High Treason: The Assassination of JFK & the Case for Conspiracy

5 Comments

1. David Von Pein says:

   August 31, 2010 at 6:29 am

   “High Treason”, co-authored by Harrison Livingstone and Robert Groden, is yet another on the all-too-long list of JFK conspiracy books written since November 22, 1963, the day when President Kennedy’s life ended so violently and tragically as a result of two rifle bullets that penetrated his body (both fired by Lee Harvey Oswald).

   One of the authors of this publication (Livingstone) states his firm belief that not only were all or most of the autopsy photos of JFK’s body “faked” and manipulated by evil conspirators following Kennedy’s assassination — but that the Abraham Zapruder Film also fell into the hands of these same conspirators and that the Z-Film has been “faked” in some manner too (to conceal evidence of multiple gunmen firing at the President).*

   * = These two (IMO) silly beliefs of widespread “photo fakery” (and film alteration too) have since been adopted by many other conspiracy theorists (CTers) in the years since “High Treason” was originally published. The “Z-Film Has Been Phonied” theory is particularly crazy when one considers the fact that the #1 thing within Zapruder’s home movie that makes most CTers believe that JFK was shot from the front (the proverbial “rear head snap”) has been retained within any and all “faked” copies of the film! How dumb is that? The photo-fakers go to the trouble of changing Zapruder’s film to “hide” any indication of conspiracy, but they seemingly just forgot about the main item that makes most conspiracy theorists shout “Frontal Shot!” when viewing the film — that head snap to the rear. This LEAVING IN of the rear head snap is the best indicator of all that Mr. Zapruder’s film has never been “tampered with” by unknown plotters.

   Groden and Livingstone don’t seem to agree, however, on whether or not the Zapruder Film was altered. Livingstone definitely thinks it was; while Groden does not. Groden, like most other hard-line pro-conspiracy rooters, does believe that a goodly number of the autopsy photos and X-rays of JFK have been faked and altered in some fashion. It’s interesting, I think, that even the CTers cannot seem to get together and agree on many aspects of the JFK evidence, as seems to be the case re. the personal conspiratorial preferences owned by Mr. Livingstone and Mr. Groden (heck, even two guys writing the SAME BOOK can’t even agree). That says a lot, in my view. And such ambiguity and disagreements between the authors of the very same publication certainly does not bode well for the overall “conspiracy case” re. JFK’s murder.

   The commonly-held belief that the autopsy pics are fakes has been put forth in numerous volumes of JFK-related literature, despite the fact that more than one dozen photographic experts, who examined all of the autopsy materials for the “House Select Committee On Assassinations” in the late 1970s — an organization for which Groden himself served as a photographic consultant — came to the conclusion that NONE of the pictures or X-rays that were taken at Kennedy’s autopsy were altered in any way. Groden, therefore, must feel that every one of those men who looked at the pictures and arrived at that determination must all be lying “cover-up agents” of some ilk. To me, that notion is simply foolish.

   Here are the completely-unambiguous conclusions of that HSCA photographic panel:

   “From the reports of the experts’ analyses of the autopsy photographs and X-rays, the evidence indicates that the autopsy photographs and X-rays were taken of President Kennedy at the time of his autopsy and that they had not been altered in any manner.” — From Volume VII of the Report of the House Select Committee On Assassinations

   Before anyone buys into the incredibly-complicated (and incredibly-ridiculous) notion that all of the JFK autopsy materials were manipulated by a band of conspirators, they should fully read the following report issued by that panel of HSCA photo experts:

   http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/autopsy2.txt

   The “Single-Bullet Theory”…….

   Neither of the two “Treason” authors (Livingstone or Groden) believes that the “Single-Bullet Theory” is the correct version of events surrounding the simultaneous (or virtually-simultaneous) wounding of JFK and Governor John Connally on 11/22/63 in Dallas. This disbelief in the completely-acceptable-based-on-the-evidence “SBT” is, of course, to be expected from any CTer. I haven’t come across a conspiracy theorist yet who thinks the SBT is a fact. But it’s a shooting scenario that has never been disproven, that is for certain.

   But what I’d REALLY like to see is just one single solitary pro-conspiracy buff come up with a believable, logical, and non-laughable “alternative” to the SBT that comes even remotely close to a realistic way the shooting of both JFK and Connally could have occurred — i.e., considering the documented evidence in the case, such as: the bullet holes in both victims, plus the lack of any and all bullets (except for Bullet CE399), plus the lack of any limousine damage in the back-seat areas of the vehicle, plus the Zapruder Film timing of the event (which would, of course, without the “SBT”, indicate THREE separate shooters firing at virtually the same time, given the tight Z-Film timeline).

   Let’s see some conspiracy theorist concoct a non-SBT “theory” (of the non-laughable variety) with those parameters firmly in place.

   I, myself, am rather sick of hearing how the Single-Bullet Theory is “foolish” and “impossible”, etc. — when at the same time not one CTer has placed on the table any kind of reasonable, logical (and above all, BELIEVABLE) alternative scenario to replace the SBT.

   Conspiracists who perpetually repeat the worn-out “The SBT Is Wrong” refrain, without offering up some kind (any kind!) of reasonable alternative for how the shooting DID actually happen that day in Dealey Plaza, are guilty of poor overall research, in my opinion. For, if the SBT is “wrong”, then something ELSE is right.

   The President’s and the Governor’s many wounds certainly weren’t “planted” there by mysterious covert operatives after the fact. Those wounds were REAL! And they were caused via SOME kind of rifle-shooting scenario in Dealey Plaza that Friday in Dallas, Texas. So, CTers, what the heck was it then (if not the SBT)? No CTer seems to want to reveal this all-important “truth” re. the wounding of JFK and Mr. Connally. (Seems odd to me, too — because such a bombshell of a revelation re. the “way it really happened!” should be good for quite a profitable book deal, I would imagine. Funny we’ve never seen such a publication, huh?)

   An Assassination Overview…….

   1.) Lee Harvey Oswald’s own rifle was found in the same building from where shots were fired (the Texas School Book Depository Building on Elm Street in Dallas).

   2.) Oswald’s fingerprints (on various objects) were found at the EXACT same place where a gunman was located while President Kennedy was being shot (i.e., within the “Sniper’s Nest” on the 6th Floor of the Book Depository Building).

   3.) Without permission from his supervisors, Oswald quickly left the Depository (his own workplace) immediately after shots were fired at JFK from that very building (i.e., within approximately three minutes of the last gunshot).

   4.) Stretcher Bullet “CE399″ was positively linked to Oswald’s 6.5mm Mannlicher-Carcano bolt-action rifle, to the exclusion of every weapon ever made.

   5.) Two bullet fragments were found inside JFK’s limousine and were positively linked to Oswald’s rifle, to the exclusion of every weapon ever made.

   6.) Three rifle shells were found beneath the “Sniper’s Nest” window in the Book Depository and were positively traced to Oswald’s rifle, to the exclusion of every weapon ever made.

   7.) Assassination eyewitness Howard L. Brennan positively identified Lee Harvey Oswald as the man Brennan saw firing a rifle at President Kennedy.

   8.) A massive amount of physical and circumstantial evidence exists providing conclusive proof that Lee Harvey Oswald shot and killed Dallas policeman J.D. Tippit forty-five minutes after JFK was shot.

   9.) Oswald told many lies (provable lies) before and after President Kennedy’s assassination.

   To all conspiracy buffs who think Oswald was nothing but a “Patsy” (Mr. Groden included), I challenge you to take a good look at the nine-item list I made above — which is a list of ACTUAL EVIDENCE (official evidence in the case against Lee Harvey Oswald for two murders he was charged with in 1963; with #9 about “Oswald’s lies” leaning more toward circumstantial evidence in the case against him, but still very solid evidence in favor of guilt) — and then tell me (and the rest of the people on planet Earth) HOW in the wide, wide world of conspiracy theories and Patsy Plots all of this evidence could have possibly been “manufactured” by evil conspirators to implicate an “innocent patsy”?**

   ** = A “Number 10″ could be added to the above list as well, to include details re. the SBT — which would have had to be “replaced” with at LEAST three different shots/bullets if the SBT is false (as mentioned earlier in this review/essay). This “Three-Shot SBT Replacement”, of course, just compounds the problems for any “conspiracy team” even more, and makes any perceived successful plot all the more incredible and near-miraculous from the standpoint of the plotters/conspirators actually getting LUCKY enough to have THREE bullets merge into JUST a “Single-Bullet Theory”. Even most conspiracy theorists should agree that that “Faux SBT” accomplishment is worthy of God’s own applause and admiration.

   I’d very much recommend a book by Larry Sturdivan (entitled “The JFK Myths”) to anyone who is interested in learning about the physical evidence in the Kennedy murder case (which includes an undeniably-HUGE amount of such evidence that all favors Lee Oswald’s guilt in both the JFK and Tippit killings, with virtually no physical evidence leading toward any other conclusion than Oswald’s sole guilt in those crimes).

   There is one particular passage within the above-mentioned Sturdivan-authored book that is so incredibly simplistic….and yet so completely filled with everyday common sense and logic as to be considered by this writer impossible for CTers to overcome:

   “While one of the pieces of physical evidence could conceivably have been faked by an expert, there is no possibility that an expert, or team of super-experts, could have fabricated the perfectly coordinated whole {and have possessed such} superhuman abilities to fake physical evidence that is in complete agreement with all the other faked evidence.” — Page 246 of “The JFK Myths” by Larry M. Sturdivan; c.2005; Paragon House Publishing

   ————–

   Not even “remotely involved”? Oh, for Pete’s sake! …….

   Let me close things out here with a direct quote from co-author Robert J. Groden himself. Mr. Groden, in the late 1970s, said the following in a radio interview (I’m not making this up, I swear; he actually said this):

   “As yet I have not seen one piece of evidence in 16 years to show that Oswald was even remotely involved in the murder except as a patsy.” — Robert J. Groden; Via a 1979 radio talk-show interview

   Anybody who would truly believe the above-spoken words by Mr. Groden should make sure they never, ever drive an automobile again for as long as they live — because such a person is almost certainly completely blind.

   Such an outlandish declaration of Oswald’s perceived innocence via the above-referenced quotation is, in my opinion, the pinnacle of a “conspiracy-favoring agenda”; and such an entirely-unsupportable quote would be quite sad and heartbreaking, I suppose, if it weren’t so outright laughable instead.
   Rating: 1 / 5
2. Anonymous says:

   August 31, 2010 at 9:26 am

   This is one of the most boring, poorly written, and difficult to read books I have ever read. One of the authors is a photographic analysis and he beats the subject of the autopsy photos to death. Near the beginning of the book the reader is subjected to about 20 pages of witnesses all saying the same thing about the large hole in the back of the president’s head. Rather than using a half a page to list the witnesses and describe what they saw, the authors recount every single witnesse name and their description of the hole. They all say the same thing yet the authors thought they needed to repeat this same description over, and over, and over, by each witness for 20 pages. Then at the end of the book we have 3 more pages of the same thing followed by a page and a half of something different and then back to the witnesses describing the hole again over, and over, and over.

   There are several sentences duplicated within the book as if the authors forget they mentioned this already. The authors also just drop a name of someone into a paragrapgh and include them in the text without giving the reader any introduction or clue to who the guy is. They also include quoted speech from people mixed right in the same paragraphs as the regular text making it difficult to determine when the person’s quote is over and when the text of the book begins. You don’t know if you are still reading what someone is saying or if you are reading the regular text of the book without studying the quotation marks.

   The authors need to stick to investigation and leave the writing of books to people more capable.
   Rating: 1 / 5
3. Anonymous says:

   August 31, 2010 at 10:41 am

   This was a very powerful source for little-known information regarding the assassination of President Kennedy, but it seemed to be rather biased, and at times, sarcastic, skeptical and cynical.
   Rating: 3 / 5
4. Joseph Rolfes says:

   August 31, 2010 at 12:28 pm

   High Treason is simply a mess. Authors Livingstone and Groden engage in a shrill, undersupported deluge of accusations, conclusions, and sinister suggestions that leaves the reader wondering what topic they are attempting to discuss. I can’t say that they are wrong, or that they are right. I can’t wade through the goo of the text to make heads or tails out of it.

   Reaching deep into a bucket of evidence, they attempted to throw so much of it at the wall that no matter what, at least some would stick. Undoubtedly, some does, but the resulting mess is an almost unreadable text that doesn’t come close to definitively supporting their conclusions.

   Some of their conclusions follow the following logic: I am a professional photographic analyst. I have concluded that the assassination autopsy photos are faked. Therefore, professional photographic analysists have concluded that the photos are faked. Want some more evidence? Well, my partner thinks so too.

   Perhaps if they had stopped the shouting they would have left room for the rest of their book. As it is, there are other much more readable assassination texts out there that have benefited from the intervention of paid proofreaders. Get one of those instead.
   Rating: 1 / 5
5. Steve Anderson says:

   August 31, 2010 at 3:27 pm

   “High Treason” demonstrates what happens when non-historians attempt to write history. This book is a confusing, maze of innuendo, whispered revelations, and shady conclusions. Minor discrepencies in various testimonial accounts of the assassination are blown all out of proportion in a feverish attempt to establish a far-reaching conspiracy. Livingston and Groden, (who have since parted company and are not speaking) take the guilty hat off of Oswald’s head and nervously hint that it will fit any number of people or organizations. However, afraid that it will look ridiculous, they never dare place the hat on anyone else. They try the old trick Johnnie Cochran, F. Lee Bailey and the boys tried with O.J. Simpson. Take the guilty hat off the defendant but don’t be stupid enough to place it on anyone else. In either case the hat only fits one person: the defendant. “High Treason” is nearly impossible to read, but for serious Kennedy assassination scholars it is fun to go through and discredit every feeble point they raise. The photos are kind of good, but if it’s photos you want, I’d recommend “The Killing of the President,” and “The Search For Lee Harvey Oswald.” Both are by Robert Groden, both are filled with nonsense, but the photos are impressive. “High Treason” is to serious historical research what the “National Enquirer” is to serious journalism.
   Rating: 1 / 5