Today is the forty-first anniversary of John F. Kennedy’s murder. It seems like only a few months ago that I was watching back-to-back specials on PBS, A&E, the History Channel and network TV on the murder of JFK during the weekend of November 22, 2003. I don’t mean to use a cliche, but time really does…never mind.
Last night while watching a rerun of a JFK-assassination special hosted by Peter Jennings, I didn’t realize a year had passed. The show was about how the murder was purportedly committed by Lee Harvey Oswald, and only Lee Harvey Oswald. Poppycock.
You know what convinces me more than anything else that something fishy was going on? The fact that Oswald, a former U.S. Marine, defected to the Soviet Union, was lent money by the U.S. government to return with his Russian wife, for crying out loud, and wasn’t immediately arrested and/or thrown in prison. People were blacklisted in those days for suspected Communist leanings. Am I really supposed to believe Oswald was acting alone and wasn’t a spy? Come on! His records are still classified, so we’ll never know what he really did while in Russia.
Back in August I revealed my conspiracy theory leanings and fondness for the movie “JFK.” I watched that last night, too, and I still didn’t remember the anniversary.
Also see Wikipedia’s entry on Oswald.
I just realized I’m more interested in Kennedy’s death than his life. Maybe other bloggers have written retrospectives. If you know of any, let me know.
Update: Have you heard about the JFK assassination video game?
{ 49 comments }
You know what bugs me? It bugs me when people dismiss all unorthodox theories as “conspiracy theories,” as though that proves that they are wrong. Some of those theories end up true–anyone remember Dan Rather’s recent scandal? Some we might never prove either way. But just calling everything that sounds implausible a “conspiracy theory” is not the way to go.
It’s good to be skeptical. It is also good to explore all possibilities and to be open-minded.
My mom has always felt that Johnson had Kennedy killed. In my adult life I have heard and read things regarding the Kennedy assassination that made me think “Hey, Maybe Mom’s ‘theory’ has some credibility.” Unfortunately, I haven’t made either mental or physical notes and have no clue where I heard/read that stuff. One had to do with Kennedy not wanting to get any more involved in Vietnam and that Johnson had some buddies that would stand to profit greatly from it. Hmm. Maybe I should look that up again….
Although I’m not 100% positive, of course, I tend to believe Oswald acted alone. To me, his attempt to kill that Texas legislator shows he was interested in the intrigue of political assassination. But I would not be surprised if he was put up to it by the same shady military-industrial-complex that successfully sought to escalate the Vietnam war (and currently has us in Iraq). In any case, it’s another shady page of history, just like the assassination of Dr. King.
I’ve always had the theory that Oswald was one of J. Edgar Hoover’s failed attempts to start his own foreign intelligence service.
I think Oswald defected to the Soviets at the behest of the FBI, but when his spy career fizzled, (there being no secrets to steal at a TV factory) and he was brought home.
My theory also thinks that Oswald fell in with some shady characters who were ticked off about everything from Bobby Kennedy’s crusade against Hoffa, to the Bay of Pigs and the threatened loss of the Oil Depletion allowances.
I think Oswald played along with the conspirators thinking he was reporting on them for the FBI. But Hoover just let them go on with their plan to kill JFK and use Oswald as their patsy. It cleaned up two problems for Hoover, it got rid of a prez he loathed, and the living evidence of an intelligence failure. And if the conspiracy was blown, it had no tangible connection to Hoover and the FBI.
Well that’s my theory. I couldn’t get Dan Rather interested in it because Bush wasn’t to blame.
Many crime experts and marksmen have claimed there was more than one GUNMAN, let alone more than one person in on it. How Harvey Oswald managed to shoot him from his supposed position is dubious too.
Like you, I’m a huge fan of the film ‘JFK’ (saw it twice in one week at the “Uptown” here in D.C., everyone else in the house was an American University law student). I also read the Wikipedia bio yesterday (but wasn’t hip to the Jennings special- have to check “Nova” and “Frontline” tonight). PBS still has the discussion between “Frontline” commentators Edward Jay Epstein, Dom DeLillo, and Gerald Posner archived. And of course, I contributed my 2 cents at http://www.bbayne.com
Hi,
I was alive when this happened, and I will always remember where I was wehn I heard the news.
The sad part is thatt he reality of the story is too tough for so many of us:
Oswald did it alone.
He may have been influenced by Mafia or by pro-communist sympathies, buthe did it alone.
Oswald was a murderous thug, a misfit and wannabe who was really a neverwuzzer. He wanted to be someone important, and could only become one by destroying someone much greater than he was.
It was a terrible, terrible day, and it has cast a long shadow across this nation and distorted our vision of today and the future, as well.
Hi La Shawn..
Oh no..You’re one of “them.” hee hee. Uno..it’s one of those deals where if you believe it..you’ll see it. I don’t see it. I was teaching a water survival course to pilots stationed in Hawaii when I heard the news that Kennedy had been mortally wounded.
I have read many articles..saw the movie..talked to many believers and I just don’t see it. Gerald Posner wrote an excellent book titled “Case Closed” where he deals with “every” aspect of this conspiracy. But..if you believe it in your heart it’s a worthless read. What I believe is that anytime something extremely bizarre happens..something beyond comprehension..humans need to believe there’s more to it than meets the eye. How could one man change the course of history? I have many logical thinking friends that believe as you. I hope we can disagree and still remain friends..although I do draw the line with the fake moon landing conspiracy..hee hee.
Briefly..to TheMariachi..I wanted to apologize to my flippant silly post concerning your question about creationist and dinosaurs. After I hit send it seemed disrespectful. That was not my intent. I was trying to be cute. I apologize. Ray..
The moon landing? Never happened. It was faked!
Seriously, Ray, what about the Soviet stuff? Wouldn’t the FBI/CIA or whoever have been watching Oswald like a hawk when he returned from Russia? Forget that. What about an enlisted man talking like a commie? What gives? If somebody can explain that part to me, I’ll disbelieve my own eyes and ignore the headshot coming from the right front of JFK.
AFAIK the ‘magic bullet’ theory is a conspiracy theory.
First, I have to say that I wouldn’t put too much reliance on the Movie “JFK”, or anything else associated with Oliver Stone.
However, I have owned, and fired, a number of Mannlicher-Carcanos. For Oswald to have fired that rifle downhill at a target moving away, he would have had to be an extraordinary marksman.
Finally, we have to remember that JFK double-crossed the Mafia, an outfit known to hold grudges.
Don’t get wrong. I think Oliver Stone’s movie contains just enough fiction to keep you entertained. I like it because of the writing, film work and performances. I didn’t believe the Oswald-acted-alone mantra years before that.
Hi La Shawn..
Posner dealt with “all” those things you mentioned. I still love you..even if I can’t explain why the flag on the moon is sticking straight out..and the moon has no wind. Yikes!!
Speaking of unexplainable things. Ponder this..
Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.
Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.
John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.
The names Lincoln and Kennedy each contain seven
letters.
Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.
Both wives lost a child while living in the White
House.
Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.
Both Presidents were shot in the head.
Lincoln’s secretary was named Kennedy.
Kennedy’s secretary was named Lincoln.
Both were assassinated by Southerners.
Both were succeeded by Southerners named Johnson.
Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in
1808.
Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in
1908.
John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln, was born in 1839.
Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy, was born in 1939.
Both assassins were known by their three names.
Both names are composed of fifteen letters.
Lincoln was shot at the theater named ‘Kennedy.’
Kennedy was shot in a car called ‘Lincoln.’
Booth ran from the theater and was caught in a
warehouse.
Oswald ran from a warehouse and was caught in a
theater.
Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their
trials.
And here’s the kicker……….
A week before Lincoln was shot, he was in Monroe,
Maryland.
A week before Kennedy was shot, he was with Marilyn Monroe! Love Ray..
Ive seen that before. Weird stuff!
LB,
I doubt that incompetance attributted to the CIA today started in recent times.
And the FBI… between investigating rabble rousers and looking for silk naughties in Hoover’s size, the chance that they missed a nut or two is fairly high as well.
Still, between the generic enemies of America at the time, and the people that Kennedy in particular ticked off, it isn’t hard to imagine any number of theories. How many more years before the Warren findings are released?
All-I too know exactly where I was when Kennedy was shot. Even more, I know exctly where I was when Oswald was shot.
At the time, there had been a TV series with Roy Thinnes about alien invaders who killed people with a brain aneurism – The Invaders, I think. Any way, it seemed pretty strange to me that all the principals wound up dead – Jack Ruby died of a brain aneurism, as did Dorothy Kilgallen (sp?), an investigative reporter.
Of course there is a conspiracy, headed by Satan, to destroy God’s people. Maybe it was all the devil’s doing and Oswlad and Ruby were possessed.
Rainmaker-
The Flag was not cloth, but cardboard so it would stick out.
I saw that ABC special last year, and I believed what they said. Seriously–they seemed to explain it well. I’m surprised that LaShawn thinks the ABC special wasn’t the truth.
I remember that televisions were brought into the school for the first time so we could watch the funeral. I don’t remember much about the funeral other than the picture of the two children – I guess I related more to them. I think I was in second grade. Mostly I remember thinking it was soooo cool to get to watch t.v. at school…
SCSIwuzzy—>between investigating rabble rousers and looking for silk naughties in Hoover’s size, the chance that they missed a nut or two is fairly high as well.
That was tooooo funny!!
Rick..thx..I knew there was a reason but couldn’t remember what it was.
I was seven when he was shot. I don’t know if it was just the perspective of a child, but it was even a bigger deal than 9/11. Teachers at school openly sobbed; I don’t remember anyone sobbing at work when the towers were hit. It didn’t feel like maybe we were at war; it wasn’t as scary. But it was a time of profound grief. It also didn’t produce the fierce patriotism we saw after the attacks (or at least I never picked up on that.)
Mary,
I can only speak for my office, but here there was shock. Profound shock, and utter confusion. I think what happened on 9/11 was just unfathomable to us. We could not wrap our minds around it. Once more details came in, shock was replaced by anger. Once the body counts came in, and when we saw the NYFD and others risking their lives, then the tears came.
With Kennedy, assassination is easier to wrap your head around. And very quickly, we had a name and a face: Oswald. And he was in custody. He was a home grown nut, as far as we knew then. People may have wanted vengance, but it was on one man, and “we” already had him.
With the 9/11 attacks, the enemy was (and is) still at large, and waiting to do it again.
La Shawn, There’s several good theories out there, but all in all, I think there was just one shooter, Oswald. But the motives is where I believe the conspiracy have credence. Anyhoo, we can agree to disagree since much is subjective.
About the headshot, instinct says it was the front because our eyes see that exit wound, not the entry. Physics says otherwise. Until they release the autopsy photos of Kennedy’s head, we can only speculate.
However, if you can stand it, there is the dead Ivorian in this video that was killed by the French troops a couple of weeks ago in Abidjan in front of Hotel D’Ivore during an anti-France demonstration. The blown away skull perfectly illustrates being shot in the head from behind. To wit, the rear portion of the skull appears intact while the frontal half is shattered into pieces and the face looking like it was turned inside out. The difference in magnitude of damages can be attributed to the higher velocity (relative ly close range) with most likely NATO 5.56 round.
Enquiring minds … http://radioci.embaci.com/englishdownload/frenchsoldiersshootingcivilians2.mpg. I hear Freepers have stillshots, since the video is quite large, but I haven’t checked it out yet.
OT, one thing I did learn from the video is that the Ivorians like to call Chirac, “Chienrac” (Dograc). As much as sKerry talks about the US not being liked, the French are hated even more in their former colonial territories. Ivorians also hate the UN and are calling for Bush to rescue them. Go figure.
IMO, We almost had another assassination on our hands in Chile’. Why else would they try to retain that Secret Service agent?
RepJ,
I think is was just some Chilleans being idiots. If the world lefty line that we are warmongers looking for a fight is believed anywhere… well, who would test that theory by being involved in an assassination?
Granted, it says something about the world comunity that Arafat got to wear a pistol on the floor of the UN, and Bush has trouble bringing in a body guard…
I too believe there was more than one shooter, I also believe Earl Warren was appointed to do the cover up work. For too long the left has been trying to rewrite history and cover up events of intrigue under the guise of national security, assassination of the president notwithstanding. I’m old enough to remember the event vividly, it ruined the day at work and the boss let everyone go home for the day so no one would get hurt from being distracted.
The Flag was not cloth, but cardboard so it would stick out.
Actually no, it was an everyday nylon flag, but it was hanging from a horizontal support at the top of the flagpole, like a tapestry. The appearance of fluttering in still pictures is due to the flag being wrinkled.
I don’t think we’ll ever know who killed JFK. Well, let me put it this way, we’ll never know who was responsible for his death.
La Shawn,
All in all, I thought this entry was great. I feel too many people too quickly dismiss the idea of a conspiracy theory.
While I feel many of Oliver Stone’s movies go way too far in their insinuations, I thought the film “JFK” was great. Very long, but I was thoroughly entertained and engaged.
I still feel there are too many questions left unanswered. As for the video game, I feel it’s really, really bad taste. But, I don’t deny the rights of those who made it.
I suppose I just have to take the middle road in my conclusion: I feel that we simply don’t know enough to deduce whether Oswald acted alone or if, in fact, there were other perps. It certainly remains an interesting discussion.
Thanks for this. Did you see on Andrew Sullivan.com that there is, along with the JFK game, a Passion of the Christ game?
http://swiftreport.blogs.com/news/2004/11/christian_gamer.html
worried about the violence of it all, but I guess in this context it is ok.
thanks for your thoughts
But have you ever read “Case Closed”?
Yep, it just doesn’t “sound right” that Oswald acted as a lone nut.
Even David Brinkley said, “It’s hard to believe all this sadness and horror was caused by a punk with a mail order rifle.”
But it’s just possible it happened that way.
Perhaps it’s a good reminder to us that some of these people who seem somehow larger than life are vulnerable to the same ills as the rest of us.
Speculating about who killed JFK and why is an armchair parlor game at best, and that’s all it’s ever going to be. It is going to go down in history as the greeatest unsolved mystery. Everyone has a theory. The leftwingers did it. The rightwingers did it. The CIA did it. The mafia did it. Castro was behind it. LBJ was behind it. I heard a new one the other day: Aristotle Onassis was behind it so he could have Jackie all to himself. Yi yi yi yi. Even if the real killer(s) were to come forward and confess, the majority of people wouldn’t believe them because it wouldn’t fit with their pet theory of it.
Actually, JFK really isn’t dead! He has been living on a Carribbean island with Marilyn Monroe since December 1963 (she had been waiting there for him for over a year). They were joined a few years back by Robert Kennedy and Princess Diana. Now they all sit around sipping mint juleps while Elvis Presley sings for them.
His paramour, by the way, is Grace Kelly (Princess Grace to you).
Dear LaShawn,
My main memory of JFK is taking my oath of service in the Army simultaneously with the president. It was in the Los Angeles induction center and there was a TV (black and white – things were simpler then) mounted in the corner of the room.
I was in Peshawar, Pakistan during the Cuban missile crisis and in Adana, Turkey when he was assassinated. I missed his presidency because I was doing other things. I have, however, been somewhat curious about the assassination. The circumstances require a leap of faith to accept the Warren Commission’s conclusions. A person whose judgement I value above all others has done that. I am agnostic. My readings over the years have lead me to believe that if there was a conspiracy it was linked to organized crime, specifically La Casa Nostra. I offer the following:
Lee Harvey Oswald was raised by his uncle, a soldier in the New Orleans organization headed by Sam Giancanna (sp?).
Organized crime had a major beef with the Kennedys. The Kennedy fortune was made through bootlegging. Joe was Irish but he moved the merchandise. Many in the families thought that Bobby, and thus John, betrayed them by going after them in defiance of their bought guy J. Edgar.
Sirhan Bashira Sirhan, Bobby’s purported assassin, was employed by a mob controlled stable at Santa Anita.
William Bonnano, in his book “My Life in the Mob”, stated that John Roselli confessed to him that he had shot JFK from a sewer manhole.
These are but a few of the vignettes that are posited by this school of conspiricists. If there was a conspiricy these seem to me to be the most plausible.
Regards,
Roy
La, you’ve had too much coffee and stayed up too late. Don’t get weird on us!
La Shawn,
I started to comment on this yesterday, but I decided not to since we had a lengthy exchange on it not too long ago. But, I couldn’t stand it any longer so I am commenting today! You already know my opinion on the matter of Oswald and the JFK assassination.
This is one of those world changing events that seem almost fictional, even to many who were present on the scene. Because its effects were so momentous on this country at the time, it is hard for many people to comprehend how one man acting alone could have pulled it off. Consequently it is human nature to want to attribute the assassination to a conspiracy involving other individuals, organizations or countries.
RE: The American Flag on the Moon.
Scott McClare had it mostly right, all but the nylon part. I am quite certain that all material brought along to the moon is of a fire-retardant variety (think Apollo 1).
I will admit that I don’t actually know and will further concede that the falg may have been stored outside eliminating (reducing?) the fire threat.
I liked the Lincoln-Kennedy thing. Interesting (and someone needs a hobby).
The range of commentary re- the assassination reveals something very humanistic. Americans develop their views on whether there was a conspiracy or not based on their predisposition “going in”. Those not likely to believe in conspiracies in general lean largely “lone nut”. Those inclined to be skeptical of panels such as The Warren Commission sway heavily “was patsy”.
The truth may never be known.
Montie – Here’s what you wrote on 8/4/04:
La Shawn, Michael is right. I have seen the Zapruder film and can tell you that the shot came from the rear. As a member of the International Wound Ballistics Association which is made up of police, medical and forensic experts who conduct wound ballistic research, analysis and commentary, the physical reaction of the President’s head to the shot is consistent with a high velocity projectile entrance from the back of his head. In autopsy photos of the wounds, the entrance and exit are consistent with the behavior of the 6.5 Carcano round that Oswald was using.
Regardless of whether you cling to a theory of “more than one shooter” or not, the wound is such that it COULD have been fired by Oswald, thus not proving anything one way or another, other than if not fired by Oswald, it would have to have been fired by someone with close to the same angle of fire and the same caliber rifle, or one that fired a cartridge with similar ballistic properties.
I then articulated why I was still right, and you wrote:
La Shawn,
As eloquent as you are at articulating an argument, it is quite possible that you could convince me to ignore what I know of forensic science and just go with your theory. That is, given a lengthy and persuasive post by you on it.
I thought my work was done!
OK La Shawn,
Your argument has taken hold. I am now open to whatever theory you would care to advance as to who, what, where, when and how, regarding the involvement of a wider conspiracy in the assassination. I still maintain that Oswald was the lone shooter, but it IS entirely possible that the PLOT envolved others.
If the memo mentioned on Wikipedia turns out to be genuine, it might explain a few things, particularly regarding the circumstances of his return to the US. In addition, there is every possibility that while he was in the USSR that Oswald could have been “turned”, and been working on behalf of the Soviets.
I have to admit, that one of the things that has always bothered me about the whole thing was the assassination of Oswald by Jack Ruby, before he could be subjected to a really good interrogation. Very convenient, and very weird.
My late mom did,nt hear about the assasination imedeatly but a nextdoor neigbor called and told her and well i guess it was pretty devestating i was 7 at the time but i do remember our schools PA mentoining it and all the flags around our town was a half mast
Bijan, please don’t generalize unreasonably. To wit:
The range of commentary re- the assassination reveals something very humanistic. Americans develop their views on whether there was a conspiracy or not based on their predisposition “going in”. Those not likely to believe in conspiracies in general lean largely “lone nut”. Those inclined to be skeptical of panels such as The Warren Commission sway heavily “was patsy”.
Undoubtedly some Americans do this, perhaps many, maybe most, but I doubt that all except you are “predisposed” to one view or another. I suspect most Americans are “predisposed” to skepticism of government AND critics thereof.
The truth may never be known.
Only a split-second after death. Until then we can only approximate it, and feebly at that.
Where to start? The JFK movie was based on Jim Garrison’s book – Garrison was the New Orleans, Louisiana State’s Atty, and more ego than intellect(my radar lit up by the second paragraph of the author’s forward). Garrison actually charged someone – Clay Shaw – with the JFK killing; Shaw was acquited within about ten minutes of the case going to the jury. However, there was a possible link shown between Oswald and the CIA — Shaw was connected with the CIA — in that Shaw apparently did take Oswald to apply for work in a Louisiana psychiatric hospital. Garrison theorized that Shaw intended to “switch records” to reflect Oswald as a patient rather than employee of the psychiatric ward. Nonsense. It would be easier to simply place fraudulent patient records and not risk some other employee remembering Oswald as a co-worker. But, the pilot David Ferrie took Shaw on numerous flights to Montreal — Montreal was the location of a psychiatric hospital in which a Dr. Cameron conducted his experiments (the Agency’s “family jewels”), funded by CIA via grants. This began under Eisenhower (Allen Dulles), an effort to find out how the Chinese (North Korea) did their “brainwashing,” and what to do to counter it.
By 1963, the CIA was more than a little anxious about whether Cameron might be “shining them on” — results were always just out of reach. It makes sense they might have wanted to place a low-level contractor into the Montreal hospital as an employee, and the Louisiana job experience would fit that scenario. In any event, on Nov. 22, 1963, A Dr. Wolff from one of the Ivies, and a couple of other heavyweights, visited and toured Cameron’s wards, asking repeatedly “Is this typical of your success?” Before leaving, they had jerked his funding (lawsuits by/for lobotomized patients were settled in 1990-1991, with nondisclosure clauses). But even IF Oswald was used for low level contracting, he was a loose cannon — one of the benign cover-ups (CYA) following JFK’s assassination was by an FBI agent in Dallas, who ripped up an angry, threatening note Oswald had left for the agent, who had interviewed Oswald’s wife. The Soviet’s records on Oswald indicated they thought him “unstable” and “unsuitable for recruitment,” not likely to have been encouraged by U.S. to defect to them, nor useful for their side. The Soviets apparently believed JFK was killed by right-wing elements here — Richard Helms was so bent out of shape hearing that, he came to believe the high level Soviet defector who said it must have been a plant, and Helms put him through extreme psychological duress trying to find out. The Soviet never changed his story.
So, who killed JFK? He did double cross the mob – or his father did, same thing (I often wondered if big Joe’s stroke was caused by Jack’s and Bobby’s “independence”). But Sam Giancana was Chicago, not Louisiana. Marcella of Louisiana had his own ax to grind — Atty Gen Robt. Kennedy had Marcella physically abducted and dumped in South America somewhere (”Spooks” by Jim Hougan I think). And “La Casa Nostra” may have been just Valacci’s little joke. Walk into any good Italian deli and order salami and Provolone on casa nostra, and you’ll get a tasty sandwich on hard Italian bread — like asking for ham and cheese on Holsum or Butternut, it’s like a brand name, “bread from our house.” While it’s possible some particular East Coast mob crew referred to profits from their own independent enterprises as “casa nostra,” distinct from the wider mob interests such as bookmaking, etc., the term was not familiar to Chicago wise guys for anything other than lunch until the Valacci Papers case hit the news. Besides, the mob had a more direct, low profile method if they wanted to take out JFK — his weakness for women (including one he and Giancana shared), and habit of slipping away from the Secret Service to meet with same. A cocktail in his cocktail would be easier, less messy, and avoid the heat and risk of a big, public investigation. Right wing? Howard Hughes comes to mind – he despised Kennedy. All of the Kennedys. Hughes even ranted about the “grotesque” funeral arrangements for JFK. But how about the Penn-Central merger Kennedy quashed? Cost some people a ton of money — and a Board Chairman involved — was it Maurice Stans? Something like that – he was a money man for the Committee to Reelect (CREEP) Nixon.
Heh, heh. God, I LOVE conspiracy theories! Try this one: The most closely guarded secret of the Kennedy White House was the health of the President (Secrecy and Power by Richard Gid Powers); the Kennedy family controls their own intelligence service, composed of highly trained (former) spooks — with the resources and savvy to find out anything worth knowing, a category under which I’d sure include who might’ve killed a relative of mine, and why. I suppose there could be valid reasons to keep it private, such as corruption that would spoil the family name and future political prospects; but the “health of the President” raises a very different and interesting possibility. The appearance of “vigor” was extremely important to JFK; an encroaching, debilitating terminal illness would have been devastating, to say the least. But a dramatic, highly charged and public assassination could have, and might have, established a presidential dynasty of Kennedys. It was JFK who countered the Secret Service detail order to have the bubble over the limo. JFK looked around and said, on getting into the limo, “You know, if someone wanted to kill the president, it wouldn’t be all that difficult.” The limo was a crime scene after the shooting, yet a secret service agent hosed it down, washed away all of the gore and brain matter — making post mortem analysis, well, maybe he wasn’t trained in securing crime scenes? Makes you think, though, doesn’t it?
Merry – I broke your comment down into several paragraphs so it would be easier to read. Good stuff. I guess readers are surprised that I’m a bit of a conspiracy theorist. To be one, I suppose you have to overestimate the intelligence of people involved. For instance, if JFK was murdered by rogue elements in our own government, how they actually got away with it all these years is a bigger mystery than their identities.
Thank you, La Shawn! I started out intending to say one or two brief things and just got carried away, I guess. You have a great blog – I’m glad I found it.
You’re right, about any government group keeping such a secret. I think the rogue elements in our government do their assassinations with half-truths and twisted-info leaks to the NY Times, et. al.
There was a great deal of “CYA,” the so-called “benign coverups,” where civil service bureaucrats would want any potential spotlight to just go away, so it’s always possible some important evidence or information was lost that way. But I seriously doubt there was actual involvement by any in our own government.
It seems strange how someone could hit a man in a moving car from the 6th story of a building just what was the speed of kennedys Linclon continental? and did you ever notice the similarities between Lincoln and Kennedy? Lincoln was in FORDS THEATER and kennedy was riding in a LINCOLN CONTINENTAL built by the FORD MOTOR COMPANY
Why do Kennedy men cry after sex? It’s the mace in their eyes.
I remember the assassination and I thought it was probably some Cuban who had been left to die on the beach by our president. Wouldn’t that have been justice?
This man had so many character flaws that the press hid because they liked him…shades of Clinton. Camelot my butt.
The old man was a murdering rum runner and you know as well as I, the sins of the father are visited upon the sons because those are the consequences of sin.
I hate to say it, but JFK was at best a mediocre president who has beeen enshrined by the liberal press as an American god.
We paid for his failure to free Cuba along with his Vietnam legacy that Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon managed to screw up beyond belief.
Conspiracy? I doubt it although I’m sure you wouldn’t have to dig to deep in Mass. to find some nut who thinks Mary Jo was planted in Teddy’s car.
HELLO THERE ==== YOU HAVE A GOD THING GOING.
TALK AT YOU LATER
RICHARD
GOOD
Comments on this entry are closed.