Same man/same clothes. I said: Same man/same clothes. That clinches it.
And what does the opposition offer? Do they provide collages of Doorman and Lovelady that match better? No, they don't provide any collages at all. They just flap their lips and make inane comments, such as: there were no witnesses who said it was Oswald. But, how do we know? If there were, they surely would have been silenced, and there is no chance they would have been included in the Warren Report or even interviewed by the Warren Commission. It was a controlled process. It was being controlled for its outcome from Day1. They controlled whom they interviewed about this, making sure it was only those who would say that Doorman was Lovelady.
And it was the same way for the HSCA about this. They controlled the outcome every step of the way. They hired Robert Groden with the understanding that he would find for Lovelady. It's not as though they were indifferent to it. It's not as though they said to him, "You are completely your own man on this, Robert. Whatever you conclude from your photographic analysis, we'll publish. If you decide it was Oswald in the doorway, that's what's going into our report." No, I'm sure they communicated to him unequivocally what they needed from him and what they expected from him, and I'm sure he told them that he could deliver, which is why they hired him. But then, they stuck Attorney Ken Brooten on his back, who watched Groden like a hawk and ultimately became Lovelady's personal attorney. He fucking quit his job with the HSCA to represent Lovelady! What does that tell you? When has such a thing ever happened before or since in the history of jurisprudence?
Oswald in the doorway is back, and he is back with a vengeance. Oswald in the doorway is now like the Biblical story of Samson in the doorway who stood in the Philistine temple, wrapped his arms around a pillar on each side him and tore that temple of wickedness down.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.