It's really a history of the Warren Commission, and not just their findings, but their personalities, their interactions, and their conflicts. Oh yes, they did have conflicts. But, not over Oswald's guilt.
Not for one nanosecond did any of the Warren Commissioners consider that Oswald may have been innocent- framed and innocent. The question wasn't asked. Not only was the question not asked- the concept was never even conceived, not even for a nanosecond.
And that is really strange because the man did profess his innocence- repeatedly and profusely. Didn't that warrant any consideration?
And the evidence against Oswald had holes in it. He denied owning the rifle, and Buell Frazier insisted that the bag he saw was no more than 2 feet long- not long enough to contain the rifle. And no one in the building saw Oswald entering with it. And, they were a little late getting there, and there were already plenty of people in the building, including Charles Givens, who saw Oswald when he first entered- and he saw no such bag.
Oswald's fingerprints were not found on the rifle, and a palm print was only found after he was dead. Oswald passed the paraffin test for not having shot a rifle. In light of that, how do you not consider the possibility that he was innocent?
But, it wasn't about the evidence against Oswald. It was that the only alternative to Oswald being guilty was massive criminality at all levels of government in a plot to kill Kennedy to overthrow him. They couldn't go there. They couldn't mentally do it. Not even for a flash of a second. Their minds wouldn't let them go there. They worked for the US government. They were part of the US government. The US government was their religion. It would be like a Christian saying Christ was guilty of a heinous crime. Latching onto Oswald's guilt was their only refuge from that fate. And they clutched at it for dear life.
But, as I said, they did have conflicts. The biggest maverick was Senator Richard Russell of Georgia, who was despised by the others. He had the nerve, the audacity, the unmitigated gall to suggest that maybe Oswald talked to somebody. Not that he had an accomplice there that day; not that anyone helped him in any way; but just that someone from a distance may have egged him on, encouraged him, and given him moral support.
It centered on Oswald's alleged trip to Mexico- that he talked to someone there.
What????? What was wrong with these morons????? When Oswald supposedly went to Mexico City (he didn't), he had no prospect of or awareness of an upcoming opportunity to kill Kennedy. There is no evidence that he had any knowledge of Kennedy's planned trip to Dallas. And even if he had had such knowledge, he had no prospect of being positioned in a high-rise building along his motorcade route where he could shoot him in his open convertible. HOW COULD OSWALD POSSIBLY HAVE KNOWN ANYTHING ABOUT AN OPEN CONVERTIBLE AT THAT TIME?
So, there was nothing for Oswald to even think about, let alone talk about- with anybody. He was completely unaware, at that time, of any opportunity to kill Kennedy. There is nothing to base any claim of him having any consciousness or conception about it.
But, another thing that bothered Russell was the Single Bullet Theory. Russell was an old deer hunter from Georgia, and he wondered why so many people were taking ballistics advice from a Philly lawyer who never picked up a rifle in his life. Russell did not buy it. He did not believe, from his shooting experience, that one bullet could traverse the bodies of two men, causing 7 wounds and bursting apart two bones, and emerge in nearly pristine condition.
So, Russell was not a team player, and at the end he was unwilling to put his signature on the Warren Report. But, Earl Warren (who was the most spineless, capitulating, sell-out-to-LBJ failure) wanted a unanimous document. So, he visited Russell, and asked him, "What do I have to do to get you into this car?" like the good salesman that he was. And they worked out some concessions in which the language was softened in Russell's direction, indicating the possibility of doubt and that later evidence may surface which proves the assumptions wrong, etc. Russell was supposedly satisfied and agreed to sign it. But, when the day came, he sent his secretary over with his name stamp. He still wouldn't sign it. He never did sign it.
The stupidity of the Warren Commissioners- and again it was a stupidity born of religion, the religion of statism- was boundless and unlimited. It is staggering the stuff they came up with.
For instance, Oswald's supposed motive for killing Kennedy was his desire for historical fame, to leave a mark on history, to be famous for something. But, why then did he so strongly deny doing it? We have him on tape denying it 13 times on the day of the assassination, where we can hear him say over and over that he didn't do it. So, how does that mesh with his so-called motive?
And then WC attorney David Belin was asked what Oswald intended to do after the assassination. Belin said that Oswald was going to escape to Mexico.
Escape to Mexico? What about his family? He had a wife and two children. Was he never going to see them again? Was he just going to abandon them? Then why was he worrying that Junie needed shoes? And what was he going to do in Mexico? Get another grunt labor job at a warehouse somewhere and live happily ever after?
Oswald's wife Marina said many, many times that Oswald liked Kennedy, that he respected him, that he defended him, both here and in Russia, that he read books just because Kennedy read them- or wrote them. And yet Oswald was going to kill Kennedy and also annihilate his own family life, abandon his wife and kids, all for the glory of killing Kennedy, a man he liked?
Someone followed up to Belin, "Well, if Oswald was going to run away to Mexico, why did he give almost all of his cash to Marina when he needed it with which to travel?"
Do you want to know what Belin said in response to that? Are you ready for this?
Belin said that as long as Oswald had his pistol that he could get all the cash he needed and wanted and whenever he wanted, that he could just hold people up or even rob a bank. ROB A BANK! I kid you not. That is what Belin said, that Oswald could just rob a bank when his cash ran low.
Where the hell did Belin get that from? Talk about making arbitrary assumptions. Talk about making up stories for Imagination Day at kindergarten. Talk about being not just deluded but self-deluded.
The idea that Oswald may have confided in someone in Mexico City is really the whole theme of this awful book, even though it wasn't even theoretically possible for Oswald to have had any idea about killing Kennedy at that time. Remember: there is NO image of Oswald in Mexico City. We've got plenty of pictures of Oswald doubles in Mexico City, but not of Oswald.
Any of them look like Oswald to you?
So, we've got Oswald denying that he went to Mexico City, saying that the only place in Mexico he ever went was Tijuana when he was in the Marines. And remember that Oswald is not alleged to have committed any crimes in Mexico City, so why, when he was being accused of killing the President of the United States and a police officer would he lie about it? He was innocent of the murders, so why would he lie about making a trip to Mexico?
And supposedly, the CIA was watching him and tracking him the whole time while he was in Mexico. They came up with all kinds of information about him. They knew exactly where he stayed. They knew where he took his meals. They knew exactly where he went and what he did. So, why didn't they grab a picture of him? How hard would that have been to do?
But, let's talk about Sylvia Duran. Don't confuse her with Sylvia Odio. Sylvia Odio was the very attractive Cuban woman who was supposedly visited by two Cuban men in Dallas who had with them a "Leon Oswald" who was supposedly the Oswald of fame. Sylvia Duran was a Mexican woman who worked at the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City and supposedly encountered Oswald there.
And she didn't just encounter him. I'm afraid I have some painful, shocking news for Marina and Judyth both: Sylvia Duran claimed to have a torrid love affair with Oswald during those few days in Mexico City- even though she was a married woman. Except for one thing: she claimed that the Oswald she knew and loved was about her height, 5'3". The Oswald of fame was 5'9".
People, it is all bull. Oswald did not kill Kennedy. He was standing in the doorway at the time. He did not kill Tippit. He did not go to Mexico City. And what the Warren Commission tried to do was concretize a fabricated story, a work of pure fiction. And they did it in homage to the Almighty State, that they served, and which rewarded them in kind.
The mental corruption of the Warren Commissioners and their staffers is the story of this awful book, and it is a corruption that the author inherited- like a contagious disease.
The moral of the story is: Statism is an evil religion that makes mass murderers of men. What these Warren Commissioners did was the same as what the plotters did- except it was one step removed. But, Kennedy's blood splattered all the way to them. They are equally guilty of killing Kennedy, and history shall not absolve them. Neither will I.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.