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

The official story of the JFK assassination is preposterous. It is so  absurd that anyone who really believes that Oswald killed Kennedy is a moron.   

The story goes that Oswald shot Kennedy for no reason at all. He shot him even though he liked him, and his wife said that he did. 

Compare Oswald to John Wilkes Booth who shot Lincoln. Booth was involved with an extremist group which was led by a woman named Lucy Hale. Their original plan was to kidnap Lincoln, but then they decided to kill him. They were Confederate sympathizers. 

But, there's nothing like that for Oswald. There is no evidence and no reason to think that he gave any thought to killing Kennedy: ever.  In other words, the whole act of killing Kennedy was completely without antecedents and preliminaries. Supposedly, he was just eating his lunch at the Depository and glancing through the newspaper, and when he saw that Kennedy would be passing the building, he decided to kill him.

The perpetrators realized that the story was weak. It was lacking in substance and credibility. So, they thought to beef it up by inventing the Walker story. 

I hope you realize that the Walker story is complete and total bull shit. There has never been a bigger spewing of bull shit than the Walker story. The bullet that they dug out of Walker's wall didn't even match the bullet from the rifle that Oswald never ordered or owned.  Witnesses said that there were two assailants and that they fled by car, each driving a car. Oswald had no car, no license, no ability to drive, and no friends.    

There is an institutionalized lie that, from the start, Marina identified the Carcano rifle as Oswald's. When she was first asked if he owned a rifle, she said that back in Russia he did, but he sold it. Now, obviously, if she knew he currently owned a rifle, she would not have mentioned the other rifle at all. There would have been no need to. So, what she told police on November 22, 1963 was tantamount to her saying, "Oswald does not presently own a rifle."

Now, I realize that by February 1964, she was singing like a canary exactly what the Warren Commission wanted to hear. But, you have to realize that this involved her contradicting all the things she said on November 22.   

You need to remember that the MK-ULTRA mind control program began in 1953, and this was 10 years later. They already had their methods honed, and they used them on Marina: isolating her, immersing her in an "Oswald was evil" world; reinforcing her with material awards, specifically money, manipulating her emotions with sex, and we simply don't know the extent to which they used hypnosis, drugs, and other things to reprogram her. But, what we do know is that they had complete control over her. We know that she lost a lot of weight between November and February, which goes along with mental stress. And you can't say it was due to grief because there is no evidence to support that.  

But, among the things they worked into her head was the story that Oswald shot at Walker, but it was not something she volunteered, nor was it something she knew about from the start. And just think about it logically: if she knew that her husband was capable of doing such a thing, would she continue living with him and exposing her daughter to him? Does it sound to you like something she could brush off? Could you? 

So, they put forth the JFK story and tried to bolster it with the Walker story, but both stories are equally preposterous, and one gets no help from the other. In fact, it just makes it worse that they conjured up two ridiculous stories. It shows how desperate they were and how aware they were that that JFK story couldn't stand on its own feet. 

So, what holds up either of these stories today? It's very simple, and it involves something they succeeded at doing. And that is: the polarization of doubt. Look how often they brandish the term "conspiracy theorist."  It's the scarlet letter of the 21st century. It's equivalent to being called a witch in the 17th century. 

For instance, if someone doubts that Jeffrey Epstein killed himself, that's called a conspiracy theory too. But why call it that? The essence of it isn't conspiracy. The essence of it is just that it's ludicrous to think that the Metropolitan Prison was incapable of preventing it.  

And speaking of that, have you been paying attention to the attacks on Woody Allen? HBO has a documentary that ends tonight about the day he supposedly molested his adopted daughter.  The matter was investigated twice by police who cleared him. I'm not going to go into it because that would be a tangent. But, just today I read an article claiming that Woody Allen was a friend of Jeffry Epstein, that they lived near each other in New York City, and that they were seen together. And it went on profusely. But, it's been known for a long time that Clinton and Epstein were very good friends, and that Clinton made something like 24 documented trips on the Lolita Express to Orgy Island. But, if you started making a stink about that- and it looks much worse on the surface than anything you can say about Jeffrey Epstein and Woody Allen- you would be called a "conspiracy theorist." 

SO, WHY ARE THEY TALKING ABOUT ALLEN AND EPSTEIN BUT NOT CLINTON AND EPSTEIN? 

I'm not going to try to answer that because anything I said would be chalked up as another conspiracy theory. But, I will point out that "news" is about manipulation.  There is an agenda behind the news. We live in an Orwellian world. 

And, that Orwellian world is the ONLY thing holding up the official story of the JFK assassination. It is ridiculous. It is absurd. And it is extremely and profoundly stupid.