Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

Dr. Thomas Halle DC, MA

The fact is that the blatantly politically-motivated and extremely disingenuous and deceitful Warren Report was LONG AGO thoroughly debunked, and one has to wonder if anyone really believes it.  Of course, there are those who persist in supporting its conclusions—whom I call its apologists—and they fall pretty neatly into three categories. 

1. Those who haven't read it and are uneducated and uninformed about the facts of the case, yet, who support it out of principle, because they believe in America and the idea that our government would never lie to us. These people are not totally hopeless, but—certainly—with a bit of information, one would hope they would begin to use what brains they have… and begin to adjust their POV to comport with reality (or with the “Reality Principle”). 

2. There are those who---one way or another—“have a horse in the game.” They were somehow involved in the assassination (directly or peripherally, immediately or subsequently), or otherwise have a political or personal agenda, such as being paid to support it. They are the ones commentator Sylvia Meagher called “Accessories after the Fact.” 

3. Finally, there are those who simply don’t have the mental “wherewithal” to comprehend the truth. These addle-brained people are readily led around by the nose. Many of them are members of extreme cults…and these people typically thrive on “formulas” or “creeds,” (or Doctrine-Dogma) rather than intelligent reasoning, which—admittedly--may FAR EXCEED their capability.

Whichever category the naysayers inhabit, their weapons are generally the same. They include personal attack (including the insipid and insulting label of “Conspiracy Theorist” (CT), various means to “muddy the water” (e.g. the citing of false information, and exasperating “strawman reasoning”), or providing endless questions… and insisting that the opponent PROVE the innocence of Mr. Oswald (and the fact of multiple shooters, and subsequent very ample whitewash activity). As it happens, in the American system of justice, satisfaction of this demand is absolutely unnecessary. The Warren Commission, in effect, sat as a post mortem (“Star Chamber” style) “Prosecution.” And, it was incumbent upon THIS body to “prove beyond the shadow of  a doubt” the guilt of Oswald (and the “Official Narrative” they foisted upon the American public). I.E., THEY are the ones who  had the “Burden.” The “Defense” does not—in this system—have to prove ANYTHING…though the citing of a few glaring problems with the evidence certainly doesn’t hurt. I will add that even a quick perusal of the Warren Report Table of Contents shows that the Commission was never very concerned about an objective, exhaustive, balanced pursuit of the truth. They had their a priori assassination scenario and, much as in a Spanish Inquisition tribunal, “Special Pleading” ruled the day.

If you’re the average American, you’re probably unaware that three members of the Commission (Boggs, Cooper and Russell) DID voice dissent with respect to the final conclusions (and though they were promised it, their dissent was not recorded in the final Warren Commission report). Boggs presumably died when his small plane disappeared in the Alaskan wilderness. 

Then, there were the two notes...one by J. Edgar Hoover, and one by Asst. Atty. General Katzenbach (to Bill Moyers) urging that the American public be convinced that the assassination was accomplished by one lone gunman (and with no conspiracy, either foreign or domestic based), which SCREAMS a hidden agenda in this case. As it happens, as early as 1964 Dallas Police Chief Curry admitted that the Dallas police had never been able to “place” suspect Oswald “in that window, and with that weapon.” Case dismissed!!! Moreover, leading forensic scientist Dr. Cyril Wecht reported that the autopsy JFK received was less complete and legitimate than what a “Bowery bum” would normally receive. Finally, David W. Mantik, M.D., PhD., after examining autopsy materials in the National Archives, reported serious problems with the post-mortem photographs and x-rays of President Kennedy, suggesting fakery. Something was “rotten at Bethesda!!”

Of course, there is also the “small matter” of the observations of the Parkland medical team who attended JFK being ABSOLUTELY inconsistent with the Warren Report photos and conclusions, including the insistence on a small throat entry wound and a massive post-cranial exit wound, which should have suggested to ANYONE with ANY BRAINS that something terribly suspicious was afoot!! Then, too, how odd it was that the Dallas authorities had announced an Oswald-like description within about fifteen minutes, and—once captured—all of the suspects but LHO were summarily released!! Yet maybe they were forced to. After all, didn’t President Johnson call two or three times to insist that “You have your man!!” ??!! And, didn’t the FBI, within a couple of days, drop by to confiscate ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING the Dallas Police had on the case?” Curiouser and curiouser!! (and the “stink” of corruption seemed to increase practically day-by-day)!!

Of course, one of the problems with the apologists is a serious ignorance of historical facts (along with exceptionally rigid thinking). Even the HSCA determined that there’d been at least four shots, and that (OBVIOUSLY) there’d been a conspiracy. And, the remarks of Governor Connally and Mrs. Kennedy might have opened a few minds…to at LEAST some OTHER POSSIBILITIES in this very squirrelly case. He, upon being shot, exclaimed, “They are going to kill us all!!” She, upon being asked didn’t she want to change out of her (blood-soaked) garments, replied, “No, I want them to see what they’ve done to my husband!!” But. WAIT!! Before both the WR and HSCA, Connally reported, “The thought that immediately passed through my mind that there were either two or three people involved…or someone was shooting with an automatic rifle.” (4H 133-4, 168. 147; 1 HSCA 42, 52-3)

Oswald's rebuttal to the charges against him was obviously so strong that they couldn't let him speak to an attorney even once. It's obvious that they were in dire need for  someone like Jack Rubinstein to come along and resolve the matter the quick and easy extra-judicial way. But, I am well aware that Ralph Cinque maintains that Ruby, like Oswald, was nothing more than a scapegoat/patsy.