Many never get "fully" exposed. You get a general gist or idea, but rarely the full truth. In most cases, the truth requires dot-connection and presumption. MKUltra is a great example of that.
yes but there is SOME tangible confirmation beyond presumptions. There’s some PROOF that ultimately gets exposed. That’s not the case here. There’s nothing TANGIBLE. That’s what I’m looking for.
Look, there’s a reason why MOST people think there was a JFK murder conspiracy. I think that two of the main reasons for that are 1) Kennedy’s head movement after the head shot and 2) the magic bullet being found on that stretcher. I guess we could throw in Ruby shooting Oswald and the bizarre circumstances surrounding that as an honorable mention. The first 2, at first blush, just seem so implausible when you line them up with the theory of a lone gunman that you say “cmon… that cant be true. That’s gotta be bullshit” and if you think that then you start LOOKING for stuff to support your belief that it’s bullshit. You start saying/thinking stuff like why did that motorcade make that unusual turn, why was the motorcade route changed, why weren’t the SS standing on the limo, how did Oswald just happen to get a job at the TSBD, why wasn’t there any blood on Oswald after he got shot, etc. However, after all the digging into this case by scores of authors of conspiracy books no tangible evidence has emerged. In fact, evidence/experiments are done which SUPPORT that the first two things could have really happened. Millions of pages of documents have been declassified which show nothing. Yet, people who still believe it was a conspiracy will always say “the truth is hidden in what’s not released”. They will cling to what they don’t have access to as the proof that there is a coverup (ie the brain).
Let’s take this psychiatrist that you’ve mentioned. I don’t know much at all about him. In fact, I hadn’t even heard of him till you mentioned him. I looked a little bit online about him but I couldn’t find much beyond he did some highly questionable stuff with people who suffered from psychiatric disorders. In fact, much of his experimenting was on psych patients because he wasn’t worried if they complained. I mean, who’s gonna believe them, right? I see from your link that he also worked with Patty Hearst and basically was her advocate for saying she wasn’t responsible for her actions bc of the mind control she was under. He even went so far as to petition for her pardon.
With respect to Ruby, he was brought into the case to “evaluate” him bc Ruby’s lawyers had lost the first case but we getting ready for a retrial. They claimed that Ruby was acting “strange” after his conviction. (Ruby argued he couldn’t remember what happened during the Oswald shooting. That he blacked out. His lawyers argued he had an epileptic seizure which explained the memory loss and bizarre behavior). Henry Wade (the DA at the time) wrote a letter saying that he and his staff believed that Ruby was faking this strange behavior. Nobody had ever diagnosed Ruby crazy before but then this doctor goes and meets with him and after examining Ruby over the course of 48 hours he declares him crazy by saying that he’s hearing voices, hiding under the table, etc but that the episodes last only a few minutes and then he picks up on the conversation he was having as if it didn’t happen. Ruby exhibited similar behavior when he met with Warren, Ford and Specter of the WC. He even said something bizarre to Specter about Jews bc they were both Jewish. It’s entirely plausible that this dr was helping Ruby set up an insanity defense.
The point is for every sinister inference that can be drawn there’s countless non-sinister ones. That’s NOT defending a certain position. That’s simply holding conspiracy theorists accountable to what is FACT and what is CONJECTURE.
Oswald never went to visit Marianna at Paines house during the week. He always went after work on Friday, stayed the weekend and went back to Dallas on Sunday night. The day before the assassination (a Thursday) he unexpectedly and unannounced shows up at the house. The next day he is given a ride to work by a neighbor. This neighbor sees him carrying a package. He tells the neighbor it’s curtain rods. Ruth Paine says he never asked me for curtain rods and I never gave him any curtain rods. The packing material is found at the crime scene (it has his fingerprints and gun oil on it), no curtain rods are found at the crime scene, his gun is found at the scene, his finger and palm prints are found on the boxes the sniper used to take the shots, the two witness’s below hear the bolt action of a gun similar to his clicking three times, they hear three shots ring out, they hear three shells hit the floor above him, Oswalds gun is found at the scene, three shells from that gun are also found, not one co-worker can account for his whereabouts at the time of the shooting, after the shooting he just leaves his job and isn’t present when they do roll call, a few hours later he shoots a cop and when he’s captured a short distance away he’s in possession of THE gun that shot the cop.
These are ALL uncontroverted facts. IF anyone ascribes to any conspiracy theory, in order to have credibility, they MUST imo account for these facts in their theory. You can’t just dismiss them and say “fuck the government! They lie!” All those people are lying? Ruth Paine, the guy who gave him a ride, the two witness’s on the floor below, the cop who found the gun, the cop who found the shells, the cop who found the wrapping paper, the cop who dusted for the fingerprints, the cop that tied the shells found to his gun, the ballistics expert that tied the two bullets found to his gun, ALL the co-workers who didn’t give him an alibi, the supervisor who took role call, the witness’s who saw him shoot Tippet and the cop who ballistically tied his gun to tippets murder? They ALL lied or were mistaken?
All I’m saying is it’s GREAT that we uncover new info but when we do we can’t just ignore all the info that we’ve already learned.
