Demolishing The Warren Report

One of my entertainments, from time to time, has been the Kennedy assassination… John Kennedy’s, that is. I’m not particularly a fan of mysteries, but once in a while one of them intrigues me.

What I’m going to show you today are two images from a CBS News Special Report from 1967, filmed and broadcast because so many people had failed to believe the Warren Report. I’m quite sure they didn’t realize they were making their esteemed report ridiculous, but they did just the same.

So, let’s take a look.

The View They Showed You

Nearly all of us are familiar with the shots Oswald was supposed to have fired at Kennedy as he drove away from the School Book depository on Elm Street in Dallas. It was a difficult angle, through or around trees, and requiring an especially difficult shooting posture. It also involved a cheap and flimsy rifle.

Here’s an image from the CBS report, showing a marksman attempting to hit a target representing Kennedy as it moved away from him. This was said to be a precise recreation of the scene. This image was just before “the fatal shot.”

Obviously these were difficult shots. In fact, Jesse Ventura, a certified expert marksman and special forces vet, couldn’t remotely pull off the feat… and Oswald was no expert marksman.

The View They Didn’t Show You…

Or at least the view they didn’t show you intentionally.

Here, again from the 1967 CBS report, is Dan Rather sitting in Oswald’s spot at the School Book depository. I’d like you to look at the left side of the photo, over Rather’s right hip. What you’re seeing is Houston Street, the street Kennedy’s motorcade came down immediately before he was shot at and killed. It was a straight one block run, headed directly toward Oswald’s window. And note, please, that the motorcade was traveling very slowly here (they had to take a hard left turn onto Elm immediately in front of the building), that there were no obstructions, and that a shooter in that window would have a perfect downward angle at JFK. It was like shooting fish in a barrel.

Take a look at the two photos again. Which angle would you choose?

In order to pass up the angle from the Rather photo, Oswald would have to be bizarrely incompetent.

What Does This Mean?

This means that if we want to believe the Warren Commission, we must say that Oswald chose to bypass the perfect angle for his shots – an angle that is immediately obvious upon looking out the window – and instead chose a terrible angle… that he preferred to shoot at a faster-moving car rather than a slow-moving car, that he preferred it farther rather than closer, that he wanted it going away from him rather than toward him, that he was happy with more obstructions and shooting from an uncomfortable position.

Again, please look at the photos and ask yourself, “Which angle would I pick?” I think the answer is obvious. And if so, the Warren Report was ridiculous.

What I’m Not Saying

Please notice that I’m not saying who the shooter or shooters were, or who may or may not have put them up to it. I’m saying one thing only: That there’s a huge hole, right at the center of the Warren Commission’s narrative. There is no way that Oswald – or any of us who are sane – would bypass a perfect angle for this deed, one that almost guaranteed success, and instead chose an extremely difficult angle with a poor chance of success. Whatever Lee Oswald was, he wasn’t a mental defective. Look at the footage of him talking to reporters after the assassination: In the midst of an utterly bizarre and existentially threatening situation, he speaks clearly and coherently.

I think it has been a grave error for people to jump to conclusions on this subject. It’s necessary first to deal with the facts we have at hand. Once we’re clear on those we can begin to address the second question of “Who did it?”

Along this line, I very much appreciated two of the earliest books on the subject, Harold Weisberg’s Whitewash and Sylvia Meagher’s Accessories After The Fact. Both were written precisely because the Warren Report was so very bad. (It had many more errors than we’ve covered here.) So, this is the point we need to make first. Afterward we can think about the villains.

And just once more, please take a moment with those two photos and ask yourself which angle you’d choose.

**

If this mystery engages you, you’ll enjoy my novel, Return Engagements, Book One.

**

Paul Rosenberg

freemansperspective.com