Meaning the goal is to generate confusion in the case, and discredit witnesses who mostly had excellent reputations, and didn't support the official cover-up.
What happened to Jim Garrison is exactly what happened to Sarah Palin.
To prove my point, go back and read MSM articles about Garrison before the assassination and Clay Shaw trial. Garrison only became a ‘wacko’ after he decided to investigate! Read about Dorothy Killgalen who got the story from Ruby.
Now fast forward to this years election. Go to google news and read MSM articles about Palin dated prior to JULY 2008 back through 2006. They were complimentary of her back then.
Fletcher Prouty had an excellent record of service to his country until he came out on JFK, strange huh?
***"Here’s a site that debunks a lot of stuff."***
I think you may want to research Fletcher Prouty a bit more before you defend him, like the wacky things that came out of his mouth, not what other people said about him. Same for Jim Garrison.
So debunking theories with evidence, photographs and documented facts is “Intel, disinformation”.
By those standards, nothing is true, anything can be disinformation, it depends what the meaning of “is” is, etc. That is deconstruction on your part, you can dismiss any evidence pointing to Oswald as “disinformation”, what is real information and what is “disinformation”?
All of the evidence points to Oswald, all of the conspiracy theories contradict each other. This is the most investigated crime in the history of civilization and STILL the evidence points to Oswald. Tell me what you think happened 11/22/63.