SidingWithTheEnemy said:
Treblaine said:
[...]
Nothing remarkable or inexplicable about Oswald.
Maybe, but I'm siding with Kevin Costner here... ;-)
I take your washed up Waterword star and raise you, the legendary Bill Cosby
It really is.
That kid at the end, that's you.
That's a fictional movie. How the hell are you citing it as evidence? Oliver Stone wasn't even trying to be factually correct, he was trying to make an exploitation thriller that barely even qualifies for the "based on" a true story. What... did you think this was a documentary? A faithful reproduction of the events? Nope.
As for what his speech says, the way it begins "Hitler always said: the bigger the lie, the more people will believe it"
That goes BOTH WAYS. It is a BIG LIE to claim a conspiracy killed the President. Also, any essential truth if not true is a big lie. Democracy could all be a facade, that would be a HUGE lie but the thing is big lies are hard to keep, Hitler had all his big lies found out and exposed incontrovertibly within years.
Also, it's Godwin's Law in the FIRST TWO SECONDS! That's a record.
"oswald... wanted attention"
Straw man argument. He was a communist fanatic, a simpleton who thought he could kill the president and just walk away. He didn't want to get caught, he didn't want attention.
"what is the constitution if president can be murdered under suspicious circumstances"
You (and others) concocted those circumstances by obfuscating the clear evidence, with help of incompetent investigators cocking up the investigation but there is a phrase you'd do to learn well, often used in British Politics "Cock up or Conspiracy".
"how many illnesses, accidents, etc will happen before they are exposed for what they are"
This is conspiratorial thinking at it's best. It's impossible that people can ever die of natural causes, there always has to be foul play. That a drug addict can die from a drug overdose. Wow, he must have been poisoned, John Belushi was getting too close to the truth!
"american public has yet to see the Zappruder film"
Yeah, it only obscenely shows their President having his head blown open. Maybe THAT is why it isn't sent to every tabloid! What it supposedly reveals is UTTERLY IRRELEVANT. Costner's character is an anti-intellectual who disparages "fancy physics" and insists blindly that the head will always move away from the direction a bullet if fired on. Real world tests reveal this to be a false assumption. Hit a watermellon on the side with a tangential trajectory and the body will fly laterally to the path of the bullet.
"smells like it, feels like it, looks like it. Call it what it is. Fascism."
Spurious superficial logic, with typical anti-intellectual "I'll just call it" approach, certainly not using scientific vigour. He doesn't seem to know the first thing about fascism, refusing to be given autopsy photos of a murdered president is NOT fascism!
"To reverse Kennedy's Withdraw from Vietnam"
Kennedy was completely committed in Vietnam, just 3-week before he was assassinated he supported/allowed a coup of the very unpopular Diem government at the hope of more joining the communist cause. He sent so many advisers, spies and other agents and spent so much money on South Vietnam and nothing about his past actions and commitments indicated he'd go against that.
"accuses literally EVERYONE of being party to this conspiracy from the CIA, FBI, Secret Service, Army, Politicians, Media"
This is where the conspiracy utterly breaks down, all these organisations have EVERY REASON to keep the president alive, and they have NO REASON to in any way assist in such an assassination. If they wanted rid of Kennedy there were other ways: there was an election in 12 months and he was having numerous affairs... duuh, soil his character. It's 1964, 30 year later remember the SHITSTORM over Monica Lewinsky. Or just frame him. That's how REAL conspiracies work, that's how Nixon tried to do it. And got caught.
"who profits most"
is the dumbest logic to base any motive. By that logic no one would ever want to be left anything in someone's will as they'd automatically be murder suspect number one if they die "suspiciously". It defies all logic to say "person who benefits most is most likely to have committed the crime". If a shop is broken into at great cost, thief makes off with $100 in cash but the repair man is paid $1'000 repairing damage... then the repair man benefited most from the crime... therefore he must have been the blaggard who broke into the store that night.
Except that's stupid. Why would a respected repair man resort to crime that could cost him life and freedom when there will ALWAYS be work and if the shop's broken it doesn't guarantee work for them, it could go to their competition.
The $80 Billion arms industry wasn't from Vietnam, it was for preparing for World War 3. Endless nuclear missiles, jets, radar and ships stockpiled for a war that ideally would never come. Swiss has a huge internal arms industry yet they haven't fought a war in 500 years.
"they're your property, you paid for them"
That logic does not work when a drunk driver slurs that at a police officer "heeuy, I pay you're salary, aaahhm ur boss" it does not work here. Secrets are secrets. Loose lips sink ships. Or in the Cold War, spare documents blow agents covers where they have their body parts fed to them in a Siberian hell hole. Paranoia was justified.
*Tragic loan trumpet starts playing*
You know that Oliver Stone and the editors were pissing themselves laughing when it got to this bit, they just did the "million mom's donating their dimes to his cause" they are piling on the schmaltz by the truckload.
"to see their kids got to Vietnam. Why?"
Because Communist North Vietnam was attacking and trying to invade South Vietnam, America's Ally. That's why.
In ALL of his closing argument he fails to summarise a single point of evidence for why the defendant is guilty. He just used this trial as a front for his nonsense conspiracy theory.