Kennedy Anniversary Thread

[Reed]

Random JFK TV/movies thoughts since it's been all over TV this week for obvious reasons.

 

-I miss being 15, watching Oliver Stone's JFK for the first time and thinking it practically a documentary.

 

-Despite it being riddled with (intentional?) errors, it's still probably one of the best edited films ever made. Five minutes of this film had more excitement and intrigue in it than all of Killing Kennedy.  As historical fiction, few films are better.

 

-has anyone ever considered that the History Channel shot JFK, so they'd be able to fill up their schedules with assassination-related programming for the next 50 years?

 

-The Lost Bullet is one of the better documentaries on the subject I've seen. They actually try and find out new things, and it's not just people arguing over the same old theories. 

[Tabe]

JFK is a lot more accurate than it's given credit for. Some people or scenes are created but the underlying facts are legit. They released the script as a book and had footnotes and references for just about everything. It's a GREAT movie and one that we owe a legit debt of gratitude to, for all the records it got released.

[Reed]

JFK is a lot more accurate than it's given credit for. Some people or scenes are created but the underlying facts are legit. They released the script as a book and had footnotes and references for just about everything. It's a GREAT movie and one that we owe a legit debt of gratitude to, for all the records it got released.

 

You should read Vincent Bugliosi's book. He does a good job at debunking the movie.

 

Granted there are still questions (like the doctors at Parkland claiming the head injury on the body they saw being far different from the one in the official autopsy photos,for instance), but I find it hard to argue against the "Oswald did it alone" theory these days.

[Brian Fowler]

I don't think I have ever seen any credible evidence, ever, that doesn't point to Oswald.

 

And now that I have lived through a similar(ly awful) conspiracy theory growing up around an (even bigger) tragedy, I am even more skeptical of conspiracy theory bullshit.

 

(Of course, I do firmly believe that the FBI played a role in MLK's assassination, so I am not immune to conspiracy theory bullshit.)

[odessasteps]

I am intrigued by the theory it was Oswald, but the third bullet was accidentally fired from one of the secret service agents behind the motorcycles.

Especially since the secret service destroyed their files about it.

Also, Don Delilo's Libra is an amazing book, regardless about how one feels about the theories.

[Tabe]

I am intrigued by the theory it was Oswald, but the third bullet was accidentally fired from one of the secret service agents behind the motorcycles.

Especially since the secret service destroyed their files about it.

Also, Don Delilo's Libra is an amazing book, regardless about how one feels about the theories.

That theory is one of the least credible - right up there with "the driver did it".

[Tabe]

I don't think I have ever seen any credible evidence, ever, that doesn't point to Oswald.

I'm the exact reverse - I haven't seen anything that supports a single shooter theory.

[Reed]

I saw a documentary with Clint Hill and he gets pretty annoyed by those theories in particular. After the thing was done, I ended up feeling quite badly for him and the other guys. Jackie Kennedy and others blamed them for doing such a bad job of protecting the president, but per Hill, Kennedy was the one who insisted they stand down and stayed way behind him. He felt he had more relatable and let people get a good look at him.

[Reed]

 

I don't think I have ever seen any credible evidence, ever, that doesn't point to Oswald.

I'm the exact reverse - I haven't seen anything that supports a single shooter theory.

 

 

Oswald:

 

-previously tried to assassinate General Walker

-owned the murder weapon

-was seen by the guy who drove him there bringing a long, thin package which he claimed were curtain rods with him. (These supposed curtain rods were never found, of course)

-was seen at the window holding a gun by witnesses

-fled the scene directly after

-was seen killing Tippit by several people

-when he's arrested and detained, tells one blatant lie after another.

 

Come on, if this was any other murder case, it would be open and shut.  

-

[jaedmc]

Where's the bullet point on how Oswald was the greatest sharpshooter of all time?

[Fat Spanish Waiter]

Anyone was better than The Rock

[Antacular]

I hate conspiracy theorists, and I feel a constant obligation to shoot down every nutjob idea from the federal reserve to 9/11, but JFK is the one where the official account just never sat right with me. Not saying I have the answer, just that I don't think anyone else does either.

[Tabe]

First, note that I said "single shooter" not "Oswald didn't do it".

 

Oswald:

 

-previously tried to assassinate General Walker

 

-owned the murder weapon

-was seen by the guy who drove him there bringing a long, thin package which he claimed were curtain rods with him. (These supposed curtain rods were never found, of course)

-was seen at the window holding a gun by witnesses

-fled the scene directly after

-was seen killing Tippit by several people

-when he's arrested and detained, tells one blatant lie after another.

 

Come on, if this was any other murder case, it would be open and shut.  

-

 

So let's address these one by one:

 

1) First, there's no evidence Oswald tried to kill General Walker.  The only thing we have on that is a statement from Marina while she was under duress from fear of deportation.  Even if he DID shoot at General Walker, it means absolutely nothing with regard to JFK.

 

2) The murder weapon?  You mean the one cops who found it identified as a German Mauser of an entirely different caliber?

 

3) The package Oswald brought to work was carried with one end in his palm and the other in his armpit - too small for a rifle.  If you're going to use the Frazier's statement that Oswald brought something to work, you gotta use the whole thing.

 

4) There's not one witness that can or did identify Oswald as a shooter in the window.

 

5) Oswald was found sitting in the lunchroom - by a cop.  Did he leave after THAT?  Yep.  Of course, there's a witness who was on the stairs during the assassination who says nobody passed by her.  Oswald himself claimed he was out front - and there's a picture that looks a lot like him of a guy in front.  Of course,the FBI says that was Billy Lovelady, only Billy was wearing a shirt that doesn't match the picture.

 

6) The witnesses to Tippit's murder described a guy who looks like Oswald.  They also described guys who look nothing like him.  They also described it as being done by two guys.  And the bullets that matched Oswald's gun?  They don't have the initials on them put there by the cop who found the bullets at the scene - so no chain of custody whatsoever.  And, again, even if Oswald did it, doesn't mean he shot JFK.

 

7) "one blatant lie after another" from Oswald.  We know this how?  From the extensive notes and recordings of Oswald's interrogation?  Oh wait, those were DESTROYED. 

 

 

Again, I am open to the idea that Oswald fired at JFK.  I just don't believe for one second that it was one shooter. 

[Burgundy LaRue]

I think it's safe to say Oswald was involved and did hit Kennedy with his bullet.  The question is did he act alone and did he really put one of the 20th century's greatest tragedies in motion by himself?  Personally, I don't think so.

[J.T.]

Where's the bullet point on how Oswald was the greatest sharpshooter of all time?

 

Reminds me of my favorite scene from Full Metal Jacket where the drill sergeant credits Oswald's marksmanship to his tenure with the USMC.

 

 

If the Zapruder film is accurate, then there is no way that Oswald could've been a lone gunman.  No bullet fired in the history of ballistics has ever struck someone from behind and above the target ever caused the victim to pitch backwards. 

 

Kennedy's head snaps back which would indicate that the fatal headshot hit him from the front.  That's Physics 101.

 

Given Oswald's Marxist leanings, it was always my assumption that Kennedy was assassinated by the Cubans in retaliation for Kennedy's obssession with ridding the world of Fidel Castro, but I am probably in the minority.

 

Warren had no intention of finding out what really happened IMO.  To do that would've shed a little too much light on Kennedy's off color private life and the CIA's clandestine assassination program.  Warren loved the Kennedy family and did his best to protect the family legacy from damage.

[Reed]

I think it's safe to say Oswald was involved and did hit Kennedy with his bullet.  The question is did he act alone and did he really put one of the 20th century's greatest tragedies in motion by himself?  Personally, I don't think so.

 

You can't rule out someone, somewhere influenced him.

 

But the idea that some major group was directly involved is absurd. OK, you're a shady top-level CIA executive who decides to off the president for whatever reason, so who do you recruit for this highly secretive, highly risky job? An emotionally-unstable, attention-seeking nutcase who can't keep a job for any length of time.

 

Oh, and instead of picking him up in a car after the deed is done and taking to Mexico (or killing him), you just let him wander around and get himself taken in for interrogation for three days?

 

The CIA/Cubans/Russians, etc would be smarter than that.

[Antacular]

But if it was the Cubans, why would the U.S. Government cover it up? Isn't that the biggest part of the conspiracy: The elite elites knew who was behind it, so they construed the phoney Warren Report to make sure the truth never got out?

[J.T.]

But if it was the Cubans, why would the U.S. Government cover it up?

 

Because we were the ones trying to kill Castro first.  Better the lie of a lone gunman than the truth of a man whose ravens had come home to roost.

[Antacular]

Then wouldn't that be the perfect reason to carry out a successful Cuban invasion? The nukes were already off the island, the assassination of a President is the perfect justification to invade.

[Reed]

 

Kennedy's head snaps back which would indicate that the fatal headshot hit him from the front.  That's Physics 101.

 

If you look at it frame by frame, his head does tilt forward slightly as soon as the bullet hits his head.

 

The bouncing back right after doesn't mean anything. It's physiological reaction, bodies can bounce forwards, backwards, left, right, etc if shot in the head. 

[J.T.]

Then wouldn't that be the perfect reason to carry out a successful Cuban invasion? The nukes were already off the island, the assassination of a President is the perfect justification to invade.

 

Who would invade?  The US Military?  And invite a Russian nuclear response?

 

IMO, Kennedy's legacy is so fondly remembered to this very because no one back then opened the can of worms that was the where's and why's about his assassination.  Some things are best left alone.

[jaedmc]

It's not like governments in every culture in every era of civilization has lied to its people for some reason or another. Just accept what they tell you. They love you.

[Antacular]

I guess this is where we differ. IMHO the CMC made it pretty clear that Krushchev wasn't willing to risk a nuclear exchange sans an actual invasion of the USSR. A US response on Cuban soil wouldn't have provoked a Soviet nuclear response. So the Cubans did it, and the US covered it up to save face? Then why wouldn't the Cubans just openly proclaim that they were behind the assassination, if they knew MAD would prevent a US invasion?

[J.T.]

I guess this is where we differ. IMHO the CMC made it pretty clear that Krushchev wasn't willing to risk a nuclear exchange sans an actual invasion of the USSR. A US response on Cuban soil wouldn't have provoked a Soviet nuclear response. So the Cubans did it, and the US covered it up to save face? Then why wouldn't the Cubans just openly proclaim that they were behind the assassination, if they knew MAD would prevent a US invasion?

 

As far as the CMC goes, my belief always was that Krushschev just didn't want to be the first one to push the button.  Kennedy was able to spin the CMC to the world as an issue of Soviet aggression rather than a matter of Cuban self-defense and the Russians blinked.

 

If the Cubans were reponsible for Kennedy's death, openly taking credit for it wouldn't have gained them anything other than notoriety.  Castro kept quiet and stayed in power until just recently when his health began to fail; one of the longest reigns of any Communist leader.

 

Of course, my opinions are my own and the result of mostly gut feelings about the information I've absorbed over time and there are certainly gaps in my logic.  Most notably, the somewhat well known fact that Oswald was under surveilance by the FBI during his trip to Mexico prior to the assassination attempt.   If the FBI and CIA had an idea of what Oswald was up to, why not try to stop him?  Certainly Hoover's enmity with Kennedy wasn't so bad that he wouldn't have done something.  Why allow the attempt to happen?  Why not hang saving the President from an assassination attempt over Kennedy's head like the Sword of Damoclese?

[Antacular]

Well that's the basic tenant of MAD: Whoever pushes the launch button first is essentially committing suicide at the same time. No one wants to push it first, regardless of professed ideology.

Idk, I always felt that it was more than likely a domestic group such as the mafia or some shit, not a foreign government or a rogue CIA/paramilitary operation.

Maybe we should ask Belzer.