JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters
We are all jurors
By David L. Neal
September 24, 2016
We are all
jurors in an ongoing trial to find the truth of John Kennedy’s murder.
Most of us have fallen asleep; some left the chamber, and others don’t
even care anymore. But a few, a very small few, have been paying
attention for the last 45 years as arguments for the prosecution of Lee
Harvey Oswald, headed up by government lawyers and their lackeys have
been constantly countered by a volunteer and unpaid defense team for the
truth made up of laymen, clergymen, historians, teachers, researchers,
republicans, democrats, non-affiliates of all ages shapes and sizes.
It has been a bewildering
experience to have been patted on the head and told to go to sleep by
the Warren Commission only to be rudely awakened by a garrulous DA from
Louisiana, followed then by a government report which said, well, there
might have been two, but go on back to sleep. Dazed and confused we
began to leave the room but were called back in by Oliver Stone who told
us to take a look at his evidence of Oswald’s innocence. We were
intrigued, but an impish Gerald Posner convinced Dick Cavett and other
icons of American mainstream media that Stone’s myth was just that and
the case was indeed closed: Oswald did it.
But Stone had garnered
enough interest to cause Congress to form the ARRB- under George Bush
Sr, no less. It took Bill Clinton half his presidency to get the thing
going, but we watched with bated breath as the Assassinations Records
Review Board began pulling from the FBI, CIA, and the rest of the
alphabet bits and pieces of information that left gaping holes in the
official story. Most of us didn’t believe it anyway, but a few, a small
few did notice that there seemed to have been two brains pulled from
John Kennedy’s head during the so-called autopsy. In fact, so many moles
began popping up it was difficult for the gatekeepers to bop them in
the head fast enough.
Distracted as we were by
911 and the war on terror, and the revelation that our government has
the capacity to pull off an Operation Northwoods, as the ARRB found out,
we continued to keep half an eyeball on the story, those of us who were
paying attention. But then just as we were ready to reach a verdict of
no true bill, Peter Jennings pops in to save the day for the
prosecution. Disregarding all prior logic, evidence and common sense he
lulled us back to comfortable numbness as he proved through computer
generation, laser beams and some small degree of witchcraft that yes,
indeed that was some magic bullet.
Nevertheless, while almost
dozing off again we heard rumblings of another defense witness about to
enter the courtroom. He was David Talbot, an almost Mainstream media
type who was arguing that John and Robert Kennedy were possibly victims
of powerful forces in our own government who wanted and needed them
gone. But before he could present his full case a boisterous and
bellicose advocate of Governmental Righteousness threw on to the floor,
almost breaking it, an objection, claiming his stake in the case with a
tome of such immense size and weight that no one, at first, dared to
read it or question its obvious Buglisosian authority.
When it was finally
opened, the muse of Arlen Spector sauntered forth speaking in only a
language that he could understand. Talk shows raved about Vince’s
masterpiece; gatekeepers swooned, and the prosecution let out a huge and
foul-smelling sigh of relief as they said, There! That ought to put
this damn thing to rest finally! Everyone began to pack up and leave,
most never having read briefs by Scott, Gerald McKnight, Larry Hancock,
etc., defense advocates who had built their arguments on the works of
Vince Salandria, Marrs, Howard Roffman, Sheim, Weisberg, etc., and the
thousands of pages of released and obscure documents.
But just as the courtroom
almost emptied, looking like a Senate Chamber with a wobbling old man
named Byrd trying to make a point, in comes a Jesuit priest. I’m no
Catholic, I thought, as I was getting up to leave with the two or three
other jurors who had sat through the whole case so far, trying to pay
attention, but this guy seems to know his stuff. He’s talking about
everything we have already heard but putting it all into context. His
summation is actually making sense- reason, logic, truth, honesty,
footnotes, primary source interviews, follow-up questions, giving the
benefit of the doubt to all sides. I sat back down. As James Douglass
presented his case, scales fell from my eyes. Oswald was innocent. I
look around. Is anybody there?
No comments:
Post a Comment