The Military’s Fraudulent JFK Autopsy Converted a Conspiracy Theory to a Conspiracy
The Future of Freedom Foundation is posting my new video commentary entitled Housewives Underground: A Video Commentary, which is an amplification of my recent article “The Housewives Underground.”
The article and the video revolve around a recent fascinating book entitled The Housewives Underground: The Untold Story of the Women Who Made the JFK Assassination Our Most Enduring Mystery by Kaitlyn Tiffany, who works for The Atlantic.
As I detail in my article and video, the key to understanding that the U.S. national-security establishment orchestrated and carried out President Kennedy’s assassination is the fraud in the autopsy that the military conducted after the assassination. A fraudulent autopsy necessarily equates to cover-up of the assassination itself and, therefore, criminal culpability in the assassination itself.
If one omits the fraudulent autopsy from the equation, then it stands to reason why one might arrive at a lone-nut theory of the JFK assassination. That’s because except for the post-assassination fraudulent autopsy, there really is no competent evidence that the national-security establishment conspired to assassinate and did assassinate President Kennedy.
In other words, without the fraudulent autopsy, it would not be unreasonable to scoff at an accusation against the military and the CIA as a “conspiracy theory.”
What is significant is that the fraudulent autopsy provides the evidence that moves the case from the category of conspiracy theory to the categories of conspiracy and assassination.
In 1970, for example, if someone were to allege that the CIA had conspired with the Mafia to assassinate Cuban president Fidel Castro, that would have been rightly labeled a conspiracy theory. That’s because there was no evidence of such a conspiracy.
In the mid-1970s, that conspiracy theory, for most people, crossed the line and became an actual conspiracy. That’s because the Church Committee discovered overwhelming evidence of the conspiracy within the records of the CIA. It’s important to note that, as far as I know, the CIA has never actually formally confessed to that crime. But most people found the evidence to be sufficiently persuasive to move the matter from the category of conspiracy theory to the category of an actual conspiracy.
Without the fraudulent autopsy, that’s pretty much the case with respect to someone who accuses the national-security establishment of conspiring to assassinate JFK. Where is the evidence of that conspiracy? It’s actually non-existent, which is why it’s not really unreasonable or illogical for someone to place that accusation in the category of conspiracy theory.
Bethesda National Naval Medical Center, where the military conducted a fraudulent autopsy on the body of President Kennedy.
Sure, one might well prove that there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK, for example, by showing that he was hit by more than three bullets. But simply establishing a conspiracy doesn’t establish who were the parties to the conspiracy. That’s why the establishment of a conspiracy to assassinate Kennedy is pretty much irrelevant at this point. The real issue is: Does the evidence convict the national-security establishment of the crime?
If we focus on Kaitlyn Tiffany’s book, it’s not difficult to see why she defaults to a lone-nut theory of the assassination. As I point out in my article and video commentary, her book revolves around three women who were in the first generation of assassination researchers. Those were the people who had deep suspicions about the official narrative of the assassination — that is, that a lone nut had shot and killed Kennedy with a rifle being shot from Kennedy’s rear.
If someone had speculated just after the assassination that it was orchestrated and carried out by the military and the CIA, he would have been labeled a conspiracy theorist — and rightly so, since there was no evidence of that. That’s why Sylvia Meagher, one of the three women featured by Tiffany, continually emphasized the importance of not coming up with an alternative theory of who had killed JFK and instead simply focus only on the flaws and defects of the official investigation and finding.
What the three women and the other critics were aiming for was a new investigation of the Kennedy assassination. In the mid-1970s, they got what they wanted. The House Select Committee on Assassinations conducted a new investigation. However, it found the same thing that the Warren Report found — that the accused assassin Lee Harvey Oswald had shot and killed JFK using a rifle that he supposedly fired from the president’s rear.
So, there you have it — two completely separate official investigations arriving at the same conclusion — a lone nut did it. At that point, what were those three housewives going to do? They had gotten what they wanted — a new investigation, which essentially confirmed the finding of the first one. As a practical matter, they couldn’t exactly accuse the House Select Committee of conducting a faulty investigation and calling for a third investigation. They were done. They were finished. Their years-long efforts to establish that the lone-nut finding was false ostensibly had proven to be for naught.
And that’s pretty much where Tiffany finishes her book, which is logical given that the book is about those three women. So, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that Tiffany defaults to the “Oswald did it” theory of the assassination. After all, two separate official investigations had found that. (While the HSCA had concluded in the end that Oswald had conspired with some unknown people, the conclusion was based on a faulty acoustics analysis.)
Even if Tiffany had gone all the way to the ARRB hearings in the 1990s, the ARRB final report did not question or challenge the findings of the Warren Commission and the HSCA. That’s because when the JFK Records Act was enacted, someone had slipped a provision into the law prohibiting the ARRB from investigating or reinvestigating the assassination. Its power was limited to securing the release of long-secret assassination-related records of the military, the CIA, and other federal entities.
So, at that point — when the ARRB issued its final report in 1998 — the lone-nut advocates would still justified in calling an accusation against the national-security establishment a conspiracy theory.
What is it then that moves the case from the category of conspiracy theory to conspiracy? That would be Douglas Horne’s five-volume book Inside the Assassination Records Review Board: The U.S. Government’s Final Attempt to Reconcile the Conflicting Medical Evidence in the Assassination of JFK. After serving on the ARRB in the 1990s, Horne compiled the evidence of autopsy fraud that had been developed during the course of the ARRB’s term and put it all together in his massive book.
It’s the evidence of autopsy fraud in Horne’s book that moves the matter from a conspiracy theory to an actual conspiracy, just like what happened with the conspiracy to assassinate Fidel Castro. (Note: my book The Kennedy Autopsy is a short easy-to-read synopsis of Horne’s book.)
Thus, until one reads Horne’s book (or views his video presentations, such as his 5-part Altered History: Exposing Deceit and Deception in the JFK Assassination Medical Evidence or his masterful online documentary The Three Bethesda Casket Entries Revisited), one isn’t likely to know about the autopsy fraud, which is why one would default to the lone-nut theory of the assassination.
The real issue is whether one who discovers the manifest significance of Horne’s book will read it. My hunch is that some people will nonetheless steadfastly avoid the book out of a fear of understanding the real truth of the JFK assassination. But only by confronting the truth about America’s dark history as a national-security state, including its state-sponsored assassinations, can we ever hope to get our nation back on the right track — toward freedom, peace, prosperity, and the restoration of a limited-government republic.
