Impossible: The Case Against Lee Harvey Oswald (5 page)

• Because it is going to be used as evidence before an arbitrator, there are far more illustrations in this book than most of the books on the Kennedy assassination. I can only think of a handful that have more.
  
• I am going to allow future Kennedy researchers to use the images which I’ve created especially for this book without having to ask me permission first, and obviously at no charge. See the copyright notice.
  
• In the beginning chapters of the book I have included URLs to all the primary documents, which in the eReader edition of this book, link directly to the document, so you can verify on the spot that what I have said exists actually does. (Of course, websites can go down, and links can be changed, so if a link does not point to the document that I say it does, please let me know).
  

Why “Who Killed JFK?” Is Not The Right Question
We are now about to enter the book itself. Before we move to the first part of the book, the
Preface
, I want to discuss another issue which comes up.

I already told you one question that people ask me when I mentioned that I was working on a book on Lee Harvey Oswald. Only a few people ask me that question. Everyone else asks me this one: “Okay, if Oswald didn’t kill Kennedy, who did?” That is a fair question, and believe me, I would like to answer that question, but before answering, I have a question for you: “What is your standard of proof? If I have evidence, am I supposed to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt?”

If the answer to that question is “yes,” then I would say you’re going to be waiting a long long time for evidence that is going to enable anyone to achieve that standard. Much evidence has been destroyed, the vast majority of witnesses are already dead, or very soon will be, so with no truly reliable evidentiary base, I think that proving the actual identities of the killers beyond a reasonable doubt is going to also be impossible.

Does that mean that we can never know who killed the president with reference to
any
standard of proof? No, not at all; I think if we shift the standard of proof, we can definitely make out a short list of suspects, the ones most likely to have shot the President. And that will be good enough to take action.

Eventually we are going to realize in addition to asking who is on the short list of suspects, that there are even more, even better questions to ask, as follows:

• Is it more important to know who
  fired
  the shots, or who
  called
  the shots?
  
• Should the question be “
  Who
  killed JFK?” or “
  What
  killed JFK?”
  
• Was it an
  individual
  who planned the assassination, or a
  group
  ?
  
• If it was a group, is that group
  still in existence
  today, even as we speak?
  
• Is the government structured in such a way that a group like that could hijack the government without us knowing?
  
• If that group is still in existence today, is that group so important and tied-in to the government that it can make sure that it will never be investigated by the government?
  
• Has the government cooperated with this group over the years to cover up the true identity of the murderers?
  
• If Oswald didn’t kill JFK, why does the first layer of evidence say that he did? And if a second layer of evidence proves that he didn’t, why doesn’t the government acknowledge the existence of the second layer, and why do they only discuss the first?
  
• If this group was powerful enough to assassinate the President and create the illusion that Oswald was responsible, and that group is still in existence today, do they have any other treasonous plans up their sleeves and/or on the drawing boards?
  

There is one absolutely critical thing to note about the questions above. If there was such a group, and that group is still active,
would it matter the names of the people in the group at the time
? I think you can see, it would not! So, we don’t need to spend a lot of time wasting time arguing about who was in the group and who was not, all we need to establish is that in fact there
was
such a group. That’s what counts!

And one final question:

• If we are convinced that there is no case against Oswald, what are the next steps?
  

What Are the Next Steps

Back in the old days, before I learned what I’ve learned in the process of writing this book, I probably would have, like numerous other people, called for a new official investigation by the government, and called for all previously unreleased documents to be released.

I now realize that either of these approaches would be a mistake.

In the first place, we don’t need any new government investigations. Government investigations can’t be trusted, and if you don’t believe that now, you will after reading this book. As far as a call for more documents goes, we don’t need any additional documents to show that the case against Oswald is dead, and I think it is extraordinarily unlikely that any existing documents possessed by the government are going to be pointing to the real perpetrators of the assassination. Also, given the illegitimacy of many of the documents that we already have, I don’t believe all the documents that will be released can be trusted, and validating the documents would be a time-consuming, time-wasting, and ultimately hopeless task.

The bottom line is that people will waste a lot of time asking the wrong questions and looking for information that will be impossible to get (because the evidence is destroyed), and therefore we can’t conclude anything beyond a reasonable doubt, and no one is going to agree on an alternate standard of proof anyway.

To me, if you want to discover what their next steps should be, you should be asking yourself the following question:

“If I was 100% convinced that the same group that was behind the assassination of President Kennedy was still in power today, what action would I take?”

That’s really the question, isn’t it? Notice how now the responsibility has shifted away from the
government
to
you
.

If you were 100% convinced of that, what action would
you
take?

Surprisingly, and shockingly, I think the answer of many people would be “no action.” They would say something like “you can’t fight City Hall,” “the system is too big to take on,” “I just don’t have time for that,” and then they would go back to manufacturing their duct tape bags.

I think you can see that that one would be pretty much a nonstarter. The government loves people who don’t take action when action is called for. That’s how government — or, more precisely, the people who have hijacked the government — gets away with murder.

So, what action
do
you take? Well, I have listed a number of possibilities in my book
Peak Oil And What To Do About It
, a book which could also be called
The
National Debt And What To Do About It
, or could also be called
The Kennedy Assassination And What To Do About It
.

If you don’t have time to read that book, and the ideas within it, take these as a brief takeaway:

• Cancel your cable. Get a
  Roku
  and
  Netflix
  and
  Hulu
  accounts. Congratulations, you just saved around $50 a month, and now have an 5-7 additional hours free a week which are not spent watching commercials. You’re going to need that time.
  
• Now that you can’t watch
  CNN
  and
  Fox News
  anymore (lucky you!), you can get your information from
  Netflix
  documentaries and by reading books: much higher quality sources of information because they were not produced on ridiculously short deadlines. Here are some
  Netflix
  documentaries I highly recommend:
  

Flow

The Corporation

Inside Job

Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room

The Best Government Money Can Buy

Unprecedented

Uncounted

Outfoxed

And here are some excellent books:

Dissolving Dollars

Web of Debt

The Creature From Jekyll Island

The Long Emergency

Into the Buzzsaw

Of course, these are just a few ideas for you, I am sure that you will have no problem in discovering your own topics of interest. The main thing is this: the issues that
you
think about as important should be driven by what
you
actually think important, and not by what the box is telling you to think.

If you follow this strategy, and all your neighbors do the same thing, eventually you and your neighbors are going to stop thinking about the items that are on the agenda of the day as defined by
The Associated Press
and
The New York Times
. You won’t be thinking about whether or not “Obamacare” is a good or bad thing, or whether the best candidate is Palin or Romney or Trump or Gingrich, and you are going to start thinking about questions that the media does not talk about very much, questions that actually require answering, like “how come the national debt always seems to be going up and up and there is never any solution?” and “if the Democrats and Republicans are
opposed
, why do they always seem to agree to raise the debt and to fight wars that people don’t want?” and “why are we being held hostage to high oil prices when we should have had an energy policy developed over forty years ago that would have gotten us off of the need to use oil, using alternative energy sources such as solar thermal, solar photoelectric, wind, geothermal, etc.?” and “why is the city trying to privatize my water supply, which will ultimately raise my rates?” Lots and lots and lots of other questions you should be thinking about, and having conversations with your neighbors about. It’s where your brain time should be if you want to get the answers to those questions.

• Here is one answer to all those questions: never, ever, ever, ever again vote for a Democrat or Republican! Now, when I say never, I mean
  never
  .
  You must absolutely sever the umbilical cord that connects the master planners in Washington with the politicians of the district you live in.
  You want the politicians that you vote for to represent
  you
  , not put into place the agendas created by someone in Washington, DC, New York, or wherever these people live. Instead, you’re much better off voting for a third-party, if there is one, but a far better strategy is simply to write in the name of a candidate. This is not necessarily a plug-and-play strategy, there are nuances involved, just read the
  Write-In America FAQ
  document included inside
  Peak Oil And What To Do About It
  .
  If you sever that umbilical cord, you will simultaneously be severing the vacuum cleaner hose that is sucking bills out of your wallet
  , which takes us to the next point.
  

Do you want more reasons to not vote for a Democrat or Republican? How about this: both parties have given us a $15,620,637,197,295 national debt!

And that figure became obsolete even before I was able to paste the screen capture. It’s higher now. Go to
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
for the latest figures.

There, I just gave you over 15,000,000,000,000 reasons not to vote for a Democrat or a Republican. Now, if that is not enough reasons for you, I will give you one more. Let’s follow a chain of logic related to the Kennedy assassination.

Let’s say that hypothetically there was some group that was responsible for planning the assassination of the President. I think it is pretty obvious that the members of this group were not patriots!

Now, if that was the case, after the election of President Johnson, the members of this group, who were not patriots, got control of the government. Having gotten control of the government, they were in a position to consolidate their power. Because the television stations in the United States are licensed by the government, the government had control over the people who own those licenses, and if they happened to broadcast the “wrong” information, the government could take those extremely valuable licenses away. Consequently, the broadcasters would broadcast officially approved material defining the agendas of the day, and before you know it everyone would be dancing to the beat of that drummer.

A group like this, who we know are not patriots, could basically be using the government for whatever purpose they wanted, like siphoning off dollars from the public treasury and delivering them into their own pockets. Where do those dollars come from? Ultimately, from you, either visibly through higher taxes, or invisibly through higher inflation (cutting of services is also a type of inflation. For example, notice how your medical deductibles have been going up over the years, and your co-pays have increased, while the percentage insurance pays for procedures has decreased? Ever notice how the amount of coffee in that coffee can went from 16 oz. down to 11 oz. without you even knowing it?).