Post by Rob Caprio on Jun 24, 2020 21:17:21 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
www.archives.gov/files/publications/prologue/2017/fall/images/warren-commission.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) assassinated President John F. Kennedy (JFK) all by himself on November 22, 1963.
In trying to make this claim seem possible the WC would ignore many leads showing that a conspiracy was involved in the assassination of JFK.
This isn't wild “CT kooky thinking” either, but rather what an honest person can deduce from reading the WC Report (WCR). This post will look at some of the examples of the WC simply ignoring things when it pointed to a conspiracy.
****************************************
In the “Other Rumors And Speculations” the WC highlight some interesting things that they would go on and ignore.
Here is the first example of them employing doublespeak and dismissal.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0344b.gif
Speculation. – Prior to the assassination Dallas police searched other buildings in the area of the Texas School Book Depository but not the School Book Depository itself.
Commission finding. – The Dallas police and the Secret Service both notified the Commission that, other than the Trade Mart, they had searched no buildings along the route of the President's motorcade or elsewhere in Dallas in connection with the President's visit. It was not Secret Service practice to search buildings along the routes of motorcades. (WCR, p. 664)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0344b.htm
Quote off
We have seen previously in this series that the former head of the Secret Service (SS), and former head of the White House detail too, U. E. Baughman was on record saying that the buildings along a parade route needed to be policed. By this he meant that the SS was suppose to work with the building managers to ensure that NO one was allowed above the second floor during the motorcade.
The WC employs doublespeak and diversion in their “finding” (presumably based on the results of a real investigation, but this never happened). Firstly, no one would have expected ALL the buildings in Dallas to have been searched, but rather just the buildings higher than two-stories along the parade route. Secondly, this assignment fell to the Dallas office of the SS and not the detail traveling with the president. The Dallas office had the 112th Army Intelligence Unit at its disposal for this task, but for some odd reason they were ordered to “stand down” on November 22, 1963.
Thirdly, does it seem reasonable that the SS would allow the President of the United States to travel in an open limousine along a route with a good number of high buildings and NOT have them searched and make sure that the building managers kept people off the upper floors? That seems unreasonable to me. If they were going to be so laissez-faire about things then why do we have them?
Finally, why were there SS agents assigned on the ground at the Trade Mart, but none were assigned to Dealey Plaza (DP)?
The key wording is, “It was not Secret Service practice to search buildings along the routes of motorcades”, but this doesn't preclude OTHERS (i.e. police and military) from doing this on their behalf and direction. It is just amazing that the WC, which included the former director of the CIA, found no issue with this lapse in security.
Evidence illustrating that LHO was being impersonated was presented to the WC, but again they would find nothing suspicious about it.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0345a.gif
Speculation. – Oswald was seen at shooting ranges in the Dallas area practicing with a rifle.
Commission finding. – Marina Oswald stated that on one occasion in March or April 1963, her husband told her that he was going to practice firing with the rifle. Witnesses have testified that they saw Oswald at shooting ranges in the Dallas area during October and November 1963. Investigation has failed to confirm that the man seen by these witnesses was Oswald. (WCR, p. 665)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0345a.htm
Quote off
Here is vital evidence that the WC did NOTHING with because they knew that the man, or men, seen at these shooting ranges was NOT LHO. They threw in an unsupported claim by Marina Oswald of course that left the reader with the thought that perhaps one of these sightings was the real LHO, but this isn't true.
These witnesses were sure that they had seen LHO. That shows how much this man, or men, looked like LHO. As we have seen previously in this series one such man was Larry Crafard. Ruth Paine thought that he looked very much like LHO. Others who have been mentioned in terms of having a very similar appearance as LHO were William Seymour and Billy Lovelady. Some researchers think that Seymour was the man impersonating LHO in New Orleans in the summer of 1963.
The WC just dismissed these sightings by saying that it wasn't LHO, but totally ran from the fact that LHO was being impersonated. Who impersonates a loner? What purpose could this be for besides trying to make LHO appear violent and memorable?
Surely Allen Dulles grasped the significance of these sightings, and others, but he did nothing to settle the matter for us. LHO impersonations equal a conspiracy.
More confusion is caused by this next “finding.”
Quote on
Speculation. – Oswald could drive a car and was seen in cars at various places.
Commission finding. – Oswald did not have a driver license. Marina Oswald and Ruth Paine have testified that he could not drive a car, and there is no confirmed evidence to establish his presence at any location as the driver of a car. Mrs. Paine did give Oswald some driving lessons and he did drive short distances on these occasions. (Ibid.)
Quote off
The “speculation” was that LHO could drive a car. There is evidence showing that either LHO, or someone acting as him, could drive a car. The WC rebutted this speculation by saying that LHO did NOT have a driver's license as if that means he could not drive an automobile.
Furthermore, we have discussed the driver license found at the Department of Motor Vehicles in Texas in the name of LHO before in this series. Where did this come from if LHO had not applied for it and passed his test to secure it? The point made by the WC is just more doublespeak as one does not need a driver's license to be able to drive a car. Legally perhaps, but not physically.
They then offer their main sources for almost everything – Marina Oswald and Ruth Paine. They said that he could not drive. No evidence is presented to support this claim of course.
The WC then employs more doublespeak as they write that “there is no confirmed evidence to establish his presence…as the driver of a car.” There is evidence showing that either LHO, or someone who looked a lot like him, was seen driving a car at different locations. This evidence was simply NOT confirmed by the WC and instead it was ignored because it pointed to a conspiracy.
The last sentence is amazing as it proves that LHO could drive a car after all! Just because he supposedly drove for “short distances” with Ruth Paine doesn't mean that he couldn't drive at all as “found” by the WC because “he didn't have a driver's license.” Pure nonsense.
As I have inquired before, why was LHO even bothering with supposedly learning how to drive a car when he planned on gunning down JFK according to the WC? Could he really expect to get away with a crime like that? He also didn't employ his new found driving skills on November 22, 1963, either according to the WC.
On the very next page of the WCR we see some evidence of LHO, or someone who looked very much like him, driving a car.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0345b.gif
Speculation. – On his way back from Mexico City in October 1963, Oswald stopped in Alice, Tex., to apply for a job at the local radio station.
Commission finding. – This rumor apparently originated with the manager and radio station KOPY, Alice, who stated that Oswald visited his office on the afternoon of October 4 for about 25 minutes. According to the manager, Oswald was driving a battered 1953 model car and his wife and a small child in the car with him. Oswald traveled from Mexico City by bus, arriving in Dallas on the afternoon of October 3. The bus did not pass through Alice. On October 4, Oswald applied for two jobs in Dallas and then spent the afternoon and night with his wife and child at the Paine residence in Irving. Investigation has revealed that Oswald did not own a car and there is no convincing evidence that he could drive a car. Accordingly, Oswald could not have been in Alice on October 4. There is no evidence that he stopped in Alice to look for a job on any occasion. (WCR, p. 666)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0345b.htm
Quote off
How is this sighting “speculation” when there is direct evidence for it? The manager of the radio station met with a person he believed was LHO for TWENTY-FIVE minutes. That is a long time, but apparently it wasn't impressive enough for the WC which ignored it and lessened it by equating it with a “rumor”.
What does the WC use to counter this statement? A fictitious story that they presented NO evidence for. There is NO evidence showing that LHO was ever in Mexico City, and there is no evidence showing that he took a bus back into the U.S. This has been covered in this series already.
This evidence shows that LHO was driving or it shows that someone who looked very much like him was again impersonating him. This impersonation, if that is what it was, even included someone who had a wife and child. No wonder the WC wanted this incident to go away. If it was the real LHO then the WC’s claim that LHO couldn't drive would be out the window.
No wonder the WC supposedly never found any evidence that supported a conspiracy when we see how they treated evidence that showed there was one. Kind of like this.
Quote on
Speculation. – Oswald or accomplices had made arrangements for his getaway by airplane from an airfield in the Dallas area.
Commission finding. – Investigation of such claims revealed that they had not the slightest substance. The Commission found no evidence that Oswald had any prearranged plan for escape after the assassination. (Ibid.)
Quote off
They claim that their investigation found no evidence that LHO or accomplices made any plans for his escape. This means that they again ignored evidence as we have covered the story of Wayne January in this series. He vividly described seeing someone who believed was LHO along with others on November 20, 1963, at his Red Bird airport office when they tried to hire a plane to fly out of the airport on November 22, 1963. He had the feeling that they were planning on heading to Cuba.
Wayne January was listed as a resource in a CIA handbook which meant that those carrying out assignments could make contact with him. He further mentioned that they were driving an older model car. This is similar to the type of vehicle seen in Alice, Texas. January was sure that it was LHO that he saw when he saw photographs of him following the assassination.
Again, the WC ignored all this. They instead used doublespeak when they wrote that they found “no evidence that Oswald had any prearranged plan for escape after the assassination.” First of all, this is only relevant IF it was actually LHO seen by January and IF LHO was going to assassinate JFK. The evidence shows that he didn't.
Secondly, how ridiculous is this statement by the WC? They insinuated, but couldn't support, that LHO planned this assassination ahead of time, but we are asked to believe that he DID NOT plan an escape! What? What kind of person would plan on killing the president, but make no plans for an escape? Can anyone say fairytale?
Lets look at one more in this post.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0346a.gif
Speculation. – Mrs. Marguerite Oswald was shown a photograph of Jack Ruby by an FBI agent the night before Ruby killed her son.
Commission finding. – On the night of November 23, 1963, Special Agent Bardwell D. Odum of the FBI showed Mrs. Marguerite Oswald a picture of a man to determine whether the man was known to her. Mrs. Oswald stated subsequently that the picture was of Jack Ruby. The Commission has examined a copy of the photograph and determined that it was not a picture of Jack Ruby. (WCR, p. 667)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0346a.htm
Quote off
There is so much more to this story than what the WC writes here. Luckily, this has been covered in this series before. SA Odum admitted that he had shown the photograph to Mrs. Oswald on November 23, 1963. He said that he had gotten the photograph from his superiors and they told him that they had gotten it from the CIA. Why did the CIA have a picture of Jack Ruby?
She initially said that she did not recognize the man in the photograph, but days later after her son was killed her son Robert had brought a newspaper that had Ruby's photograph in it since he had killed LHO. This is when she proclaimed that this was the man the FBI agent had shown her.
Again, we see that the WC was examining a COPY of a photograph. Why were they given copies of things so many times? How do we know that the photograph they examined was the same one that was shown to Marguerite Oswald? We don't of course. This type of ambiguity was a trademark of the WC.
What did Marguerite Oswald have to gain by saying that the man in the photograph was Ruby if it wasn't? Why did the WC not publish this photograph if it wasn't Ruby?
Once again we see that the WC ignored and denied any evidence that pointed to a conspiracy. They were given numerous examples of people clearly impersonating LHO, but drew no conclusions from this. In terms of LHO being able to drive they stated that he could, but then said that he couldn't. There were two other witnesses, Edith Whitworth and Gertrude Hunter, who also saw LHO or someone looking a lot like him driving a car when this person visited their store looking for a gunsmith.
There was overwhelming evidence showing that LHO was being impersonated, and the WC ignored it all because it could only point to a conspiracy. This means that their conclusion cannot be correct since they never considered and weighed ALL the evidence, therefore, their conclusion is sunk.
Note: While doing this mini-series in my series it became crystal clear that this section, Appendix XII, was the go-to section of the WCR for the WC defenders. This section is used to counter any comment made by a CTer. Of course the true “speculation” is the WC's answers.
www.archives.gov/files/publications/prologue/2017/fall/images/warren-commission.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) assassinated President John F. Kennedy (JFK) all by himself on November 22, 1963.
In trying to make this claim seem possible the WC would ignore many leads showing that a conspiracy was involved in the assassination of JFK.
This isn't wild “CT kooky thinking” either, but rather what an honest person can deduce from reading the WC Report (WCR). This post will look at some of the examples of the WC simply ignoring things when it pointed to a conspiracy.
****************************************
In the “Other Rumors And Speculations” the WC highlight some interesting things that they would go on and ignore.
Here is the first example of them employing doublespeak and dismissal.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0344b.gif
Speculation. – Prior to the assassination Dallas police searched other buildings in the area of the Texas School Book Depository but not the School Book Depository itself.
Commission finding. – The Dallas police and the Secret Service both notified the Commission that, other than the Trade Mart, they had searched no buildings along the route of the President's motorcade or elsewhere in Dallas in connection with the President's visit. It was not Secret Service practice to search buildings along the routes of motorcades. (WCR, p. 664)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0344b.htm
Quote off
We have seen previously in this series that the former head of the Secret Service (SS), and former head of the White House detail too, U. E. Baughman was on record saying that the buildings along a parade route needed to be policed. By this he meant that the SS was suppose to work with the building managers to ensure that NO one was allowed above the second floor during the motorcade.
The WC employs doublespeak and diversion in their “finding” (presumably based on the results of a real investigation, but this never happened). Firstly, no one would have expected ALL the buildings in Dallas to have been searched, but rather just the buildings higher than two-stories along the parade route. Secondly, this assignment fell to the Dallas office of the SS and not the detail traveling with the president. The Dallas office had the 112th Army Intelligence Unit at its disposal for this task, but for some odd reason they were ordered to “stand down” on November 22, 1963.
Thirdly, does it seem reasonable that the SS would allow the President of the United States to travel in an open limousine along a route with a good number of high buildings and NOT have them searched and make sure that the building managers kept people off the upper floors? That seems unreasonable to me. If they were going to be so laissez-faire about things then why do we have them?
Finally, why were there SS agents assigned on the ground at the Trade Mart, but none were assigned to Dealey Plaza (DP)?
The key wording is, “It was not Secret Service practice to search buildings along the routes of motorcades”, but this doesn't preclude OTHERS (i.e. police and military) from doing this on their behalf and direction. It is just amazing that the WC, which included the former director of the CIA, found no issue with this lapse in security.
Evidence illustrating that LHO was being impersonated was presented to the WC, but again they would find nothing suspicious about it.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0345a.gif
Speculation. – Oswald was seen at shooting ranges in the Dallas area practicing with a rifle.
Commission finding. – Marina Oswald stated that on one occasion in March or April 1963, her husband told her that he was going to practice firing with the rifle. Witnesses have testified that they saw Oswald at shooting ranges in the Dallas area during October and November 1963. Investigation has failed to confirm that the man seen by these witnesses was Oswald. (WCR, p. 665)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0345a.htm
Quote off
Here is vital evidence that the WC did NOTHING with because they knew that the man, or men, seen at these shooting ranges was NOT LHO. They threw in an unsupported claim by Marina Oswald of course that left the reader with the thought that perhaps one of these sightings was the real LHO, but this isn't true.
These witnesses were sure that they had seen LHO. That shows how much this man, or men, looked like LHO. As we have seen previously in this series one such man was Larry Crafard. Ruth Paine thought that he looked very much like LHO. Others who have been mentioned in terms of having a very similar appearance as LHO were William Seymour and Billy Lovelady. Some researchers think that Seymour was the man impersonating LHO in New Orleans in the summer of 1963.
The WC just dismissed these sightings by saying that it wasn't LHO, but totally ran from the fact that LHO was being impersonated. Who impersonates a loner? What purpose could this be for besides trying to make LHO appear violent and memorable?
Surely Allen Dulles grasped the significance of these sightings, and others, but he did nothing to settle the matter for us. LHO impersonations equal a conspiracy.
More confusion is caused by this next “finding.”
Quote on
Speculation. – Oswald could drive a car and was seen in cars at various places.
Commission finding. – Oswald did not have a driver license. Marina Oswald and Ruth Paine have testified that he could not drive a car, and there is no confirmed evidence to establish his presence at any location as the driver of a car. Mrs. Paine did give Oswald some driving lessons and he did drive short distances on these occasions. (Ibid.)
Quote off
The “speculation” was that LHO could drive a car. There is evidence showing that either LHO, or someone acting as him, could drive a car. The WC rebutted this speculation by saying that LHO did NOT have a driver's license as if that means he could not drive an automobile.
Furthermore, we have discussed the driver license found at the Department of Motor Vehicles in Texas in the name of LHO before in this series. Where did this come from if LHO had not applied for it and passed his test to secure it? The point made by the WC is just more doublespeak as one does not need a driver's license to be able to drive a car. Legally perhaps, but not physically.
They then offer their main sources for almost everything – Marina Oswald and Ruth Paine. They said that he could not drive. No evidence is presented to support this claim of course.
The WC then employs more doublespeak as they write that “there is no confirmed evidence to establish his presence…as the driver of a car.” There is evidence showing that either LHO, or someone who looked a lot like him, was seen driving a car at different locations. This evidence was simply NOT confirmed by the WC and instead it was ignored because it pointed to a conspiracy.
The last sentence is amazing as it proves that LHO could drive a car after all! Just because he supposedly drove for “short distances” with Ruth Paine doesn't mean that he couldn't drive at all as “found” by the WC because “he didn't have a driver's license.” Pure nonsense.
As I have inquired before, why was LHO even bothering with supposedly learning how to drive a car when he planned on gunning down JFK according to the WC? Could he really expect to get away with a crime like that? He also didn't employ his new found driving skills on November 22, 1963, either according to the WC.
On the very next page of the WCR we see some evidence of LHO, or someone who looked very much like him, driving a car.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0345b.gif
Speculation. – On his way back from Mexico City in October 1963, Oswald stopped in Alice, Tex., to apply for a job at the local radio station.
Commission finding. – This rumor apparently originated with the manager and radio station KOPY, Alice, who stated that Oswald visited his office on the afternoon of October 4 for about 25 minutes. According to the manager, Oswald was driving a battered 1953 model car and his wife and a small child in the car with him. Oswald traveled from Mexico City by bus, arriving in Dallas on the afternoon of October 3. The bus did not pass through Alice. On October 4, Oswald applied for two jobs in Dallas and then spent the afternoon and night with his wife and child at the Paine residence in Irving. Investigation has revealed that Oswald did not own a car and there is no convincing evidence that he could drive a car. Accordingly, Oswald could not have been in Alice on October 4. There is no evidence that he stopped in Alice to look for a job on any occasion. (WCR, p. 666)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0345b.htm
Quote off
How is this sighting “speculation” when there is direct evidence for it? The manager of the radio station met with a person he believed was LHO for TWENTY-FIVE minutes. That is a long time, but apparently it wasn't impressive enough for the WC which ignored it and lessened it by equating it with a “rumor”.
What does the WC use to counter this statement? A fictitious story that they presented NO evidence for. There is NO evidence showing that LHO was ever in Mexico City, and there is no evidence showing that he took a bus back into the U.S. This has been covered in this series already.
This evidence shows that LHO was driving or it shows that someone who looked very much like him was again impersonating him. This impersonation, if that is what it was, even included someone who had a wife and child. No wonder the WC wanted this incident to go away. If it was the real LHO then the WC’s claim that LHO couldn't drive would be out the window.
No wonder the WC supposedly never found any evidence that supported a conspiracy when we see how they treated evidence that showed there was one. Kind of like this.
Quote on
Speculation. – Oswald or accomplices had made arrangements for his getaway by airplane from an airfield in the Dallas area.
Commission finding. – Investigation of such claims revealed that they had not the slightest substance. The Commission found no evidence that Oswald had any prearranged plan for escape after the assassination. (Ibid.)
Quote off
They claim that their investigation found no evidence that LHO or accomplices made any plans for his escape. This means that they again ignored evidence as we have covered the story of Wayne January in this series. He vividly described seeing someone who believed was LHO along with others on November 20, 1963, at his Red Bird airport office when they tried to hire a plane to fly out of the airport on November 22, 1963. He had the feeling that they were planning on heading to Cuba.
Wayne January was listed as a resource in a CIA handbook which meant that those carrying out assignments could make contact with him. He further mentioned that they were driving an older model car. This is similar to the type of vehicle seen in Alice, Texas. January was sure that it was LHO that he saw when he saw photographs of him following the assassination.
Again, the WC ignored all this. They instead used doublespeak when they wrote that they found “no evidence that Oswald had any prearranged plan for escape after the assassination.” First of all, this is only relevant IF it was actually LHO seen by January and IF LHO was going to assassinate JFK. The evidence shows that he didn't.
Secondly, how ridiculous is this statement by the WC? They insinuated, but couldn't support, that LHO planned this assassination ahead of time, but we are asked to believe that he DID NOT plan an escape! What? What kind of person would plan on killing the president, but make no plans for an escape? Can anyone say fairytale?
Lets look at one more in this post.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0346a.gif
Speculation. – Mrs. Marguerite Oswald was shown a photograph of Jack Ruby by an FBI agent the night before Ruby killed her son.
Commission finding. – On the night of November 23, 1963, Special Agent Bardwell D. Odum of the FBI showed Mrs. Marguerite Oswald a picture of a man to determine whether the man was known to her. Mrs. Oswald stated subsequently that the picture was of Jack Ruby. The Commission has examined a copy of the photograph and determined that it was not a picture of Jack Ruby. (WCR, p. 667)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0346a.htm
Quote off
There is so much more to this story than what the WC writes here. Luckily, this has been covered in this series before. SA Odum admitted that he had shown the photograph to Mrs. Oswald on November 23, 1963. He said that he had gotten the photograph from his superiors and they told him that they had gotten it from the CIA. Why did the CIA have a picture of Jack Ruby?
She initially said that she did not recognize the man in the photograph, but days later after her son was killed her son Robert had brought a newspaper that had Ruby's photograph in it since he had killed LHO. This is when she proclaimed that this was the man the FBI agent had shown her.
Again, we see that the WC was examining a COPY of a photograph. Why were they given copies of things so many times? How do we know that the photograph they examined was the same one that was shown to Marguerite Oswald? We don't of course. This type of ambiguity was a trademark of the WC.
What did Marguerite Oswald have to gain by saying that the man in the photograph was Ruby if it wasn't? Why did the WC not publish this photograph if it wasn't Ruby?
Once again we see that the WC ignored and denied any evidence that pointed to a conspiracy. They were given numerous examples of people clearly impersonating LHO, but drew no conclusions from this. In terms of LHO being able to drive they stated that he could, but then said that he couldn't. There were two other witnesses, Edith Whitworth and Gertrude Hunter, who also saw LHO or someone looking a lot like him driving a car when this person visited their store looking for a gunsmith.
There was overwhelming evidence showing that LHO was being impersonated, and the WC ignored it all because it could only point to a conspiracy. This means that their conclusion cannot be correct since they never considered and weighed ALL the evidence, therefore, their conclusion is sunk.
Note: While doing this mini-series in my series it became crystal clear that this section, Appendix XII, was the go-to section of the WCR for the WC defenders. This section is used to counter any comment made by a CTer. Of course the true “speculation” is the WC's answers.