The 22nd of November 1963 is a day that will forever live in infamy. On that day in Dallas, Texas, John F. Kennedy was assassinated. According to the official records and official story at the time, Lee Harvey Oswald was the one responsible for shooting JFK from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository using an Italian Carcano Model 91/38 infantry rifle chambered in 6.5x55mm Carcano. According to the Warren Commission in 1964, Lee Harvey Oswald was the sole assassin; a lone man who had assassinated the president himself. Later on, in 1979, the HSCA (the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations) came to the conclusion that the assassination was probably a conspiracy; that Oswald was mostly set up in order for someone else to get away with the assassination. In 1963, it might have been hard to believe, but 54 years later in 2018, with the vast amount of new evidence and conspiracies on the assassination, a conspiracy seems more plausible than Oswald having done the assassination solely of his own doing.
To begin with, the U.S. Government isn't stranger to conspiracies and very real plots to achieve certain goals or experiments using any means necessary… things like Operation Northwoods (proposed, not fully authorized, thankfully) and MK Ultra, for example. Besides the confirmed conspiracies which the U.S. government (or certain 3 letter agencies) have had to admit to in the past, The JFK assassination isn’t one of them, despite being a very plausible theory behind the assassination by many. The failed bay of pigs invasion and the refusal afterwards to commit to Operation Northwoods are the main reasons why the government (allegedly) wanted to eliminate JFK. The government essentially saw JFK as a big roadblock to their Cuban and anti-communist strategies. There’s also many different groups accused of the conspiracy; but all-in-all, the government as the conspirator is the most widely believed. Some refer it to be “The mother of all conspiracies”, clearly citing that Lee Harvey Oswald wasn’t the sole conspirator in the JFK assassination. Furthermore, the overwhelming majority (some say up to 95%) of books about the JFK assassination point towards a conspiracy and/or are against the Warren Commission. Sure, correlation does not imply causation, but the facts do show the very possible existence of some conspiracy. If anything, a conspiracy can’t be completely ruled out. In Fact, Lee Harvey Oswald wasn’t the only man arrested for the crime; “214 suspects, 42 groups and 82 different killers had been accused of the crime in the aftermath of the assassination”. The Warren Commission was the first official complete investigation done on the assassination. They reported back their findings to the general public in 1964, claiming that Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin for sure, and that there definitely wasn't a conspiracy behind the assassination. The Commission determined he was a lone assassin. But for many people and investigators alike, the Warren Commission seems more like a cover up than anything else; it seems as if the commission overlooked many things about the assassination.
[The Warren commission and it’s report] both ignored or suppressed what was opposed to the pre-determined conclusion that Oswald alone was the Assassin. This meant that the destruction, alteration and manipulation of evidence had to be “overlooked”. It was. (…) This meant that valuable evidence available to the commission had to be avoided. It Was.
The valuable evidence overlooked by the Warren Commission was also just simply “held back” by both the FBI and the CIA. Both agencies just gave away the strict minimum of the evidence they had gathered to the commission, and only when they were specifically asked to do so. They were just mainly reluctant to help out one another or to share all of their information on the case. This was confirmed later by the HSCA. But a president just got assassinated – why would those agencies who where made to protect America not fully step in and help in every way they can and just let the commission see everything they had on the subject? The agencies in question had a certain desire to keep some things secret – whatever those secrets could be. Good or bad.
Now, it’s important to remember that conspiracies, while they may be popular, aren't necessarily true. It’s not because something is widely believed that it should be taken as a fact. In the early 1900’s smoking was considered to be somewhat healthy. After all, doctors where even widely used to promote Camel Cigarettes in the past. Turned out the health benefits weren't much of a fact. It was widely believed though. Widely believed but still false. A great example of a conspiracy, which is still believed by some even today, would be the conspiracy regarding the American moon landing being staged in Hollywood. If it really was, why didn't the Soviet Union, the United States mortal and extremely powerful enemy at the time, speak up about it and denounced the United States? After all, the space race was an important part of the cold war for both superpowers – who would constantly take any opportunities to discredit and attack each other. Despite this being a fairly popular conspiracy; it is extremely unlikely to be one for obvious reasons. Some claim to have the “evidence” to prove it is a conspiracy… but then again if the USSR can’t prove it, how could an individual do it. Some other conspiracies are even straight up laughable and just far-fetched. Like the earth being flat… despite evident and widely available photographic and hard scientific evidence proving it is in fact round. But it’s still believed by many. Then there’s other old and current conspiracies such as the fluoride present in water being a communist plot to ruin the American population’s health in the 50’s and 60’s mainly, and HAARP – the military weapon, weather controlling, natural-disaster-causing-at-the-press-of-a-button, worldwide mind control machine of pure evil. Those Conspiracies are definitely the far-fetched results of people with good imagination and way too much time on their hands. To be fair, the HAARP conspiracies are quite interesting, seeming to have come right out of a science-fiction novel. This is in part why people choose to believe in conspiracies, because let’s face it; sometimes it’s simply more interesting than the official story. Some boring research installations in a remote location in Alaska to study the ionosphere? The cool story is clearly the one where this research facility can actually control the weather. But then again, the teachings of the Church of Scientology are also believed by many… and like with most conspiracy theories – it’s not exactly what should be considered as the truth.
As just mentioned, all of the other more far-fetched conspiracy theories tend to put a sort of stigma on the concept of conspiracy in general. However, the JFK assassination is a completely different matter in some regards. First off, in the 1979 final report by The United States House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA), it was concluded that all prior investigations into the matter had never fully considered looking into a conspiracy. If the matter was never properly and fully investigated, why rule it out? The HSCA also never ruled out the possibility of a second shooter during the assassination; the final report showed that some evidence does point to a second shooter being present. It was deemed probable, according to the evidence available, that an extra shot was likely fired by someone other than Oswald. Moreover, during the Warren Commission, the HSCA concluded that the CIA and FBI hadn’t shared all of their information on the case to the Warren commission. In fact, they would only honour very specific requests and even then would leave out crucial information, according to the HSCA. Finally, the very existence of the HSCA over a decade after the fact does lead to some questions by itself. Why the need to re-evaluate everything if the Warren Commission was deemed accurate and true? If Lee Harvey Oswald was really the sole killer and that there wasn’t any shred of evidence at all of foul play or of a larger conspiracy at play, why re-open the case this long after the fact? Well the Warren Commission sure wasn't convincing enough; and for good reasons. Clearly, the existence of a conspiracy was always a possibility since the beginning. The U.S. government wouldn't re-open such a case this long after the fact unless it was completely necessary. Yes, the skeptics might say that this in itself could just be a stunt to lay to rest the conspiracies by pretending to revaluate everything. But this level of re-evaluation of facts isn't something that has been done with many other mainstream, widely believed conspiracy theories. It’s not like the HAARP or area 51 conspiracies have special committees designed to quench the public’s thirst on the subject. The conspiracies that tend to be false are usually only really believed by a small percentage of the population and just don’t necessitate some high level governmental reviews by special committees. This re-evaluation of facts and evidence surrounding this case shows that even the government wanted answers for an investigation that just wasn't done properly originally. In fact, with the re-opening and thorough analysis of every piece of evidence and events pertaining to this case, the HSCA does believe that the assassination was most likely the result of a conspiracy. No specific group or actors where able to be identified as being the conspirators, however. Some where mostly ruled out, but there just wasn't enough evidence to point fingers at a specific conspirator(s).
First the Warren Commission, then the HSCA. In 1992 a new law was passed to make the case more public, again, as it was necessary to review the case, again. It’s hard to find another popular conspiracy in which the U.S. government had to review this often. It’s also important to note that every time a new report is made; the original storyline tends to be questioned and many questions are either left unanswered due to lack of evidence or can’t be completely answered without leaving some sort of a doubt of a very probable alternative version of events. If Lee Harvey Oswald was the sole assassin, if all the evidence pointed to him solely, if there wasn't any evidence of a conspiracy, why would the U.S. government have to re-open the case again and again without being able to prove a conspiracy wasn't possible? It’s a case that has always been very controversial since a conspiracy just hasn't been able to be definitively ruled out – to this day. In fact in 1992 the case had to be re-evaluated and a new law had to be created to release the documents to the public, 25 years later in October 2017. In 2017, thousands of new files we’re released from many agencies from the FBI and the CIA to interviews with defected agents of the KGB. In 2017 president Trump also announced he wanted, as president, to make the remaining files also available to the public. Currently, thousands of files are still under review to see wether they can be released following Trump’s order. Now about the newest act. In October 1992, U.S. congress passed a new law: the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992. When this act became law, in short, it required all of the assassination documents from many agencies across the country to be consolidated into one big collection kept by the National Archives and Records Administration. The act also created the Assassination Records Review board (ARRP), which wasn’t tasked with proving either side of the narrative, but rather was there to make sure all relevant documents related to the assassination were collected and reviewed in order to be released to the public. In 1998, the ARRP released it’s final report. One of the most interesting things to note about the ARRP’s final report is that the report actually gave partial credit to a movie for the passage of the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 in Congress. Oliver Stone’s JFK movie essentially showed the CIA, FBI and even the U.S. military as the key conspirators behind the assassination in 1963. The movie
Popularized [publicly] a version of President Kennedy’s assassination that featured U.S. government agents from the Federal Bureau of investigation (FBI), The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the military as conspirators.
Sure, this in itself isn't evidence at all of a conspiracy. Sure, a movie was made showing a conspiracy on the assassination. Like many other books and studies… etc. But the fact that this movie’s narrative contributed at all to the passage of the act in 1992 just shows the very high level of uncertainty surrounding the whole case. The majority of the American public just always thought that there was more to it than Lee Harvey Oswald acting alone – that a conspiracy was involved in the assassination.
Lastly, it’s important not to overlook the evidence on Lee Harvey Oswald; the man who allegedly shot Kennedy as a lone wolf. Also Jack Ruby, who quickly murdered Oswald after the assassination. First off, years before the shooting, Oswald wasn't the typical American. From 1959 to 1962 he had defected to Minsk, Belarus which was at the time still part of the Soviet Union. He publicly presented himself as a Marxist, being against the American way of life despite moving back to Dallas, Texas in 1962 with his wife who he had met in the Soviet Union. As a devout marxist and communist living in the Soviet Union, what could have been his motive for moving back to America – a country fervently opposing communism and marxism as a whole. Oswald was arrested a few hours after the assassination and charged with the murder of JFK. In the next two days, while awaiting trial, Oswald denied committing the crime while being interrogated by Dallas Police. He denied even owning a rifle, and that the pictures of him with the rifle in his backyard were fakes. Not only did he deny the crime, but he portrayed himself as a scapegoat; that he was in the library during the assassination but that he wasn't the one who fired the shots. None of this was ever confirmed since Oswald never went to trial. He was shot only 2 days after his arrest by Jack Ruby, a local night-club owner. Jack Ruby was a friend or at least an acquaintance (allegedly but very likely) of many organized crime figures at the time. This leads many to believe of a conspiracy where the mafia was somehow involved in the assassination. Or that they at least acted as a “clean up crew” for a larger conspiracy – their purpose being to silence Oswald before he could go to trial. Ruby claims to have killed Oswald on an impulse; claiming to be so saddened by the loss of JFK that it drove him over the edge, to a certain level of insanity. He also claims he wanted to “saving [save] Mrs. Kennedy the discomfiture of coming back to trial”. Despite pleading guilty to murdering Oswald solely based on his personal intentions, many claim that there was more behind the killing of Oswald:
The mob was Ruby’s “friend”. And Ruby could well have been paying off an IOU the day he was used to kill Lee Harvey Oswald. Remember: “I have been used for a purpose”, the way Ruby expressed it to Chief Justice Warren in their June 7, 1964 session. It would not have been hard for the mob to maneuver Ruby through the ranks of a few negotiable police [officers]
Ruby’s friends and acquaintances did generally believe he was friends with members of organized crime. The HSCA doesn't confirm wether Ruby was linked or acted on behalf of organized crime. Nonetheless, the Staff director and chief counsel for the HSCA, George Robert Blakey, famously known nowadays for drafting the RICO act, does believe Ruby committed the murder on the behalf of organized crime. According to Blakey:
The most plausible explanation for the murder of Oswald by Jack Ruby was that Ruby had stalked him on behalf of organized crime, trying to reach him on at least three occasions in the forty-eight hours before he silenced him forever.
Not only Blakey was raising questions on the connections organized crime had to do with Ruby. It’s widely believed that the underworld and Ruby definitely had connections. Ruby was a suspected gun-runner with lots of underworld connections. The HSCA was also suspicious of the situation; as to just how simple and easy it was for Ruby to commit the murder. The committee also believes Ruby was able to enter the police station’s basement with some sort of assistance. As the commission puts it:
(…) Ruby’s shooting of Oswald was not a spontaneous act, in that it involved at least some premeditation. Similarly, the committee believed it was less likely that Ruby entered the police basement without assistance, even though the assistance may have been provided with no knowledge of Ruby's intentions… The committee was troubled by the apparently unlocked doors along the stairway route and the removal of security guards from the area of the garage nearest the stairway shortly before the shooting… There is also evidence that the Dallas Police Department withheld relevant information from the Warren Commission concerning Ruby's entry to the scene of the Oswald transfer.
In conclusion, according to the evidence and investigations done on the subject, it was very likely that Ruby had acted on behalf of organized crime. This evidently leads to many questions. Why would organized crime want to silence Oswald? Some conspiracies point to organized crime having been part of a conspiracy behind the assassination. Mostly as the “clean up crew” to silence Oswald but some even claim there was much more involvement. Regardless of one’s position on the subject, it’s very hard to deny that Ruby had some pretty questionable connections and motives behind the murder.
In conclusion, the JFK assassination is a very complicated case with many different narratives behind it. While Lee Harvey Oswald might have fired at the President, it’s undeniably a very complicated case where a conspiracy seems most probable. Most investigations done on the subject do point to the high probability of a conspiracy. With more evidence still waiting to be released to the public, who knows what new evidence the future will hold. For the time being however, most Americans do believe the assassination was a conspiracy.