Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

bpete: You are a paid internet troll. But, just for the record, go ahead and deny it. I'd like to have your lie in writing. 

GCHQ and JTRIG, discussed below, are in the UK, just like you, though I don't say you necessarily work for them. 

Paid Gov’t and Corporate Internet Trolls Are Real

March 1, 2014 By 21wire 16 Comments

21st Century Wire says…

You know them… Their mission has nothing to do with national security, fighting terrorism, and catching criminals. Their mission is to distort public opinion and spread propaganda in order to generate a ‘consensus reality’ – and they are responsible for polluting the internet with much of the garbage in comment sections, Facebook groups, forums and bogus blog posts.

They jump into productive online discussions and civil debates, and undermine them, ruin them, with uninvited insulting, racist and inflammatory comments. If only it stopped there.The secretive  GCHQ and JTRIG training manual which was leaked via Glenn Greenwald and Ed Snowden show an even dirtier side to our governments’ new ‘digital Stasi’. Their report means that the public can finally put an ugly face on this disease which is ruining the internet. First Look explains:

“Among the core self-identified purposes of JTRIG are two tactics: (1) to inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets; and (2) to use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable. To see how extremist these programs are, just consider the tactics they boast of using to achieve those ends: “false flag operations” (posting material to the internet and falsely attributing it to someone else), fake victim blog posts (pretending to be a victim of the individual whose reputation they want to destroy), and posting “negative information” on various forums.”

The cat is out of the bag…

Where do trolls come from?

Brasscheck TV

We’ve posted this on our Facebook page when it first came out. Now here’s a video that explains it in detail…We’ve been victims of this going back as far as 1997 when a police agent hired to sabotage the Critical Mass bicycle ride in San Francisco launched a smear campaign against me for exposing the elaborate plot and her role in it. I sued her and won a $5,000 judgement which was overturned by a corrupt San Francisco judge who literally dozed off during the trial.

We also reported about this when the US Army Corps of Engineers got on the web after the federal levee failures in 2005 (Katrina) that killed over 1,000 people, rendered over 100,000 homeless and caused $100 billion in financial losses.
Corps computers were used to post insulting, racist and inflammatory remarks and disrupt any forum – anywhere in the world – where people were asking about the Corps role in the catastrophe. Nola.com owned by the New Orleans Picayune has all the data on the posts to its site and not only will not release it but fired the employee who collected the data and was about to turn it over to investigators. 
Here's the link to the article, which you should read because there are some interesting comments from readers at the end.
http://21stcenturywire.com/2014/03/01/paid-govt-and-corporate-internet-trolls-are-real/
One reader asks:

bpete? We'll let you field that one. 
So, the punk thinks that the claim of this guy being Jack Ruby is quite plausible. He's defending it. 

Personally, I think it's a great leap and totally unwarranted. But, if you're going to claim there are enough data points there to call those two a match, how can you possibly deny that these two are?

This is 1000X stronger, the correlation. You've got the man, the clothing, the build, the face- it's all crystal. So, bpete wants to deny that Oswald was Doorman but insist that that other guy was Ruby, or at least say that we should respect the idea?
But, you've got to understand something: bpete doesn't really think that other guy was Ruby. You have to understand how his mind works. bpete deals with each battle- one skirmish at a time. His tactics in one battle may be polar opposite to his tactics in another battle. If it calls for him to say that Oswald was up on the 6th floor locking and loading on Kennedy, he'll say that. If it calls for him to say that Oswald was in the domino room at 12:30 eating lunch, he'll say that. He doesn't give a shit. He doesn't have any underlying conviction. He never states what he believes happened on 11/22/63. He attacks other people's theories of the crime, but he never lays out his own. Attacking is all that he is about. He's not a real advocate of anything. He is just a paid, hired gun, an attack dog. He is a paid cyber troll.   
Now, let me have that denial in writing, and yeah, I'll be keeping it.