Bugliosi's "Conclusion of No Conspiracy"

[Steve Howsley]

I have always thought that is the most persuasive statement from VB regarding the very high probability that Oswald acted in isolation. He couldn't trust anyone and no one with any common sense could trust him.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

I have always that is the most persuasive statement from VB regarding the very high probability that Oswald acted in isolation. He couldn't trust anyone and no one with any common sense could trust him.

He once described himself as: "The son of an insurance salesman whose early death left a far mean streak of independence brought on by neglect."

[Bill Chapman]

I have always that is the most persuasive statement from VB regarding the very high probability that Oswald acted in isolation. He couldn't trust anyone and no one with any common sense could trust him.

Working alone was the smart move. Nobody to rat on him.

[Jerry Freeman]

If V. Bugliosi's Reclaiming History is so impactful, revealing, and such a pillar of accuracy and truth...why isn't available online?
From the video...
Bugerlosi claimed that "Oswald read the newspaper every day except that Friday when he killed Kennedy." 
How in the blazes of hell could he possibly have know that?
 

[Jerry Freeman]

  If Marina was willing to come back to him, a possibility he already knew was faint, he was prepared to forego his plans concerning Kennedy. If Marina, then, had agreed to come back to Oswald on the night before the president came to Dallas, it is almost a certainty the assassination would never have taken place. Oswald?s entreaty to Marina to come back to him on the night before the assassination virtually precludes, all by itself, the existence of a conspiracy.

Among the most absurd fables I've ever read.
       
     

 



 
 

[John Mytton]

10. Not only wouldn?t any group of conspirators ever dream of putting its entire future into the hands of Oswald, but the evidence is very clear that Oswald himself, being such a loner and someone with a mind of his own who disliked taking orders from anyone, would be highly unlikely to work with anyone else on such a mission.23 As author Jean Davison points out, the ultimate weakness of the conspiracy theorists? contention that Lee Harvey Oswald was framed is their erroneous conception of Oswald. ?In every conspiracy book, Oswald is a piece of chaff blown about by powerful, unseen forces?he?s a dumb and compliant puppet with no volition of his own.?24 But we know from all the evidence that Oswald was the exact opposite of this, in the extreme, that he was anything but meek and malleable. Here?s someone who described himself as having a ?mean streak of independence?; someone who for awhile in grade school even refused to salute the flag in the morning with his fellow students;25 someone who, during high school, when ordered to jog around the field with the other players during tryouts for the football team, told the coach, ?This is a free country, and I don?t have to do it?;26 someone who, as a fellow marine who was stationed with Oswald in Japan said, ?was often in trouble for failure to adhere to rules and regulations and gave the impression of disliking any kind of authority?;27 and someone who, as another marine who was stationed with Oswald in San Diego said, ?was an argumentative type of person [who] would frequently take the opposite side of an argument just for the sake of a debate.?28       

There were no exceptions to this perception of Oswald?s independence from those who knew him. A member of the Russian emigr? community in Dallas said that Oswald wasn?t ?responsible enough to have?anybody above him really telling him what to do.?29* ?He resented any type of authority,? another said.30 Still another said, ?I just thought he was a person that couldn?t get along with anybody or anyone.?31       

Yet the conspiracy theorists want us to believe that the man who couldn?t get along in school, couldn?t get along in the Marines, someone we know couldn?t even get along with his own wife, was supposedly selected by a group of conspirators to get along with them in committing the biggest murder in American history.       

No one knew Oswald better than Marina, and when she was asked, under oath, by the HSCA, ?Can you visualize him working with an accomplice?? she answered, ?Personally, I can?t,? basing this on the fact, she said, that ?living with a person for a few years you?have some kind of intuition about what he might do or might not.?32 Earlier, before the Warren Commission, when she was asked whether she felt that her husband ?acted in concert with someone else,? she responded, ?No, only alone.?       
?You are convinced that his action was his action alone, that he was influenced by no one else??       
?Yes, I am convinced.?33       


Marina?s biographer, Priscilla McMillan, who spent a great number of hours interviewing Marina, writes, ?I have often asked Marina whether Lee might have been capable of joining with an accomplice to kill the President. Never, she says. Lee was too secretive ever to have told anyone his plans. Nor could he have acted in concert, accepted orders, or obeyed any plan by anybody else. The reason Marina gives is that Lee had no use for the opinions of anybody but himself. He had only contempt for other people. ?He was a lonely person,? she says. ?He trusted no one. He was too sick. It [killing Kennedy] was the fantasy of a sick person, to get attention only for himself.?? McMillan says that Marina believed that with respect to the assassination, Lee acted on impulse and first thought seriously about killing the President only a day or two before he did it.34       

Not that by itself it would carry great weight, but it should be noted that no evidence has ever surfaced that Oswald, either around the time of the assassination or at any prior time, ever hinted, even accidentally, to anyone, including his wife, that he was working for or associated with any agency or group of people, and the Warren Commission, after an exhaustive inquiry, was unable to find any such evidence. And as to Oswald?s connection to any other individual, such as Jack Ruby, Warren Commission assistant counsel Arlen Specter said, ?The Commission left no stone unturned to track down Oswald?s background to the maximum extent possible, to see if he had dealings with anyone else who might have been a co-conspirator,? and nothing was found.3
RHVB



JohnM

[John Mytton]

11. As we?ve seen in this book, at the time of the assassination and Ruby?s killing of Oswald, those who knew Oswald and Ruby well, including family members, rejected the likelihood or notion that either had acted in concert with others to carry out their respective deeds. Yet years later, thousands of conspiracy theorists, not one of whom knew or had ever met either Oswald or Ruby, are convinced Oswald (in those cases where they don?t go further and say he was just a patsy) and Ruby were members of a conspiracy. On this one point alone of familiarity with the subject, who is more likely to be correct?those who knew the two men or those who did not?
RHVB



JohnM