Progressive Populism for the 21st Century

Populismo Progresista para el Siglo XXI!!!

Rw005g

Rw005g
Location
Constantinople, Eastern Roman Empire/Byzantium
Birthday
December 31
Title
Strategos
Company
Kataphractoi
Bio
Veni, Vidi, Vici is better than Veni, Vidi, Vixi. Vici is always better than Vixi.

MY RECENT POSTS

MAY 1, 2010 8:48PM

Congress Admits Lee Harvey Oswald Didn't Act Alone

Rate: 24 Flag

Wonder why this happened? 

 

I have been reading alot about the JFK assasination lately, accessing online government depository documents and various publications issued in the 1960s and 1970s (most of which are out of print and can't be found at Barnes and Noble, but can be purchased through Amazon.com).

Contrary to popular belief, the Warren Commission didn't have the final say when it came to analyzing the JFK assassination. Amid great public uproar concerning the accuracy and candor of the Warren Commission, in 1976 the US House of Representatives established the House Select Committee on Assassinations, to re-examine the facts behind the assassinations of President JFK and Martin Luther King, Jr.

The Committee's results, while public record, were never widely publicized. Interestingly, the Committee officially stated that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't act alone, and that yes, there were additional shots fired by an unknown person located at the infamous "grassy knoll." The Committee stated that there WAS, indeed, a 4th shot, as shown by accoustical evidence analysis put forth by the National Academy of Sciences.  

Although the Committee was careful to not point fingers at specific organized crime families, foreign governments, local organizations or even US government organizations, they worded their conclusions in a manner that didn't rule-out individual members of said organizations acting together, illicitly, without the approval of the organizations they worked for.

Finally, the Committee Report was highly critical of the FBI and Secret Service, not only for their unusual and aberrant behavior during the day of the assassination (All of the traditional tactics, routines and procedures for Presidential protection, procedures that had been in place for 30 years prior to the assassination and most of which are still in-place today, were oddly abandoned on that day in Dallas), but also for their behavior after the assassination, particularly, the impetuous manner with which they propounded the "single gunman" theory, the speed with which they announced it was Lee Harvey Oswald, their immediate insistence that there was no conspiracy and their ruling-out the existence of any potential accomplices (something that no sensible law enforcement investigation, even in a normal homicide, ever does).

These criticisms extended to the CIA as well. Indeed, the Chief Counsel for the Committee, G. Robert Blakey, accused the CIA of very sketchy behavior throughout the course of the investigation and hearings. At various times, Chief Counsel Blakey issued official complaints to the Justice Department, officially charging the CIA with Obstruction of Justice. Usually such complaints would result in an investigation, but this was one of the rare circumstances in which the DOJ did nothing.  

The Committee also stated that the assassination of Martin Luther King was also, probably, the product of a conspiracy, even though only one person served as the gun-man. This makes sense. While James Earl Ray clearly fired the shot that killed Dr. King, other people must have supported him, worked with him and financed him. These things don't happen in a vacuum. Just ask Archduke Franz Ferdinand.

If anybody wants more information, please review this wikipedia article, and the books it cites at the bottom. I also encourage you to obtain a copy of the Committee's report, on Amazon.com. http://www.amazon.com/Final-Report-Select-Committee-Assassinations/dp/0979009960/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1272761126&sr=8-1

I also suggest that you read the book, "Praetorian Guard," (1991, South End Press) by John Stockwell, former CIA Angola Task Force Director (no small job, considering the fact that Angola was a Communist nation, with active Cuban regular and guerilla fighters supporting the dictatorship, all the while fighting a constant low-intensity battles against American and Portugese troops and insurgents).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_on_Assassinations

At the end of the day, I am a little shocked that I hadn't previously heard about this Committee, these hearings and this report. I always thought that the Warren Commission was the end-all, be-all of official pronouncements and analysis concerning the assassination. I guess I was wrong. I had no idea that Congress officially disagreed with the Warren Commission, that it conducted its own investigation and issued its own report that not only contradicted the Warren Commission, but criticized the CIA and FBI of obstruction of justice. This is big news, but we never hear about it, we only hear about the Warren Commission.

This is yet one more example of how we should never be content with conventional thought and conventional opinion, because, most of the time, it is wrong. We should always think, always probe and always ask questions, never being complacent with what others tell us we should think.

Author tags:

jfk, kennedy, populist, populism

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
Back and to the left...
May I recommend a book to you? Legacy of Secrecy by Lamar Waldron and Thom Hartmann. This has been in print for a while, but the most recent update includes the name of the believed "grassy knoll" shooter and ties together the Watergate burglary with the JFK assassination (as well as RFK's and MLK's.
I think if you google the book you will get a web site too.
I shall check those out. What amazes me is that CONGRESS labeled these conspiracies, and yet, people get nervous when you say they were conspiracies. Its almost as if we WANT to believe the Warren Commission, because the truth is too scary to accept. Even when your own government tells you said truth, we still don't want to think about it. Scary.
Rw I am shocked that a man of your intellectual acumen ever bought even a single word in the Warren cover up . Eisenhower dutifully warned every American in his closing address that their was a vast conspiracy afoot his backing of Nixon consisted of making fun of him in front of the press core ; when a reporter asked him what policies Nixon had helped him formulate in his role as vice president Eisenhower quipped give me a couple of weeks to think about it I'll think of one. This lost Nixon the election which was exactly what Eisenhower wanted since he believed Nixon was intellectually ill equipped to deal with the conspirators. History would bear Eisenhower's suspicions of Nixon out they simply used there growing media machine to run him out of office. Kennedy was a different animal he was not about to turn over control of the most powerful nation on earth to a bunch of inbreed pansy's from Europe and their creepy American henchmen ( Bush senior : read Family of Secrets by Russ Baker ) who liked to lay naked in coffins and recount their sexual exploits ( the Skull and Bones initiation ritual ) Kennedy stymied their efforts to engage America in the quagmire of Vietnam just like Eisenhower and he surrounded himself with his own people he would not be caught dead taking advice from a talking rat like Henry Kissinger. In order for them to complete the take over that Eisenhower had warned about Kennedy had to die and he did. The stink of Oswald's CIA connections necessitated him also being shot on national TV by a loyal mob gunmen ( take it from me Rw you were not involved in topless bars especially back then unless you were a dues paid up mobster they were a license to print money ) while surrounded by a hundred Dallas police officers enter Lyndon Johnson and the happy days of Vietnam. Kennedys brother decides to run for office and is also gunned down by a man who had obviously undergone some kind of psychic driving technique as latter was discovered being practiced by the CIA in the MKultra fiasco in the early seventies. These are the facts of the case one can argue endlessly with professional debunkers like Gerald Posner about shots from grassy knolls and view tapes like the ones distributed by the late William Cooper showing the driver of the limo turn around and pop Kennedy but like you Rw I prefer to stick to the facts wasn’t it Bob Dylan that said you don’t need a weather man to tell you which way the wind blows
Jack Ruby and the Dallas Mob clearly knew more than they let-on. This was so much bigger than most people realize.
Your welcome, Bonnie. This, Vietnam and Watergate are all related in a way, and they all serve to discredit many of the folks in government, as well as many of the ways our government handles things. We can't afford to be as complacent as the "Great Silent Majority" was back in the 1960s and 1970s. When they should've asked more questions, when they should've raised the heat and pushed the government to do more, they did nothing, except drink the Cool-Aid. We can't afford to let these sorts of things happen again. There is simply too much at stake.
I am not much of a conspiracy theorist - I think these days, with the Internet, DNA, video cameras everywhere, it's kind of hard to work a complex conspiracy - but 1963 was the dinosaur era technologically, and whenever someone insists Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone and that there was no conspiracy, I ask, "What's the story with Jack Ruby?" Nobody ever has a satisfactory explanation for a non-political club owner with deep debts to the Mob plugging Oswald on national TV.
Indeed. The Mob is clearly suspect #1.
Just read about George de Mohrenschildt, this guy's connections, and the role he played in Oswald's life practically put the whole conspiracy together.
Sean lives I recomended your book up their sean
Cranky Cuss,
It's so difficult to put a conspiracy together, with all the in depth, investigative journalism in our media, and a public that is so questioning of the talking points and half-truth put out there by politicians. Lol... Like that underwear bomber, there was a man on the plane with him, that helped him out... The MSM didn't report that whatsoever, why would there by anything to hide if we were getting the truth of the matter?

CNN Eye Witnesses: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGacWPV6MLA&feature=related

Webster Tarpley on the incident: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v71_IlcYftM&feature=related
Apparently, J. Edgar Hoover, the head of the FBI had tremendous power and was a bit strange. He could have been involved.
Sorry, but this is old news to those of us who lived thru all this. Like Obama's birth certificate, no amount of evidence is going to convince conspiracy theorists that the Kennedy assassination wasn't a plot, but so far no one has produced a shred of evidence tied to any of the alleged conspirators -- the CIA, LBJ, the Mafia.

But if you really want the truth -- or as close as we're ever likely to get -- you should read Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy by Vincent Bugliosi
Of course it was a conspiracy. We conspire to shoot everyone who tells the truth. But the idea of taking ownership for our actions is what makes the whole concept unacceptable. We like the idea it's just some lone nut acting out but the reality is we manufacture these people. From Lincoln to Lennon, it wasn't just bad luck they were all killed.
The interesting thing is that in the Post War United States, very rarely is it that conservative establishment figures get whacked, but only liberal, progressive, revolutionary types. Even those few right-wingers who are whacked, or whom people attempt to whack, are revolutionary in some way. So, on the left, we have MLK, JFK, RFK, Malcolm X, Medgar Evars, Bobby Hutton. On the right, its only reactionary, revolutionary folks like George Wallace (attempted assassination) and the neoNazi, George Lincoln Rockwell. It seems that the extremists all get whacked, on both sides of the aisle, and only the moderate, status-quo supporters remain.

I wonder if this is part of official policy? That the Establishment tries to create domestic order and avoid domestic turmoil by whacking those political figures, on both sides of the political spectrum, in order to prevent domestic upheaval in times of civil unrest? The problem with this, of course, is that (a) its immoral and (b) its undemocratic. Its undemocratic because the people have a right to choose leaders and political beliefs for themselves. Its patronizing and absolutist for an Establishment to tell us which ideas are good, and which are bad, and to "protect" us by killing-off those whose ideas they disagree with. I think this is part of the normal policy of COINTELPRO, which should also be looked at, more closely, by Congress.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
Tom, you shouldn't equate the suspicion about the Kennedy Assassination, with nutjob Tea Party suspicions about Obama's Birth Certificate. Even CONGRESS, as cited above, thinks that Lee Harvey Oswald had accomplices.

Sure, some conspiracies are dreamed up by psychopath nutjubs, but the attention we pay to such folks only serves to delegitimize those who criticize and cast light on the real plots and plans of those in power. Look at how Hitler conspired with high ranking Nazis to commit the Holocaust and conquer Europe. This was a conspiracy. Look at how the US conspired to get involved in the Spanish American War, in order to have access to raw materials in the Carribean and Pacific. Look at how the US conspired in Vietnam, and later, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Some "conspiracies" are clearly the domain of nuts. But I think we as a society focus on them and discredit them to the degree that we do, only so that we can discredit and label as "nuts" those who actually have something important to say.

Again, if this is "fantasy" then why did CONGRESS say there were accomplices?
Yeah, just looked up that book. It, like Posner's, is a major defense of the Warren Commission. That being said, CONGRESS REFUTED the WARREN COMMISSION, as said above.
Funny, not ha ha but odd that I spent the summer immersed in JFK's murder. For me, the absolute best book on the subject is called: (be back gotta look it up. which is strange because I had all of Maui reading this and watching the videos.)
JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters by James W. Douglass

This book is a must read. Check out the comments on Amazon.com
Wendy--looks like a good book. I just ordered it off Amazon! Thanks for the suggestion! 8)
Copolla cleared it all up: (not perfect quotations)
"MICHAEL. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE. YOU'RE TALKING AS IF YOU CAN KILL THE PRESIDENT."
"TOM. I'M SURPRISED AT YOU. IF HISTORY HAS TAUGHT US ANYTHING...IT IS THAT YOU CAN KILL ANYONE."
Then, of course, Michael has Hyman, surrounded by FBI at Miami Airport, offed.
Copolla knew what we all knew and from the start and what we never needed ten thousand conspiracy books to know.
I was listening to KPFK's latest Background Briefing program today, and they had a professor who specializes in conspiracy theories on at the end of Sunday's broadcast.

As a person who read 40 of the 44 volumes of the Warren Commission report as part of my PhD research, I can tell you that the official findings of the commission totally ignored the mountain of evidence indicating that an actual conspiracy did exist around the shooting of JFK.

Only a few of the many facts: The magic bullet that went through JFK and Gov. Conally, and yet didn't have a single nick in it.

The fact that the Armed Forces best marksmen could never duplicate Oswald's rapidity and accuracy in firing.

And most damning of all, the film showing the Secret Service director waving away the agents from the back of the President's car just before it goes in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building.

That, and the fact that numerous movies show crowds of people running towards the grassy knoll, where they were convinced the fatal shots came from.

Also, an unprecedented number of key witnesses and accomplices died mysterious deaths in a very short period of time after the assassination.

And the most likely suspects are the Mafia, that may have blackmailed J. Edgar Hoover (who incidentally spiked an urgent memo from the Dallas Field Office dated Nov. 9th stating that a plot against the President was imminent in Dallas).

This in my opinion was a true conspiracy, and you only need one real one to keep the loony conspiracy theories (9/11, Obama's birth certificate) alive and well.

The most important thing about the JFK assassination to me is that the absolutely worst people in the United States were behind JFK's assassination, and these same elements are spiritually alive and well today in the form of backing the Tea Party movement, extreme anti-abortionists, and Christian fundies.

There is a dark side to the United States of America that will never die.
'never being complacent with what others tell us we should think.'

Amen.
Oh that's interesting old new lefty, the Kennedy assassination is the 'acceptable' conspiracy to believe in... All the others are for the tinfoil hat people.
ONL--That's fascinating evidence. I, for one, support Big Government for purposes of taxing the wealthy, redistributing wealth in the form of infrastructure, internal improvements, improving the qualitative aspects of the US economy and nation, subsidizing, to a degree, export-based US manufacturing and the like.

I fear Big Gvt when it comes to the FBI, CIA and the like. Their record has been less than democratic, particularly in the 1960s and 1970s, with COINTELPRO and the like. These groups follow the commands of who? Is it only the President? Are they fully accountable to the President? Can Congress really exert pressure on them? Isn't it true that we aren't allowed to know how much money they spend? WTF? Is that Constitutional? Why are they not accountable to the people?

In many ways, we have become a 21st century version of old Prussia, of whom it was said, were an army with a country, rather than a country with an army. We are like Prussia, in that we are an intelligence establishment and military industrial complex with a country, rather than a country that possesses and controls these things. We have very little control over them. Its like "Wag the Dog."

The thing is, with the United States, there is always a high level economic/social interest that favors certain policies. Look at how many blue-bloods were in the OSS and later, CIA. Many Roosevelts, many Ivy Leaguers and such. We are a republic, and the politicians always dance to the beat of the wealthiest and most well-connected drummer. Many of these drummers even work within our intelligence/defense-related bureaucracy.

Legislative battles are in effect, proxy wars between these competing economic and social interests. Which economic/social interests most favored the American Empire? Which supported the pseudo-fascist policies folks in HUAAC and COINTELPRO engaged in? Who gained the most, financially and politically, from the Red-Scares? Who gained the most from McCarthyism? Was it only Joe McCarthy? I think not. Many were enablers.

Rational Choice, although not a very useful tool when looking at irrational actors, is a highly useful tool when looking at how businesses and high-level, sophisticated actors play politics. Game theory is like this. He who gained the most from X, is usually the one who supported X. Prosecutors use this logic, as do police detectives, when analyzing and constructing a list of possible suspects in a standard criminal investigation.

If we just think about this issue a bit, and be rational and reasonable, the world makes a lot more sense.
I certainly didn't mean to put the JFK conspirasists in the same league with the Birthers. What I meant to suggest is that for some people, in both cases, there will never be enough proof.

With JFK the facts are that there are damned few facts and an endless well of suspicions -- as ONL's comment makes plain. Could the CIA or the Mafia have been involved? Of course. Were they? As I said, despite the multitude of suspicions, there is not a shred of real evidence to support that conclusion.

In such matters, I apply Occam's Razor, and in this case, as in countless others thru-out history, a lone-nut with imagined grievances and a desperate need for attention is almost always the culprit -- as unexciting and unsatisfying as that answer may be.
Then why did the House Select Committee on Assassinations say the opposite?
In response to "occam's razor," I quote the great Sherlock Holmes:

"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
"Few facts?"

It is so unfortunate to hear what should otherwise be intelligent, informed voices making so little sense...whether intentionally, or not.

A duly empaneled jury has deliberated upon the matter of President Kennedy's assassination, and delivered judgment.

The American Way recognizes the Jury as a direct manifestation of the People's sovereignty, and of the individuals' of which it is comprised.

This is The Law in the matter. Only anarchists or operatives of the Roman Anti-Christ's "Fifth Column" will dispute it:

824 F.2d 916 (1987)
E. Howard HUNT, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Victor L. MARCHETTI, Defendant,
Liberty Lobby, a D.C. Corp., Defendant-Appellee.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18356532457876733136&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr

Richard Nixon and his Knight of Malta, Hitler-financing mentor's son, GHW Bush, led a team from the Roman Catholic, Knight of Malta-led CIA to "reverse" NSAM263 and EO11,110, sending 58,000 of their betters to die fighting whig, Jeffersonian, Ho Chi Minh, in Rome's latifundial estate of Vietnam on behalf of the five percent Roman Catholics who owned 95% of that country's wealth.

Say otherwise and know yourself to be ignorant, an ineducable fool, a liar, or a traitor.

They've yet to be brought to justice because they were working for Vatican banker Rockefeller and Rome's "Black Aristocracy." How else did only the Roman Catholics on SCOTUS justify appointing a dry drunk, draft-dodging closet-queen as POTUS? Why else have Bush and Cheney yet to be brought to justice for 9/11? (Viz. "The New Pearl Harbor," Griffin, Ph.D.).

Thomas Jefferson was a genius, and bright enough to recognize the same soci0-political historical "engine for enslaving mankind" which comprised the Ancien Regime, The Old Sectarian Order of king and pope: caesaropapism...the default social order in human history before whig, Jeffersonian, American Exceptionalism.

Never wondered why one of the three mottoes of Our Creed is "Novus Ordo Seclorem," The New Secular Order? There was no "old" secular order.

Use your brains, or be just one more, yet to be "unplugged," slave.

[delete it again and it won't have been in error...you really should read Jefferson's writings. He, too, was schooled in the Law, and he gained immortality with the cause he chose: fighting the Roman Anti-Christ by Founding America.]
This post has been attracting a lot of attention as well it should if I had to pick a turning point in American history when it all started to go wrong it would have to be the assassination of JFK. Kennedy was not killed in a vacuum in my previous comment I outlined the back round, and given that back round no American had any excuse to view Kennedys assassination as anything less than a coup by exactly the people who Eisenhower had warned Americans of. When it was time to take to the street with their precious guns that they are always fawning over and exercise their second amendment right which they exalt with a religious fervor what did Americans do ? Well they had a barbecue and watched the murderous usurpers cavort on their brand new color TV sets each one trying to outdo the next one with preposterous fairy tales of magic bullets and sentimental hit men who had such a crush on that over priced prostitute Jackie that they could no longer suffer Oswald (an obvious CIA operative ) to live. Then a whole generation kicked off their shoes grew their hair long and recited bad poetry courtesy of Alan Ginsberg if the generation that beat back Hitler and Hirohito were the best generation then their offspring must certainly be considered the worst. They were cowards each and every one of them with the exception of Bob Dylan ( it would take a whole post which I will provide in the future ) and Jim Morrison ( before he was run out of the country his picture adorned the cover of life magazine with the caption exclaiming that he was the most dangerous man alive an amplified poet in black leather jeans that was likely to start a revolution in America) and a few incoherent radicals together with the black panthers who understandably were only worried about black people. Emboldened the usurpers went on a rampage and killed every leader that was a threat to them Robert Kennedy and MLK were felled in short order and Americans responded by attending Woodstock. It became somewhat of an elitist sport; shooting people of substance it was culminated in the early eighties with George Herbert Walker Bush demonstrating his distain for western civilization when he had John Hinckley Jr. the son of John Hinckley Sr., chairman of the oil company Vanderbilt Energy Corp., one of Vice President George H. W. Bush's larger political and financial supporters in his 1980 presidential primary campaign against Ronald Reagan empty a revolver at Reagan not two months into Reagan's first term. They blamed that one on a disturbed crush for … Jodie Foster ? almost as absurd as the Ruby loves Jackie but yet overfed Americans were only to happy to believe it.
There are even a few doubters today that Jesus Christ rose to heaven on a purple cloud after the crucifixion. A fascinating piece of fiction on the Kennedy murder: Sisters by Robert Littell
The same identifiable faction, called "the real Anti-Christ" by Thomas Jefferson, which killed John Kennedy, crucified tens of thousands for the second conviction for sedition, under codified Roman law. Sedition was to deny that Caesar was God. Crucifixion was administered for no other "crime."

Known to the "knowledgeable" as the "Black Aristocracy," the same families in Europe have lived in the same castles on the same hills for two and three thousand years. Their "Knights of Malta" run the Vatican, by their own public admission, now "headed" by a gay Hitler Youth-alum found to have a "Gentleman of the Pope" procuring for him homosexual prostitutes.

Who knew?

America's Founder knew.

Rockefeller works for Rome and built Roman Catholic "Big Oil" on unredressed murder and arson.

Bushes have fronted for the Rockefellers for five generations.

Why "reinvent the wheel?" Read Jefferson, an anointed prophet of G-d. Or, perhaps the ideals upon which Our Nation was founded hold little appeal?

Death for Treason
Justice for John and Martin, Our Dead of Vietnam, 9/11, Iraq and Afghanistan
Tom Cordle says there is no evidence. There's one very simple piece of evidence... George H.W. Bush was once asked where he was at the time of the Kennedy assassination and he told the interviewer that he couldn't remember. To me this is smoking gun evidence that he minimally had some knowledge of 'the conspiracy' and who the actors in it were.

Just anyone do a test of people who were alive during the Kennedy assassination and see if you can find one person who does not recall where they were.

p.s. Btw, where was George H. W. Bush the day Kennedy was assassinated? He was in Dallas, TX... He even tried to establish an alibi for himself by calling in a tip -- a government document says that he was calling from Tyler, TX and would be going to Dallas later in the day -- that a man he knew (who the FBI questioned and found to harmless), might have wanted to kill Kennedy.
Sean - Of all those in the world born before 1959 unable to recall their whereabouts upon hearing news of President Kennedy's death, we must also count, with CIA officer E. Howard Hunt (the identified "Old Tramp" in Dealey Plaza), GHWBush's father's hand-picked protege, Richard Nixon, who, in print, stated three differing, false locations in which he claimed to have heard. In fact he was on a NY bound passenger jet taxiing the runway on Dallas' Love Field when the captain came on the intercom to make the announcement of the results of the CIA hit-team's treason. A legal jury determined that the CIA did the crime...which Europe's newspapers reported for six months, until enough "American" fascist, treasonous pressure was brought to bear on the matter.

Nine months after Dallas the CIA fabricated the non-existent Gulf of Tonkin Incident to follow the 120 Americans who had died since the French defeat at Dien Bien Phu until 22nov63, with 58,000 more...and millions of innocent Asians.

Though Nixon has gone to his grave, Bush1 is yet breathing our air.

Let us hang him with his son and Cheney, for 9/11, at the Navy Yard and act like true Patriots worthy of the name American.
I left out one thing too, George H.W. Bush was CIA at the time. There is a memo from J. Edgar Hoover dated November 29, 1963 that refers to George Bush of the CIA being briefed on the Kennedy assassination the day after it occurred.
Nobody is addressing my rebuttal of Tom. If there is "no" evidence, then why did the Select Congressional Committee say there was, and why did they come to a different conclusion based on the evidence available?
I always found it strange that Lee Harvey Oswald is shown standing in the doorway of the book depository as the president passed. He an fellow workers were standing there. He was leaning against the door. How did he fire shots from a window while standing in the doorway?
Rw, assassination attempts were made on both Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan -- and again the attempts were made by mentally unstable persons. I maintain the smartest thing Bush the Lesser, aka the Fool Who Would Be King, ever did was to "pick" Cheney for his VP -- nobody in their right mind was gonna take out W and put Dirty Dick in the driver's seat.

It is not well-known, but Cheney and his right-hand man David "Torqemada" Addington had an obsession with the Imperial Presidency and both considered Cheney the ideal candidate for that job. Addington even carried around a copy of the constitutional provisions for presidential succession. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to learn Addington, the real author of the torture memos, had plotted to put his boss in the driver's seat.
Again, you're misreading what I said -- yes, some see some evidence suggesting there was more than one gunman (other experts disagree), but no one has presented a shred of evidence against any of the assumed conspirators, i.e., the CIA, the Mafia.

Supposition is not evidence -- but that never stops anyone from supposing.
A jury determined that the CIA committed the assassination of President Kennedy.

824 F.2d 916 (1987)
E. Howard HUNT, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Victor L. MARCHETTI, Defendant,
Liberty Lobby, a D.C. Corp., Defendant-Appellee.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18356532457876733136&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr

But please don't let yourself be confused by the facts.
Just to let you know where I stand on this issue...

I am now no longer interested in debating the Kennedy assassination. After discussing it with people for so many years, I have come to this final and sad conclusion:

If after all this time has passed and after all this debate anyone still believes in a conspiracy theory they simply lack the intelligence to see the truth. In my opinion it is just that simple. You aren't smart enough to figure it out, so I don't waste my time any more.

You aren't solely to blame, of course. The snake-oil conspiracy salesmen that have developed over the years have also created for themselves quite a business, and sadly truth and reason take a back seat to book sales and paying the rent. But to me these people should be put in the same category as Lee Harvey Oswald himself. Every time they (or you) forward a new conspiracy theory, you should realize you are doing exactly what Oswald himself, the self-proclaimed revolutionary, was hoping you would do. In fact, he succeeded beyond his wildest dreams. You're still talking about him. And he so wanted you to believe in a conspiracy because he wanted to bring down the government and create a world were guys like him wouldn't be kicked around by life and society so much. And he wanted you to be part of his revolutionary group, too. So congrads on that.

Oh, the Congressional "conclusion" that the writer of this post seems to be so confused by? Apparently he doesn't understand something pretty fundamental about politics, particularly at the Congressional level. Politicians tend to reflect public opinion. The late 1970s was a time when people were starting to question the Warren commission conclusion. You could even say that part of a normal grieving process of an individual and even a nation is to go through a period of "denial," "doubt" or "confusion." That's what this so-called congressional "admission" reflects. But there is now ample time and ample evidence (or lack of said evidence) to erase any doubt by any one who has the intelligence to do so.

If you still think there was a conspiracy behind the JFK assassination, your problems of perception are much much greater than anything that can be addressed by anyone here. You need to learn something more about people and how they act and behave in the real world, not a fantasy one. You need to understand something more about life. And a post here can't help you with that.
Personally, I'm moving on to the Titanic disaster. That was another "so odd" event, wasn't it? Why did that iceberg conspire to be at such a lower latitude than expected? And why would the captain go so fast and think his ship so unsinkable?

So very, very, odd.

Yes, tragedies usually are.
Indirection by witting agents of the identified Roman Anti-Christ, whose agents committed the crime, notwithstanding,

A jury determined that the CIA committed the assassination of President Kennedy.

824 F.2d 916 (1987)
E. Howard HUNT, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Victor L. MARCHETTI, Defendant,
Liberty Lobby, a D.C. Corp., Defendant-Appellee.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18356532457876733136&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr

Truth and Justice rule the People, alone.
Annuit Coeptis
Death for Treason
Wow, it's been fascinating to paw, swim, struggle and drag myself through these responses! I was born in 1959, and to me, since I cannot say where I was when it happened, but I can attest to what it did to my family, it's obvious it was murder, and murder most fowl - i.e., treason. It's too bad; we're one fkd up nation, and we deserve the worst for not Paying Attention.

I'm intrigued by the GHWB connections - I was aware of the JFK/CIA implications, but had never really thought about Reagan and Hinckley. Very interesting.

And I find the wandering meandering yet still scimitar-pointed commentary of Jack Heart to be, pardon me, Art. At first, all I wanted to do and indeed did do in my head was edit: Periods, semicolons, paragraphs. Then I realized when I read the risibly racous rants as writ - it was poetry.

A fitting end to the democracy.
oopsie! self-edit:

"raucous"

{to never be confused with roucous, rouches , or any other rococo rogues or roquelaures!}
The reason the conclusion of the Select Committee is little known is that the main evidence for it collapsed shortly after it issued its report. The committee members were actually poised to render the verdict that Oswald acted alone when a supposed expert in all things audio whose name escapes me presented the claim that a recording from the radio of a police motorcycle proved that shots were fired from several directions. However, it was later demonstrated that this recording was not from a motorcycle in Dealey Plaza. The evidence against Oswald is actually very strong; people have been convicted on much less. It's a shame he never got his day in court.

If you haven't already, I recommend you check out "Case Closed" by Gerald Posner. He does a great job demolishing the most popular red herrings, and also gives you a comprehensive portrait of Oswald. Obligatory reading for anyone who takes an interest in the JFK assassination. The Vincent Bugliosi book is also a tour de force. And he actually got a "jury" to convict Oswald!

Humans are storytelling animals. We expect life to be like a novel, where the discarded match found near the body turns out to be of vital importance. When events have great consequences, we expect them to have great meaning and great causes. But sometimes an angry lone nut is all it takes to change history.
These conspiracy deniers are quite a hoot. It's almost as if they would believe anything as long as it comes out of official channels. They don't engage with any of the evidence unearthed by researchers, they just dismiss it as innate in the human character to come with stories about events.

p.s. I guess they dismiss the whole academic discipline of History, lol. That is basically what historians do, gather evidence and come up with the story of human events.
N.B. For the youth passing by here: Jack Ruby was an employee of Richard Nixon's back in the HUAAC days...under the name Jack Rubenstein. Oswald was probably an American Hero, working undercover for the FBI, ONI, and CIA.

Nixon and GHW Bush oversaw the CIA's hit on JFK six weeks after NSAM263 ordered us out of Vietnam.

120 of us died in SE Asia before Dealey Plaza, 58,000 after.

Do the math. Chomsky's nothing but a Court Dissident.

Before Dealey Plaza JFK's EO11,110 had ended the illegal Fed money franchise, after, Vatican banker Rockefeller resumed control. See all the "good" the recent welfare fascism Wall Street Bailout has done?
It seems apparent that there was more going on than the Warren Commission was ever supposed to find. Interesting post.
Retalbo:

1. Are you saying that the Warren Commission was more politically independent and objective than the Congressional Select Committee on Assassinations? What made the Warren Commission more objective, and the Select Committee more subjective for purposes of analyzing the facts at issue in this post?

2. Trying to disuade discussion, by saying I will play into the hands of Lee Harvey Oswald is nothing more than a form of the 'argumentum ad terrorum," or a reverse form of the "appeal to authority." Perhaps even a form of the "Fallacy of Association/Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle."

You are basically saying that one should not make an argument, or engage in a discussion, if facts can be shown that a certain bad person, may or may not have wanted you to engage in said discussion. As someone who was once a Public Defender, I can tell you that oftentimes, bad people tell the truth. Oftentimes, they tell the truth for very selfish, ignoble purposes (exculpatory evidence), but that this in no way mitigates the veracity or truthfulness of what they said. Sadaam Hussein once said that one of America's greatest weakness was her national debt. Does this fact, "Saddam's saying X," in any way refute, objectively, the truthfulness of the proposition that the American Debt is problematic for the country as a whole? I think not.

The ad hominem attacks you hurl at me and my ability for cogent perception will be summarily disregarded, as they are irrelevant and in poor taste.

The Titanic was a tragedy. And although some (maybe you), may say it was a natural accident, I would say it was an example of criminal negligence and/or possibly criminal recklessness. I would have charged the White Star Line with these crimes, and any remaining members of the officers that comprised the crew. Speeding blindly through iceberg infested waters, when the presence of icebergs was HIGH, was not only a BREACH of the duty the captain and crew had to the passangers, but was also RECKLESS, in that it was an unreasonably careless and indifferent disregard for highly probable consequences that posed an extreme risk to life or human safety. So, yes, even in regard to the Titanic I would see a Conspiracy. A Criminal Conspiracy to put PROFIT above HUMAN LIFE. One of the most spectacular examples of Corporate-Level Criminal Conspiracy and Corporate Criminal Recklessness, Civil Negligence and Civil Recklessness ever recorded in the annals of Anglo-American law. BRAVO TO YOU for pointing this wunderbar example out to me!
Norwonk

1. The reason we didn't hear much about the Select Committee was because the vast majority of the hearings were held in private, and almost all the documents were sealed for 50 years, which sort of made the Committee's report a bit anticlimactic. As the wiki cite above, and newspapers coroborate, we are still waiting for full disclosure from this Committee. All we know is they said a conspiracy was likely with regard to both JFK and MLK.

2. The Dictaphone evidence has good arguments on both sides. There is just as much evidence supporting the Committee's findings, probably more, than evidence rebutting it. We don't really know all the evidence supporting it BECAUSE it was all sealed up for 50 years. If the JFK assassination was merely by Oswald, why all the secrecy? What are they trying to hide?

3. The Committee's conclusions were NOT DEPENDANT UPON THE DICTAPHONE RECORDING such that any rebuttal of its veracity, would necessarily invalidate the conclusions of the Committee. You make it seem like the dictaphone recording was the sole piece of evidence the committee relied upon. It was not. The Committee could have reached these results EVEN WITHOUT THE DICTAPHONE EVIDENCE. The dictaphone evidence may have been sufficient, in of itself, to show a conspiracy. But the dictaphone evidence WAS NOT NECESSARY for the Committee's findings to stand. It was but one prong of the numerous pronged-argument they had.

Now, in 1992, Congress promised to create the Assassination Records Review Board to further review and catalogue evidence as it became public. They issued a "final" report, discussing their findings in 1998. However, most of the evidence was not yet produced as of that date and much time is still left until the 50 year tolling period after 1978 is up, when all the records will be at our disposal and perusal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_Records_Review_Board
JackHeart---I didn't know that about Hinkley, but just looked it up. You're right. His father was head of the Vanderbilt Oil Company, was a close personal friend of George H. Walker Bush, and was one of his top 5 campaign contributors. Here, a website at the University of Misssouri, Kansas City School of Law, discusses it:

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/hinckley/HBIO.HTM
If it was a conspiracy, it was carried off very well. 47 years later, we continue to know only minuscule facts and rely on conjecture for the rest.

As a single act, the JFK assassination disrupted the minds and hearts of the American people and left a seething wound that will never heal for some. But most strongly, I feel sad for the readers who feel as though we are living from one conspiracy to another.

It is our government, our system. We are the real power yet fewer and fewer of us exercise our vote. We must either change how things are carried out or make the best of what we have.
This is an excellent post. For further information I'd recommend a book by James Douglas "J.F.K. and the Unspeakable". There's more to the title, but you will be able to find it easily with this information. Thanks for this fine post.
Compton: I agree. Totally. I am not a "conspiracy theorist," but that doesn't mean I don't have an open mind. All ideas that eventually become conventional are, at some time, unconventional prior to their acceptance. I agree about the voting thing. We need more involvement. Outrage, though, is a great motivator. Historically, one of the most potent.
Thanks for the support, Fay.
Tom Cordle---I agree. There is no evidence, as the committee said, showing that the CIA or Mafia, as institutions, conspired in the assassination. However, the Committee also said that they did not rule out the fact (a likely one at that) that a handful of folks with ties to these groups might have worked with Lee Harvey Oswald.

Generally speaking, though, Intelligence Communities, Special Forces, and certain high level terrorist groups like the IRA or PLO (back in the day) did have the ability to engage in assassinations, without any direct evidence being uncovered. CIA, Mossad, KGB, MI-6 all have this ability. For every "story" we know of, there are hundreds we don't know of. Generally, most of the stories we do know, are because the agencies themselves leaked these stories as a form of "deterrence" against possible enemies, showing them what they are capable of if they don't get their act together.

I don't think there was a macro-level conspiracy here. I do think there might have been a low-level criminal conspiracy with certain folks having some experience in various professions, illicit or otherwise.

Remember, even in the world of law, conspiracy is a COMMON charge against felons. Not everybody gets charged with it. It is an INCHOATE crime and VERY, VERY difficult to prove, even in terms of proving Conspiracy to commit normal, run of the mill crimes. When you have an external enforcement mechanism in place to prevent prisoners "turning" on eachother in classic "prisoner's dilemma" fashion, then the INCHOATE crime is that much more difficult to prove.

Yes, Ford and Reagan also had attempts on their lives. William McKinley was assassinated as was Garfield. Assassinations and attempted assassinations happen frequently throughout history.

That being said, some are the product of pure nuts, and others are the product of political philosophy. Even the McKinley assassination was politically motivated. Some, indeed, are the product of well-placed conspiracies. Look at the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand.

Past instances of non-conspired assassinations do not, in of themselves, prove sufficient for disproving the existence of other conspiracies to assassinate. Nor do they tend to prove any generalized tendency for assassinations to only be the realm of the mentally unstable. If people did come to think that, that would be a bad thing, because it would be a great cover for those who really wanted to do it. I certainly hope our law enforcement community is smarter than this. I pray that they are. Organized groups are certainly dangerous. Just look at Al Qaeda.

We also have to be careful to not commit the "boy who cries wolf" fallacy. In WW1, many people heard falsified stories of German brutality in Beligium. Stories involving mass rapes, cannibalism, eating babies, etc...These were all shown to be the product of sensationalist propaganda after the war. The problem with these stories was that when the Germans REALLY DID DO EVIL STUFF IN WW2, nobody believed it for a very long time. They all thought they were being fooled again. Many people said when they heard stories of Wehrmacht attrocities in Russia or stories about death-camps, they didn't believe it, because they remembered the fake-stories from World War One.

This was unfortunate. Folks generalized from a past non-instance of X, thinking that because X didn't happen then, it certainly can't happen now and will never happen in the future. That's like a Captain of a ship putting his vessel on red-alert, because of possible huricane. After the huricane passes, and nothing happens to the ship, everybody gets relaxed. The next time a hurricane comes, red alert sounds and again, nothing happens. The third time the hurricane comes, nobody goes on red-alert and thinks its just "neuroticism," because most hurricane alerts are just false-alarms. Problem is, its a real hurricane and the ship sinks.

The Chinese discuss this mental fallacy in a great book, called the "36 Stratagems." Its a classic form of self-induced blindness, one that humans are very, very prone to and that skilled strategists can take advantage of. We generalize too much from past instances. Of course, generalizing from past instances is fine, but not in terms of proving frequency from unrepresentative samples.
Will Jones---What the hell are you talking about?
While late to this party and woefully less educated I would like to offer something. The shadow world exists, what is hidden from view is the x factor in this event. A president, that had this many co-incidences at the same time would have to have been the unluckiest man alive. I would not call myself a conspiracy nut, but in the case of the John Kennedy assassination, I cannot reconcile the story as given by the powers that be with reality. The reason? The fifty year rule. The one that has still got evidence locked away from public view. If the Warren report covered it all and as they stated there was no FBI/CIA connection, then whom are they protecting? No, I don't believe them about this and if that labels me a "conspiracy nut" oh well. We all know who took out Indira Gandhi don't we?
My citations are not in order, because It's been 15 years since I did any concerted reading on this topic -- my books are in a box in my parents' attic -- when I get a chance I should pull them out and make a post of my own with more specifics.

I doubt LHO was assigned to be a gunman in Dealy Plaza, but he was definitely there "on the clock" -- recently I saw a cable TV show which maintained he was an FBI undercover investigator digging into alleged (assassination?) plots by Cuban extremists and Bay of Pigs discontents (& that Hoover was later blackmailed or threatened into covering this up). This makes given what I already know; he distributed fliers & picketed on behalf of BOTH right wing AND left wing Cuban militant groups (which he ran), and all these diametrically-opposed groups were operating out of the same Dallas offices. That makes sense only if he was keeping tabs on diverse extremists for Hoover. He was a cog in a very complicated intel network.

Some other fishy tidbits: Oswald had 2 official military IDs -- one was the normal Marine grunt issue which is most often published, and the other -(much less well publicized)- was a naval intelligence issue, the same style which the famous U2 pilot Francis Gary Powers possessed. The fact that Oswald had this form of ID indicates that he had higher security clearance than is officially acknowledged, and that his trips to Russia were most likely not recreational, but at the behest of Uncle Sam.

There were DMN newspaper photos of a bullet-riddled road-sign (conveniently removed under cover of darkness) an "extra" bullet hole in the frame of the windshield (conveniently repaired by the government's mechanics before any forensic examination), and a photo of FBI agents displaying the weapon found in the book depository -- not the cheap Italian rifle Oswalt owned, but a German Mauser more appropriate for such a task (this "fact" was later "revised" to better fit Oswald's paper trail).

The last bit of data I'll mention is that there was something shady going on in the book depository because none of the publishers listed as operating there were real publishers -- they were all shadow corporations that used publishing as a front; typical covert operations cells although for what purpose is a mystery. Given that Oswald was apparently involved in similar operations pertaining to Cuba, it makes sense that his business would have had him in the Book Depository -- he was probably networking with colleagues.
The House Select Committee didn't completely contradict the Warren Commission. Because they still found that Oswald fired the three shots from the TSBDB that killed Kennedy. But then joined Oswald along with another group of assassins based on shots coming from the grassy knoll. Which has never been proven. Primarily because there's not one shred of physical evidence to support this. Which I'll show by starting with the photographs taken of the grassy knoll only moments before the assassination. And also, because they've gone through a lot of careful scrutiny by researchers. Which consequently, never yielded one image of anyone. Unless the darkness of the shade by the trees overlooking the grassy knoll is any kind of proof?
Then finally, the acoustical recordings taken from a policeman's dicta-phone that purportedly showed more than three shots fired. Which then became he primary source of evidence for the House Select Committee. As well as being found to be proof positive by their own panel of experts. Only to be later discredited by another independent scientific lab. Whose credentials have never been questioned. Thus leaving us with nothing be conjecture, second guessing, and conspiracy theories. Which, ladies and gentlemen, for my money, isn't good enough.
I never bought the lone shooter conclusion, but I always doubted that the truth would ever come to light. If the underpinnings of the system were exposed it would collapse. What keeps the system going is our faith in it; our desire not to know how it actually works.
TDG--I notice you have never made any other comment in OS, except this. Ever. You have also never written a post. Ever. How did I deserve this singular honor? 8)
This was very finely done I applaud you work here.
i once tried writing an essay on the Warren report, but got thoroughly bogged down in all its twists and turns and misdirected information.
Nice job. ~R~
am I hallucinating? I couldva sworn this was an EP. nice work dude. Ive read a lot of conspiracy theory & I wasnt really aware of this.
22,671 views of this article as of this morning!
"am I hallucinating? I couldva sworn this was an EP. nice work dude. Ive read a lot of conspiracy theory & I wasnt really aware of this."

vzn is right -- I found the page & friended you only because it was an EP on the cover yesterday. Some of the higher-ups must have disapproved and applied the thumb-screws to Judy Berman, and it is no longer an EP. I'm not saying Salon ins run by Illuminati or something stupid like that, but just noting the pervasive way that conspiracy theories are denigrated by "serious adults" in our society.

It's like the old "Conspiracy Theory Rock" (a parody of Schoolhouse Rock you can see on YouTube or GoogleVideo); It aired once on Saturday Night Live, and gave quite a good description of the "media-opololy" involving NBC/GE etc. and some of their corporate malfeasance.

Wouldn't you know it? The damn sketch was cut out of all future re-runs of the episode. Just like NBC, It doesn't matter how many views your article gets -- Salon's image is on the line. All the conspiracy theory articles on Big Salon in the past year or two (JFK, MLK etc.) have been about how conspiracy theory is some irrational state of the human condition and not anything worthy of historical consideration beyond their sociological quirks.

----

Oh, by the way "samuels" aka "George" is a clever spammer. Notice how his comment is a platitude not pertaining to your article at all, and how he has links to his spam-site embedded in the signature area.
Since you've reopened comments, may I include this link to one previously deleted?
http://open.salon.com/blog/iamerican/2010/05/04/close_comments_rather_than_address_truth_and_treason

America's guide should be only Truth, that the "Dream" live on and prosper us. There is but One Creator G-d - the Infinite Power with Whom the Founders made covenant.

Let's be Americans, first and foremost, and uplift this Promised Land.
Judy Berman has good articles. Lots of those higher-ups don't. In fact, sometimes I wonder about the criteria they employ in designating EPs.
VZN and Indiana---if what you say is true, then so be it. Many media liberals are what Marx termed "Haute Bourgeois." They profess social liberalism as a means of ensuring for themselves greater personal freedom, but oppose economic liberalism of the broadest sort, because they have deep-seated class-consciousness and socioeconomic/cultural antipathy toward those from working class backgrounds, particularly those working class folks who don't act gracious for the noblesse oblige they receive.

This will be the subject of a new article I shall write. I have been working on it, on and off, for 2 weeks now. It shall focus on the dangers posed and hypocrisy displayed by, upper-class, powerful, self-styled liberals. Most importantly, it will show how these folks are actually the greatest enemy faced by the left. Indeed, they are far more dangerous to the Left and the Progressive Cause than the Republicans and Conservatives ever, ever could be.
the only reason to doubt that oil interests had jfk killed is their success before and since in getting things done discreetly in the senate. but that was a time of high emotion, and insecure capitalists may have doubted jfk's commitment to fighting communism.

he was trailing feelers about getting out of south east asia, an incitement to violence in houston's oil plutocracy, where by no co-incidence the killing was easily supported by local police and criminal figures. it's pleasant to see discussion of this matter, and future historians will nod their heads and say "isn't it interesting that they knew these things and did nothing?" "yes, a clear example of the serf-like mind-set of the time, so primitive compared to our loyalty to big brother."
BTW=-VZN and Indiana, thanks for the support! 8)
Ron Griffin:

It's amazing how so many myths about he assassination keep getting repeated even after being debunked.

The man in the doorway of the TSBD is Billy Nolan Lovelady, a fellow employee of the schoolbook depository who bore a resemblance to Oswald. Lovelady identified himself as the man in the photo and several of his fellow employees who were standing alongside also said it was Lovelady.

An excellent web site:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
We will never know the truth until all the documentation is fully available to the public.

Why the government has kept so much secret is still the greatest question of our day. If they have nothing to lose, and everything to gain, why not disclose? A lawyer who fails to disclose his sources during Discovery can be cited by the court and held in contempt. Why is the government not held in contempt for failing to disclose material documents and material evidence in the courtroom of public opinion?

For Shame, for shame!
A belated congratulations on this piece and the response that it generated. Nice work. R.
I stumbled across this and thought some of you may want to see a different view on the assassination. I'm not saying if I agree or disagree with this, but I have never heard of this theory before - that John was shot by Jackie... http://www.realityreviewed.com/JFK%20murder.htm
Facts that kill the Lone Nut Cover Story:

1. RFK and Jacky sent a messenger to Russia to tell Kruschev that they knew he didn't kill JFK. They knew that it was domestic right-wing elements, and they could only reopen the investigation if RFK were President.

2. The Wound on JFK's back (that Ford tried to move) was too low to have come out of the throat as the "magic Bullet"

3. Why did Oswald work at Guy Bannister's office if he wasn't a spook?

4. Jack Ruby: Everything pertaining to what's happening has never come to the surface. The world will never know the true facts, of what occurred, my motives. The people had , that had so much to gain and had such an ulterior motive for putting me in the position I'm in, will never let the true facts come above board to the world.

Reporter : Are these people in very high positions Jack ??

Jack : Yes.

5. Back and to the Left

6. Why did the Commission have Allen Dulles running most proceedings when he had been fired by Kennedy and as Director of the CIA he conspired to execute coups d'etat and carry out political assassinations?

7. How was Magic Bullet in Perfect condition after shattering Connely's rib and wrist bone?

I reccommend either Brothers by Salon founder David Talbot or JFK and the Unspeakable. No offense but stay far away from Legacy of Secrecy or Ultimate Sacrifice. Thom Hartmann worked for the CIA and likely still does. It is a terrible book that may as well be called "I
Last part should read:

"Thom Hartmann worked for the CIA and likely still does. It is a terrible book that may as well be called 'I
Bah!!!

"I (heart) the CIA"

:(
I came to many of the same doubts as you. I heard many of the same things including of course JFK by Oliver Stone which I assumed was a semi-fiction version of the truth. After looking into it I came to the conclusion that Stones fiction was much closer to the truth than any of the official versions of “fact.” The Warren Report was absurd there can be little doubt after reading it that it doesn’t make sense.

As for Lamar Waldron and Thom Hartmann I glanced at it and quickly concluded that they were ignoring some of the basic facts of the case. It was too long to waste my time on it; so was Vincent Bugliosi’s 1,500 page debunking book where he claims that the Warren commission did “admirable” work. There is no way that the report could be considered admirable by any reasonable person. A better book is clearly “JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters” by James W. Douglass as well as “On the Trail of Assassins” By Jim Garrison. However the best material comes directly from the government not because it is reliable but because it is so incompetent including the Warren Report, the House Select Committee Report on Assassinations and the Clay Shaw Transcripts all available free on line.
WORD, Mr. Taylor. WORD.
jfk had upset the houston oil plutocrats, and they owned the police department in houston. doing the deed there was most convenient.

but the arrogance and corruption at the top of america has its base at the bottom. ignorance and hopelessness turn the people into slaves, free-range cattle.

i got out when america's character was exposed by mylai, and the national response was "moooo." since then, when i wake up and read the latest atrocity, i think "smart move, al."
This is I think before my time, I mean this post. What I read was that the FBI and CIA were both interested in covering up how badly they blew seeing the assassination coming in spite of the warnings, so yes there was a massive cover-up, but not necessarily of the assassination itself.
if you accept that the government of the usa is complicit in the assassination of jfk, perhaps they were equally present in all crimes reported by left-wing commo creeps. then it's hard to sleep at night. better to ignore reality, so long as the black suburban doesn't roll up at your address in the night.

perfectly natural, and a tried and proven survival technique. the wildebeest use it vis a vis hyenas, and it works for them very well. after all, hyenas and secret police can't eat everyone...