There is a very basic fact of the JFK assassination that is often and usually overlooked. It starts with recognizing that when one denies Oswald's guilt, that guilt immediately jumps to the State. And keep in mind that among those who claim that, not the State, but the Mafia killed Kennedy, which I consider to be an absolutely stupid and ridiculous position, they have it that the Mafia hired Oswald to do it. Like for instance, Blakey the Flakey. That idiot maintains that. However, "hired" isn't the right word, since there is no evidence that the Mafia paid Oswald. Oswald killed for the Mafia for free. Don't you know? Oh yeah, when they saw what working at the radio factory in Russia for three years did for his trigger finger, they knew it had to be him. Plus, with him not charging anything, it was a no-brainer. Anyway, the point is that absolutely nobody maintains that the Mafia killed Kennedy without Oswald. So, when you get to Oswald innocence, you're through with the Mafia, and you go right to the State being guilty- the very ones who arrested and charged Oswald.
And the basic fact that I'm talking about is that once you realize, as I do, that the State was guilty, then the claims of the State in relation to Oswald are meaningless. You really can't trust anything the State said.
For example, the State, via the FBI, claimed to find a partial fingerprint of Oswald on the trigger-guard of the rifle. But, it's meaningless. It's just lip-flapping. It's not as though anyone of an expert nature outside of and independent of the State confirmed it. It was just the State. And the case never went to trial. The Defense never had a chance to challenge the claim. They never had a chance to bring in their own fingerprint expert to testify that it was bogus. And since all we have is the State claiming it, it's nothing. It's worthless. It is useless. It is immaterial.
And yet, look how common it is for people to glibly claim that Oswald's fingerprint was found on the rifle, and therefore, he must be guilty. They act as though, I, and others like me, have no choice but to accept the dictates of the State. But, why would I accept the claims of an entity that I consider to be murderous? And why would I accept the word of an entity whom I consider to be compulsive and pathological liars, where the idea of lying being wrong doesn't even exist on their radar? And keep in mind that established, widely recognized, and undisputed State lies are numerous in the United States. Look at LBJ having lied when he told the Congress and the country his lies about the Tonkin Gulf. Look how the director of the NSA lied when he said that his agency wasn't collecting data on millions of Americans. Look at the lies about the WMDs in Iraq. Colin Powell: "What we are giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence." Of course, the intelligence wasn't so solid, but, the depleted uranium weapons used on Iraq were plenty solid. Look at Nixon's lies. And Clinton's? Maybe I should have said Clintons'. It goes on and on. So, where does anyone get the nerve to cite a government claim about the JFK assassination and assume that I, and others like me, have to accept it? Because the FBI said it? J. Edgar Hoover's FBI?
Here's another example; 25 children were killed at Waco after they gassed the compound with a chemical agent for which it was written all over the cans that it was not for indoor use. The State has tried to mitigate its responsibility for these deaths by claiming that a certain number were due to someone in the compound shooting these children, presumably, to spare them further suffering before they died. Two points: First, even if it's true, the situation was still created by the government. The government is still responsible for those deaths, even if there were mercy killings involved. But second, and more important, this is exactly the kind of lie that I would expect the government to tell to save face, and therefore, unless the bodies of those children were examined by an independent coroner who had no connection whatsoever to the State, and was not being subjected to any kind of pressure or coercion or harassment from the State, then there is no reason to accept it at all. Fact: 25 children died at Waco as a result of the actions of the State. That's it. That's what we know. That is the only thing that is bankable. The rest is just lip-flapping heaped upon it. Do you understand that?
So, to both friends and enemies, don't cite a claim of the State to me in the JFK case. Unless it's something that has been independently confirmed and verified by someone separate from the State and with no affiliation- direct or indirect- with the State, it means nothing to me- less than nothing. The State killed Kennedy. I'll say it again: The U.S. government killed Kennedy. And therefore NOTHING that the U.S. government claims as a fact in the case should be accepted as true - unless it can be confirmed independently. And if you are a mature JFK researcher, you will see it the same way. Remember: there are lies; damn lies; and then there are State lies.