The media onslaught

[Tracy Riddle]

Pat Speer has a stronger stomach than I do.

For decades now, single-assassin theorists and media pundits have been claiming 1) that the majority of Americans believe President Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy because they've been exposed to so much conspiracy-oriented material, and 2) the creators of the conspiracy-oriented material do so to make money, because that's where the real money is, in claiming Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy. These are truly some of the BIGGEST LIES ever told about the assassination. And yet they are repeated over and over. So, on the lead-up to the 50th anniversary of Kennedy's assassination I decided to put this to the test, and record how much conspiracy-oriented material is pushed upon the public, versus how much Oswald did-it-all-by-his-lonesome-and-we-should-all-get-over-it material is pushed upon the public.

http://www.patspeer.com/the-onslaught
http://www.patspeer.com/the-onslaught-part2

[Jim DiEugenio]

Pat did a wonderful job on this.

I mean it really shows how determined the MSM was in not letting Pandora's box even crack open, let alone fly open.

Nothing showed what a Jungian state of denial this country is in more than this amateurish extravaganza.

THey ever trotted out their old standbys from 1993 and 2003, those good old Hessians, Gus Russo and Dale Myers, the lying fruitcake who actually said a computer could show that something that never happened was actually the Single Bullet Fact. I mean it does not get any more desperate than that does it?

[Tracy Riddle]

I can't tell you how many people I've encountered on the internet who are persuaded by Dale Myers' cartoon. "Well, they done proved it with computers!" Most Americans are very easily impressed by technology and visual images, which is why they're so easily fooled into believing nonsense. Hence the comic book version of the 9/11 Report.

[Martin White]

Does Pat post here?

I saw most, but not all of these programs here in the UK. I too was surprised by the lack of even a pretence of balance. I seem to recall that for the 25th and 30th, at least, there was a fairly even distribution of pro- and anti-conspiracy shows. The irony here is that the AARB documents make the existence of a conspiracy more provable, not less.

The BBC, which journalistically, is rapidly disappearing up its own orifice, ran a stinkingly badly informed "minute by minute" special on Radio 2 on Nov 22nd. It aired at 6pm-ish UK time, to tie up with the six hour difference between GMT and CST. It was pure WC. I asked the presenter Jeremy Vine, on Twitter prior to the show going out, whose "timeline" he was using. He replied "Dallas. Is there another?" (can you believe this? Jeremy Vine also presents political and investigative shows on BBC TV!)

I replied that there are several aspects where even the mere timing is disputed, such as the Tippit shooting. He didn't reply.

FWIW, I think that by the 25/30 year mark, those that control the media (at least the visual media, if not the print) thought that they could afford to give CTs enough rope to hang themselves, and that the public would eventually tire of it all. That's why TMWKK - for all its faults - was allowed out, along with other shows like the one James Earl Jones hosted. Sure, they countered with Posner etc.

However, I think that this time they realised that they could not let their foot off the research community's throat. They could not, and did not, allow any oxygen of publicity to reach the research community, regardless of what the evidence is.

[Jim DiEugenio]

I think that is about correct.

Surprised the BBC jumped on board though.

Was it completely?

[Tracy Riddle]

The BBC is not what it used to be, back when they did some excellent documentaries on subjects like Gladio.

[Albert Doyle]

Now a days if you are a presenter it means you are pro-government. They allow factualists to come off the reservation in order show the majority of the Planet Of The Apes simians a good example of persons from the forbidden zone. However I did get a sense that glimpses of the truth were allowed through as possible theories but only if they were grounded in the official story in order to allow an escape route for the government at all times. In other words, you can have your truth but only if we are allowed to crush it and have final say.

[Martin White]

I think that is about correct.

Surprised the BBC jumped on board though.

Was it completely?

Yup. Hook line and stinker. No discussion of anything that deviates from WC fantasy.

[Magda Hassan]

The Washington Consensus.

[Peter Lemkin]

Sadly, Pat doesn't post here. Many from the EF who might, don't....I think some fear if they do, the evil Simkin might end their 'stay' over there...though he has never done so.....he gets rid of people for other reasons.