Saturday, June 13, 2015

I've been saying that if you are going to deny Oswald in the doorway, you've got to place him. What you can't do is say:

"I don't know where Oswald was. He could have been anywhere. I just know he wasn't in the doorway."

That does not compute. And by that I mean that if you don't know where he was, then you can't possibly know that he was not in the doorway. 

This is really just another way of saying what Hondo said on his Facebook page:  "He MAY have been innocent, but he wasn't in the doorway." 

Obviously, if you don't know if he was innocent or guilty, then you don't know anything at all. Therefore, you don't know that he wasn't in the doorway.

I read a piece today by a CT who tried to claim that Oswald never went to the 2nd floor lunch room, that it was all made up. And, as I read it, I kept saying to myself, "Surely, before this article ends, the author is going to lay out where Oswald was and what he was doing when he was reportedly in the 2nd floor lunch room." But nope. He never addressed it. He never felt the need. 

Another thing I often hear that is very appalling is when CTs glibly say that Oswald was in the lunch room during the shooting (whether they mean the first floor one or the second floor one) and they never even address WHY Oswald would not want to watch the Presidential motorcade. They just take it for granted that, of course, he wouldn't- that it doesn't even require an explanation. Of course, Lee Harvey Oswald would have no interest in seeing Kennedy. That's a given. It doesn't require an explanation. But, that is bull. If you're going to start with an assumption, it should be: of course, Oswald would have as much interest as anyone else in seeing Kennedy. In other words, until evidence is provided to the contrary, that is the reasonable assumption to make. That is the default. That is the starting out point. 

In other words, unless you have reason to think that someone is abnormal, you assume that he would do what a normal person would do. And, no one has the right to think any differently about Oswald.

If you're going to say he wasn't interested in seeing Kennedy, you've got to substantiate it. You've got to base it on something, and I mean something real; something concrete; something persuasive.    

There was a once in a lifetime event going on, and most of the employees were outside watching it. Of the few who remained inside, some of them were watching from the windows. The few who ignored it completely were very few, and to assume that Oswald was one of them is arbitrary and baseless.   

Oswald had as much or more reason to be interested in seeing Kennedy than most of them did. You would need to have a very specific reason to doubt that. Yet, we have people who have no reason to doubt it, and who have no reason to place Oswald anywhere else during the motorcade except outside watching it (since we know he didn't watch it from a window), who take up fighting it for one reason and one reason only: spite. 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.