The Strange Anti-Conspiracy Argument about Which View Is Less Troubling

[Michael T. Griffith]

One of the oddest, most illogical arguments against the case for conspiracy in the JFK assassination is the argument that those who posit a conspiracy do so because they find it too troubling to believe that a U.S. president could be killed by a lone-nut gunman, that those who posit a conspiracy feel a psychological and emotional need to believe that JFK was killed by a plot because they just can't accept that such a popular and powerful American president such as JFK could be killed by some crazy guy firing from an open window with a WWII-era bolt-action rifle.

This is utter nonsense and gibberish. I would much rather believe that JFK was killed by some lone nut than believe that he was killed by a powerful conspiracy. The lone-gunman theory is far, far less troubling than the conspiracy theory. Which would you rather believe: that your mother died because some crazy man shot her to get attention, or that your mother was killed by a group of influential people who viewed her as a threat to their power? It would far more comforting and far less disturbing to believe in the lone-nut explanation than in the conspiracy explanation. 

Moreover, many people who posit a conspiracy in JFK's death initially accepted the lone-gunman explanation and only changed their minds after they read the other side. I am one of those people. Until the 1991 movie JFK caused me to start researching the JFK case, I believed in the Warren Commission's version of the shooting. I thought the case was open and shut. I only went to see Oliver Stone's JFK movie out of raw curiosity, not because I had any doubts about Oswald's guilt. 

If anyone seems to have a psychological and emotional need to believe in their version of the JFK case, it is lone-gunman theorists. The idea that a powerful plot killed JFK severely threatens their beliefs about America and the American government, and it challenges their very understanding of reality.

I actually wish that the lone-gunman theory were true, that there had been no conspiracy and no massive cover-up, just a troubled lone nut who got astonishingly lucky with two of his three shots. 

[Gerry Down]

Well, what's the alternative? The mafia did it? The Cubans did it? LBJ did it? What's the alternative to the SBT? How many shooters - 2, 3, 4 or 5? CTers don't offer a coherent alternative to the lone gunman theory.

[Tom Graves]

Well, what's the alternative? The mafia did it? The Cubans did it? LBJ did it? What's the alternative to the SBT? How many shooters - 2, 3, 4 or 5? CTers don't offer a coherent alternative to the lone gunman theory.

All they know is what their beloved KGB* and Comrade Oliver Stone have told them: Former Marine sharpshooter and U-2 radar operator Lee Harvey Oswald was a "patsy," and JFK was killed by the evil, evil, Military Industrial Intelligence-Community Complex!!!

*Today's SVR and FSB

[Lance Payette]

The earth must have tilted on its axis, because I must agree with Michael here. I have certainly seen the "psychological explanation" that CTers require an assassination worthy of JFK, but I haven’t seen it often and not much recently. While there may be some grain of truth, it surely can’t be a prime motivating factor.

I really think there are a handful of primary motivations common to both CTers and LNers:

1. Some tiny percentage of folks are simply interested in historical truth, let the chips fall where they may. These folks are rare birds on either side of the JFKA research community. They may have reached a CT or LN conviction, but they will at least listen to and consider the countervailing evidence and arguments. Naturally, almost everyone thinks he or she is within this category, when in fact close to no one actually is.

2. Every area of weirdness, be it the JFKA or Bigfoot, attracts a fair number of ego-driven characters who want to be big fish in these tiny ponds – which is far easier than being a big fish in a big pond. Start a website, write a book, host a podcast, etc., etc., and soon you’re a big deal to the tiny segment of the populace that really cares anything about the JFKA or Bigfoot. I believe this pretty well explains virtually all of the “names” on both the CT and LN sides. It’s mostly about “Look at me!” It’s kind of comical because these are truly tiny ponds. I know several of the big names in the UFO field and, believe me, they aren't buying mansions with the earnings from those efforts.

3. Every area of weirdness, and especially the JFKA, has a significant segment for whom the subject matter is secondary to promoting an ideological agenda. It’s not really about the JFKA per se, but about what these folks think the JFKA tells us (or should tell us) about our country, our government, the world in which we live. Their theory of the JFKA is derived heavily from what they think about these other things. Here as well, I think, we see this very obviously on both the CT and LN sides.

4. Then we have the vast hordes, including myself, for whom puzzling areas of weirdness, from the JFKA to Bigfoot to UFOs to the Shroud of Turin, are mostly just hobbies and amusements and even quasi-religions. Wrestling with the issues and arguments and all the evidential minutiae and bonding and debating with others is just kind of entertaining and fun.

On the CT side of this horde, there are well-known psychological factors, which I share, that contribute to a conspiracy-prone mindset and thus are likely to attract someone to the CT perspective. Ditto for the LN perspective. I don’t think these are controlling factors – I’m a conspiracist in some areas and not in others, and I have waffled between a CT and LN position in my JFKA journey – but they do have an influence. The key is to know yourself and recognize these propensities and biases before they do take control.

For most people in the vast horde, however, I think the JFKA is mostly just a puzzle-solving hobby or game with little in the way of a psychological “need” for a particular theory to be true. Once someone’s convictions harden and he or she becomes heavily invested in a particular theory and bonds with others who share that theory, however, then it can become more like a religion and critical thinking tends to fly out the window.

For myself, I recognize a lifelong strong attraction to many areas of weirdness – the JFKA, UFOs, NDEs, the Shroud of Turin, many anomalous phenomena, etc., etc. I would love for the JFKA to have a weird, multi-faceted, jaw-dropping solution just for the sheer “Wow!” factor. I admit that I really cared nothing about JFK and don’t really care how he died apart from this aspect of vaguely hoping it was something fascinating. I don’t think the JFKA tells me much or has the potential to tell me much of anything at all about our country, our government or the world in which we live. I have actively resisted trying to become a big fish in the JFKA pond (or cesspool, as the case may be); my ego simply doesn’t require it. I admit that my interest is simply that of a puzzle-playing hobbyist who thinks the entire exercise is entertaining and intellectually stimulating at some level but fundamentally absurd because there will simply never be any clear answer or even consensus. The JFKA has never become, and never will become, a quasi-religion for me, nor do I think I have lost my rationality or ability to think critically insofar as the JFK or UFOs or anything else is concerned.

Oops, I did omit a fifth category:

5. In the above categories, there is a fair amount of genuine mental illness. Simply having a conspiracy-prone mindset or strong confirmation bias one way or the other is not a mental illness. In categories 2, 3 and 4, however, I do believe there is a very significant percentage of folks whose cognitive faculties are not operating properly (to put it politely). This seems screamingly obvious to me and perhaps to you. Alas, internet forums in particular attract a disproportionate number of these folks.

If you recognize and accept this, however, it can be part of the fun. This is why I have always said that the psychology and dynamics of internet forums are more interesting to me than whatever subject is being discussed. I actually participated for a long time on a theological forum where seemingly intelligent people were adamant that the earth is flat and the moon landings were faked. The discussions were absurd, but the people and group dynamics were fascinating. Ditto for much of the JFKA stuff, mostly CT but not entirely. Some foaming-at-the-mouth LNers are as curious to me as any CTer – almost, to get back to Michael’s original post, as though there is some deep need for the LN narrative to be correct.

Actually, I guess, a foaming-at-the-mouth LNer is more puzzling to me than a CTer. If you really think the LN narrative is correct - well, that's the verdict of history, so let it go. These LNers create the same puzzlement for me as the atheists on religion forums. If you really think there is no god and religion is foolishness, why do you spend so incredibly much time ranting against the Bible and all the various doctrines? It almost has to be, it seems to me, some level of insecurity about the truth of what you proclaim. Eek, did I just agree with Michael again? WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH ME?

Oh, well, on it goes.

[Benjamin Cole]

LP--

You are a little tough on JFKA researchers, but you make a lot of good points.

I thought you overlooked one aspect of JFKA research: Ideology.

The ideology drives the agenda, and the agenda drives the narrative.

Devout left-wingers have developed elaborate JFKA narratives (Vincent Salandria and others) that insist the JFKA was a plot involving dozens, if not more, and reached into highest levels of US government and capitalism. Not only that, elements of the CIA, the Pentagon, the Secret Service, the FBI, the Navy autopsists, the Dallas Police Department and the Dallas Sheriffs and DA, all played bit parts in the narrative. There have been even more participants that I have forgotten about. The media was totally onboard.


OTOH, former CIA Chief James Woolsey authored a book blaming the KGB for the JFKA.

The Education Forum is dominated by left-wing ideologues and crackpots who have all but snuffed out other points of view.

But there are other points of view.

My guess: Alpha 66, or KGB and G2 assets embedded in the Cuban community and the US intel community.

A very small plot, perhaps only three people, and that includes LHO.

 

[Lance Payette]

LP--

You are a little tough on JFKA researchers, but you make a lot of good points.

I thought you overlooked one aspect of JFKA research: Ideology.

The ideology drives the agenda, and the agenda drives the narrative.

Devout left-wingers have developed elaborate JFKA narratives (Vincent Salandria and others) that insist the JFKA was a plot involving dozens, if not more, and reached into highest levels of US government and capitalism. Not only that, elements of the CIA, the Pentagon, the Secret Service, the FBI, the Navy autopsists, the Dallas Police Department and the Dallas Sheriffs and DA, all played bit parts in the narrative. There have been even more participants that I have forgotten about. The media was totally onboard.


OTOH, former CIA Chief James Woolsey authored a book blaming the KGB for the JFKA.

The Education Forum is dominated by left-wing ideologues and crackpots who have all but snuffed out other points of view.

But there are other points of view.

My guess: Alpha 66, or KGB and G2 assets embedded in the Cuban community and the US intel community.

A very small plot, perhaps only three people, and that includes LHO.

Those motivated primarily by ideology are my category #3 above. I noticed this early-on at the Ed Forum and started a highly unpopular thread about it. I have to agree with Michael, however, that I think there is a strong ideological component to the fanatical LN defense community as well.

Your guess sounds considerably more elaborate than the small-scale conspiracy I thought you were suggesting. I could at least entertain either:

1. Oswald is influenced and perhaps made promises by some fellow pro-Castro types in New Orleans or Mexico City, but Dealey Plaza is pretty much the LN scenario.

2. Same as #1, but there is another pro-Castro gunman in the Dal Tex or County Records building.

3. Oswald makes a spectacle of himself in New Orleans to the extent that Marcello's folks recognize a made-to-order patsy. Oswald is induced to think he's part of a pro-Castro operation but in fact is part of a Mafia operation with a Mafia pro in the Dal Tex or County Records  building.

I think there are LN objections to all three scenarios, but they are at least within the realm of possibility. Once we get into anything more elaborate or that requires Oswald to be anything other than the Castro-admiring Marxist he actually was, it seems to me that things quickly fall apart.

I see now that you posit perhaps only three people including LHO. It was the term "assets" that threw me.

[Tom Graves]

Those motivated primarily by ideology are my category #3 above. I noticed this early-on at the Ed Forum and started a highly unpopular thread about it. I have to agree with Michael, however, that I think there is a strong ideological component to the fanatical LN defense community as well.

Your guess sounds considerably more elaborate than the small-scale conspiracy I thought you were suggesting. I could at least entertain either:

1. Oswald is influenced and perhaps made promises by some fellow pro-Castro types in New Orleans or Mexico City, but Dealey Plaza is pretty much the LN scenario.

2. Same as #1, but there is another pro-Castro gunman in the Dal Tex or County Records building.

3. Oswald makes a spectacle of himself in New Orleans to the extent that Marcello's folks recognize a made-to-order patsy. Oswald is induced to think he's part of a pro-Castro operation but in fact is part of a Mafia operation with a Mafia pro in the Dal Tex or County Records  building.

I think there are LN objections to all three scenarios, but they are at least within the realm of possibility. Once we get into anything more elaborate or that requires Oswald to be anything other than the Castro-admiring Marxist he actually was, it seems to me that things quickly fall apart.

I see now that you posit perhaps only three people including LHO. It was the term "assets" that threw me.

Dear FPR,

You forgot to mention that a big difference between Lone Gunman Advocates and KGB-encouraged, tinfoil-hat Conspiracy Theorists is that the latter require oodles and gobs of evil, evil "Deep State" bad guys for the planning, the "patsy-ing," the planting of evidence, the shooting, the getting-away, the altering of all of the Dealey Plaza films and photos, the altering of all of the Bethesda photos and x-rays, and the all-important (and evidently ongoing!!!) cover up.

-- Tom

[Benjamin Cole]

TG-

Yes, you did mention ideologies. We think alike!

I find your scenarios plausible.

I suspect a second gunsel on Nov. 22, due to the cadence of shots that struck JFK and JBC. (Z-295 and Z-313).

The GK smoke-and-bang show suggests another participant as well.

The recent Kirk assassination, and the incredible close-miss Trump assassination attempt, destroy suggestions that only a skilled marksman could hit JFK on Nov. 22. Rank amateurs are dangerous, and from greater distances than seen in Dealey Plaza.