CNN Peddles Lies on JFK Assassination 50th Anniversary

[Winston]

50 years ago, the last real US President was gunned down in Dealey Plaza in Dallas, Texas on November 22nd, 1963. It was one of the most tragic days in American history. It also marked the turning point in people's trust of government. Instinctively, people knew that the government had conspired to kill their beloved President and covered it up. Thus, growing dissatisfaction in government and lack of trust began to grow from that day. Child-like faith in government turned to rabid cynicism.

Ever since then, the US government has lied about what happened that fateful day on November 22, 1963. Commissioned by the subsequent President, Lyndon Johnson, the Warren Commission concluded that a lone nut assassin named Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in killing President Kennedy.

However, many books have been written, and documentaries produced, as well as a blockbuster film by Oliver Stone, JFK (1991), that have debunked the government's official account of what happened. Even the second official government investigation into the matter by the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1978 concluded that there was more than one shooter. Yet this did not change the government's official position.

Yet in spite of this, the US government continues to stick with its disproven claim that a lone nut acted alone, despite all evidence and data to the contrary. This continuing and obvious cover up has only further undermined its credibility. You'd think that after 50 years, the government would learn its lesson and stop lying to the American people, and finally fess up on what everyone knows, that there was an obvious conspiracy in the assassination of JFK.

Well on the 50th Anniversary of the JFK Assassination this year, the major media network CNN continues to aid in the cover up of the assassination of President Kennedy, and making themselves look like fools in the process. They began running specials on the Assassination event, all clearly biased and one-sided toward the disproven and outdated Warren Report conclusion of a lone assassin.

Some of the CNN specials show clips from conspiracy researchers, but they are only interviewing those who support the Warren Commission's cover up and fiction, such as the lying sociopath Vince Bugliosi, author of "Reclaiming History" and Gerald Posner, author of "Case Closed". Both act with religious zeal that Oswald acted alone, and seem to certain of it, which is odd because it is a 100 percent indefensible position that contradicts so much data. Besides, even if one truly believed that Oswald was an assassin, there is no way any person could say that he acted alone with 100 percent certainty. Thus, the lone assassin position is highly illogical, as Spock would say.

How can Bugliosi and Posner explain the following:

- Why minutes after the assassination, J Edgar Hoover immediately said that Oswald was guilty and acted alone? How could he know that after a few minutes? That's a dead giveaway that he was a patsy set up in advance. What could be more obvious? No one can explain that away.
- Why the Dallas District Attorney said the SAME DAY of the assassination, that it was a "moral certainty" Oswald alone was guilty and no one else was involved. How could that be a moral certainty when there was no investigation and no way he could have known that? Unless of course, he was trying to frame him.
- Why 16 doctors and 40 medical personnel at the Parkland Hospital saw head wounds with a rear exit wound that contradicted the official autopsy photos, which can only mean that they were altered?
- Why there was a massive cover up attempt and suppression of evidence? If there was no conspiracy, then why classify documents and silence witnesses and sabotage Jim Garrison's prosecution case? That makes no sense. If there's nothing to hide, then why suppress?
- Why people with incriminating evidence, such as Dorothy Kilgallan who was the only person to interview Jack Ruby, suddenly decided to "commit suicide", or were made to look like they did?
- Why did most people at Dealey Plaza hear shots coming from the grassy knoll, including a police officer? Why were there fake Secret Service agents behind the fence at the grassy knoll?
- Why did Kennedy's head in the Zapruder film move to the BACK AND LEFT after the fatal head shot, if the shot came from the rear? No tests have ever shown that an object moves toward the shooter rather than away from it, as the lone nut theorists claimed and lied about, such as Gerald Posner (Case Closed) and Vince Bugliosi (Reclaiming History), who are attorneys, not truth seekers.
- Why was the arrest of Oswald never explained? The story goes that he entered a theater after the assassination without paying the ticket price. The theater staff called the police and all of a sudden, 20 cops showed up to arrest Oswald. Wouldn't the cops have been too busy looking for the assassin of JFK and the murderer of Officer Tippit to have bothered with a guy who entered a movie theater without paying? Yet they sent 20 men to get him? That's never been explained.
- Why did the Secret Service lower their protection around Kennedy's limo? They were all behind him or in front of him. Why was there no protection from the side? And why did the limo driver, William Greer, slow down to almost full stop when the shots began firing out, instead of speeding away? Why did he only speed away after Kennedy was killed by the fatal head shot? Actions speak louder than words don't they?
- Why did the Warren Commission move the bullet wound on Kennedy's back up 6 inches to try to match the "single bullet theory" needed for a lone assassin theory to work? Why alter the data if there's no conspiracy?
- Why did the guy running the morgue that housed Lee Harvey Oswald's body say that the FBI came and took ink prints of Oswald's hand, and then immediately after, they claimed that Oswald's fingerprints were on the alleged rifle? If he alone was guilty, then why would they have to take fingerprints from his body and plant them on the rifle? That makes no sense.
- If the fatal head shot came from behind, then why did Jackie Kennedy climb onto the back of the limo to try to retrieve a piece of her husband's head that was blown off? Shouldn't she have climbed to the front of the limo? CNN's piece NEVER addressed this. They obviously aren't objective truth seekers.

These facts cannot be explained away by lone nut defenders like Bugliosi and Posner, so they sweep them under the rug and pretend they don't exist. That's the only thing they can do. Their minds are already made up because they were never objective truth seekers to begin with. They clearly had an agenda and foregone conclusion from the start, and set out to prove it. Clearly they do not follow the data and were not interested in the truth, only in defending the lone nut theory.

You gotta remember that Bugliosi and Posner are professional attorneys. Attorneys are paid to carry out an agenda. They are not truth seekers or lovers of truth and wisdom. Duh. So what makes them think they are credible is beyond me. Lawyers have a bad reputation for a good reason.

Still, I wonder how these CNN news anchors who are covering up the truth in this matter sleep at night knowing that they lied to people on TV? Why does CNN lack any critical thinking on this matter and fail to ask any of these critical questions? Obviously because they are controlled by the powers that be. Yet CNN is critical on other subjects such as petty low level civilian crimes. Go figure.

For more evidence, facts and logical arguments proving a conspiracy in the JFK Assassination, see my Conspiracy Trilogy Report:
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/Conspiracies.htm

See also:

CNN's articles about the JFK Assassination
http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/22/us/kenned ... index.html

Motives for Killing JFK: Powerful Interests vs. Lee Harvey Oswald
viewtopic.php?t=16985

[Winston]

Check out the debate about the 50th anniversary of the JFK assassination on my SCEPCOP Forum:

http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/forum/ ... =12&t=2838

Also, check out this clip on CNN's Piers Morgan where Oliver Stone, director of JFK, gives three simple irrefutable facts that prove that JFK was assassinated by a conspiracy.

[Mr_Truth]

I recently saw a clip of a press conference Nixon gave where he said: "I am not a crook." That was in November 1973, just ten years after JFK was killed.

I put myself in that time (November 1973), and I realized something: the period between November 1963 and November 1973 had to be most turbulent 10 year period in American history.

Right after JFK's death up till "I am not a crook," America had gone through: the Beatles, the British Invasion, LBJ escalating the war in Vietnam, LSD, Black Panthers, anti-war riots, long-haired hippies, assassinations. Can you imagine another 10 year period where so much had happened to change American society so dramatically?

1973 to 1983
1983 to 1993
1993 to 2003
2003 to 2013

In all those 10 year periods, nothing compares to the drama, chaos and turmoil of the 1963-1973 period.

[Winston]

Here is a funny satire video called "JFK: A Conspiracy Theory".



Here is a great presentation, released on the 50th Anniversary, by Professor Jerry Kroth, that puts together all the pieces of the puzzle called "The JFK Assassination: What Really Happened". The major players involved are named, and their motives outlined.

[Winston]

Here is a revealing documentary by the History Channel about how and why LBJ plotted the assassination of JFK. It was episode 9 of the series "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" and was banned from TV, but was eventually uploaded to YouTube, fortunately. It will drop your jaw and make you never see LBJ the same way again. The evidence in it is compelling and strong, featuring hard evidence and whistleblowers.

[Winston]

There's something I don't understand.

Why does CNN and the US government believe with 100 percent certainty that Oswald acted alone? I mean, even if Oswald was guilty, there is no way in hell you can prove that he acted alone and that there were not multiple shooters involved. So why are they so certain about it? Very odd.

Steve Neese told me that the reason he doesn't believe in conspiracies, is that one or two people can conspire to commit a crime together. But any more than that, and they start talking or refuse to participate out of conscience. He believes that this point alone debunks all "conspiracy theories".

What do you all think of his reasoning?