Stop Horsing Around

[Tim Gratz]

History will not long remember this Forum.

The ONLY way to change the historical record, IMO, is to have a new investigation, by a special prosecutor, a "truth commission" empowered to subpoena witnesses, the release of all documents, etc. I am sure BK and probably most of you agree with that proposition. (Well, we can at least agree on one thing!)

One step in that process is, IMO, to convince as many members of Congress as possible that there is little, if any doubt, that there was a conspiracy despite VB's admittedly articulate 1,600 plus page tome. Not every MC will be convinced, of course, but a goal should be to convince two-thirds of the members.

A second step is to convince those members that the issue might still be able to be solved, that there are still leads to be investrigated, witnesses to be deposed, etc. Many may be dubious of this proposition but I think most of us agree there is still time but it the "window of opportunity" as it relates to witnesses may be flying by us fast.

But back to the first step. IMO, what is not needed now is more speculation that this group or that group might have shot JFK because it disagreed with him on this issue or that issue. Congress will never listen to that nonsense.

Want to contribute some "research" that might be helpful? How about members trying to prepare essays of no more than four pages that set forth as cogently as possible the top four reasons to suggest a conspiracy. A lot of great stuff has been written on various issues the challenge is to consolidate it and put it in a form that is as readable ("lucid") and persuasive as possible.

One issue that intrigues me is the probable planting of CE 399 and problems with its change of custody. The NAA analysis by Dr. Guinn presented strong evidence for the SBT IMO but the two recent scientific challenges to its premises go far, I think, to demolish the NAA, greatly increasing the probability the bullet was indeed planted, making a conspiracy all but certain. A second issue would be the whereabouts of Oswald. I think it is quite persuasive that he was not a shooter but the argument is not "new".

In any event, if we could concentrate on a competition to draft the best essay to "prove" a conspiracy in no more than four pages, then perhaps members could help select the essay they believe to be the most persuasive. The "final" product might even be a consolidation of the best essays.

Then we hope and pray there will be an opportunity to use the work product to prod Congress to action. And if it does work, then my first sentence in this piece will be falsified!

Any takers?

Edited August 24, 2007 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Gratz]

As I see it, one challenge is to present Congress with "new" evidence. I don't think Congress will respond if it thinks we've "been there, done that".

The two new challenges to the NAA fit that criteria.

Given the controversy over the "last-minute" acoustic evidence, and its importance in potentially proving a conspiracy, Congress might also be willing to revisit that issue.

The other challenge may be to convince Congress it is important for our history to have a final, definitive answer to whether there was a conspiracy even if the conspirators may not be able to be identified with certainty.

[Ron Ecker]

Tim,

The problem with your idea is that both houses of Congress are absolutely gutless. Part of that I'm sure is based on fear. I call it the Boggs Syndrome. And fear of the Cheney regime seems worse since 9/11. In any case, today's Congress is not going to go after any government conspiracy. This is not the mid-70s, or even the mid-90s. It's more like 1984, and I think it will only get worse.

I know this is "pure hokum" to you.

Ron

[Tim Gratz]

Ron, I certainly understand there is reason for your skepticism.

I think what it would take is a groundswell of public support that Congress could not ignore. I think it might be possible to create such public interest through public exposure of the new leads to be investigated, e.g. Jenkins, Joannides, the story of Hunter Leake, etc. I am going to be working on attempting to raise funds for an advertisement in USA Today to educate the public. I mean how many members of Congress even know about the pending Joannides case? I bet less than a majority! Part of the answer is education.

And despite our little tiff the other day (I had meant to send you a private e-mail) and our differences re the size of the conspiracy, I greatly admire your writing skill and have printed copies of your articles on WerBell, Albert Osborne, etc. Are you willing to help on the project? Perhaps write the esssay on the Joannides matter and why it is important?