172 lines
8.5 KiB
Plaintext
172 lines
8.5 KiB
Plaintext
|
||
Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 1 Num. 13
|
||
======================================
|
||
("Quid coniuratio est?")
|
||
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
RESOLVED: President Kennedy was killed as the result of a
|
||
conspiracy.
|
||
|
||
[Continuation of my transcription of a radio debate which took
|
||
place in the Fall of 1993 between Peter Dale Scott and Gerald
|
||
Posner. Today, Mr. Posner gives his rebuttal to Mr. Scott's
|
||
opening remarks.]
|
||
|
||
MODERATOR: Thank you, Mr. Scott. Mr. Posner, you have 6 minutes
|
||
for rebuttal.
|
||
|
||
GERALD POSNER: The... Some of the points that Mr. Scott mentions
|
||
I think are absolutely critical because it's [a] fundamental
|
||
difference between the two of us. And it deals, again, with the
|
||
evidence and an analysis of what is the credible evidence.
|
||
|
||
In the instance of the Walker shooting: Did Lee Harvey Oswald in
|
||
fact shoot Edwin Walker? Which to me is a key point because
|
||
nobody has ever satisfactorily explained to me why the CIA or the
|
||
mafia or the KGB or the anti-Castro Cubans wanted Walker dead.
|
||
But here's Oswald shooting at Walker in April of '63.
|
||
|
||
Mr. Scott says a moment ago (It's in April), the bullet is
|
||
described as fully copper-jacketed. That's correct. That's the
|
||
ammunition that Oswald used, is copper-jacketed bullets. Matter
|
||
of fact, we have something better than just what was described by
|
||
the Dallas police: there's the bullet. You can go to the National
|
||
Archives. You can examine it. I've been down to the National
|
||
Archives. It *is* a copper-jacketed bullet.
|
||
|
||
But more importantly, I'm willing, with Mr. Scott, to throw out
|
||
all the testimony from 1963. That bullet is too mangled to
|
||
determine ballistically if it matches Oswald's rifle. But
|
||
*science* intervened. In 1978, Dr. Vincent Guinn, the nation's
|
||
leading expert in neutron activation, a scientific test which
|
||
compares the base element of metals, came in for the House Select
|
||
Committee on Assassinations, took the mangled bullet and did
|
||
neutron activation tests. Now he could have proven that that
|
||
bullet had nothing to do with the ammunition that Oswald used
|
||
later in the Kennedy assassination. But guess what? Lo and
|
||
behold, it turns out that that bullet comes from the same batch
|
||
of Mannlicher-Carcano 6.5 mm shells, made by the Western
|
||
Cartridge Company, used in the Kennedy assassination. So there's
|
||
no question anymore where the bullet comes from. It's very
|
||
interesting. The questions could have existed in '63, but they've
|
||
been solved by science since.
|
||
|
||
One thing that we do agree on. Mr. Scott says, "Look at Oswald's
|
||
links." I think that's key. I don't just give a biography of Lee
|
||
Harvey Oswald. What am I doing through the entire time? I'm
|
||
looking to see if, in fact, there's a trail of money, if there
|
||
are telephone calls, if there are acquaintances. And what's the
|
||
key period? The key period is October and November of 1963.
|
||
Oswald has just returned from being rejected by the Cubans. His
|
||
life is literally spinning out of control. His wife is separated
|
||
from him. He can't hold a job. Um, he's been turned down by the
|
||
Cubans. He's been turned down by the Soviet Union. And the FBI's
|
||
harassing him. He's a time bomb ready to explode. On September
|
||
26, when he was on the bus on the way down to Mexico, the White
|
||
House announced that Jack Kennedy was visiting Dallas. Everything
|
||
that happened in Lee Harvey Oswald's life before September 26th
|
||
took place *before* anybody knew that Kennedy was coming to
|
||
Dallas in November.
|
||
|
||
So the key period is what happens in October and November of '63.
|
||
Where's the conspiratorial contact between Oswald and the
|
||
plotters at that point? And this is key: He's not living on his
|
||
own. We know what he's doing. He's staying in a rooming house at
|
||
1026 North Beckley and he has a whole host of rooming house
|
||
members and partners there with him; other people in the house,
|
||
including a housekeeper. And what do they say he did? Every night
|
||
he's home by 5 or 6 o'clock and he never left a single night --
|
||
except on Fridays when he would disappear for the weekend. Sounds
|
||
interesting, until you find out he was in Irving, Texas, visiting
|
||
his wife, Marina.
|
||
|
||
He never received a single telephone call, except for one, the
|
||
weekend before the assassination. Check the telephone records. It
|
||
comes from... it comes from his wife's house. He *made* a
|
||
telephone call, one a day, in a foreign language. That turns out
|
||
to be to his wife, Marina. He never received a single visitor.
|
||
Where's the opportunity for the conspiratorial contact at a time
|
||
that the plotters supposedly know that Kennedy's coming to
|
||
Dallas. It doesn't exist.
|
||
|
||
What happens is, what Mr. Scott does (and other conspiracy
|
||
theorists) is they have very good evidence to show you that
|
||
people hated Jack Kennedy. I agree with that and that there may
|
||
even have been a plot brewing. I wouldn't be surprised if
|
||
Marcello and Trafficante sat around the table and said, "Let's
|
||
kill that no-good President." What I'm saying in my book, the
|
||
challenge that I'm essentially making to conspiracy theorists, is
|
||
to show me the credible evidence that brings Lee Harvey Oswald
|
||
into the plotters. That's what doesn't exist. If there was a plot
|
||
to kill Jack Kennedy and it was afoot in '62, it didn't involve
|
||
Oswald. And that's the key point. At the critical junction when
|
||
Oswald would have had to be part of it, he's just not.
|
||
|
||
And when you look at Jack Ruby (and I think this is very
|
||
important), Mr. Scott talks about the fact that Jack Ruby knew a
|
||
lot of police, and he knew a whole host of gangsters, and he was
|
||
"dirty" "up to his eyeballs." Guess what? I agree with most of
|
||
that. There's no doubt about that. It just has nothing to do with
|
||
why he killed [...tape runs out...]
|
||
|
||
[...tape continues...] Oswald. And that's the point. People take
|
||
one existence of facts about Ruby's connections and they say,
|
||
"Therefore, he killed Oswald and they must be related." And
|
||
that's where the story falls down.
|
||
|
||
Two final points: In terms of Mr. Scott's view of this case, he
|
||
also says in his book something I fundamentally have to disagree
|
||
with: that McCarthyism and the assassination in Dallas and
|
||
Watergate and Contra-gate are all connected, with some of the
|
||
same people involved. He says he doesn't have a conspiratorial
|
||
view of the world, but I have to disagree.
|
||
|
||
And I think that what's important in this: he has a very unusual
|
||
way of proving some of the elements that he makes in his case --
|
||
sort of linking people up by who knew who, by who knew who -- but
|
||
also something he calls the "negative template," which is, if you
|
||
look at a piece of paper that has lists of names, and one of the
|
||
names you think should be there is *not* actually there, that
|
||
indicates maybe it had been removed as part of a cover-up or
|
||
conspiracy. The "negative template" means, in *my* view, that you
|
||
can prove anything you wanted to. If I was looking for a piece of
|
||
paper that said Oswald had been employed by the CIA and I took a
|
||
CIA document and Oswald's name wasn't there, it must mean that
|
||
they had *removed* his name because, in fact, he'd been an agent.
|
||
The "negative template" does not, in fact, prove what he says.
|
||
|
||
MODERATOR: Thank you, Mr. Posner.
|
||
|
||
ANNOUNCER: You're listening to "The Assassination of John F.
|
||
Kennedy, A Formal Debate," from the Virtual Radio Network. The
|
||
proposal is that President Kennedy was killed as the result of a
|
||
conspiracy. Taking the "pro" position is Peter Dale Scott, author
|
||
of *Deep Politics and the Death of JFK*. Taking the "con"
|
||
position is Gerald Posner, author of *Case Closed: Lee Harvey
|
||
Oswald and the Assassination of JFK*. Your moderator is David
|
||
Mendelson.
|
||
|
||
MODERATOR: You are listening to "The Assassination of John F.
|
||
Kennedy, A Formal Debate," with Gerald Posner and Peter Dale
|
||
Scott.
|
||
|
||
Each of you will now ask alternating questions of the other
|
||
participant. Mr. Scott, you have one minute to ask a question.
|
||
|
||
(to be continued)
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
I encourage distribution of "Conspiracy Nation."
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
If you would like "Conspiracy Nation" sent to your e-mail
|
||
address, send a message in the form "subscribe my-email@address"
|
||
to bigxc@prairienet.org -- To cancel, send a message in the form
|
||
"cancel my-email@address." && Articles sent in are considered.
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
Aperi os tuum muto, et causis omnium filiorum qui pertranseunt.
|
||
Aperi os tuum, decerne quod justum est, et judica inopem et
|
||
pauperem. -- Liber Proverbiorum XXXI: 8-9
|
||
|
||
|