The murder of President Kennedy was a seminal event for me and for millions of Americans. It changed the course of history. It was a crushing blow to our country and to millions of people around the world. It put an abrupt end to a period of a misunderstood idealism, akin to the spirit of 1989 when the Soviet bloc to began to thaw and 2008, when our new American President was fairly elected.
Today, more than 45 years later, profound doubts persist about how President Kennedy was killed and why. My film JFK was a metaphor for all those doubts, suspicions and unanswered questions. Now an extraordinary new book offers the best account I have read of this tragedy and its significance. That book is James Douglass's JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters. It is a book that deserves the attention of all Americans; it is one of those rare books that, by helping us understand our history, has the power to change it.
The subtitle sums up Douglass's purpose: Why He Died and Why it Matters. In his beautifully written and exhaustively researched treatment, Douglass lays out the "motive" for Kennedy's assassination. Simply, he traces a process of steady conversion by Kennedy from his origins as a traditional Cold Warrior to his determination to pull the world back from the edge of destruction.
Many of these steps are well known, such as Kennedy's disillusionment with the CIA after the disastrous Bay of Pigs Invasion, and his refusal to follow the reckless recommendations of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in resolving the Cuban Missile Crisis. (This in itself was truly JFK's shining moment in the sun. It is likely that any other president from LBJ on would have followed the path to a general nuclear war.) Then there was the Test Ban Treaty and JFK's remarkable American University Speech where he spoke with empathy and compassion about the Soviet people, recognizing our common humanity, the fact that we all "inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's futures. And we are all mortal."
But many of his steps remain unfamiliar: Kennedy's back-channel dialogue with Khrushchev and their shared pursuit of common ground; his secret opening to dialogue with Fidel Castro (ongoing the very week of his assassination); and his determination to pull out of Vietnam after his probable re-election in 1964.
All of these steps caused him to be regarded as a virtual traitor by elements of the military-intelligence community. These were the forces that planned and carried out his assassination. Kennedy himself said, in 1962, after he read Seven Days in May, which is about a military coup in the United States, that if he had another Bay of Pigs, the same thing could happen to him. Well, he did have another "Bay of Pigs"; he had several. And I think Kennedy prophesied his own death with those words.
Why does it matter? The death of JFK remains a critical turning point in our history. Those who caused his death were targeting not just a man but a vision -- a vision of peace. There is no calculating the consequences of his death for this country and for the world. Those consequences endure. To a large extent, the fate of our country and the future of the planet continue to be controlled by the shadowy forces of what Douglass calls "the Unspeakable." Only by unmasking these forces and confronting the truth about our history can we restore the promise of democracy and lay claim to Kennedy's vision of peace.
But don't take my word for it. Read this extraordinary book and reach your own conclusions.
John F. Kennedy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I promised to get back to you with my thoughts on Bugiosi's work on the assassination after reading James Douglas's book which was the reason for this blog post by Oliver Stone, I have read back over the comments and you appear to be the single most obsessed person with the CT and the assassination posting here by far. Yet there is no evidence at all that you had or have ever read Mr. Douglas's finely researched work. I take great stock from the fact that nowhere in Mr. Douglas's book is Mr. Bugliosi mentioned. No footnote, no note, no work of the man you revere so is cited by this fine historian.
I am now certain in my belief and constant conviction that a conspiracy of the CIA existed to assassinate President Kennedy and that he indeed had a "Rendezvous with Death" and he did not shirk it. The fervent obsessive refutations you make hundreds of times in this thread are as nothing in comparison to the solid and pragmatic logic of Mr. Douglas's documentation. Mr. Bugliosi's book is like reading the Inquirer for comparison, that's ludicrous as are most of your slavish adherences to the cover-up WC report. You are plainly and clearly not a person of credibility no matter how many times you've insulted other people's efforts to gain some information about this conspiracy. You need to seek therapeutic assistance to aid you in your obsession.
IMO LHO did not kill JFK at all.
I have noted Douglass' failures in his book - Douglass repeats the same lies and fabrications as do most JFK CTists. And I didn't need Bugliosi to debunk Douglass. The WCR worked just fine.
The only reason I have so many posts on this thread is because I'm outnumbered a couple of hundred to one.
I don't see why you would expect Douglass to cite Mr Bugliosi in his book. Douglass' book was released a mere 11 months after Bugliosi's. And why would Douglass cite Bugliosi's book when it eviscerates his recycled CT?
If you would care to look at the citations I provide in my rebuttals in this thread, you will see that almost every one of them comes from the good old reliable WCR, not Bugliosi. These rebuttals are child's play as most CTists simply parrot the admitted fictions that Mr Stone tossed into his screenplay.
BTW - as no JFK CTist has ever had occasion to physically examine the evidence in the case, even single one of them is totally reliant on the WCR for their information about the evidence in the case. Do you not find it odd that so many of them are selective in their quoting of said evidence, often ignoring the conclusions drawn by the scientific experts in the case?
If a CTist averred that JFK wasn't actually killed on that day, and that it was some double, would you let such a statement stand unchallenged? I think not.
So, when a person says, "the WC never found evidence that LHO fired a rifle after leaving the USMC," isn't it incumbent that someone step forward a provide the WC evidence that puts the lie to such a whopper?
When some says LHO was a crappy shot, shouldn't somebody provide the testimony given to the WC by representatives of the USMC who said he was an above-average or good-to-excellent shot?
Why act like evidence in the WC doesn't exist? The adult thing to do would be to challenge the evidence with new evidence. If you have proof, say, that LHO was NOT a good shot, then provide actual evidence that counters the testimony. If you have evidence that Robert and Marina Oswald were both lying when they recounted LHO's use of a rifle after he exited the USMC, then present it. Don't assert your belief as fact IN SPITE OF the evidence.
The fact is that while law enforcement did a piss-poor job of protecting JFK that day, they did a helluva job capturing his killer, gathering evidence and solving the murder. That's a fact, despite what the CTists imagine.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/JFK/postphotos.html
Quoted from the web page:
The Warren Commission "identified" the individual as Billy Lovelady, a fellow Book Depository employee. But while Lovelady identifed the person in the Altgens' photo as himself, he also stated that he'd worn a red and white vertically striped shirt on the day of the assassination The man in the doorway's shirt in not striped and is open in front, exposing the tee shirt underneath.
In color films taken from another angle, the color of the shirt worn by the man in the doorway was revealed to be orange-brown. When Oswald was arrested, he was wearing the identical shirt- an orange-brown tweed with missing buttons and tee-shirt underneath.
Other films taken on November 22, 1963 revealed that Lovelady was in fact wearing a red and blue plaid shirt.
Hence, the figure in the doorway is NOT Lovelady.
(Billy Lovelady died of a heart attack Jan 1979)
One can also find better versions of this particular shot just about anywhere else, and in those higher quality shots, the pattern on Lovelady's shirt becomes quite clear and bears absolutely no resemblance to the solid-color shirt LHO wore that day, while his facial details look less like LHO.
Finally, to believe that it was LHO in the doorway flies in the face of the expert testimony of none other than - Oswald himself, who told police that he was in the first-floor lunchroom at the time of the shooting. Here, we have a case of the JFK CTists trying to provide an alibi for LHO that contradicts LHO's own alibi! Amazing.
For instance, Douglass says that LHO was spirited away from the scene in a car, yet we know that he took a bus and a taxi to get back to his room. Douglass also makes the whopper of saying the famous Altgens photo shows LHO in the doorway of the TSBD moments after the second shot was fired, yet TBSD employee Billy Lovelady identified himself as the "Oswald" in the photo and even produced the shirt he was wearing in said photo.
He ignores the testimony of the three workers on the 5th floor of the TSBD almost directly under the south eastern window who not only heard THREE distinct shots above them, but who heard 3 shell casings hit the floor above them. He also ignores that 95% of ear witnesses heard three shots.
Douglass also present the story of JA Mercer and the truck full of assassins parked on Elm near the grassy knoll with a package of guns. Douglass doesn't bother to tell us this has been debunked countless times - the truck was owned by a local maintenance company and that they were undertaking work on behalf of the civic authorities. For Douglas, it's "proof" that shooters positioned themselves at the knoll.
Like Stone, Douglass proceeds from a position that there WAS a CT, and then tries to bend the facts to fit his theory.
Typical.
He was called "The Rambler Man," because he said that he saw LHO whisked away from the crime scene in a white Nash Rambler. He speculated that the car was owned by Ruth Paine, and that she was involved in providing a getaway for LHO. When Paine testified to the WC that she owned a GREEN Chevy station wagon, Craig began saying that he saw a green Rambler leaving the TSBD. Why he didn't bother saying it was a Chevy as well is puzzling.
Craig accused the WC of changing his testimony, averring that he said that the Rambler was green, and that they changed it to white. But a check of CE 1993 shows that Craig said the car was WHITE in his deposition of 11/25/63. The WC didn't change a thing. They simply cited his original testimony to the FBI in Dallas.
The autopsy determined Craig was a suicide. He left a note. His body was found by his father, who was mowing the lawn at the house at the time of the suicide. Craig was drinking at the time of the suicide and was on valium. The shot was to his chest, with the muzzle of the gun against his skin.
OR, you can believe an assassin sneaked in the house, shot him in the chest with Craig's own gun, fabricated a suicide note and got away without Craig's father noticing.
* Saw .45 slug in Dealey Plaza — with a piece of Kennedy's head. Absolutely zero supporting evidence. Claim contradicts his own WC testimony (!), and the testimony of everyone else in the area.
* Saw three hulls in Sniper's Nest, lined up an inch apart, all pointing in the same direction. Flatly contradicted by officers who discovered Sniper's Nest. The hulls were photographed in place, and Deputy Luke Mooney marked photograph showing their locations.
* Rambler escape story. A bus pass dated 11/22/63 was found in LHO's possession when he was arrested, proving he took a bus away from the scene. Does it make sense that he'd flee in a car and then transfer to a bus?
* Saw inscription "7.65 Mauser" on recovered rifle. Contradicted by testimony of ALL officers present . Newsfilm at scene shot by Tom Alyea shows rifle to be Mannlicher-Carcano, not a Mauser. And, the MC and the bullets recovered that matched to the MC were 6.5 mm , not 7.5mm.
Thanks for keeping the JFK discussion alive. After researching
this for many years, I think there is even more here than you think.
And with the new media, the phony history of the old media is beginning
to be discredited across generational lines...Look how many posts your article engendered here. Also, you might appreciate Mo Murphy on U-Tube...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmIorghNTWA
Jimpager
LBJ: How did it happen THEY hit Connally?
JEH: Connally turned to the president when the first shot was fired and I think in that turning it was where he got hit.
LBJ: If he hadn't turned he probably wouldn't have got hit?
JEH: I think that is very likely.
LJB: Would the president have got hit with the second one?
JEH: No, the president wasn't hit with the second one.
LBJ: I say, IF CONNALLY HADN'T BEEN IN HIS WAY?
JEH: Oh yes, yes, THE PRESIDENT WOULD NO DOUBT HAVE BEEN HIT.
LBJ: Are you familiar with this proposed group that they're trying to put together on this study of your report?
JEH: No, I haven't heard of that. I've seen the reports on the Senate investigating committee that they're talking about.
LBJ: I want to get by with JUST YOUR FILE AND YOUR REPORT.
JEH: It would be VERY, VERY BAD TO HAVE A RASH OF INVESTIGATIONS.
LBJ: Well, the only way we can stop 'em is to probably appoint a high level one to evaluate your report and to put somebody that's PRETTY GOOD on it, from... that I COULD SELECT and tell the House and Senate not to go ahead with their investigations.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-L5xYwb2ls&NR=1
LBJ: You're more than the head of the Federal Bureau, as far as I'm concerned, you're my brother and personal friend. You have been for 25 to 30 years. SO I DON'T WANT -- I KNOW YOU DON'T WANT ANYTHING HAPPENING TO YOUR FAMILY.
JEH: Absolutely not!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVfIh-8nXyQ&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYaoBB1rwkc&feature=channel_page
Hard to stomach but the truth must be told.
Jack Ruby said it was a conspiracy
Madeline Brown (LBJ mistress) said it was a conspiracy
Billy Sol Estes (LBJ associate) said it was a conspiracy
David Morales (CIA) said it was a conspiracy
Marita Lorenz (CIA) said it was a conspiracy
Barr McClellan (LBJ attorney) said it was a conspiracy
Judy Baker (Oswald friend) said it was a conspiracy
The HSCA said it was a conspiracy...
If a special prosecutor could be appointed over Monica Lewinski, how is it possible that the JFK conspiracy does not merit one?
http://www.josieg6.wordpress.com
I am waiting around, trying to avoid being downhill from a grassy knoll....
Actually the CIA are involved in everything but not in the way you imply...I think they are the dedicated lightening rod in case things go south. The more interesting question to me is what are the operational capabilities of the other intelligence agencies that you never hear about?
NSA
Naval-ONI and Task Force 157
Air Force OSI
Marine Corp Intel
DIA
State Department
Treasury/Secret Service
IRS
FBI/DOJ etc.
ON HIS DEATH BED THAT HE WAS PART OF A CONSPIRACY TO KILL
JFK..!! Now...What are we going to do about it..?
I say re-open the investigation and bring the guilty out into the light of day....
"Let Justice Be Done,
Though The Heavens Fall.."
I'm convinced that nobody has more of a vested interest in seeing the JFK CTs continue than the Republican Party, who must giggle in glee every time a left-winger asserts that the way the left wing handles political problems is to kill their own elected leaders.
By the way, LBJ was a pro-war conservative who represented profiteering interests diametrically opposed to the Kennedys. JFK held his nose when he put Johnson on the ticket, but he needed every possible vote to defeat Nixon. The lone gunman propagandists are still spreading disinformation like cream cheese on a bagel.
You are correct. Johnson may not have been directly involved,
but he WAS AWARE of what was going to happen and he did NOTHING
to stop it. There is a photo of Allen Dulles visiting with Vice-President
Johnson at his ranch. What was the purpose of this meeting? Why wouldn't
Dulles meet with Kennedy if he had issues to discuss? Johnson also
handpicked the Warren Commission, with the help of Allen Dulles
of course. Johnson had also been given some dirt on Chief Justice
Warren Burger by J. Edgar Hoover regarding an "incident" that occurred
in Mexico. Perhaps consisting of a visit to a Bordello that Warren had foolishly
made. This was used as leverage to get Warren to rubber stamp whatever
ridiculous conclusions that "The Commission" came up with...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaWUcyjAeIk
There was one shooter, a sick individdual looking for some attention to an otherwise pathetic existance... look at him on camera, he's loving the attention.
There are no black helicopters either...
The people who really love the JFK conspiracaries are the ones making money from the books, movies, etc.
It's not healthy to obsess over something proven time and time again to be LHO acted alone...
You fail to mention one, important point: if Oswald was the lone shooter, as you assert . . . then why is the documentation about the assassination sealed away from the public until 2038 -- when everyone who could be held accountable for it, is dead -- ??????
If there's nothing to hide . . . why is anything hidden?
The storyline you happen to believe was concocted by J. Edgar Hoover (read his biography if you doubt it) -- and he was never a big fan of the Kennedys to begin with (go figure).
Arlen Spector dreamed up the "magic bullet theory" to fit Hoover's "facts" . . .
And Gerald Ford was Hoover's plant on the assassination committee -- just to make sure that Oswald was the one fingered for it, in the end.
We had a coup d'etat in Nov. 1963 . . . it was covered up very successfully -- and you bought it, too.
1. 100% of the WC documents were released by 1998 (except for a few tax records). 100%! What, exactly, is still "sealed away until 2038?" I'd like to know.
2. Spector did NOT come up with the single bullet fact on his own. The facts surrounding the forensic evidence in the assassination support the single bullet conclusively.
3. The evidence that Oswald did the killing is overwhelming and incontrovertible. Read the WCR. Read Bugliosi's book on the subject. The evidence against Oswald is staggering.
4. To believe the JFK killing was a coup d'etat, you must believe that Democrats from LBJ on down conspired to have a Democratic president murdered. You must believe that even Jackie was involved in the plot (it was she who requested mid-flight from Dallas that the autopsy be performed at Bethesda after it had already been scheduled at Walter Reed. Did Jackie have the autopsy moved so the "cover-up" autopsy team could get to work at Bethesda? Using JFK CT "logic," the answer has to be, "yes.')
Believing the JFK CTs is an anti-Democratic Partyist's wet dream.
There is no mystery and it's dangerous to keep this crap going. That is, it inspires would be sick-o's to shoot up schools, etc. so they too can be famous like LHO.
Let's drop this once and for all...
Conspiracy is what happens when facts to meet-up with beliefs/ideology/feelings.
Why don't you?
You don't appear to have any idea of what you are talking about. How many minutes have you studied this case to make your enlightened decision that there was one shooter?