious.

One need not be perfect to see through the fabrication of the Warren Report.

Average Intelligence and common sense is all that is needed.

[Greg Parker]

I was just saying that, in most of the online JFK discussion groups, there are a lot of people with uncompromising positions for or against Garrison, which makes it hard to opine that Garrison was a smart and sincere guy who deeply believed in his case and who peeked under rocks not yet examined, but that he made a few mistakes.

Stephen,

Do you, as the person who lays claim to having "turned" one of the main polarizing culprits, Reitzes,against Garrison, see any irony in what you now claim is your difficulty in expressing your beliefs in such an environment?

In what way do other opinions make yours harder to express?

Isn't it true that the polarization is really, in the main, only on the anti-Garrison side?

Doesn't pretending that their are an army of Garrison supporters who see no wrong in the man, just help validate the propaganda spewed out with every shout of "Garrisonite!" by McAdams et al?

Well said, Greg.

I've yet to come across a researcher who believes that Garrison was a saint who never put a foot wrong. That's just a myth propogated by the LN crowd. It's kinda funny how Warren supporters see everything in absolutes. It reveals a very child-like intellect - which I guess you'd have to have to buy the official story.

Martin,

judging from comments made, no one here seems to have any problems with expressing the opinion that Garrison was human. But this is just one forum.

As a general rule of thumb, propaganda works best when it is indirectly supported by the "voice of moderation"... coming from the Middle of the Road.

Stephen could distance himself from that general rule and make his case by simply naming the "lot of people" who he sees as polarizing on both sides, and on which forum/s he has found difficulty in expressing his own opinion.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

I have been reading a bit lately about Jim Garrison. I find it amazing that anyone would buy into his rubbish. Garrison appears to be one of the most corrupt people I have looked at in this case......

AND, THE ANSWER IS (or at least includes):

(1). Lack of ability to properly research exactly who and what Garrison was.

(2). Grasping for any straw of "conspiracy", which Garrison fully expoused and promoted.

(3). Lack of ability to research all of those whom Garrison attempted to "tie" into the big/giant conspiracy.

(4). It promotes the BS theory that some giant conspiracy existed which included almost everyone with the possible exception of you and me.

(5).__________________________________fill in the blank with whatever assinine theory and/or concept one can think of.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

I have been reading a bit lately about Jim Garrison. I find it amazing that anyone would buy into his rubbish. Garrison appears to be one of the most corrupt people I have looked at in this case......

AND, THE ANSWER IS (or at least includes):

(1). Lack of ability to properly research exactly who and what Garrison was.

(2). Grasping for any straw of "conspiracy", which Garrison fully expoused and promoted.

(3). Lack of ability to research all of those whom Garrison attempted to "tie" into the big/giant conspiracy.

(4). It promotes the BS theory that some giant conspiracy existed which included almost everyone with the possible exception of you and me.

(5).__________________________________fill in the blank with whatever assinine theory and/or concept one can think of.

And if 1-5 are true in your mind would they have still existed if he'd have been backed by certain Governmental Institutions rather than scuppered by them every single step of the way?

Step off the narrow minded soap box for half an hour.

What would your work look like if you were undermined in a thousand different ways? If everyone was out to get you? If your offices were bugged? If your family was threatened? If you were offered bribes? If people you were relying on to support you were murdered?

That is what comes from an "overdose" of watching the movie JFK far too many times, to the extent that one begins to think it is actual reality.

Why not include:

If you set up a completely phony investigative service in which your company could charge up large amounts while investigating the death of JFK!!!

[Thomas H. Purvis]

I have been reading a bit lately about Jim Garrison. I find it amazing that anyone would buy into his rubbish. Garrison appears to be one of the most corrupt people I have looked at in this case......

AND, THE ANSWER IS (or at least includes):

(1). Lack of ability to properly research exactly who and what Garrison was.

(2). Grasping for any straw of "conspiracy", which Garrison fully expoused and promoted.

(3). Lack of ability to research all of those whom Garrison attempted to "tie" into the big/giant conspiracy.

(4). It promotes the BS theory that some giant conspiracy existed which included almost everyone with the possible exception of you and me.

(5).__________________________________fill in the blank with whatever assinine theory and/or concept one can think of.

And if 1-5 are true in your mind would they have still existed if he'd have been backed by certain Governmental Institutions rather than scuppered by them every single step of the way?

Step off the narrow minded soap box for half an hour.

What would your work look like if you were undermined in a thousand different ways? If everyone was out to get you? If your offices were bugged? If your family was threatened? If you were offered bribes? If people you were relying on to support you were murdered?

That is what comes from an "overdose" of watching the movie JFK far too many times, to the extent that one begins to think it is actual reality.

Why not include:

If you set up a completely phony investigative service in which your company could charge up large amounts while investigating the death of JFK!!!

Why, Thomas, how many times have I watched Stone's JFK?

Sufficient number to gullibly believe it! Unknown as to whether this took 1 or 25 viewings.

I await your reply.

And how many times have I read Joan Mellen's and Jim DiEugenio's books?

Same answer as above, merely that it applies to reading ability (as opposed to reading/comprehension ability) rather than visual stimuli.

As long ago posted on this forum, the Garrison Investigation was a pure "smoke screen" in which the intention was (and pretty well succeeded) in diversion of attention of exactly who; what; where; when; and how; LHO actually was, as well as his direct connections to those who were in positions of the "aristocracy" of New Orleans.

The "land sharks" most certainly baited a lot of dumb-assess into chasing the Garrison Investigation and it's completely worthless concepts.

Of course, it also got Clay Shaw out of their hair as well.

[Greg Parker]

I have been reading a bit lately about Jim Garrison. I find it amazing that anyone would buy into his rubbish. Garrison appears to be one of the most corrupt people I have looked at in this case......

AND, THE ANSWER IS (or at least includes):

(1). Lack of ability to properly research exactly who and what Garrison was.

(2). Grasping for any straw of "conspiracy", which Garrison fully expoused and promoted.

(3). Lack of ability to research all of those whom Garrison attempted to "tie" into the big/giant conspiracy.

(4). It promotes the BS theory that some giant conspiracy existed which included almost everyone with the possible exception of you and me.

(5).__________________________________fill in the blank with whatever assinine theory and/or concept one can think of.

And if 1-5 are true in your mind would they have still existed if he'd have been backed by certain Governmental Institutions rather than scuppered by them every single step of the way?

Step off the narrow minded soap box for half an hour.

What would your work look like if you were undermined in a thousand different ways? If everyone was out to get you? If your offices were bugged? If your family was threatened? If you were offered bribes? If people you were relying on to support you were murdered?

That is what comes from an "overdose" of watching the movie JFK far too many times, to the extent that one begins to think it is actual reality.

Why not include:

If you set up a completely phony investigative service in which your company could charge up large amounts while investigating the death of JFK!!!

Why, Thomas, how many times have I watched Stone's JFK?

Sufficient number to gullibly believe it! Unknown as to whether this took 1 or 25 viewings.

I await your reply.

And how many times have I read Joan Mellen's and Jim DiEugenio's books?

Same answer as above, merely that it applies to reading ability (as opposed to reading/comprehension ability) rather than visual stimuli.

As long ago posted on this forum, the Garrison Investigation was a pure "smoke screen" in which the intention was (and pretty well succeeded) in diversion of attention of exactly who; what; where; when; and how; LHO actually was, as well as his direct connections to those who were in positions of the "aristocracy" of New Orleans.

The "land sharks" most certainly baited a lot of dumb-assess into chasing the Garrison Investigation and it's completely worthless concepts.

Of course, it also got Clay Shaw out of their hair as well.

Some questions if I may Tom...

1. How do you rate your own objectivity against others in this case on a scale of 1 to 10?

2. Why, in 1967, would anyone need to divert attention away from "exactly who; what; where; when; and how; LHO actually was, as well as his direct connections to those who were in positions of the "aristocracy" of New Orleans."

3. Why, as the documentary evidence indicates, did the FBI and CIA seek to scuttle Garrison's investigation, when the CIA in particular, have historically sought to protect the types of "land sharks" and "aristocracy" aka big business that you say were using Garrison as a "diversion"?

Edited September 16, 2011 by Greg Parker

[Thomas H. Purvis]

I have been reading a bit lately about Jim Garrison. I find it amazing that anyone would buy into his rubbish. Garrison appears to be one of the most corrupt people I have looked at in this case......

AND, THE ANSWER IS (or at least includes):

(1). Lack of ability to properly research exactly who and what Garrison was.

(2). Grasping for any straw of "conspiracy", which Garrison fully expoused and promoted.

(3). Lack of ability to research all of those whom Garrison attempted to "tie" into the big/giant conspiracy.

(4). It promotes the BS theory that some giant conspiracy existed which included almost everyone with the possible exception of you and me.

(5).__________________________________fill in the blank with whatever assinine theory and/or concept one can think of.

And if 1-5 are true in your mind would they have still existed if he'd have been backed by certain Governmental Institutions rather than scuppered by them every single step of the way?

Step off the narrow minded soap box for half an hour.

What would your work look like if you were undermined in a thousand different ways? If everyone was out to get you? If your offices were bugged? If your family was threatened? If you were offered bribes? If people you were relying on to support you were murdered?

That is what comes from an "overdose" of watching the movie JFK far too many times, to the extent that one begins to think it is actual reality.

Why not include:

If you set up a completely phony investigative service in which your company could charge up large amounts while investigating the death of JFK!!!

Why, Thomas, how many times have I watched Stone's JFK?

Sufficient number to gullibly believe it! Unknown as to whether this took 1 or 25 viewings.

I await your reply.

And how many times have I read Joan Mellen's and Jim DiEugenio's books?

Same answer as above, merely that it applies to reading ability (as opposed to reading/comprehension ability) rather than visual stimuli.

As long ago posted on this forum, the Garrison Investigation was a pure "smoke screen" in which the intention was (and pretty well succeeded) in diversion of attention of exactly who; what; where; when; and how; LHO actually was, as well as his direct connections to those who were in positions of the "aristocracy" of New Orleans.

The "land sharks" most certainly baited a lot of dumb-assess into chasing the Garrison Investigation and it's completely worthless concepts.

Of course, it also got Clay Shaw out of their hair as well.

Some questions if I may Tom...

1. How do you rate your own objectivity against others in this case on a scale of 1 to 10?

2. Why, in 1967, would anyone need to divert attention away from "exactly who; what; where; when; and how; LHO actually was, as well as his direct connections to those who were in positions of the "aristocracy" of New Orleans."

3. Why, as the documentary evidence indicates, did the FBI and CIA seek to scuttle Garrison's investigation, when the CIA in particular, have historically sought to protect the types of "land sharks" and "aristocracy" aka big business that you say were using Garrison as a "diversion"?

====================================================================================================================

That remains about one of the most "open-ended" questions one could ask.

"others" could include anyone from those who are sufficiently ignorant enough to accept and believe the Warren Commission, to those who believe that the Warren Commission was a lie, yet are sufficiently ignorant enough to fall for and believe in such mythical creatures as multiple assassins; body snatchers; and wound alteration specialists.

Along with I might add, the concept that about every government agency as well as organized crime were all in this together.

Because LHO was from NO. This was his home as well as the location of about the only persons whom he knew and trusted.

Which would have included the only ones who could have dragged him into this event.

The "oxymoron" here is that many believe that the FBI as well as the CIA were firmlly involved in the assassination of JFK.

Yet, to have done so would mean that they were so efficient that no one to date could tie (absolutelyl) either to the event.

And, yet, these two government agencies were so impotent that they could not do anything about the great "Jimbo" Garrison and his crusade for the truth?

Give me a break!

The great "Jimbo" Garrison lead many off into the "dismal" swamp, and thereafter abandoned them to flounder like fools in the garbage that he had concocted into his assassination scenario.

Jimbo! You did one hell of a good job there!