'The Great Awakening'? How Does A Piece Of Q-Anon Conspiracy Garbage Make It To No. 1 on Amazon?

Can any sane person really believe this Amazon ranking for this piece of trash?  People interested in conspiracies - REAL ones - are better served going to my book on the JFK assassination:

My book is the product of  35 years of research into the conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy, incorporating acoustic analyses, image analyses as well as exposing the sundry deficiencies of The Warren Report. In other words, it's grounded in reality,  not fantasy.

By contrast, 'The Great Awakening' was hatched by QAnon freaks,  likely on an all night bender of booze, bennies and  opioids, mixed with  MJ candy .  It is designed to appeal to the  indiscriminate Pizzagate conspiracy trolls and gullible gobblers,  the ones who believed (in 2016)  Hillary Clinton had a stable of child sex slaves.   I would say also  similar to  the wacko  delusions of Alex Jones of Info Wars fame, but even he has now admitted his false flag ideation about the Sandy Hook massacre was a result of severe mental illness.  What excuse do these latter dispensers of toxic mind rot have?

The Amazon book, which says it was written by a dozen “anonymous Q followers, decoders and citizen journalists known collectively as Where We Go One We Go All (WWG1WGA),” takes up where the Pizzagate rubbish left off. It claims that Democrats murder and eat children and that the government created AIDS, polio and Lyme disease. Then there’s the belief that the world is run by a Satanic cabal led by Hillary Clinton.

NBC News, which first reported on the book's placement on the Amazon charts, noted that the book received an algorithmic boost from product recommendations. The book, written by an anonymous author, averaged 4.5 stars and has been flooded with positive reviews.

Mike Rothschild, a conspiracy-theory expert, told NBC that the book is just another way for the QAnon movement to cash in on its gullible followers, calling it “a bold new step in the endless grift at the heart of Q.”

Nevertheless, the book keeps selling and racking up questionable glowing reviews, which Jason Kint, CEO of the trade association Digital Content Next, chalks up to manipulation and the lack of oversight on Amazon’s part.  As Kint explained to NBC:

“To be clear, they absolutely shouldn’t be censoring the availability of books like this. But the fact we’re left only with the publisher’s own description of the book and a clearly gamed set of 5-star reviews — how is the average shopper supposed to know this is toxic garbage?”

Uh, how about critical thinking? How about having an I.Q. that exceeds room temperature digits? 

Amazingly,  even Reddit now appears to be coming to its senses.  Last September it banned a forum dedicated to the QAnon conspiracy theory, saying users repeatedly violated its content policies.   This isn't difficult to parse because after Pizzagate nearly incited a tragedy (unhinged Trumpie entering D.C. Comet pizza parlor with loaded rifle to "liberate Hillary's child sex slaves")  there can be no issue these are dangerous loons.

Let's also get it very clear from the get go that the assorted nonsense being peddled does not qualify as conspiracy theories. They are conspiracy claptrap or refuse. In  previous blog posts I noted 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.

Dr. Bannister's classification was simple:

1- Conspiracy analysts

2- Conspiracy theorists

3- Conspiracy crackpots or cultists


At the top of the hierarchy were conspiracy analysts, such as Mark Lane, Peter Dale Scott, Harold Weisberg, Richard Charnin and others (like yours truly)).  These were serious people possessing some measure of intellect who brought their scientific, mathematical and other aptitudes to the investigation of multiple aspects of a putative real conspiracies like Iran-Contra and the JFK assassination.  These people put in real man hours and actually published their work in authoritative media (e.g. BOOKS - real books!) and respected forums as opposed to spreading bunkum through half-assed posts in the lowest dreg regions of the net, like 4chan and 8chan.  

By contrast, the 'conspiracy theorist' put forward conspiracy conjectures but didn't back them up with evidence. Or, if evidence was provided, it didn't meet elementary scientific standards for acceptance, such as consistent selection, coherent and accurate data assessment, and avoidance of confirmation bias.

The bottom feeders of the classification scheme were conspiracy crackpots or clowns, like Alex Jones.   Jones is most famous for his off the wall bunkum that the Sandy Hook/Newtown massacre was a federal "false flag" operation. Those slain  kids weren't really dead, 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.  Jones claimed he'd watched "films over and over and just seen those kids walking in circles".  At least now he's admitted to being mentally unbalanced.  We now await the authors of The Great Awakening to do likewise.

How would Dr. Bannister, if she were alive today, describe a convoluted, paranoid -infused mental mosh pit like "The Great Awakening"?   Basically, she'd probably call it a psychotic's phantasmagoria and schizoid ideation attempting to make sense of disparate, suspicious elements in the contemporary U.S. - driven by social media. 

 She'd also make note that such fever dreams don't need a whole lot of external memetic fuel to get started: a coincidence here, a loaded word from Trump there, an obscure reference to "deep state" there- oh  and some "genius" who first puts it all together in his mother's basement and posts it on 4chan. Whereupon a susceptible brain will be infected and spread it on to other gullible souls, searching for meaning in their vacuous lives. Well, to be sure, it's probably a bit better than using opioids!

 It would be great if we could just ignore these looneytunes-  or dispatch them to an asylum for general ECT and lithium therapy. But alas, their fevered baloney can have real world consequences and act outs - especially when a virulently infected zombie gets activated - like the guy who fired a round into the D.C. pizza parlor looking for child sex slaves. Or the other screwball who tried to block traffic headed for the Hoover Dam.

These people desperately need help, but it seems there are just too few professionals around now to get the job done.   Where is Dr. Bannister when we need her?

As The Right Spins Its "False Flag" Flatus Let's Not Conflate Conspiracy Crackpots With Actual Conspiracy Theorists -Researchers

Alex Jones (left) is a conspiracy kook, while Mark Lane is a conspiracy analyst. It's time the scribes in the mainstream media began to learn the difference!

As noted in my post of Oct. 24, it was mere hours after the news broke that explosive devices had been sent to George Soros, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and other prominent Democrats, that  deranged conspiracy ideation  (I refuse to dignify it with the term 'theory') was spawned in certain corners of conservative media.  The bombs, according to this hogswill, were not actually part of a plot to harm Democrats, but were a “false flag” operation concocted by leftists in order to paint conservatives as violent radicals ahead of the elections next month.  As Matt Miller put it last night ('Last Word', MSNBC) "This is coming from conservative circles that this was somehow a liberal plot to distract from the caravan  which they believe is what the election ought to be about. So again, you have this idea that because they were Democratic targets it's not a national crisis, but something we can again fight over - which is obviously a really reprehensible idea."

Sound familiar? If it does you might recall it comes right out of the playbook of  über -kook Alex Jones who fabricated the false flag bunkum that the Sandy Hook/Newtown massacre was a federal "false flag" operation. Those twenty  kids weren't really slain, they were merely child actors- as well as the teachers- in an elaborate script to befuddle the public and make them demand gun confiscation across the land. (Jones was also one of the nitwits who confected the cockeyed conspiracy codswallop that the Parkland shooting victims, who became gun control activists-  were all actors.)

Many of these lowbrow kooks, which is what they are, were  also foursquare behind helping to spread Michael Flynn's  Pizzagate conspiracy, i.e. that Hillary Clinton was keeping child sex slaves in the basement of a D.C. pizza parlor and exploiting them.

So no one need be a Mensa brainiac to know the template for this latest false flag conspiracy B.S. has been in existence from the Right's stooges and trolls for some time. Hence, it ought to have been of minimal surprise to learn this latest iteration shares the same deranged heritage, or "DNA" if you will. In this case, a wacko named  Jacob Wohl-   a pro-Trump twit who writes for Gateway Pundit (a Right wing troll farm)-   tweeted  the  refuse that the assorted pipe bombs were props, planted by Democratic operatives and amplified by a biased liberal media.  In other words, all a ruse to drive voters to the Dems. No, folks, you cannot make this shit up, this is real and happening in Rightist Trump World.

One is led to inquire what engenders this degenerate crap.  What defects in the brains of these losers causes them to spawn such bollocks, say instead of applying what gray matter they have to researching real conspiracies?  Well, one answer is that researching the real ones - like the JFK assassination  - actually takes hundreds of man hours of real work.  Just plowing through Oswald's CIA files - e.g. the  OS-351- 164 file from his  201- 289 248 CI/SIG file or his 74-500 file. as reported in the Appendices of  John Newman’s book, ‘Oswald and the CIA’- can take hours.   It's a damned sight more exacting than merely scribbling  an imbecilic text on 4 Chan, Reddit or Gateway Pundit.

Sadly, columnist Kevin Roose, in a recent  NY  Times piece : ' False Flag Theory on Pipe Bombs Zooms From Right-Wing Fringe to Mainstream',  appeared not to be able to distinguish this latest right wing baloney from serious conspiracy research. That is the nature of the work done by Mark Lane  - who would be called a REAL conspiracy theorist or better, conspiracy analyst.  (The analyst having often shown facts, evidence, data beyond the conjectures of theorists.)

 As articulated by Dr. Pat Bannister, the conspiracy research community is the province of mature, rational, educated adults. Serious people possessing some measure of intellect who bring their scientific, mathematical and other aptitudes to the investigation of multiple aspects of a putative real conspiracies - whether the BCCI banking conspiracy, Iran-Contra or the JFK assassination. These people put in real man hours and actually published their work in authoritative media and respected forums as opposed to spreading bunkum through the lowest dreg regions of the net.

Lane, for example, was the first to expose the misdirection and artifice to do with Lee Harvey Oswald's USMC rifle test scores. This was in conjunction with the Warren Commission's questioning of Major Eugene D. Anderson in reference to Commission Exhibit No. 239.  Thus, the WC simply published Anderson's ambivalent speculations on what  weather conditions  for May 6, 1959 might have been, i.e. at first asserting "it was an ideal day".   But it was Lane who pointed out, 'Rush To Judgment', p. 124:

"Although the Commission adopted and published the major's speculation on what the weather 'might well have been'  there was no need for imprecision on this point. Whenever weather is a factor in a court case in the United States, the records of the United States Weather Bureau are subpoenaed and presented as a matter of course.  ... The Weather Bureau records show that the day was not 'windy, rainy, dark', it was sunny and bright and no rain fell."

 That, I submit, is the work of a serious researcher, not a wacko like  Jacob Wohl, Michael Flynn or Alex Jones.   Alas, Mr. Roose - unable to make any critical distinction between genuine theorists-analysts like Mark Lane and ignorant poppets such as Alex Jones, Jacob Wohl et al, writes:

"Conspiratorial thinking has always been with us — the grassy knoll, the moon landing, the Freemasons. But it has been turbocharged in the Trump era..."

Thereby conflating conspiracy thinking and analysis with paranoid ideations and blatant nonsense.  This occurred as soon as he dragged in "the grassy knoll".  Following on from his book 'Rush To Judgement', Lane prepared a video with eponymous title, in which actual assassination witnesses were interviewed including: S.M. Holland, Lee Bowers, Aquilla Clemmons,  Orville Nix and others. In the case of S. M. Holland, e.g.

Lane escorted him to the top of the Triple Underpass overlooking Dealey Plaza to assess the full layout including the grassy knoll, and the curve of Elm Street around the Texas School Book Depository. Subsequently,  Lane actually walked with Holland  to the picket fence on the grassy knoll, clearly revealing its height would have concealed an assassin. Holland also recounted for Lane the questions never asked him by the Commission.

The interview with railroad worker Lee Bowers (later found dead in a suspicious car accident) disclosed the movement of men and a vehicle ('58 or '59 Chevy, tires covered with mud) behind the picket fence on the knoll just before the assassination.

Lane's preliminary work in many ways set the stage for the research of D.B. Thomas (published in the journal Science and Justice, Vol. 41, p. 21, 2001) which showed the putative origin of the kill shot in the assassination, traced to the grassy knoll using echo correlation analysis. This was based on the inferred geometry:

Thomas incorporated  both the original acoustic data (in dictabelt recordings) from Nov 22, 1963 and  more recent evidence from August 1978, when a test shot was fired in Dallas’ Dealey Plaza to provide a fiducial mark for the putative Grassy Knoll shot.   This integration was such that the test shot could be compared with the impulse record obtained on Nov. 22, 1963, e.g.

 This enabled the  fiducial mark to be lined up to events recorded on the Zapruder film. Thus, the test evidence (mainly in terms of echoes and echo delay times received via an echogram from a test shot (See Fig. 1) was essentially used to confirm the microphone recording & positions for the shots made on the actual date, by resort to microphones placed at the same (or approximately so) locations.

The hypergeometric p-function was then used for differing weighting factor distribution sets, H{M..N, n, i} to assess significance or likelihood of occurrence. It's based on the number of echo  'windows'  M,  with each spanning 190msec (total time)  at 2msec width per window and n for assigned impulses in the evidence pattern, with 'i' the "coincident impulses" or those matching the original (11/22/63)evidence and the test result. 

The question was whether a succession of first impulses of given amplitude could be manifesting a signal or was merely random noise. Thomas found that for a given configuration for 2 motorcycles at designated locations, 1 for (Grassy knoll) shooter location and one for alignment of muzzle blasts with one pair of echoes, the p -value is 0.000012 or about 1 in 100,000 against the null hypothesis, i.e. that the impulses were from random noise. An alternative way to put this is that the odds are 100.000 to 1 against being random noise. Hence  in favor of the impulses comprising actual rifle shots.

For the test shot, using Thomas' sonar model and the muzzle velocity for a Norma 6.5mm Mannlicher-Carcano (which is very doubtful that the GK shooter used), one arrives at a 171 msec time for the shock wave to take the defined path to the microphone, from a distance of 28.3m.  (See geometry diagram above)  One must then add the time taken for the putative bullet to travel the distance to the time for the shock wave. In this case: 126 msec + 45 msec. The first parameter is relatively fixed since the distance from bullet to test microphone is fixed at 44.2m and the speed of sound defined for the sonar model was 350 m/s.

The second component changes depending on the muzzle velocity. A German Mauser, with muzzle velocity not much greater than 760 m/s will have its bullet traverse the 28.3 m distance in 37 msec, so that the time will now be: 126 msec + 37 msec or 163 msec, which is some 8 msec shorter. If the rifle used was a Remington Fireball with muzzle velocity 825 m/s then we have a total time: t1 + t2 = 126 msec + 34 msec = 160 msec, or 3 msec shorter.

In the “analytically determined” schema (e.g. actual data obtained on 11/22/63), all the above values change slightly. For example, the distance to Kennedy (from the GK shooter) becomes 30.5 m, and the speed of sound is 342 m/s given the air temperature was 18  C (64.4 F)  at the time of the assassination. The distance from the (GK) assassin to the nearest motorcycle was 67 m leading to the muzzle blast arriving at the motorcycle some D t = [67m/ 342 m/s] = 196 msec, after the shot. When air resistance is corrected for by + 11.5% (from the shooter location) the muzzle velocity resulting becomes 748 m/s (using a starting assumed bullet speed of 672 m/s). Because of a shooter “location uncertainty” of +/- 1.5 m (A<-> A') the muzzle velocity uncertainty is at least +/- 32m/s, so one is left with a range of: 748 +/- 32 m/s. Assuming Thomas’ parameters are correct, then this excludes a Remington Fireball as a possible candidate weapon, but it does permit either a German Mauser or a .30-30 Winchester.

The bottom line is that Thomas' investigation soundly reconfirmed the original acoustic tests and that the kill shot came from the grassy knoll.

My point in writing this post and undertaking this exercise is to show the need for more scrupulous attention to details, as opposed to recklessly and lazily employing throwaway terms like "the grassy knoll"- to conflate one of the few genuine conspiracies with current wacko ideations.  The  latter referring to the false flag idiocy spewed by the Right's parade of morons, paper patriots  and shameless knuckledraggers.

By also showing more perception, intelligence and insight, writers like Roose will command more respect, especially in being able to discern poppycock from actual events that merit close analysis and research of the type I have shown.  Writers like Roose thereby emerge as more competent and informed when they write pieces on claptrap, paranoid conspiracy ideations - such as circulated by Jacob Wohl and Alex Jones.  The takeaway for serious journalists?  Do not insert "grassy knoll"  phrases or references as a kind of cheap homage to "conspiratorial thinking"  when criticizing today's incarnations of paranoid bunkum.

See also:

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2018/08/research-into-conspiracism-undermined.html

And:
Here Are 5 of the Worst Far-Right and White Supremacist Terrorist Attacks of Recent Years

James K. Lambert- Another WC Toady and Tool - Tries To Spin JFK Assassination Researchers As The Original Fake News Purveyors

Only a rank propagandist or imbecile would put wacko Alex Jones (left)  on the same conspiracy continuum as  the late conspiracy analyst Mark Lane.

"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

It was frankly incredible - as well as appalling- to see James K. Lambert consume no less than six pages in SKEPTIC Magazine (vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 14-19) and end up saying very little of substance. Unless, of course, one regards blatant propaganda as substance.. To back up, it was only by sheerest serendipity I got the issue, as we had stopped in Barnes & Noble yesterday afternoon so I could use a birthday gift card Janice had given me.  It wasn't until we returned home and I read Lambert's recycled codswallop ('Conspiracy Theorists and the Harm They Do') that I realized the Warrenite toadies and apologists had descended to a new, vile low:  Now blaming JFK conspiracy researchers for actually launching the obscene fake news permeating so many outlets today.

So this hack wants us to believe the whole fake news cycle began with the advent of  sober conspiracy analysis following the assassination of John F. Kennedy.  This was when so many decent citizens questioned the PR whitewash of the Warren Report. Lambert  scribbles at the end of his balderdash, for example:

"From 9-11 to Sandy Hook, the paranoid and divisive view of the world that conspiracy theories promote has been gaining in popularity since the first 'false facts' about President Kennedy's death became widely accepted."

Actually, Sparky, the only false facts were to do with the effort to cover up the hit and blame it all on Lee Harvey Oswald.  In the single statement above, Lambert elides everything, including Alex Jones' insane Sandy Hook conspiracy (claiming a false flag operation using live child actors for dead kids) and ends up destroying whatever shred of credibility he might have possessed.

Recall in this regard, it was Barbadian psychologist Dr. Pat Bannister who once invoked the idea of  a "conspiracy culture",  to distinguish it from "conspiracy research community". The latter she envisaged as the province of mature, rational, educated adults. Serious people possessing some measure of intellect who brought their scientific, mathematical and other aptitudes to the investigation of multiple aspects of a putative real conspiracy - whether that be the BCCI banking conspiracy or the JFK assassination. These people put in real man hours and actually published their work in authoritative media and respected forums as opposed to spreading bunkum through the lowest dreg regions of the net.

 The "conspiracy culture"  by contrast was defined by the  resident "conspiracy theorist",  who put forward conspiracy conjectures  but didn't  advance adequate evidence or documents to  support them. Or, if such were advanced, they didn't meet elementary scientific standards for acceptance, including consistent data selection. For example, the nincompoops who claimed no men actually landed on the Moon and it was all filmed on a Hollywood lot.

Mark Lane, for example, who Lambert would have us accept as one of the original  fake news purveyors, was the first to expose the misdirection and artifice to do with Oswald's USMC rifle test scores. This was in conjunction with the Commission's questioning of Major Eugene D. Anderson in reference to Commission Exhibit No. 239.  Thus, the WC simply published Anderson's ambivalent speculations on what  weather conditions  for May 6, 1959 might have been, i.e. at first asserting "it was an ideal day".   But it was Lane who pointed out, 'Rush To Judgment', p. 124:


"Although the Commission adopted and published the major's speculation on what the weather 'might well have been'  there was no need for imprecision on this point. Whenever weather is a factor in a court case in the United States, the records of the United States Weather Bureau are subpoenaed and presented as a matter of course.  ... The Weather Bureau records show that the day was not 'windy, rainy, dark', it was sunny and bright and no rain fell."

 That, I submit, is the work of a serious researcher, not a wacko like Alex Jones.   But Lambert fails to make any distinction, any discrimination between the two classes at all, thereby revealing himself as a first class hack.   Indeed, speaking of the rifle test scores - Lambert fails to even mention as an aside the total failure of the Warren Commission to replicate Oswald's alleged shooting feat on Nov. 22, 1963.  See e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2013/11/frequently-asked-questions-on-fhe-jfk.html

But let's dig into some of his claims one by one, and let me begin with the photo shown below, appearing in the magazine, e.g..  

This is Commission Exhibit 903 which Lambert describes thusly in the caption for it, distinguishing it from the usual crooked path of the bullet, e.g. as portrayed by Robert Groden in 'The Killing of a President':  "By contrast in Exhibit 903 from the Warren Commission Report the path of the bullet is roughly estimated with  metal rod to be a straight line".  Before we continue, note where Arlen Specter is placing the entry point!  This is just above the base of the neck and higher than it was originally placed in an original WC sketch, e.g.


The upper inclined blue arrow shows the WC original positioning, with the trajectory of the bullet that would be needed (the WC first  believed) to account for BOTH the JFK neck wound AND the back wound. The problem was twofold: first, the throat wound was described by Parkland surgeon Malcolm Perry (who should know his business given having to deal with multiple Dallasites' gunshot wounds at Parkland) as an ENTRY wound.

The neck wound placement (from Perry) is shown in the collage below along with the JFK back wound.  Also included is the Zapruder film frame showing the instant JFK grabs at his neck, signifying the bullet impact.

 Second,  the Warrenites realized almost too late the placement was too low. The angle wasn't right and would have required a shooter firing from street level (e.g. upwards) when they needed an assassin at elevation, specifically six stories up in the Texas School Book Depository. Thus they were forced to make the placement, entry point higher, leading to the lower -angled yellow path instead.   The question of changing the position posed a conundrum: How to proceed, and how to justify it to an audience - fortunately, lacking in highly technical skills?  The solution was advanced by Commissioner Gerald Ford:  to slightly alter the wording of the autopsy draft report. The initial draft of the report had read:   

"A bullet had entered his back at a point slightly above the shoulder to the right of the spine." 

 

But Ford altered it to read:  

"A bullet had entered the back of his neck slightly to the right of the spine."
 
His actual changes are shown here in the draft:

Corroborated in a NY Times account in 1993:

Clearly Gerry Ford, doubtless with the agreement of other commissioners, needed the autopsy report to conform to the (downward trajectory)  path demonstrated  by Specter. It had to be made to fly so that even the most hardened WC skeptics and critics would swallow it.  But these toadies weren't prepared for the hard core conspiracy analysts of the future, such as Mark Lane, Robert Groden, Harrison Livingstone, Harold Weisberg. Peter Dale Scott, Richard Charnin and of course, yours truly

The bottom line problem for Ford and his WC accomplices in this autopsy fakery and skullduggery was one of contradicting basic anatomy.  The original autopsy sheet, including the placement and description of the back wound, was signed and verified by Admiral George Gregory Burkley, personal physician to the president who directed the autopsy. He verified the BACK wound placement at JFK's   third thoracic vertebra   on November 24th.    By contrast, the neck has seven CERVICAL vertebrae and the observed and verified original wound (from Adm. Burkley) was described as three thoracic vertebrae lower then the neck itself.   But Ford's hocus pocus was intended to make us believe it was near the seventh cervical vertebra where the bullet had entered.  A contrivance and artifice which would force us to accept Ford actually knew MORE anatomy than Kennedy's physician, Adm. Burkley!  

 But one can instead accept- on the clear evidence- that Ford was a lying,  deceitful poltroon,  performing a fake news operation on the autopsy report when he wasn't even qualified to remove a splinter from his dog's paw. In this case,  the whole farce falls away of its own weight and the fake nature is exposed.   Thus, Arlen Specter's "straight line"  path (Exhibit 903) becomes pure fiction because it's based on a false anatomy, or rather the faking of the original autopsy draft from Adm. Burkley.

Make no mistake this is a major, indeed colossal, revelation - because it shows clearly the LIARS are all on the Warren Commission defenders side- which Lambert is clearly on. Maybe someone paid him to do this latest hit job on the truth, who knows? Maybe this was in accord with CIA Document 1035-960  which clearly advocates mischief, e.g.

"To employ propaganda assets to [negate] and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose".

Of course, Lambert will no doubt deny he's a CIA asset like John McAdams does.  Apart from the Specter - WC Exhibit 903 baloney Lambert also trots out the usual bunkum like trying to denigrate Lee Oswald as "a perpetual loser who couldn't hold down a job". By contrast we know from deep politics researcher Michael Parenti (The JFK Assassination  - Defending the Gangster State.):

“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. “

Lee Oswald then was no "commie" dupe but an intel operative. Most researchers who've delved into this in much more depth than superficial 'buffs' come away with the conviction Oswald was set up as part of ZR/Rifle.  The proof in the pudding was the letter ‘D’ – on the cover sheet of Oswald’s 201 file – indicating a  CIA Staff D  SIGINT or signals intelligence operation run in concert with the National Security Agency or NSA. As pointed out by Peter Dale Scott (Deep Politics Quarterly, Jan. 1994): “In 1961, when William Harvey headed Staff D, he was assigned the task of developing the CIA Assassinations Project, ZR/Rifle.”  To  be totally blunt, I seriously doubt Lambert knows anything about Oswald's 201 file or any of his other files, period.

Lambert later bitches about where all the bullets went and we already know most of that - such as for example, the fragment of one striking James Tague near the Triple Underpass, as well as leaving a bullet imprint on the curb. Another bullet left a dent clearly photographed on the limo windshield frame, e.g.     


Harold Weisberg and others (e.g. Noel Twyman, 'Bloody Treason', p. 104) have noted the FBI subsequently removed the curb  (in July, 1964) with the bullet imprint and dispatched it to D.C.   while good ol' LBJ had the limo dismantled so no evidence at all could be obtained including the bullet indentation shown. Twyman, on his photo page( ibid.) shows  an image of the curb section removed by the Feds and also other bullet impacts.

Lambert blabs:

"If they had a substantial case to make against the Warren Commission they would have made it, and they wouldn't need to grossly misrepresent what the Warren Commission actually found." 

Well, what did it find? According to its own version of the head photos it found NO damage at all to the rear of the skull. However, the actual autopsy photo as it first appeared in David Lifton's 'Best Evidence' clearly shows the rear of the head blown out, e.g.

There the damned case pivots-  right there, on top of the back wound alteration lies by Gerald Ford!

The Parkland doctors cited with photographs of their hands - in 'The Killing Of A President' - all indicated the rear of the head as bearing the massive wound.  The doctors include:

-Dr. Robert McClelland

- Dr. Paul Peters

- Dr. Kenneth Salyer

- Dr. Charles Crenshaw

- Dr. Ronald Jones

- Dr. Charles Carrico

- Dr. Richard Dulaney

 The massive rear head damage is also substantiated by the fact Jackie was filmed launching herself  over the trunk of the limo. In her secret Warren Commission testimony Jackie insisted she was trying to salvage a dislodged bone fragment. 


Jackie lurches over the rear of the limo trying to snatch a dislodged fragment of JFK's skull. Lambert doesn't mention this critical image at all, though it supports the Newtonian laws of physics for a frontal shot.

From the laws of physics, the fact she was moving to the rear means the head shot had to have come from the front. (The linear momentum transfer occurring from front to rear.) Why doesn't Lambert mention that image at all? Or, is he like John McAdams and wishes it never existed?   But maybe he has an alternative explanation for Jackie's rear motion, even contradicting that she herself insisted she was chasing a bone fragment, e.g.  in a 1964 taped interview with Arthur Schlesinger.  Maybe Lambert will argue Jackie suffered a sudden yen to lurch across the limo trunk, even at great risk to herself.


The massive REARward cavitation path was also documented by Floyd Riebe, the medical photographic technician at Bethesda,  who also described a "big gaping hole in the back of the head", and  reinforced it with the sketch below, e.g.  


Strangely, Lambert mentions none of this. Not Jackie's rearward motion over the limo trunk - explaining it fully - not Floyd Riebe's observation or the actual autopsy photos showing the REAR of Kennedy's head blown out.  Nor does he explain how it was that Parkland surgeon Charles Crenshaw also validated and confirmed the occipital region of the skull blown out.  

Dr. Crenshaw reported (see his book link below, page 10) being shown one of the Warren Commission autopsy photos by Garry Shaw of the Sixth Floor Museum, and was asked whether it matched what he observed while attending to JFK.  Crenshaw was incredulous, immediately spotting the fake, and ascertaining the head had been "manipulated"  exposing a conspiracy at work.  Readers are advised to read more in his book, 'JFK - Conspiracy of Silence' :

http://www.krusch.com/books/kennedy/Conspiracy_Of_Silence.pdf

We can only conclude from these relevant, massive omissions that Lambert is part of the fake news- fake  history cavalcade, such as when he insists Oswald was lying when he claimed the backyard photos of him holding a rifle were faked. But I already showed this is exactly so, e.g. 

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2013/11/analysis-of-pixel-diffusion-in-oswald.html

As for Lambert's attempt to dismiss Lee's claim the police were in on it. one need look no further than the Oswald "ghost" photo recovered at the Dallas P.D. e.g.

The blank offered a perfect template with which to work photographic mischief and misdirection, but clearly Lambert isn't clever enough to see it, or grasp that the technical capacity was indeed available at the time.  In 1977, Canadian Defense Dept. Photographic specialist Maj. John Pickard noted the 99% probability the LIFE cover photo was a fake and noted each photo was taken from a slightly different angle. When superpositions of the images are performed, e.g. one photo laid atop another in succession, it is found that nothing matches exactly. As Pickard observed:

"Yet, impossibly, while one body is bigger - the heads match perfectly."

Again, this can be explained using the same "spliced out head"  re-incorporated into each image.

WC tool that he is, Lambert also dredges up the old curtain rods canard. That the package Oswald was carrying with him to work - riding with Buell Wesley Frazier- was actually a rifle and not curtain rods that Lee claimed.  But this claptrap was skewered by  Prof. David R. Wrone, whose review of Case Closed appeared in The Journal of Southern History 6 (February 1995), pp. 186-188:

"100 percent of the witness testimony and physical evidence exclude Oswald from carrying the rifle to work that day disguised as curtain rods. Posner manipulates with words to concoct a case against Oswald as with Linnie Mae Randle, who swore the package, as Oswald allegedly carried it, was twenty-eight inches long, far too short to have carried a rifle. He grasped its end, and it hung from his swinging arm to almost touch the ground. Posner converts this to "tucked under his armpit, and the other end did not quite touch the ground"(p. 225). The rifle was heavily oiled, but the paper sack discovered on the sixth floor had not a trace of oil. Posner excludes this vital fact."

The most despicable aspect of Lambert's whole, lame screed is near the end (p. 19) where he tears into the upstanding and honorable investigators of the House Special Committee on Assassinations, e.g.

"highly political investigation spearheaded mostly by people trying to advance their own careers in public office and make themselves look like heroes."

Which is total,  arrant balderdash. None of the chief investigators, including Gaeton Fonzi ('The Last Investigation') Danny Hardway, or Ed Lopez - who interviewed  Sylvia Duran   (tortured  by Mexican police because she refused to retract her original testimony that the person she dealt with as a consulate officer at the Mexico City Cuban Embassy was not Lee Oswald)  had a dishonest or career advancing bone in their bodies when it came to turning over the evidence. What they wanted above all was for the HSCA to do an honest investigation and not succumb to pressure from the CIA as well as Warrenites out to preserve their political cover story - intended to save LBJ's butt.   

As for the HSCA investigation, I already described in detail how it was literally compromised from the start, e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2013/11/frequently-asked-questions-on-jfk_19.html

 after Richard Sprague was replaced (he had intended to go full bore) and  after CIA "Information and Privacy Coordinator"  Jim Lawderman wrote ( on July 27, 1977)  the terms of the CIA’s control of Blakey’s investigation. (Mellen, J., ‘Farewell to Justice’, p. 345).  One of the terms cited was (ibid.):


“ Certain areas relating to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy should be entirely disregarded based upon our contention they are without merit or corroboration”

.Of course, those "areas" included additional shooters and shots from the grassy knoll. As I noted in the previous link:

"The HSCA’s own acoustic tests showed it (kill shot) originated on the grassy knoll (also corroborated by the Parkland surgeon’s own testimony and the actual autopsy photos.)  Thus, the weird attempt of the HSCA to "square the circle" - finding for conspiracy while retaining the original Warren Commission location for the head shot's origin"

I believe then, as I do now, the HSCA contorted itself in order to try to satisfy Lawderman's  demands. And yet, incredibly, despite all that - the final HSCA conclusion was for a conspiracy (96 % probability)  

Lastly, Lambert - ever faithful to his fake history mandate-   misrepresents the HSCA's finding which found for FOUR shots - not three. This was based on the Barger-Weiss (MIT)  team's  acoustic analysis of impulses.   Lambert claims that "the one piece of alleged evidence (the 4th impulse) that the HSCA did find in favor of an unknown co-conspirator was later refuted by every scientific expert that examined it"  - which is total,  palpable, fake history bullshit! 

 The truth is one set of "experts" - Norman  Ramsey's team - was brought in and they failed to overturn the initial Weiss and Barger findings.  The Ramsey Panel analysis was alleged to have  'refuted' the original Weiss -Barger study, but in fact only showed that the Weiss group had omitted some considerations. The Ramsey analysis certainly does not 'nullify' the Weiss/Barger analysis since up to now it has not been  reproduced, so cannot be accepted as a bona fide scientific conclusion. (Indeed, as per an email from another acoustic researcher, W. Antony Marsh, the Ramsey team even exceeded the claimed errors of the Barger team and at a more fundamental level)

The Ramsey insinuation and deliberate muddying had the effect of forcing the HSCA to now tie itself in knots - accepting enough of the MIT analysis to find for "96 percent probability of conspiracy" but not enough to shuck the idiotic WC version for the head shot (allegedly fired from the rear and the Book Depository when the rear of the skull was blown out - a physical impossibility).  

What we are left to conclude here is that James K. Lambert is the real offender, like his WC sidekicks, in triggering the suspicions of the American people about official accounts and validity of news sources. This was compounded by the Operation Mockingbird hijinks of the 1970s, e.g  

How the CIA Paid and Threatened Journalists to Do Its Work - The …

Perhaps the most pathetic  and desperate display in Lambert's fake history excursion was his (p. 15) excerpt from Chief Justice Warren's memoir in which he "tried to point out the absurdity of such conspiracy fiction".  Alas, the joke is on Lambert who either never knew, or ignored that Warren was co-opted by LBJ from the start. 

 Johnson's infamous words were caught on tape in a phone call to Sen. Richard Russell, after LBJ had been initially rejected by Earl Warren to lead his pet Commission. Johnson needed the credibility of Warren so the media would accept the commission as a bona fide government entity as opposed to a creature of Johnson's whim and machinations. (Johnson’s first kneejerk reaction was to form a “Texas Commission” to look into the assassination, with staff entirely composed of Texans.). 

 Anyway, Johnson's taped words were - after speaking to Warren (cf. Michael R. Beschloss, Taking Charge:The Johnson White House Tapes 1963-64, 1997, p. 72, as cited by Russ Baker, in 'Family of Secrets', p. 46):

"Warren told me he wouldn't do it under any circumstances...He came down here and told me 'No'...twice. And I just pulled out what[FBI Director} Hoover told me about a little incident in Mexico City....And he started crying and said: 'I won't turn you down...I'll just do whatever you say.'


So much for Earl Warren being any kind of reliable or credible source on the "absurdity" of conspiracy research.

If anyone is to blame for spawning the current fake news environment it is James K. Lambert and his cohorts like John McAdams, the now deceased Vince Bugliosi as well as Gerald Posner of 'Case Closed' fame  - whose book was already picked to pieces by true rationalists, and actual skeptic researchers. 

Posner's many oversights, lies, distortions and "fake facts" were revealed in an issue of The Electronic Assassination Newsletter. Several dedicated actual researchers  collated these assorted "Posnerisms"  mainly from his propaganda book, 'Case Closed' (1993).

http://assassinationweb.com/twpos.htm

You, the readers,  can be the judges of who are the real progenitors of current fake news:  honest, hard working JFK assassination researchers like Harold Weisberg, Richard Charnin, Mark Lane, Pete Dale Scott and many others....or those who defend liars and CIA disinformationists, like Gerald Posner, John McAdams and James K. Lambert.