Issues of balance, history and JFK Research

This past week I had a chance to chat with Chuck Ochelli about some of the issues which continue to concern me as we try to move the realities of the assassination beyond the official story line of the Warren Commission report and into a more responsible history of the event.

Decades have been spent in deconstructing material contained in the Warren Commission Report, even as compared to its 26 Volumes. At this point professional historians could, if they chose to do so, write a true history of the issues with the initial DPD and FBI investigations as well as the presidential autopsy all as presented in the Commission report – and do so in part with documented materials from the Commission itself. Such a work could soundly document why the presentation of a Lone Nut assassin deserves to be treated skeptically by history.

My issues are with the conspiracy side of the coin, the reality of Oswald’s direct involvement – if any – and the fact that we are not handling that with the same rigor and, truth to say skepticism. that has been used with the Warren Commission deconstruction. We have not held ourselves to the same standards of fact checking, documentation, citations and historical analysis that we demanded from the Warren Commission. 

Which means that even if we manage to persuade people that the official story is in doubt, we continue to do a poor job of offering alternatives that would stand up to the measurements of historical treatment.

My issues have surfaced most recently in regard to the Rob Reiner series of podcasts, which are being received very positively, provide great entertainment and I consider to be woefully lacking as actual history. Chuck and I discussed some of the reasons why, and why I have become so concerned about the differences between entertainment, journalism and history as time passes….you will find that discussion at the follow link to his web site.

Home