The sad truth

A reader writes about the Warren Commission.

“The sad truth is, both what should have happened before and during the investigation of the assassination, and what obviously should have happened after it, I fear is no longer a possibility…”

“…now that the powers that sponsored the murder of JFK have escaped. Make no mistake, they will never be prosecuted, at least, not in any of their lifetimes, much less ours. To the vast majority of the population under 40 years old this event is an endless, meaningless, debate without beginning or end, just as the Warren Commission intended as their best case outcome. The murderers and their witting and unwitting supporters have so completely hidden, distorted, falsified, and restricted the true evidence, with good intentions or bad, that there will never be accountability for this despicable act. Even if more indisputable proof is discovered and presented, it will, at best, be a footnote to the “Official”version in our grandchildren’s history books. For “National Security” has become the excuse that ended our Democratic Republic and rendered both the Constitution and the Presidency irrelevant. Our wise founding Fathers could never have anticipated such deception from within their Democracy!”

4 comments

  1. Stephen Roy says:

    “The Warren Commission intended” that the JFK case simply be an unending debate?? That group INTENDED it?

    • Whatever happens in the present and future relative to the efforts of getting Americans to fight for the truth in this tragedy-I’ll say one thing: Those who say “No one has provided any proof of a conspiracy” need to see why that is true…it’s because many forms of evidence for just that were hidden, blocked, etc…by those involved in the coverup. There was PLENTY of evidence of a conspiracy-it was just never allowed to be seen in the public eye.

  2. Allen Lowe says:

    yes, in a weird way, yes, Stephen. By creating such a massive mess of evidence, of contradictory actions and reactions, by going off the record and then on the record, by burying so much where only the most dedicated researcher could find it, this is exactly what the Commission did, and not by accident – such obfuscation exists not to solve a crime but to make its resolution seem futile and self defeating. I’m surprised you don’t recognize this very obvious technique,

  3. jeffc says:

    In my opinion, the Warren Commission’s objective was to punt the ball as far down the field as possible, so that a true understanding of the assassination would not be available to anyone with a living memory of the event. That is why the classified information was sealed for 75 years. That is a “sad truth”, but not reason for despair. The Commission and its Report are fully part of a true understanding, and therefore coming to terms with the mechanics of the Commission and the transmission of its findings through the mainstream media and establishment, assists in profound ways a truer understanding of our contemporary world.

    One significant thing about the Warren Report is that its conclusions are loaded with qualification and hedges, such that the Report never outright states a conclusion – it suggests one. The “conclusion” – a lone assassin named Oswald – was purely an assertion hammered into the consciousness of the public by the media and establishment. Similar dynamics continue today.

    For instance, the current hysteria over the plane shot down over Ukraine features many similar properties. I urge anyone interested to read through the Associated Press account of Tuesday’s briefing by unnamed senior US intelligence officials. Count the number of qualifications and hedges, and compare that to how the story instead plays in the media – where outright certainty is a given.
    http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_289563/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=w15BvDAM

    The Russians gave their own briefing on Monday. They offer what appears to be factual evidence and notably do not draw conclusions. Here is a solid summary of what they said, which starts about the halfway mark of the commentary:
    http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/07/25/mh17-sacrificed-airliner/:

    The simple act of pointing out the discrepancies between the briefings – i.e. that one briefing refers to radar and satellite imagery while the other refers to unverified YouTube videos – sets one up to be vilified as a “Russian apologist”, much as questioning the Warren Report leads to accusations of being a “conspiracy theorist”. Even more notable – just as was done with the Warren Report – the US senior intelligence officials dismiss alternate conclusions as unlikely, and instead offer a narrative based on circumstantial evidence as the most plausible, even as they have no firm basis for that conclusion. And the media takes it from there.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.