Customer Discussions > History forum

Ten of the Most Commonly Repeated Falsehoods Concerning the Kennedy Assassination


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-5 of 5 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jan 15, 2013 10:09:25 AM PST
Arguably, the most popular tactic used by conspiracy cultists is to simply repeat the same unsupported claim, ad naseum, until it has been heard so many times the public starts to believe it. Lacking any supporting evidence, this tactic is the only method conspiracy cultists can employ to get silly theories before the public eye. This tactic hasn't changed in fifty years, but today with the Internet it has become more common than ever. Here are ten of the most commonly-repeated myths promulgated by the conspiracy cult in spite of the fact that no forensic evidence supports such claims:

1. Claim: Oswald's prints were not found on the murder weapon until AFTER his death.
Facts: False. Oswald's fingerprints AND palm print were located on the rifle and photographed the night of 11/22/63 prior to Oswald's rifle being flown to Washington D.C. to be examined by the FBI's fingerprint specialists. These prints were photographed and kept by Dallas polic officer Rusty Livingston later to appear in Gary Savage's book "First Day Evidence". The claim is totally false.
2. Claim: The package Oswald brought to work with him on 11/22/63 could NOT have contained the murder weapon.
Facts: False. The package recovered only a few feet from the SE corner window of the TSBD was folded at the appropriate length to conceal the disassembled Mannlicher-Carcano--the same rifle that matched ALL bullet fragments and the one intact bullet recovered after the assassination. The testimony of Wesley Frazier and Linnie Mae Randal must be read in light of their own admission that neither one had any reason to pay particular attention to the length of the package and neither one had any reason to pay particular attention to Oswald bringing a package to work with him. The fact that Oswald's right palm print was on the bottom of the bag agrees perfectly with the manner in which Frazier said Oswald carried the package into the TSBD on the morning of the assassination. Coupled with Oswald's disproven alibi of being in the first floor break room it leaves little doubt that Oswald did NOT eat any lunch on the day of the assassination therefore his package could NOT have contained his lunch as he claimed.
3. Claim: Oswald fingerprints were never located at the snipers nest following the assassination.
Facts: False. It is hard to believe that ANYONE that has read anything about the assassination could make this claim. While Oswald's prints did not exactly litter the sniper's nest location they WERE found on multiple boxes including the boxes stacked to form a resting platform for a rifle. Some of the prints were located in an orientation that would agree with a person located and facing the direction Howard Brennan saw a man with a rifle in the window moments before the shooting started. While Oswald's prints located at the SE corner window do not conclusively prove he was the gunman, they certainly form circumstantial evidence that Oswald was there and conversely, the absence of anyone ELSE'S prints there preclude the notion that someone else moved the boxes and spent time there prior to or during the assassination.
4. Claim: Most witnesses to the assassination thought the shots came from the grassy knoll area of Dealey Plaza.
Facts: False. As expected, many of the witnesses that heard shots in the echo chamber known as Dealey Plaza could NOT identify the source of the shots, but among those that DID feel confident as to the location of the shooter 28% identified the TSBD as the source of ALL shots. The grassy knoll was identified by 12% of the witnesses and 17% felt the shots originated elsewhere. Keep in mind that of the three locations there was ONLY one location where ANY physical evidence was found--the TSBD. A rifle was found there, the SAME rifle that matched all bullets and fragments recovered, a paper bag with the accused assassin's prints on it, three spent rifle casings matching the murder weapon, and fingerprints matching the accused person. The grassy knoll yielded NO evidence of any kind. No weapon, no spent casings, no eyewitnesses saw a gunman there, no eyewitnesses saw anyone fleeing from there, no fingerprints, no footprints, nothing. Therefore conspiracy cultists like Richard Hooke, Jim Fetzer, Jack White, Gregory Burnham, David Healy, and others have to be aware that their belief in a right-front gunman lack ANY credible, physical evidence of any kind. Their belief in a right-front gunman is no different than a belief in the tooth fairy, the Loch Ness Monster, or Elvis Presley sightings in 2013--these beliefs also attrack a some adherents and also have no physical evidence supporting them as well.

6. Claim: A photograph taken moments after the second shot by AP photographer James "Ike" Altgens shows Lee Harvey Oswald leaning out of the doorway of the south entrance to the TSBD. Therefore if Oswald was in the doorway to the building he COULDN'T be on the sixth floor shooting the president.
Facts: False. This issue was resolved within only a few days of the assassination of President Kennedy--wqhy it persists today is proof positive that NO claim, NO theory, NO allegation is too wacky for fringe cultists to embrace and revive. When shown the photograph taken by Altgens, TSBD employee Billy Lovelady immediately identified himself in the photograph and even offered the names of coworkers standing nearby at the time. EVERY ONE of these coworkers, when shown the Altgens photograph, agreed it showed Billy Lovelady in the doorway and NOT Lee Oswald. In fact not one single TSBD employee, to this day, claims they saw Oswald anywhere near the entrance to the TSBD, before, during, or after the assassination of President Kennedy. Not one.

Not that any further proof is necessary but the fact that Lee Oswald, during his official interrogationand when questioned by reporters NEVER ONCE, NOT ONE TIME, ever stated that he was outside the building, standing int he doorway at the time of the assassination. Common sense would dictate that if ANYONE would know who was in the doorway it would be the person that was actually there--Lovelady said it WAS him and Oswald NEVER ONCE said it was him. In fact the exact opposite is true--Lee Oswald stated on video that at the time of the assassination he was IN the building. All of the recent hub-bub and claptrap coming from a few members of a fringe group of conspiracy mongering cultists concerning photographic alterations to the Altgens photograph ignore the factual evidence that clearly and unequivocally refutes any claims of Oswald in the doorway. This has not been a legitimate issue for forty-nine years.

7. Claim: ALL of the Parkland Hospital doctors identified the throat wound as one of entrance, therfore if the throat wound was an entrance wound and if the Zapruder film never shows Kennedy facing the TSBD once he was on Elm Street, how did Oswald fire the bullet that ENTERED the throat?
Facts: False. Granted, there were a couple of Parkland doctors that DID initially think the throat wound appeared to be a wound of entrance, but that was due to the relatively small and neat area around the wound and the fact that the doctors NEVER turned the president over to see a matching wound in his back. Seeing only the throat wound, some doctors were misled into believing that it had to be a wound of entrance. Here is what EVERY attending doctor said concerning the throat wound (I won't take the time to include word-for-word portions of their testimony/statements since they are readily available online for any interested individual to read in their entirety):
Dr. Charles Baxter: The throat wound could have been EITHER an entrance wound or an exit wound. (Inconclusive)
Dr. Marion Jenkins: Convinced it was an exit wound. (Exit)
Dr. Ronald Jones: The wound appeared to be a wound of entrance (Entrance)
Dr. Gene Akin: Could have been either an entrance or an exit wound. (Inconclusive)
Dr. Malcolm Perry: Thought initially it appeared to be a wound of entrance, but upon hearing of the back wound changed his opinion to state the wound would have been one of exit. (initially entrance/later exit)

Other doctors often lumped into the entrance-wound camp such as Dr. Robert McClelland and Dr. Charles Crenshaw (both of whom stated the wound was one of entrance) were not even in the room prior to Dr. Perry destroying the wound in order to insert an endotrachael tube to facilitate breathing. Therefore anything McClelland or Crenshaw says on the subject if pure conjecture since NEITHER one ever saw the unaltered throat wound.

8. Claim: EVERY doctor at Parkland saw a massive wound to the REAR of the president's head thus precluding an entrance shot to the rear and an exit wound to the right front.
Facts: False. While some doctors DID see what they assumed to be a massive defect to the rear of the head these initial impressions were later proven to be inaccurate when the autopsy revealed the true nature of the president's head wounds. The notion that some of the doctors had that the rear of Kennedy's head had been blown out can be attributed to several sensible and expected factors:
a. The president's head was matted with blood and brain matter making a clear analysis of his head wound virtually impossible, until the head had been shaved and washed--which didn't occur until the autopsy later that night.
b. As the doctors worked on the president and as his body was jostled around during the emergency care he received, the skull DID come apart more and more, resulting in the fracture lines in the skull giving way and opening up a larger wound than was initially there.
c. Since the president was NEVER turned over, it stands to reason that NONE of the doctors could see as much of the skull as they later claimed to have seen. Therefore what some of the doctors referred to as the "back of the head" was more likely the "top" of the head or the "side" of the head.
d. NONE of the doctors were there that day to carefully ascertain the nature of the president's wounds. Mistakes were made and false impressions were reached. THAT is exactly why we have autopsies. If emergency room personel were sufficiently trained to determine the details of wounds to patients, then all the police and the courts would do is to ask the doctors how many times and from what directino a person was shot and that would be the end of the issue. But time has proven that emergency room staffers are NOT trained to accurately make such determinations, therefore autopsies are conducted under carefully-controlled conditions, enabling forensic patholigists (who ARE properly trained) to reach a definitive conclusion as to what caused death to occur.

9. Claim: Several key witnesses, germane to the case, died within a short time following the assassination, thus making a complete investigation impossible.
Facts: False. This claim was first articulated by Penn Jones in his 1969 pro-conspiracy book "Forgieve My Grief." Not content with Jones's list of "victims" assassination conspiracy cultist Jim Marrs expanded the list dramatically with his 1989 pro-conspiracy work "Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy." Sadly, both of these lists have not stood up well under closer scrutiny. Without gong through every name suffice it to say that the majority of people on both lists died under perfectly natural causes. Jones and Marrs include people that died from cancer, heart disease. automobile accidents, suicides, and similar provable causes of death. And many of the individuals on both lists had virtually NOTHING to do with the assassination in any way whatsoever. Some were friends of friends of friends who once knew Jack Ruby or police chief Jesse Curry, and therefore couldn't possibly know ANYTHING germane in regards to the assassination. Both Jones and Marrs write of several deaths in mysterious ways stating that "such...and such...died of an APPARENT suicide." Implying that such a determination was still open to investigation, but neither Jones nor Marrs EVER gives reasons to doubt the coroner and police reports that determined cause of death in the first place. Other "victims" were in fact individuals convinced of Oswald's guilt--such as Earl Warren, Dr. Charles Gregory, and J. Edgar Hoover--of course eliminating these people makes no sense. Others had virtually nothing to do with the assassination in any way such as Hank Suydam, who worked at Life magazine and helped write a couple of articles on Kennedy--nothing more, or Guy Banister and David Ferre who never even knowingly met Ruby, Oswald, or Kennedy.

Perhaps the single most damning rebuttal to Jones and Marrs' claim is the fact that in fifty years NOT ONE single conspiracy researcher or writer has died under mysterious circumstances. Common sense and level-headed logic would tell any objective reader that if ANYONE would need to be "rubbed out" by a conspiratorial "hit squad" it would be individuals that were close to exposing the very conspiracy the hit squad was a part of. Mark Lane, Jim Marrs, Robert Groden, Dr. David Mantik, Josiah Tompson, and hundreds of lesser-known conspiracy cultists are alive and well and writing at this moment on websites across the globe. NOT ONE of them--those that actually pose a threat to the conspiracy--have been harmed in any way. Meanwhile Marilyn Walle, a former Ruby employee (who didn't even associate with Ruby for twelve months prior to the assassinatioin) posed such an enormous threat that she had to eliminated.

10. Claim: Several eyewitnesses saw more than one gunman firing at the president's motorcade and some even ran towards the assassin(s).
Facts: False. On November 22, 1963 there was not ONE eyewitness that stated they saw a gunman ANYWHERE other than the SE corner window of the TSBD (Oswald's location). Even the professional conspiracy witnesses like Jean Hill and Ed Hoffmann NEVER said initially that they saw any gunman or any rifle. Of course several pseudo witnesses came forth later CLAIMING to have seen multiple gunmen but that was only after rumors of multiple gunmen had already flooded the media causing these witnesses to change their initial accounts to include these unsupported multiple-gunmen theories. Of course witnesses that didn't appear until years (or in some cases decades) later such as Gordon Arnold, Ed Hoffmann, and Beverly Oliver have absolutely NO credibility and warrant no serious rebuttal to their clearly-fabricated allegations.

And there you have ten of the most common myths about the assassination and the factual rebuttal to each one. Of course this list could have been stretched out to thirty or forty or fifty such nonsense claims, but one doesn't have to eat the entire pot of chili to know what it tastes like.

Posted on Jan 15, 2013 11:30:01 AM PST
John M. Lane says:
Thanks for the informative summary.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 15, 2013 3:49:20 PM PST
Jeff Marzano says:
Thank you Andersen for regurgitating everything the FBI told the gullible public like you.

All lies, but very thorough.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 15, 2013 4:49:25 PM PST
Marzano...you're still around? Tell Nurse Ratched hello for me.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 15, 2013 6:07:22 PM PST
Debunker says:
Care to refute anything he posted? Or are you just going to give us a list of irrelevant books, like you usually do?
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  History forum
Participants:  4
Total posts:  5
Initial post:  Jan 15, 2013
Latest post:  Jan 15, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions