PSC482G, Spring 2000
Answers to Assignment 10
Pre-WCR Reactions by the Left: M. S. Arnoni
(N.B. This assignment is for your guidance only. It need not be turned in.)
Read: “Who Killed Whom and Why?”, by M. S. Arnoni and the introduction to this article on the summary page for Pre-WCR Reactions by the Left. Be prepared to discuss these questions in class Friday.
Answer these questions (briefly):
1. What does Arnoni believe about the American people’s viewpoint on conspiracies at home and abroad? We accept and expect conspiracies abroad but not at home. How would this affect our ability to understand the assassination? Would bias us toward the lone-gunman explanation.
2. How does Arnoni propose to approach the question of lone gunman versus conspiracy? Consider the implications of the assassination. Give some examples of questions he considers to resolve this question. How could the local police “solve” the case so quickly? Why did they want to falsely link Oswald to leftist groups and causes? How could Ruby manage to shoot Oswald so easily? How could Oswald be hired so soon before the assassination at the warehouse that later was right along the route? How does his approach compare with the approach of this class? Very different. We begin with physical facts and leave motive, etc. to the last.
3. What does Arnoni believe about conspiracy versus nonconspiracy in the assassination? It was obviously a conspiracy. If conspiracy, what specifically does he believe about the conspiracy and their motives? High-ranking military officers who were determined to prolong the Cold War and not negotiate with the Soviet Union. How did he actually decide this question? Not sure. Seems to be an educated guess.
4. Arnoni has strong opinions on how fast an official investigation could answer the major questions of the assassination versus how long the Warren Commission was projected to function and what this said about the Commission’s investigation. What were those opinions? The government could easily get the answers in a matter of days to weeks if it wanted to. The longer term proposed for the WC means that a whitewash is in the making. Are they justified? Not to my mind. They are just speculation. He offers no support for them.
5. How does Arnoni think that President Johnson’s foreign policy may differ from Kennedy’s? Johnson will be more hard-line. Why? Because that’s what both he and the Conspiracy want.
6. Why does Arnoni think that Cuba is in “mortal danger”? Because Kennedy was planning to give Cuba to the American voters as an election gift, and Johnson will have to do the same in order to show that he has enough stature to be President.
7. What does he think will happen with respect to Cuba in the near future? Some pretense, like the earlier “Maine,” will be concocted, after which Cuba will be invaded, conquered, and presented to the American people.
8. Take the facts and the questions that Arnoni uses to reach his conclusions and use them with our procedure for reasoning. What kind of answers about the assassination would we get? Be careful!
Here is a quick version of the answer, which lists Arnoni’s evidence as presented in this article, and some of his many questions (it turns out that one need not list all his questions).
Questions
1. Who made it possible for Ruby to kill Oswald?
2. Did somebody help Oswald to establish a biography that linked him to the
shooting an d gave him a motive for it?
3. Did somebody help him get to Mexico?
4. How was he hired by the TSBD?
5. Was the trajectory of the bullets consistent with Oswald’s location?
6. As there enough time after the final route was announced to plan the
assassination? If not, who tipped off Oswald early?
7. Who knew about the final route early?
8. Why was Oswald allowed to leave the building after it was cordoned off?
9. Was Oswald a fall guy from before the assassination, along with perhaps other
fall guys?
Evidence
1. The truth of the assassination is in inverse proportion to the way that
Americans view it.
2. The machinery behind the assassination functioned perfectly smoothly.
3. The Dallas authorities solved the case “too” quickly.
4. The Dallas police were eager to link Oswald falsely to leftist causes and
organizations.
5. Jesse Curry seemed too eager to close the case.
6. Oswald was not associated with the Fair Play For Cuba Committee.
Of these six pieces of “evidence,” not one is strong and at least three are factually wrong (numbers 2, 3, and 6.) The others are either just assertions or are irrelevant.
Thus, Arnoni has no reliable evidence, and so he cannot support any view of the assassination, let alone the particular one that he chooses or appears to choose.