With Our Own Eyes: Revealing Conspiracy Fact Through History
One of the first things you’re taught when studying criminal justice is that eyewitness testimony is wholly unreliable.
It’s not true.
Eyewitness testimony is essential, and defense attorneys and government agents know it. Those with a vested interest in duping large groups of people have maintained this lie – that we can’t trust our own eyes – with such vehemence that many have come to accept the myth as dogma. Lawyers use it to dissuade otherwise rational juries, journalists fall back on it when trying to reconcile uncomfortable facts (even ones caught on film), and governments craft narratives and crush dissension with it after painting themselves in a corner.
Can you trust your own eyes? We’ve spent the last three years with hostile government officials and media gatekeepers lambasting anyone daring to blow the whistle on all variety of crimes. Election investigators, medical researchers, federal agents, disaster response workers, mathematicians, auditors, EMTs, border officers, war correspondents, soldiers, electronic surveillance specialists, economists, doctors, nurses, embalmers, coaches, social workers, and a hundred other professionals are all being told to ignore what their eyes are telling them.
But despite what the talking heads say, the word is getting out: the evidences are on display across alternative platforms. Hidden video footage, independent reporting, and volunteer research is daily convincing more and more Americans to align themselves with the whistle blowers — that the smoke is real because a fire is raging behind the false fronts of Deep State media outlets.
Ignoring the evidence and those gathering it hasn’t worked out the way it used to. Every crime they commit, every lie they try to sell us is instantly refuted on alternative media. So recently they’ve unleashed the big guns; researchers, lawyers, election clerks, and even Presidents are being indicted or sued for millions. The guilty perpetrators are desperate to convince you that you didn’t see what you think you saw on election night, or during the latest “natural” disaster, or in countless false flag events captured on multiple videos.
Nothing to see here. Remember, eyewitness testimony is unreliable.
University of Alaska, Anchorage
September 1996
We filed into the classroom, found our usual seats, and waited for the professor to begin the day’s lecture. He said nothing and merely pressed the play button on the VCR and stepped to the side of the room as we watched the monitor, curious what we were about to see.
A brief movie scene played out on the screen. A van streaked through a crowd while a man leaned out the van’s window bludgeoning people as it passed them. It lasted all of four seconds.
The professor turned off the television and quizzed the students about the details of what they’d just witnessed. What color was the van? Describe the driver, the passenger. Which hand was he using? Describe the weapon etc…
The point of the exercise was to highlight what many justice or law students would erroneously come to accept as a universal truth: eyewitness testimony is unreliable.
Truth be told, it’s hard to recall the exact details of a sudden, shocking event. University professors or instructors in justice and psychology have repeated this experiment, sometimes using leading questions in the aftermath to explain how police and investigators can influence memory and taint witness statements. They conclude that people just can’t trust their own eyes and memory. Period.
They suggest to students that in their future careers as investigators they should either toss out eyewitness evidence or be extremely wary of it, focusing instead on hard, incontrovertible facts. The best evidence according to the experts is not the testimony of average people, but rather the nuanced details filtered through lawyers, labs, reports, and experts.
Going back to the professor’s experiment — the one thing he failed to note in the class discussion afterward was that every single one of us clearly and accurately recalled a vehicle tearing through a crowd, a man leaning out of the vehicle, and hitting people with a weapon.
Several of us even got the specifics right. The details may have varied slightly but the big picture was firmly engrained. We saw it and we could trust our own eyes, just like you can. Eyewitnesses are essential. They give the big picture that ought to direct the more detailed investigation, not the other way around. So where did the lie that we can’t trust our own eyes and ears come from? Where did this policy of marginalizing, fact-checking, or even mocking public testimony originate?
Dallas, Texas
1963
Sixty years after the fact, most people have concluded that President John F. Kennedy was assassinated not by lone gunman Lee Harvey Oswald, but by a larger group of conspirators; the scientific and circumstantial evidence is overwhelming. No fewer than 63 eyewitnesses testified to seeing smoke and hearing gunfire from the grassy knoll forward of the presidential limousine, not simply from the upper window of the Texas Book Depository behind him. Just like with our class experiment, everyone there got the big picture right.
Likewise, every doctor and nurse in Dallas who worked on the fallen president concluded immediately that he was clearly killed by a gunshot wound from the front. Yet mere minutes after the event, the wheels of the government and media spin machine was already working to discredit eyewitness testimony and intimidate witnesses, and alter the statements to paint a false narrative.
When the Warren Commission released its official report just months later the vast majority of the eyewitness evidence was discarded. Millions of people knew the report was a joke and said as much. More joined their ranks in the years that followed, as more evidence was examined and brought to light. But the lie provided cover for those who wanted a simple answer to a complex event. It’s much easier to reconcile a worldview of honorable leadership with a lone perpetrator who snapped. It’s a much harder sell to accept a widespread network of corrupt officials at all levels of government.
You can’t trust your own eyes, they say. Trust us instead. Sadly, many people still do.
We want to believe that justice is still valued as a virtue, and attainable in modern times. You might even argue that our psyches need to believe justice is still a thing. We need a fallback fantasy world to cope with the injustice we see everywhere, and the lazy option is to choose not to connect the dots about what we witness. We don’t want believe that billions of people voluntarily sterilized themselves, or injected toxins into their children. So instead we accept it when every sudden death, every fellow church member with a blood clot, and every young man collapsing on the field is merely natural, despite all of the evidence otherwise.
They want us to defer to the authorities who are keeping watch for us. They want us to shut up and stay in our pens, to trust the experts who’ve got it all under control. Doing so allows us to write-off what we don’t want to believe, what we can’t imagine to be true —like intentionally derailed trains, deliberately set fires, or stimulated acts of war.
September 11th, 2001
I used to get annoyed when people claimed 9/11 was an inside job. Seriously, I got mad.
That kind of talk was borderline un-American to me. I couldn’t fathom anyone in our government allowing acts of murder against our own citizens, or that someone on our side would want a global war costing billions of dollars in military spending. The simple answer was the best one: a handful of Islamic terrorists brought down the Twin Towers and blew a hole in the Pentagon with a few box knives and some jet fuel.
I’d never examined the evidence from the 9/11 truthers, never watched the Twin Towers’ collapsing in slow motion with an eye toward the details. I had no idea that there were multiple eyewitnesses, even firefighters, who testified to seeing evidence of controlled demolition. And I certainly didn’t know that there are a thousand structural engineers who say categorically that – just like with the JFK evidence – the scientific, circumstantial, logical, and eyewitness evidence doesn’t square with the official reports.
We want the official explanation to be true lest we succumb to the hopelessness of recognizing we live under the rule of some terrible people and that they’ve been doing this kind of thing for generations. Such knowledge might begin fomenting talk of revolution, because that’s what you get when the levers of society are controlled by unaccountable tyrants. That’s a road most people don’t want to travel down, or are afraid to.
“It is easy to believe that the palace guard of a banana republic could be penetrated, that policemen could be bought. But it is difficult to accept the idea that such things can occur in our own country.”
David Litton, Best Evidence: Disguise And Deception In The Assassination Of John F. Kennedy
Conspiracy, Captured On Film
It should come as no surprise that the term “conspiracy theory” was coined by The New York Times in five stories they ran in 1964, defending the Warren Commission. It wasn’t until 1978 – when the general public was allowed to view the Zapruder film of JFK getting shot from the front – that the Warren Commission critics were vindicated and proved right all along. Yet nobody was ever held accountable for the crimes or the cover-up.
Will the election crimes of the modern era be any different? The crimes against humanity by the pharmaceutical industry? The due-process violations against the political prisoners of Jan 6th, or the public at large over all things Covid since 2020?
History is repeating itself, with thousands of hours of video footage of January 6th being suppressed so that absurd charges can lead to unjust verdicts by way of burying exculpatory evidence. Studies confirming Covid as a bio-weapon are memory-holed out of existence, their authors castigated. And as mentioned earlier, election researchers who challenge the machines are in the cross-hairs of corrupt prosecutors and automaton judges.
Executive authorities and investigative agencies of all stripes – from the three letter U.S. agencies on down to county sheriffs — are willfully negligent in prosecuting anyone associated with election theft. We’re neck deep in a national disgrace, with conspirators whitewashing terabytes of election interference evidence, just like the Warren Commission tried to do. Try as they might, people simply can’t forget what they see with their own eyes. And we’ve seen overt crimes perpetrated by a class of individuals who think they’re above the law.
The uniparty politicians in Washington D.C. know that if average citizens were allowed to view the January 6th footage, we would reject their BS story. Our eyewitness tells the tale that the spin doctors can’t deny. That footage — like the Zapruder film, or like Damar Hamelin collapsing on Monday Night Football, the untouched Building Seven collapsing on 9/11, and real-time vote flipping across the network television on election nights — testifies to conspiracy fact.
Eyewitnesses being unreliable is just one lie that the conspirators fall back on. Another is the lie that large criminal enterprises can’t keep secrets. Critics quick to disregard conspiracy theories on the grounds that someone would have talked by now need to go back and study drug cartels and the mafia. Or even easier, walk down to the bad part of town and ask a drug dealer who his source is. Dangerous men with a lot of power and money – like D.C. insiders, for example – are quite adept at bribing or executing whistle blowers and investigators out of the way.
The Eyes of the Nation
In 1963 the public saw with its own eyes the murder of a U.S. President. The official reports made a mockery of their witness and ordinary citizens went to work exposing the coverup, the conspiracy. Witnesses were killed, journalists and investigators were threatened, careers were destroyed, and the lie was maintained. They got away with it.
Sixty years later not much has changed, except that instead of a few assassinations and cover-ups this modern crop of conspirators are shoving multiple affronts in our face. From damning evidence of a fake pandemic to voting machines with universally pre-programmed outcomes, the dark forces in this country are gleefully telling us not to believe what we’re witnessing with our own eyes. They want us to ignore the data, discard the videos, forget about the math and probabilities, write off the sudden deaths, and forget what we’re seeing.
Once upon a time they succeeded in murdering a popular president who stood against them. Today they’re on a warpath against another popular president who’s doing the same. Back then the people knew it was a lie, but had no ability to expose them; today we do.
In the mid-60s the citizen investigators were merely a nuisance to the conspirators. With a monopoly on information dissemination, government officials could brush the annoying little nerds away. Nowadays we’re able to expose them in real time, and we need to get adamant about calling out the crimes they’ve committed.
Photo Credit: Polaroid photograph of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, taken an estimated one-sixth of a second after the fatal head shot. (Friday, November 22, 1963, Elm Street, Dealey Plaza, Dallas, Texas) Mary Ann Moorman (Mary Krahmer). Public domain
You can follow me on Telegram, Substack, Truth Social, GETTR, and Gab. You can also reach me on Twitter (X), but I don’t post there very often because I still don’t trust them yet. You can subscribe to receive new posts to your inbox as well as get information on my latest novel, book four in my modern war series.
If you enjoy my work, please consider supporting us with a paid subscription. Keep fighting.
If you liked this post, you might enjoy these as well:
History On Repeat: Why The Church Must Confront The State
Standing Your Ground: Lawfare’s Attempt To Disarm America
Trolling the Fedboys: An American History Primer
Looking for a fun new story to share as a family? Check out The Dread Pirate Roberts, my fan fiction sequel to The Princess Bride now available for free in its entirety.
Need a break this weekend from the political battle? Do you love movies? Do you love having pointless arguments with friends and strangers about movies? If so, you’ll love Movie Fight Club, a weekly opportunity to have pointless arguments with strangers about movies.
How it works:
Every Saturday a new movie question is posted. It’s free to watch the fight ringside, but subscribers get to participate and compete with other fighters answering the question. Whoever gets the most likes on their answer gets the honor of choosing the next week’s question.
Subscribe for free to follow the comments and vote on answers. Paid subscribers get to participate. 7-day free trial.
Great article, Vince! I appreciate the research, time and effort you put into it and can think of a few people I would like to send it to. Thank you!