Do you still believe the official JFK story?
Let me guess what you believe about the assassination of John F. Kennedy in November of 1963. You believe that Kennedy was shot by a lone gunman named Lee Harvey Oswald, with the shots coming from the window of a book depository to the rear. You believe that Oswald was later arrested, having shot and killed a police officer who had stopped and questioned him. You believe that Oswald, while in police custody, was later killed by a man named Jack Ruby. Case closed. Oswald did it alone.
But have you ever asked yourself why you believe this account or whether there is any reason to doubt it? Perhaps not. After all, this is the narrative that has been reinforced through decades of news programs, documentaries, books, and indeed by the Warren Commission’s report, the official document whose conclusions are touted as the only rational explanation of the events of that fateful day. There seems to be no reason to doubt it. Not so fast. What if there were details about the case that you had never heard before? What if, on closer inspection, there were aspects of the official account that did not make sense? Even worse, what if they could not make sense? If such details existed, would you want to hear them? Or would you dismiss them outright as the typical ravings of conspiracy theorists? If so, why? Isn’t it possible that there are important details you aren’t aware of? Wouldn’t it at least be worth seeing them before waving it off as delusional nonsense?
I decided to listen when someone offered to tell me about some details of the JFK case that I had never known about. What I learned was shocking, and I have never looked at the event in the same light since. The case is a bottomless pit, and you could spend years or even decades researching it. But there are a few central problems that present the most serious challenges to the story as you know it. The most famous problem is the Single-Bullet Theory (aka Magic Bullet Theory). This preposterous theory holds that Oswald, a below-average marksman according to marines he had served with, peeled off three rifle shots in under 6 seconds, a feat that experts were later unable to replicate with the same weapon. One shot missed. The final shot was the infamous fatal head shot to the president. And the other bullet? The physical evidence requires that the theory attributes all the remaining wounds to that one remaining bullet. Thus was born the bizarre tale of a wildly zigzagging bullet that defied physics and credulity by creating seven serious wounds in two different men, eventually winding up in almost pristine condition on a gurney, having smashed through bone, cartilage and muscle during its meandering trajectory. Yet this ludicrous piece of reverse-engineered reasoning is still the central pillar of the official narrative.
Another crucial piece of evidence that calls into question the entire lone-wolf scenario is the highly credible testimony of Roger Craig, a deputy sheriff in the Dallas police department who was on duty and on the scene in the immediate aftermath of the shooting. Of the many observations he spoke candidly of, there are three that stand out. First, as he arrived on the scene, he saw another police officer react and run up the grassy knoll. This led Craig to assume that shots had come from that direction. He investigated that area for around 5 minutes on that basis. Second, he actually saw Oswald leaving the scene with another man in a green station wagon. They appeared suspicious, but Craig was unable to reach them in time to detain them for questioning. Third, he was in the book depository when the alleged murder weapon was found. He was standing inches from the rifle when it was identified and was shown the word ‘Mauser’ stamped on the barrel (Mauser is a German arms manufacturer). It later emerged that this appeared to make no sense because the empty shells in the book depository (from the bullets supposedly shot at Kennedy) were from a different rifle, an Italian ‘Carcano’ rifle. Suddenly, it was reported in the media (and later in the Warren Commission report) that the murder weapon was not a Mauser after all. It was a Carcano. But Craig had been right there when they found it. He was standing inches from it, reading the word ‘Mauser’. Did he hallucinate? Is he just a liar? No. As pointed out by attorney and criminal investigator Mark Lane, Craig’s claim is supported by an affidavit by Deputy Constable Seymour Weitzman, the Dallas police officer who identified the rifle on the day. The details of this and much more are contained in Lane’s 1976 film “Two Men in Dallas”. While there are other damning points in Craig’s testimony, these three alone fundamentally contradict the official narrative, casting serious doubt on its veracity. After all, both versions cannot be correct.
The details above are merely the tip of the iceberg. Of all the so-called conspiracy theories out there, JFK's assassination remains one of the most discussed to this date, almost 60 years on. One reason for the lingering controversy surrounding this daring murder is that the explanation provided simply does not make sense in the context of all the other facts. People still want to know what happened. If it wasn’t Oswald acting alone, then it hints of a far more sinister spectre of powerful players hiding in the shadows of society. Maybe you just don’t want to believe that something even more terrifying than a lone gunman could be at play. Maybe it’s more convenient to go along with the fantastical magic bullet theory. But can you afford to be so cavalier? Can you really just casually ignore Roger Craig? I couldn’t. It’s time we took another look at the evidence and stopped pretending that genuine attempts to learn the truth are just some tinfoil-hat rants by conspiracy theorists. Because if you think that Flat Earthers are a joke, you should find the Single Bullet Theory hilarious. As for Roger Craig, there’s nothing funny about his words whatsoever.