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

So, what would cause a young journalist to defend the official story of the JFK assassination? And I mean young journalists who are not very knowledgeable about it and probably not interested enough to become knowledgeable. All they want are sound bites with which they can trash the people who are disputing it. As if they know better? They don't know anything. 

So, why do they do it? Ultimately, it comes down to pocketbook. They write for the mainstream media, and the MM is monolithic about the JFK assassination. For them, it's lone nuttery: 24/7/365. 

Just think: polls have always shown that the majority of Americans reject the official story of the JFK assassination. And yet not one of those Americans writes for the mainstream media? 

And even the polls are corrupt. What they ask is whether Oswald acted alone or acted within a conspiracy, but the presumption is that he definitely acted to kill Kennedy and that nobody doubts it or disputes it. You would think from these polls that not one American thinks that Oswald was innocent.  

Imagine if they polled me. My response would be, "Neither. Oswald didn't act. He was innocent. Framed and innocent." 

But, what would they do with that response? How would they process it? How would they register it in the poll? I don't know that they would do. They would probably just discard it and probably have. 

So, how could something as vast as the mainstream media, which includes newspapers, magazines, television, and internet, be so monolithic about something as controversial as the JFK assassination?  And they are monolithic not only with the dogma that Oswald did it and did it alone, but with the exceptions to it- such as that Jack Ruby watched the motorcade expecting fireworks. They accept and propagate the official story of the JFK assassination but also cooperate with the strategic exceptions to it that are planted and designed to "bait the buffs" and control the direction of contrarian thinking. It is all very Machiavellian. 

It is truly bizarre that the same mainstream media that routinely trashes "conspiracy theorists" will sometimes embrace, and with great vigor, a conspiracy theory, such as that Jack Ruby went to Dealey Plaza to watch the fireworks. What the hell is going on here?

What is going on is that the Mainstream Media are just puppets. They are manipulated; they do what they are told. Somebody from above is pulling their strings. Somebody from above decided that peppering the crowd with that Jack Ruby story was a good idea. And I know why. It's a matter of lean. They want the public perception to lean towards Jack Ruby being involved in the JFK assassination because it cements the idea that he killed Oswald. It keeps people far, far away from the truth, which is that he was innocent. It's a way of taking him from guilty to super-guilty. 

So, there is the official story that Jack Ruby did it, that he killed Oswald all by himself because he was upset and wanted to spare Jackie a trip to Dallas. But then, you lean it towards the idea that he was involved in the JFK assassination because it increases his criminality, his demonic-ness.  

So, there is a Central Command who pull all the strings of the Mainstream Media, whether about the JFK assassination, 9/11, the negotiations with the Taliban, or what have you. It's a top-down system. And reporters, even young ones, quickly get it that their success depends on being devoted little minions of the State.