Posted on 04/07/2025 4:37:43 AM PDT by MtnClimber
After today I promise to move on to other topics. But for today, some final thoughts on the Kennedy assassination and conspiracy theories.
Prolific commenter Richard Greene points out that immediately after issuance of findings by the Warren Commission, something like 87% of Americans accepted those findings. Today, it is more like 30%. What happened?
Put aside for the moment the “anomalies” that I have identified in this series. They are significant, but they are not the most important reason for the change. The most important reason for the change is that we have learned from bitter experience that the criminal justice and national security agencies of our country are only too willing to use their powers to seek to control who runs the government. Among the tactics we now know that they will use, because they have been caught red-handed using them: spying on the campaign of the lead candidate of the opposition; helping to spread false information (e.g., the Steele dossier on Trump) to undermine that campaign; bringing baloney criminal charges against the disfavored candidate in order to take him out of the race; enlisting and pressuring social media platforms into systematically suppressing the political speech of the opposition; suppressing information unfavorable to the favored political party or its candidates (e.g., the Hunter Biden laptop); and so forth.
If these agencies are willing to engage in such clearly improper behavior in the attempt to swing elections and get their favored candidates into power, then why exactly would they not be willing to go to the next step and do an assassination?
The second most important reason for the greatly increased receptivity to conspiracy theories is something closely related. A strong argument against Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories has always been that a hypothesized conspiracy involves too many people for the secret to be kept. If a hypothesized conspiracy involves many people in the CIA, perhaps some more in the FBI, and yet some more in “the mob,” surely at some point someone would have spilled the beans. I certainly would have thought that. But somehow, the spying on the Trump campaign involved lots of people, but it never would have become public if Trump had not won the 2017 election. The “Censorship Industrial Complex” would never have become public unless Elon Musk had bought Twitter. The details of how information about the Hunter Biden laptop was suppressed within the FBI are only becoming public now that Kash Patel has taken the helm of that agency. These agencies have much more ability to keep a deep secret than I ever would have thought possible — at least if the deep secret relates to controlling who gets to be in power in the government.
And then we come to the various “anomalies” that I have identified — facts at least arguably undermining the “lone shooter” narrative. The government has had the ability to address these anomalies for decades, but has mostly chosen not to do so. Now, it is probably too late.
For example, consider the anomaly of George de Mohrenschildt. At some point along the way the government could have said “yes, we sent George de Mohrenschildt to keep tabs on Oswald.” They could have released all of their files on de Mohrenschildt. Undoubtedly, there have been plausible reasons for not doing that. Such a release could have undermined de Mohrenschildt’s subsequent work in Haiti, or could have embarrassed the CIA for its role in Haiti. But in the absence of a full accounting of what de Mohrenschildt was up to, Oswald’s sending him a photograph showing the newly-purchased rifle certainly raises questions. Why would Oswald send such a picture to de Mohrenschildt unless he was discussing with de Mohrenschildt some potential use of the weapon?
Similar issues arise with the government’s failure to address the subject of Jack Ruby. Anyone would look at Ruby’s killing of Oswald as exceedingly suspicious. Why would the government possibly not do a thorough and comprehensive investigation of everything related to Ruby?
It may well be that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in planning and carrying out the assassination of President Kennedy. But the American people have a healthy level of skepticism as to whether that is all there is to it, and their skepticism is fully justified.
The Kennedy Assassination And The Persistence Of Conspiracy Theories -- Part I
The Kennedy Assassination And The Persistence Of Conspiracy Theories -- Part II
The Kennedy Assassination And The Persistence Of Conspiracy Theories -- Part III
The Kennedy Assassination And The Persistence Of Conspiracy Theories -- Part IV
The Kennedy Assassination And The Persistence Of Conspiracy Theories -- Part V
Smokeing Gun...
Manhattan Contrarian ping
Dallas PD: no gunshot residue on Oswald..
MtnClimber wrote:
“
The previous FR posts on this topic are here:
The Kennedy Assassination And The Persistence Of Conspiracy Theories — Part I
The Kennedy Assassination And The Persistence Of Conspiracy Theories — Part II
The Kennedy Assassination And The Persistence Of Conspiracy Theories — Part III
The Kennedy Assassination And The Persistence Of Conspiracy Theories — Part IV
The Kennedy Assassination And The Persistence Of Conspiracy Theories — Part V
“
Many thanks for the links!
That Francis is quick—and bold. You can’t slip anything by him.
Next you know, he’ll start doubting the moon landings, 9/11, and our election processes!
Oswald didnt fire a weapon on Nov 22nd - including the shooting of officer Tippett.
What a big. Nothing burger that all was, huh?
Pretty clear that Oswald didn’t shoot Tippett.
But bolt action rifles are not like handguns as far as the possibility of gunshot residue is concerned. I have not seen a competent study of residue from rifles, but I’d like to see one.
But I have stood in the Schoolbook depository window and looked down at the street. Making that shot is not “easy” but as a longtime deer hunter, I have seen guys make more difficult shots look easy. No question in my mind that an expert rifle shooter could make that shot from that window.
This is a textbook example of why the 57% who used to believe Oswald acted alone no longer do. Because the Internet has given everybody with a computer the ability to post incorrect or incomplete information -- invariably represented as the gospel truth -- where the entire world can see it.
Direct cut-and-paste from the actual Warren Report:
During the evening of November 22, the Dallas Police Department performed paraffin tests on Oswald's hands and right cheek in an apparent effort to determine, by means of a scientific test, whether Oswald had recently fired a weapon. The results were positive for the hands and negative for the right cheek. Expert testimony before the Commission was to the effect that the paraffin test was unreliable in determining whether or not a person has fired a rifle or revolver. The Commission has, therefore, placed no reliance on the paraffin tests administered by the Dallas police.
On the face of it this would seem to incriminate Oswald in the murder of Dallas Patrolman J. D. Tippit but exculpate (or at least not incriminate) him in the Kennedy assassination. Except the Warren Commission Report also references a test in which FBI Agent Charles L. Killion fired three rounds from the Oswald rifle using an ammunition "similar" to what Oswald (allegedly) used and then was administered a paraffin test. Afterwards, both of Agent Killion's hands and his right cheek tested negative for GSR.
The Dallas police DID FIND GSR on Oswald's hands, so to state "no gunshot residue on Oswald" is patently false. And whether the lack of GSR on his right cheek is exculpatory is debatable since testing with the same weapon showed it could be fired without leaving GSR on the shooter's cheek.
This also is an example of why the influence of misinformation continues to grow with time. It took me close to 400 words to comprehensively refute seven words of misinformation. And the body of documented facts on the Kennedy assassination has been more or less static for 60+ years, but misinformation continues to be invented.
As Jonathan Swift wrote, "Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it."
Not proved.
Not proved.
ConclusionThe foregoing evidence establishes that two eyewitnesses who heard the shots and saw the shooting of Dallas Police Patrolman J. D. Tippit and seven eyewitnesses who saw the flight of the gunman with revolver in hand positively identified Lee Harvey Oswald as the man they saw fire the shots or flee from the scene,...
FACT: There were multiple eye-witnesses to Oswald shooting Dallas Patrolman J. D. Tippit.
and you know this how? The people who saw Oswald shoot Tippit didn't really see that?
The guy who followed Oswald to the theater didnt see that?
The theater cashier didn't see Oswald run in without paying.
The cops who Oswald tried to shoot in the theater didn't see that?
Ok. You know more.
Correct, we all know the USG FBI Warren Report is 100% trustworthy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.