[PREV - HEAD_WOUND]    [TOP]

GAGE_THEORIES

                                             January 03, 2014
                                             January 14, 2014

Upon reading Beverly Gage's survey
(published in _The Nation_)
of recent additions to the JFK
literature...

At this point, I take              JFK_MODEL
this all as given:

  There were more than one shooters, irrespective of whether
  Oswald was one of them.  So, there was a conspiracy (as
  the '76 congressional investigation also concluded).

  The Warren Report contains falsified evidence: it presents
  autopsy photos that don't match the condition of the body
  reported by the medical staff that originally saw it.
                                                              SMOKING_REPORT
  The Warren Commission was not just mistaken in going for
  the "Oswald Alone" story: they were lying or were conned.
  There was indeed a cover-up at a fairly high level.

  The assassins either had connections in the government, or
  alternately, someone in the government voluntarily
  covered-up for an enemy of the United States (e.g. fearing
  an outbreak of war if truth were known).

  It is plausible, albeit not proven, that the conspiracy
  involved elements associated with the CIA (which Kennedy
  reportedly had threatened to "scatter to the winds").
                                                             UR_CONSPIRACY

Beverly Gage essentially takes the "we will never
know" line popular with journalists.  She at least
mentions the congressional investigation (The
"House Select Committee on Assassinations"), but
downplays their findings, perhaps inadvertently:

Yes, they concluded that "the single-bullet theory
was hopelessly flawed", but further they concluded
that there were multiple shooters, and that there
actually was a conspiracy.

So: any one who pushes the story that "Oswald acted
alone", may be Very Serious, but isn't actually
serious, and doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.

Gage's attempt at avoiding engaging with mere
"conspiracy theory" causes her treat the Very
Serious people like this with too much respect.

Gage praises Philip Shenon's "In A Cruel and Shocking Act"
("one of this year's most rigorous assassination books")
but also chides him, commenting:

  "Even experienced journalists trained to avoid conspiratorial
  thinking sometimes find themselves drawn in."

Though she comments approvingly:

  "To his credit, Shenon never adopts the false certainty that
  characterizes so much conspiracy literature."

It is true enough that dealing with uncertainty is a
difficult skill to acquire, but refusing to deal with an
issue because there is some degree of uncertainty is not
actually being reasonable, it's being lazy.


Gage, in attempting to stand above the fray, appears out of touch
with what's actually at stake.  Consider her remark:

  "For the uninitiated, the vehemence of the conspiracy
   literature can be disconcerting."

A US president was killed and the official story was a lie.
Oh gee, what is everyone so huffy about?



Take a walk on the Conspiracy-side with me for a moment.
I contend that the following is unproven but not at all
absurd:

  The assassination of JFK was effectively a military coup
  conducted by the US intelligence apparatus to prevent the
  executive branch from reigning them in.

  In the years since then, every president has been to the
  right of the actual center of US public opinion: this is
  not an accident.

  And Elizabeth Warren better be careful about air travel,
  or she may get the Paul Wellstone treatment.

A real journalist should not treat the
Overton Window as a set of goal posts.


--------
[NEXT - LEAVE_OSWALD_ALONE]