Showing posts with label JFK Records Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label JFK Records Act. Show all posts

Thursday, August 15, 2019

If You Lean Toward Conspiracy In Jeffrey Epstein's Death At Least Embrace A Plausible Theory

Jeffrey Epstein mug shot.jpg

"Conspiracy theories are usually false because the people who come up with them are outsiders to power, trying to impose narrative order on a world they don’t fully understand — which leads them to imagine implausible scenarios and impossible plots," - Russ Douthat, NY Times

"Consider the Bureau of Prison’s suicide prevention protocol. Epstein was found last month unconscious in his MCC cell with marks on his neck. If he was not on suicide watch, it would be astonishing. Yet if he were on suicide watch, his death would be virtually inconceivable.....We are not talking about inexperienced yokels. BOP personnel, especially at MCC, are the best professionals in the corrections industry, and they receive special training in administrating suicide prevention. Who better to guard against such a horrific development?"-   Harry Litman, The Washington Post, Monday, 'Jeffrey Epstein's Apparent Suicide Is Unfathomable'


After billionaire financier bad boy Jeffrey Epstein's apparent suicide over the weekend, it was inevitable that the conspiracy theories would be flying..(cf. 'Conspiracy Theories Fly Online Over Epstein Death', WSJ, Aug. 13, p. A2).  Of course, most of the "theories" - namely the ones spewed by Trump and the Right- which I call conspiracy hogwash-   don't amount to a micro-hill of ant feces. They are made up garbage with no plausible basis, and above all, fail to provide any logical answer to the question one always raises after such events: "Cui bono?"  Who benefits?

As I noted in my post of October 28, 2016 ('Separating Paranoid Balderdash From Rational Conspiracy Thinking')  one must take care to separate rational and coherent conspiracy proposals from those spawned by outright kooks and whackadoodle screwballs.  In the latter category we can put Alex Jones, e.g.
Image result for alex jones








Jones is a confirmed, demented moron,  notorious for  the nutso conspiracy ideation that the Sandy Hook/Newtown massacre was a federal "false flag" operation. Those twenty  kids weren't really slain, they were merely actors- as well as the teachers- in an elaborate script to befuddle the public and make them demand gun confiscation across the land.  

Another conspiracy kook is Donald Trump with his "counting illegal immigrant votes"  bunkum from 2017 (to explain why Hillary won the popular vote by nearly 3 million). Oh, and claiming Ted Cruz' father was in on the JFK assassination, e.g.


http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2016/05/did-rafael-cruz-help-lee-oswald-kill.html

So given Trump's history of  'kookamonga'  conspiracy rubbish there is no reason at all now to put any stock into his tweets implicating Bill Clinton.  This is even more perverse, in my opinion, than his paranoid codswallop from February, 2017 that Obama was bugging him. Recall this followed all the birtherism conspiracy nonsense he started in 2011.

In the end, I always go back to Barbadian psychologist Pat Bannister's categorization of those who invoke conspiracies and how she differentiated them. As part of her construction of a theory of mind, specifically showing the role of lying in young children, she also noted adeptness at detecting lies was linked to accurate detection of real conspiracies. 

Bannister  published several erudite papers, mainly appearing in university symposiums, showing that conspiracy investigation arose as an evolutionary adaptation to the (earlier evolved) ability to lie. In her conception, if conspiracy is among the most sophisticated forms of lying (entailing misdirecting actions as well as words)  then an evolutionary  "equalizer" was needed in order to expose it so this advanced lying would not be to the total future detriment of a tribe, community or nation.

Think of it: effective conspiracy (a surreptitious plan to alter outside events to a group's advantage)  is not merely a simple matter of bending the truth, but bending it - usually in an extended manner over time - to achieve a specific end or manifestation in the real world. It requires not only the awareness of what's in the minds of those one conspires against and those who might try to detect the plan, but also predicting in advance how they might act or respond to prevent the conspiracy from being executed in the first place. And also predicting how future inquirers might be impeded from exposing it decades later.

Thus, as Bannister pointed out in a 1972 UWI  symposium, the Kennedy assassination conspirators would have to know not only how the normal law enforcement structure would respond to an executive action (assassination), but also the official  paraphernalia needed to misdirect it in the case of an accidental encounter while the plot was unfolding.  (Thus, years later, with the publication of Abraham Bolden's 'The Echo From Dealey Plaza', we learned about the critical role of the stolen Secret Service Commission books which allowed conspirators to pass for security personnel.)

The conspirators would also have to be able to predict where the biggest potential threats might lurk, e. g.odd citizens with movie cameras (like Abraham Zapruder and Orville Nix) or with still cameras (like Mary Moorman). Thus, they had to have special teams ready to confiscate them.  The greatest level of forward planning and cognition was reserved for the autopsy - which had to be carried out in a secure venue under full government control (not Dallas' Parkland Hospital) so that the actual entry and egress points for the bullets could be manipulated as well as x-rays, regular photographs.

In other words, taken in concert the Kennedy assassination conspiracy amounted to one of the most sophisticated lies in history, fooling a generation almost totally (other than a few original skeptics like Mark Lane) until at least the JFK Records Act required long stored documents, files be released to the public.  Bannister didn't accept any given conspiracy case dismissed by the media was hopeless. Hence,  whatever the conspiracy,  there would always be 'x' number of critical intellects capable of detecting its mechanisms ex post facto from clues that the conspirators left behind.  


In Bannister's mode of thought then, the conspiracy alert sounder had to possess a theory of mind at least equal to the conspiracy planners', certainly in finally exposing it.  Yes, there could be missteps - especially given the conspiracy planning side would inevitably add further layers of lies ex post facto to throw off conspiracy investigators. These would be in the form of misinformation and disinformation (e.g. inventing whacky conspiracy theories to circulate and get many to bite then ridicule them as 'buff-based') or simply ridiculing any person that even conceives of conspiracy - no matter how well -versed or grounded the formulation is.

It was basically a race between successful gaming of the public via actual conspiratorial  actions (in cover ups)  and exposing it at a deeper cognitive level by those with conspiracy awareness.   

This brings us to the Epstein case, which one can begin to examine by asking "Cui bono?"  In the first instance this would, of course, be Epstein's pal Trump - and make no mistake Trump would have much to worry about from any Epstein testimony - should he have lived.  Does this mean Trump ordered him killed? Nope. An active aggressive (as opposed to passive)  modus operandi was unnecessary given last month  Epstein was found last month unconscious in his MCC cell with marks on his neck.  Thus, we  already knew Epstein was at risk (to himself) having already had one event in which he attempted self-termination.

Hence, all that was needed was to remove the  protections and safeguards present to prevent his commission of the act.  In other words, some person or persons had to have merely wielded enough leverage (money?) to  upend the Federal Bureau of Prisons suicide prevention protocol.   Even Miami Herald reporter (Julie Brown) who was the lead journalist in exposing Epstein's crimes, agreed that this would not have been that hard to do knowing what she did about "prison culture".   So payoffs would be made, likely to some higher up, then lower echelon guards would be brought into the mix say to doctor their  check-in logs.   Voila!  Epstein is left unattended for at least one long enough period (2 hours according to reports on CBS yesterday a.m.) to do himself in. 

Now that we further know (revealed yesterday)  the guards may have well  falsified their suicide check -ins, we have further ballast for a working conspiracy.  This in the sense that missing the Epstein checks wasn't just a case of "forgetting" or blatant incompetence.  No, there was clear skullduggery at work.

This gives the basis for a rational conspiracy proposal, as opposed to the crap and brain barf we behold Donnie Dumpsterfire spewing and retweeting from the Right wing loons.

Add to this the other power players, i.e. all those "players" in sex games who could have been scalded with reputations ruined  by any Epstein exposures.  As we read in this NY Times piece from Aug. 12 ('The Day Jeffrey Epstein Told Me He Had Dirt On Powerful People')

"Almost exactly a year ago, on Aug. 16, 2018, I visited Jeffrey Epstein at his cavernous Manhattan mansion.
The overriding impression I took away from our roughly 90-minute conversation was that Mr. Epstein knew an astonishing number of rich, famous and powerful people, and had photos to prove it. He also claimed to know a great deal about these people, some of it potentially damaging or embarrassing, including details about their supposed sexual proclivities and recreational drug use.
So one of my first thoughts on hearing of Mr. Epstein’s suicide was that many prominent men and at least a few women must be breathing sighs of relief that whatever Mr. Epstein knew, he has taken it with him."

Or....they breathed sighs of relief that their plan had succeeded.   The bribes were taken, MCC payoffs made, check-in reports falsified.  The worst punishments for the offenders would be either forced unpaid leave, or reassignments,  i.e. being moved to other facilities. Ho hum. This again makes the above passive conspiracy proposal the most logical and rational.  IF indeed the reputations of powerful people were in play they would stop at nothing to compromise Epstein's suicide prevention protocols to prevent him talking.    This leaves the three key questions:

1) Who benefited?

2) Who had the power to orchestrate the disruption of Epstein's suicide prevention protocol?

3) Who would have the power to cover it all up with a specious report?

Now you can agree with this depiction or not, after all it's only a theory - heck, maybe only a suspicion, an educated, rational conjecture. But one thing for sure Epstein's death at just this time spares a hell of a lot of power players tons of embarrassing news print.   Much like Lee Oswald's killing 56 years ago, e.g.

Image result for brane space, Lee Oswald project

spared a clique of conspirators from devastating exposure. Thereby ensuring an investigative charade  and whitewash in the infamous "Warren Report".  Hopefully, an FBI investigation will be rigorous enough to eliminate  a similarly bogus "Epstein report".

In the WSJ piece I cited at the top we were informed:

"Conspiracy theories are likely to complicate probes under way by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. and the Justice Department."

However, I dispute that provided the FBI focus on the rational (and most probable) conspiracy theory I summarized in this post, and ignore the utter bilge spouted by Trump and the Right. The latter is all deflecting noise and the FBI needs to be after the signal not the noise.  As for the Justice Dept. let's bear in mind that while AG Barr delivered a good patter on pursuing this case and insisting "no conspirators should rest easy" his own DOJ isn't clear.   After all as pointed out yesterday (WSJ, p. A4, 'Prison Staff Put On Leave In Epstein Case'):   Barr's DOJ "controlled staffing levels and other safeguards" through the 120 facilities and 180,000 inmates under the Bureau of Prisons.  Hence, unless Barr investigates his own DOJ, BOP there is nothing gained by asserting conspiracy theories "complicate probes".  Given all this it is evident that Barr needs to recuse himself from any future investigation, or judgments. 

See also:


Opinion | Count Me Among the Jeffrey Epstein Conspiracy Theorists


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/14/opinion/jeffrey-epstein-death.html?


Excerpt:

"To take the sudden death of such a man in stride — a man whose alleged misdeeds cast him as a veritable pimp to the elite, not to mention a monster in his own right — would be a bit irrational, I think, even if it had happened in Times Square at noon on a clear day. Yet Mr. Epstein died in a locked room guarded by agents of the same establishment, the same power structure that he so broadly and horribly corrupted.


And:


And:


And:
by John Kiriakou | August 14, 2019 - 6:03am | permalink

And:
by Richard Eskow | August 14, 2019 - 6:22am | permalink

Excerpt:

The talking heads have also babbled on about the inner workings of federal prisons. Nearly every word I’ve heard is either factually incorrect, out of context, or fantastical. I spent 23 months in a federal penitentiary and served on suicide watch over a fellow inmate. So I can set the record straight about how suicide watches work in federal prisons, and about the conditions that led Epstein, apparently, to take his own life. If Epstein’s death turns out to have been an actual suicide, it would be the result of a complete breakdown in the system that was supposed to protect him.



Thursday, April 16, 2015

Bernie Sanders Needs To Run - To At Least Give Voice to Populist Issues

"The Ron Paul of the left": Why Bernie Sanders is the cranky socialist 2016 needs
Bernie seen on Rachel Maddow last night.

Make no mistake that Sen. Bernie Sanders - committed Democratic Socialist like yours truly - has no more chance of winning a presidential contest than well......extraterrestrials landing and kicking the mutts in D.C. out and setting up a new ET government.  Sen. Sanders is tarred from the get go with the hated word "socialist" which too many bumpkins in this country don't even understand and hence, fear like an Ebola epidemic. It's a tragedy when brains get fried by a hyper-capitalist media that prefers lies and re-cycled bunkum  to substance.

Given this, it might boggle a few minds that anyone would even ask Sanders to run, but I am, if for no other reason to keep Hillary and her entourage having to defend her left flank.  Most of us, while we would vote for Hillary as the "lesser of two evils"  (the  thought of President Ted Cruz- or another Bush - ought to send anyone to the brink of despair) are not enthused by the Clinton history which was way too inundated with DLC,  Repub Lite thinking and hideous "triangulation".  And let's not forget NAFTA being enacted, welfare “reformed,” and Glass-Steagall repealed, leading directly to a prime cause for the 2008 financial crisis when banks got crazy playing with our money as "investments" when we never intended that. We instead wanted a safe place to park what we had.

Bill Clinton did do one major thing right, and that was acting to release millions of files after the passage of the JFK Records Act. The new files released in its wake, if one had the patience to dig through them, made lots of Warren Commission defenders look outright stupid - if not outright liars - including that tool Gerald Posner. His book, 'Case Closed' (1993) emerged as the laughing stock of the Clinton years given how much was proven false by the tidal wave of additional files. (Including of Gerald Ford altering the wording to the original autopsy report to conform to the magic bullet bollocks - changing the bullet wound to the base of the neck as opposed to the upper back, level with the third thoracic vertebra.)

But back to Hillary: We on the populist left don't buy her "middle class"  champion shtick because what populism she does express appears half--hearted at best, and let's face it, anyone who can amass a $1b war chest can't be a genuine populist, especially if Wall Street money is infused into the mix.

So the Dem left has tried to shame Elizabeth Warren into running, but Sen. Warren has made it clear she has no interest in doing so.  (The last time was last Friday with an interview on Bill Maher's Real Time).  So given Warren isn't in it, we need someone like Bernie Sanders.

Make no mistake, Bernie Sanders is chomping at the bit to have a national stage to sell his form of democratic socialism, and wrestle the party, and the country, to the left. Sanders returned to “The Rachel Maddow Show” Wednesday night to reiterate what he’s been saying for some time: He’ll run for president if you want him to. One gets the feeling that a meaningful fraction of the effort put into drafting Elizabeth Warren would be enough to rouse Sanders to become a full-time thorn in the side of Clinton.
 
A recent salon.com piece argued:

"Sanders is probably not the best spokesperson for democratic socialism: Someone young (Sanders is 73), someone not so Yankee, someone whose clothes aren’t “rumpled”–there’s probably someone, somewhere who’d be a better pitch man for a political ideology that just seven years ago was used as an effective epithet against the newly elected Obama. "

But I disagree! Sanders' age, wisdom and experience make him the perfect defender of socialism - much better than any youngster would be. Even salon.com had to admit:

"what Sanders lacks in polish, and acquaintance with a comb for that matter, he more than makes up for in conviction. He’s experienced in articulating populism, and he’s more than happy to be a true antagonist to Hillary on a debate stage. He’s like the Ron Paul of the left, unafraid–even eager–to ruffle feathers in the furtherance of his political beliefs."

Also, as salon noted, unlike Warren — who is a reformer, not a revolutionary – "Sanders would deliver a full-throated call for an end to the “ruling class” on the campaign trail, which Clinton would, in turn, be forced to defend. While Warren might have forced Clinton to make uncomfortable declarations on Wall Street reform, she'd not have made Hillary question the entire system of which she’s a vital part and advocate." After all, her fingerprints are all over the much-maligned Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal–what Sanders calls “NAFTA on steroids”–which as Secretary of State she helped shepherd to agreement among governments and corporations and said “sets the gold standard in trade agreements.”

Don't buy it for a second. And this is why we have our reservations because no matter how much Hillary tries to be the "middle class champion" her Neoliberal DNA is too much a part of her. We need Bernie to keep her honest, at least for a time!
 
See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/ted-rall/61834/hillary-clinton-runs-first-thinks-last

And:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/bob-burnett/61829/ready-for-hillary

Friday, March 20, 2015

Obama's Grades At The 6-Year Mark


Obama after his election in 2008. All things were possible then including straight A's

Time now to assess President Barack Obama's grades at the crucial 6-year mark. These assessments are based on examining his performance and decisions on multiple fronts, from peace diplomacy, to national security, defense of civil liberties, speech craft, environment, transparency, and executive leadership. Brief explanations will be given after each mark, and a lengthier one will follow the lone 'F' earned, for transparency. These objective assessments are more important than ever after watching some of the clips on Chris Hayes' 'All In' last night, featuring right wing crazies at public meetings with Rick Santorum yelping hysterically about Obama "gone crazy" and "destroying our country". Of course, any such jabber disqualifies these knuckle draggers from having any opinion worth consideration!

Now the marks:

Speech craft:   A minus

Based not only on his 'State of the Union' speeches but others given at various venues in the past six years.


Economy: A

Unemployment now down to 5.5 % and stock market at all time highs. What more can be said?


National Security:   A minus

Obama has done everything one can rationally expect on multiple threat fronts, from ISIS, to Iran. Only the crazies are dissatisfied with his approaches and want more wars- expending blood and treasure we cannot afford.

EnvironmentB minus

His veto of the Keystone XL pipeline has gained many kudos from enviros, but this still hasn't damped disappointment with his support of fracking, intentions to do offshore drilling (off the east coast) and the export of low grade fossil fuels elsewhere (cf. The Denver Post, 'U.S. Exports Pollution, Offsets Advances' Dec. 9, p. 15A)

Peace DiplomacyB

Good, and again would be better if it hadn't been for the fact that he needed Russian help to ensure we didn't get into a Syrian debacle two years ago. Never mind, he seems to have found a backbone against neocon pressure for wars, for now. We need him to be especially alert he doesn't make any missteps by courting the neocons and assisting them against Russia in the Ukraine.


Executive LeadershipB

While Obama began as a tepid leader, he's now become a "ball buster" with his executive orders and actions, including on immigration, health care and the environment. It gives the repukes fits but it warms the cockles of liberal hearts!


Defense of civil liberties: D

Let's see: his refusal to oust CIA head John Brennan after the CIA was busted for spying on the Senate, his pursuit and prosecution of whistle blowers under the 1917 "Espionage Act", his refusal to come to the defense of Edward Snowden when he exposed the NSA's awful overreach in the mass snatching of data - violating the Fourth Amendment. The only reason he avoided an 'F' is that he did (eventually) propose a review board for the NSA programs.


Transparency: F

Obama promised full transparency on his election and then promptly dropped the ball....or never wanted it in the first place. His going after gov't whistleblowers has already been noted, but the real wake up call for me was the failure to deliver archival records  (mainly from the CIA) on the JFK assassination in the 50th anniversary year of that event, e.g.
http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2012/06/national-archives-to-jfk-file-seekers.html

Those of us in the JFK assassination research community were severely disappointed given how many doors had already been opened under President Clinton's watch (when the JFK Records Act was passed.). By comparison it was a giant step backward under Obama.   We suspected that the CIA had notified Obama that they didn't want their 1960s "tradecraft" exposed, but really...seriously, that wouldn't be used any more anyway, including techniques such as: splicing the head of a patsy onto another's body (with a rifle), poison pens to kill witnesses, aerial imaging photography, i.e. frame by frame projection of a film to the rear of a glass screen with minute traces of paint added, then re-shot - which would have been used to alter specific frames in the Zapruder film.

In truth, the only reason NOT to disclose this antiquated tradecraft would have been to protect those actually involved in the conspiracy to kill JFK. After all, if the pertinent documents were released exposing it, then all and sundry would know it COULD be done and those knotheads that howl about "tin foil" hats and an implicit chuckle factor would be put down once and for all.

But while some may believe this National Archives' misstep to be unique, it's actually turned out to be part of a pattern. According to an article in yesterday's Denver Post ('Administration Sets Record For Withholding Documents', p. 11A):

"The Obama Administration set a record again for censoring government files or outright denying access to them last year under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, according to a new analysis of federal data by the Associated Press."

The article also noted:

- The gov't took longer to turn over files when it provided any

- More regularly stated it couldn't find any documents at all

-Refused a record number of times to turn over files quickly that might be newsworthy

- Acknowledged in nearly 1 of 3 cases the initial decision to withhold or censor records was illegal

Worse yet, the backlog of unanswered requests grew by nearly 55% by year's end.  This despite citizens, journalists, businesses and others having made nearly 714, 231 requests for information.

While some may respond with rolling eyes and smug smiles at the seriousness with which files are pursued by some citizens, they really do not get it. They don't get that alert citizens have a responsibility to hold their government (and President) to account. And if they fail to do that - irrespective of whether the issue is the assassination of a past President, drone kills, or NSA secret programs - they don't merit being called citizens.

Obama, fortunately, still has time to pick up the two low grades, but like a student far behind in Calculus or Physics, it will take a lot of sincere effort and plain old hard work.  I for one am confident he can do it - assuming he really wants to!

Tuesday, October 14, 2014

Scott Aaronson : In Over His Head On The JFK Assassination (Part One)

"How do we know that our own rational rejections of conspiracy theories are not themselves infected with beliefs so strong that they are, in effect, conspiracy theories too?" - Matt Ridley in 'Maybe We're All Conspiracy Theorists', The Wall Street Journal, Sept. 10-11, 2011

Scott Aaronson seems to believe that because he’s a quantum physicist that he’s also knowledgeable enough to make intelligent comments – in his blog – on the JFK assassination. He isn’t. He comes across as yet another overconfident, under-informed  proxy  "expert" (using his quantum physics bona fides) but who probably couldn’t tell Oswald’s  OS-351- 164 file from his  201- 289 248 CI/SIG file or his 74-500 file. All as reported in the Appendices of  Military Science professor John Newman’s book, ‘Oswald and the CIA’ – from freedom of information act documents.

But this is the typical BS that serious assassination researchers have to put up with – because these semi-educated (on the assassination) critics only serve to clutter the blogosphere with yet more disinformation and ignorance when some of us are attempting to educate our countrymen as to what really went down – based on actual documents released on the basis of the JFK Records Act – not half-assed speculations or conjectures.

Look, I will try to go easy on this guy – given he’s a quantum physicist – but I will not back away from calling out balderdash when I see it, the same as I would with SPLC writer Marilyn Elias, Miami Herald columnist, Glen Garvin, and Dr. Steve Mason.

For those who want to see all of his dreck you can dredge it up here:


I will stick only to the distilled claims extracted from his bilge.  My points in the order in which he elicits them in his forlorn preface to his "20 reasons for believing Oswald was the lone assassin".


1-     The use of the term “buffs” is a derogative term as has been pointed out by Dr. Michael Parenti in his paper, The JFK Assassination  - Defending the Gangster State. Parenti notes:


These investigators have been described as "assassination buffs." The term "buff" is a diminishing characterization, describing someone who pursues odd hobbies. For the same reason that we would not refer to "Holocaust buffs," so should we not refer to these serious investigators as "assassination buffs." Their efforts reveal a conspiracy to assassinate the president and an even more extensive conspiracy to hide the crime. “

By invoking the term “buffs” in the JFK case, one can suspect that – logically – Aaronson would also label Simon Wiesenthal as a “Holocaust buff” because he’s pursued further research into the Nazi butchers who ran the camps – especially those that pulled the levers to release Zyklon B.


2-     Aaronson claims when the “scales were peeled from my eyes” he found the Warren Commission claim that Oswald fired exactly 3 shots with his Mannlicher –Carcano from the Texas School Book Depository “compelling”. REALLY? Then either Scott didn’t examine the WC evidence diligently enough, or he was incapable of applying the most basic geometry and physics – not to mention being unable to peruse files more recently released via the JFK Records Act – including Gerald R. Ford’s abominable revision of the (upper back) wound placement, see e.g.


Let’s make it clear Aaronson - as a physicist  -  could have done the same analysis as I did above, if he’d have gotten off his ass and actually obtained the requisite files (FOIA requests from the National Archives), examined them and proceeded.  Did he? Clearly not! In fact, he’s not even remotely aware of how the Warren Commission itself was compromised ab initio. See e.g.


and:


3- Aaronson claims “And as for Oswald’s motives, I think I understand them as well and as poorly as I understand the motives of the people who send me ramblings every week about P vs. NP and the secrets of the universe.”  

I don’t think so, pally. If you didn’t access his CIA files, how the hell could you possibly know anything about his motives?  As Michael Parenti notes (ibid.):

Lee Harvey Oswald spent most of his adult life not as a lone drifter but directly linked to the U.S. intelligence community. All of his IQ tests show that he was above average in intelligence and a quick learner. At the age of eighteen in the U.S. Marines he had secret security clearance and was working at Marine Air Control in Atsugi Air Force Base in Japan, a top secret location from which the CIA launched U2 flights and performed other kinds of covert operations in China. The next year he was assigned to El Toro Air Station in California with security clearance to work radar. “

In regard to the last, examination of his CI/SIG file showed that Oswald had clearance – access for all the following:

The locations of all bases on the west coast, all radio frequencies for all squadrons, all tactical call signs, strength of all squadrons, the number and type of aircraft in each, names of commanding officers, and authentic codes of entering and exiting all ADIZ radar ranges.”

If indeed Oswald was as lame as Aaronson claims, he’d never have been entrusted with any of these, period!  Hell, he’d not have been entrusted with the CIA Director’s pet poodle. Moreover, he'd never ever have been let out of the States, and with the ease of dispatch the document trails disclose.

Once again, this glaring failure of perception – because Aaronson hasn’t done his homework- shows he’s not qualified to comment on any aspect of the assassination.


4-Aaronson claims he began his thinking by allowing something like a “10 % probability” for conspiracy in the JFK assassination and then – after presumably investigating (which he clearly didn’t – as shown from the previous critiques), he then goes on to aver:

 “Now, though, I’d place the JFK conspiracy hypothesis firmly in Moon-landings-were-faked, Twin-Towers-collapsed-from-the-inside territory.”

Really? And you call yourself a physicist? You ought to turn in your diplomas, degrees! This bloviation discloses he can’t discern an actual conspiracy from a loony bin conspiracy “theory” or paranoid speculation.  The clearest example of the latter, apart from the ones he conflates with the JFK assassination conspiracy, is one cited by Joe Klein in the latest TIME (Oct. 20, ‘A Troubled American Moment’, p. 28).  That is, the “federal government buying tons of ammunition for the post office in order to raise the price of ammo for gun owners.”

Now THAT is a "conspiracy theory" at least by the standard of common mocking and ridicule as present in the mainstream media and too many blogs! In fact, it’s little more than a wild speculation because there’s  NO evidence offered at all. It is based on a feeling or more accurately a paranoid suspicion. This type of  subjective foolishness is impossible to prove or disprove because it’s in some psychological la-la land where no evidence would even be accepted by the paranoid, anti-government speculators.

 Compare that to the fake Moon landing bilge which can easily be disproven (assuming the proposers are open to science) by referencing the lunar laser ranging experiments (to determine the precise distance from Earth to the Moon). These use lasers fired from Earth to reflectors left on the Moon’s surface by the Apollo Moon landing teams. (If they contend that “robot craft” could have left them there the logical retort is, “Well if we could send robot craft to the Moon why not manned craft? Once you can compute the necessary trajectory 99% of the problem is solved!)

In the case of the JFK assassination, physics works the reverse way to show why a conspiracy – had to exist.

Let’s first bear in mind when we write or speak of conspiracy we mean  a three-layered configuration, as noted by Peter Dale Scott in his ‘Oswald, Mexico and Deep Politics: Revelations from  CIA Records on the Assassination of JFK’.  The layers include:  1) The framing of Oswald, 2) the actual assassination and the 3) the cover up of (1) and (2).  The error of the corporate media and too many dilettantes is they do not separate the parts, which renders any analyses incomplete and misguided from the start.

The framing itself was accomplished using: 1) fake cables, dispatched from the Mexico City station, 2) an Oswald impostor who was photographed going into the Cuban consulate in Mexico City, and 3) raising false speculations about Cuban-Soviet involvement. For a lengthy accounting of the details go to these links:



Again, this isn’t speculation – but based on actual CIA files that disclosed what went on – especially in the Staff D purview as well as David Atlee Phillips shenanigans!

Regarding Staff D, as Peter Dale Scott observes (op. cit., p. 18), after referring to the letter D on the cover sheet of Oswald’s 201 file:


Staff D was a SIGINT or Signals Intelligence operation, run in conjunction with the National Security Agency or NSA. Because of the ultra-secrecy of the NSA and SIGINT, Staff D became a hiding place for other CIA ultra-secrets as well. In 1961, when William Harvey headed Staff D he was assigned the task of developing the CIA’s assassination program, ZR-Rifle, because ‘D’ was the perfect cranny in which to tuck a particularly nasty bit of business.”

 Which was to assassinate any head of state. Even a U.S. head of state who assorted powerful interests (Joint chiefs, Military defense contractors,  CIA  etc.) felt had betrayed them.

 Now let’s get back to what the physics discloses in term of the conspiracy element (2).

The image of interest from the Zapruder film is shown below:
Carefully note the direction of her motion! It is toward the direction of the limo rear or toward the Book Depository.

According to her secret Warren testimony (excised from original published Report, see e.g  Appendix E):

"I was trying to hold his hair on. But from the front there was nothing. I suppose there must have been. But from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull on."

In other words, parts of JFK (hair, at least one occipital bone – later recovered) were being hurled back across the trunk. Such motion is impossible for a rear shot such as from the Book Depository, because the direction of linear momentum is always in the direction the bullet travels. Hence, the shot had to have come from the opposite side of the limo – or where the stockade fence of the grassy knoll stood.

That  this never even occurred to Aaronson, as a physicist, is even more startling and suggests again he didn’t do squat in terms of even looking at the films available (Nix and Zapruder) before jumping to his absurd conclusions.

As for the cover up, that part of the conspiracy is also solid, as I already showed (check the earlier links) for my FAQ parts 4a, 4b and 5 on the bullet wounds. Only a dilettante or slacker would fail to see the obvious hands of cover up if the details are read and understood.

Does Aaronson want to do this?

5- Nope. Aaronson, in the clearest evidence yet that he’s unfit to take on something as big as the JFK assassination,  blabs:

I’ll give twenty reasons for believing that Oswald acted alone.  Notably, my reasons will have less to do with the minutiae of bullet angles and autopsy reports, than with general principles for deciding what’s true and what isn’t.  Of course, part of the reason for this focus is that the minutiae are debated in unbelievable detail elsewhere, and I have nothing further to contribute to those debates”

Oh, okay, so basically Aaronson confesses from the outset he can’t be bothered by any “details” which have been argued “elsewhere”.  He will instead provide us with “general principles” for deciding what’s true and what isn’t.

Hmmm….”general principles” minus the actual physiological, physical and documented  facts (e.g. from CIA files)  before him. Sounds like a guy conducting a séance or voodoo to me. Abracadabra! Here is reality …..based on my general principles of truth, honor and the American (media) way!

I guess that based on his aversion to details, Mr. “General Principles” can tell us the tunneling probability for a particle through a rather steep Coulomb barrier, without even knowing the wave functions for the different regions or the height of the barrier. Makes sense, no? I mean if he can offer general principles of truth for the JFK assassination without even dirtying his hands with "details"  or glancing at a single CIA file for Oswald - certainly he can do that quantum tunneling trick too. Right?

As I will show, this historical event is far above his head and no macroscopic tunneling is available to help him penetrate the ignorance barrier. . Maybe he needs to stick with quantum tunneling!

Next: Response to Aaronson's twenty reasons for believing that Oswald acted alone.