CONSPIRATORS OR LONE ASSASSINS?

By Tom Kando

On November 13, Jeff Cottrill published “Ten Reasons to Stop Believing JFK Conspiracy Nonsense” in the Digital Journal (http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/362080) I’m sure he is right.

Also, Bill O’Reilly’s book “Killing Kennedy” was recently made into a movie, with Rob Lowe starring as the late President. I hate to admit that both the book and the movie, while not terribly exciting, probably got it right. For once, O’Reilly was fair and balanced.

Nevertheless, let me quibble about some of this stuff, and tack on some general observations:

First, as an aside, when Jeff humorously describes such diehard beliefs as Apollo 11 fakery, 9/11 trutherism, Elvis being alive and Sasquatch Nazis from Mars, he forgets one of the great current beauts: Donald Trump & Co - the wacko birthers!

Secondly, his article contains a bit of a red herring: Jeff spends too much time arguing that Oswald was not innocent. To many of us, that was not the question. We recognize the obvious fact that Oswald killed Kennedy, but the question is whether he was helped in any way by anybody or not.

And a corollary question is: If he was helped, was it by people on the “right” or on “left”? In other words, did Oswald by and large hate right-wingers (such as General Walker) and still sympathize with Castro and with Soviet Communism, or: was he aided by anti-Castro Cubans, Mafia-like figures, Southern Yankee-haters, etc?

Clearly, liberal conspiracy buffs like Oliver Stone prefer to believe that Oswald was backed up by right-wingers, whereas conservatives such as Bill O”Reilly reject this. In the book and the film “Killing Kennedy,” there isn’t a single allusion to any possible link between Oswald and the right. Instead, it is made clear that Oswald was a “commie,” or at least a confused commie sympathizer.

Now don’t get huffy, Jeff. In the end, I agree with you. I just want to add to your analysis. If we ask, NOT whether Oswald was innocent or guilty (indeed a stupid question), but whether he acted entirely alone or not, then the answer can, at first anyway, go either way. I refer to your reason number #3 - Jack Ruby.

Let me play a little game of statistical probabilities: let’s start with the premise that we know NOTHING about ANY aspect of the assassination, except that (1) Oswald shot Kennedy and (2) Ruby shot Oswald. With that premise, there is a 50% probability that Oswald acted alone, and a 50% chance that Ruby was also a lone nut. The probability that both men were lone nuts is therefore 1 in 4. Reasoned this way, there is a 3 in 4 chance that there was some sort of cooperation. It is because of such odds that a majority of the world - in the US and overseas - still believes that Oswald did NOT act alone. Many people view the assassination of the assassin himself within a couple of days as too much of a coincidence. That’s how the Romans did it . First you hire someone to kill Domitian, or Caligula, and then you kill the killer.

The question of lone assassins vs. conspiracies is an extremely interesting historical one: Consider the following haphazard list of a dozen examples:
Henry the Fourth’s assassination by Ravaillac, 1610,
John Wilkes Booth, 1865,
President Garfield’s assassination in 1881,
French President Sadi Carnot’ assassination, 1894,
Austrian Empress Elisabeth’s assassination 1898,
President McKinley’s assassination in1901,
Archduke Ferdinand’s assassination by Gavrilo Prinzip, 1914,
Martin Luther King’s assassination by James Earl Ray, 1968,
Bobby Kennedy’s assassination by Sirhan Sirhan, 1968,
Gerald Ford’s attempted assassination by Squeaky Fromme 1975,
John Lennon’s assassination by David Chapman, 1980,
Ronald Reagan’s attempted assassination by John Hinkley,

Every single one of these was by a lone assassin, presumably. On the other hand, ancient Romans preferred conspiracies. The most famous conspiracy in that era was Caesar’s assassination by Brutus, Cassius and others. Caligula, Nero, Domitian and dozens of other emperors were also killed by conspirators - usually members of the praetorian guard.

I’m not sure what this difference between the ancient world and the modern world indicates in terms of cultural and political differences. Just wondering.

And another thing: Kennedy was our 35th president and the 4th one to be assassinated. That’s 1 in 9, excluding failed attempts on the lives of presidents! What a dangerous job! Way more dangerous than being a cop, or a soldier in combat, or just about any other job.

Anyway, all in all I agree with Cottrill: Oswald was probably a lone assassin. And while I hate it, I am also forced to agree with Bill O’Reilly: (this one time): Confused as Oswald was, he was a Lefty. leave comment here