John F. Kennedy Assassination Conspiracy

[Sentry]

On the thread about Don Ecker's recent Paracast appearance, the conversation somehow turned to the Kennedy assassination. Lance Moody offered to continue the conversation in a new thread, so here it is.

I was a conspiracy buff, and in my teens read every book in the library on the JFK killing. I later visited the Schoolbook Depository building and even bought a souvenir tape of the Zapruder film there.

I had other interests too, some a few steps removed- mostly other sensational mysteries such as UFOs, the Loch Ness Monster, Jack the Ripper and so on. What I began to see was an pattern of effort across these stories to make 2 & 2 add up to 22. Leaps of imagination were necessary to make many of the connections between conspirators or evidence. In so very many of the theories, the only way they could happen is if there was a massive, well-orchastrated conspiracy that was able to maintain secrecy for all time. What I'm trying to say is, that without the conspiracy, the theory could not possibly be true.

One of the themes that seemed to run between these conspiracy theories was a distrust for authority, particularly the United States government. Given the political climate after the Kennedy assassination and moving from Viet Nam to Watergate, it was an easy sell. But the distrust obviously runs deeper and was born far earlier than that, and Donald Keyhoe was able to capitalize on it and made it a fundamental tenet of his "Flying Saucers are Real" book.

My interest in the assignation at this point is more about the social dynamics that led to the propagation of the myths, but I hope anyone wishing to discuss the case will contribute their opinions.

 

[nameless]

Can some one tell me why E Howard Hunt is the Kevin Bacon of the conspiracy world??

 

[TheMoon]

What about the bullet, was the rifle in the book depository using full metal jackets and fragments recovered from the skull hollow point?

Why does head fly back and to the left defying physics which would have sent his head forward, like wise the blood spatter on the police motor cycle suggests a forward shot?

Please note I'm not stating these as facts just information I have read I wasn't there to validate any of it

 

[Sentry]

Can some one tell me why E Howard Hunt is the Kevin Bacon of the conspiracy world??

I'll try, but this is from memory. Hunt was around a long time and involved in some unpleasant business. He had ties that were just too tantalizing for conspiracy theorists to pass up on, even if the links didn't quite connect. Hunt was involved in Watergate, Nixon was a Kennedy enemy- not much more was needed.

Also, there was a Texas oilman, with a similar name. In one of the few genuine examples of conspiracy disinformation, the Soviets (according to The Sword and the Shield by Christopher Andrew) created a phony Oswald letter written to Hunt asking to clarify his position.

 

[Sentry]

Why does head fly back and to the left defying physics which would have sent his head forward, like wise the blood spatter on the police motor cycle suggests a forward shot?

Bullets don't move people. They move through people. There may be rare exceptions where they strike helmets or body armor and push them, but when passing thorough flesh and bone, it pretty much slices through.

There has been analysis about the body in reaction to the shot, and suggestions are that it was a spasm or a result of the blood and flesh jetting out of the open skull.

Sorry, I don't have any details on the bullet characteristics, but my dim memory seems to regard that as a manufactured mystery.

 

[Polterwurst]

Sorry, I don't have any details on the bullet characteristics, but my dim memory seems to regard that as a manufactured mystery.

Well, if it's manufactured then my eyes and brain are doing the manufacturing. I wouldn't expect a bullet to go right through the thick bone of the skull, without the skull being violently moved. There is a slight movement towards the front right before the "explosion", but that doesn't seem very forceful, it might be from the forward collapsing after the first shot.

Actually I wish I'd never seen the film. Besides not being able to get these horrible pictures out of my head, it would be much easier to accept the lone nut explanation. It just plain looks like he's hit by Oswald's shot, starts collapsing towards the front seat and then gets hit by a bullet from the front.

In this high contrast image at the moment of impact, we can see the tissue, bone, and blood matter is flying forward. Conspiracy mongers rarely mention this or the fact that the occupants in front of Kennedy were showered with this stuff.

Thanks for the image. I'd never seen that. Mostly it looks like the explosion goes just about in every direction, though.

And what about the CIA saying they had no files on Oswald? Does anyone believe that?

 

[Vance]

Instead of asking who killed Kennedy ask why Kennedy was killed. Who benefited and what changed.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

LBJ!

 

[SRL+]

And what was LBJ? What kind of person would have a chair modified in order to rise, allowing them to show their dominance over others?

 

[Sentry]

The assassination was a brutal event and it is also one charged with emotion. Unfortunately it has also been used as a political tool, one to divide people by fueling suspicion.

Gene's LBJ comment may have been part wisecrack, but my parents believed it. I can't understand how anyone could remain in a country if they really believed the leadership was capable of such an act against its own people. But as far as Johnson goes, he was a haunted man, not from guilt of the assignation, but perhaps of the responsibility thrust on him and the incredible tangle he made of Viet Nam. If Johnson felt guilt about Kennedy's death it might have been his efforts to cover up the conspiracy he felt was behind it, a conspiracy by the Soviets. One that if exposed to the American public would surely lead to a war that could end in a nuclear exchange.

As far as Lance's "nut" characterization, I've always hated the term, but it fits. In looking at Oswald's behavior before and after the events, It's consistent with his actions. He had a desperate record of disorganized attempts to connect with something that could further his political beliefs and increase his standing. His prior assignation attempt of General Walker is a clear ini cation of that, along with his posed photo, "hunter of fascists."

There was a cover-up in the assassination investigation. Mostly it was the incompetence of the CIA and FBI in investigating and their failure to share information, something they still haven't gotten right. Coupled with LBJ's instructions to pussyfoot around the Soviet connections, the Warren Commission report did have gaps, mostly those of instances of the US dropping the ball.

Edited to add. The unanswered questions continue to fuel the fire for various conspiracy theories. I think everyone interested in the case, regardless of their opinions, will be frustrated by that.

 

[Vance]

After the assassination; the CIA was not shattered into a thousand pieces, J. Edgar Hoover was not forced to retire due to the mandatory age law, RFK's mafia special task force closed up shop, the printing of money was was returned to the powerful Federal Reserve, LBJ succeeded a man he despised to the Presidency and avoided the Bobby Baker scandal, the Cubans feeling betrayed by the Bay of Pigs Invasion felt revenged, the oil depletion allowance was saved for the oil companies, segregationist felt a blow against integration had been struck. Shortly after it became open season on Oswald, RFK and Doctor King. The US entered a long term winless war with a third world nation borrowing from the Federal Reserve and spending it on the Military Industrial Complex. A lot changed.

 

[ViperPilot]

Instead of asking who killed Kennedy ask why Kennedy was killed. Who benefited and what changed.

For a very good book that addresses this very topic read James W Douglass' book, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died, and Why It Matters. One of the best books I've read on the subject.

 

[Randall]

For a very good book that addresses this very topic read James W Douglass' book, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died, and Why It Matters. One of the best books I've read on the subject.

Then again, what if the fatal shot really was an accident?

 

[Polterwurst]

Sometimes a nut is just a nut. And we have ample evidence that this is exactly what Oswald was.
Lance

No doubt he was. But that doesn't mean he might not have been used, too.

Then again, what if the fatal shot really was an accident?

Well, that would be some cosmically bad joke. The greatest conspiracy of all caused by an accident.

 

[Randall]

Posted Moved From the Don Ecker Thread:

Have either of you seen that documentary where it is theorized that accidental shots came from a security detail car behind Kennedy's due to it suddenly speeding up and knocking the agent with the gun off balance? It sounds ridiculous at first but I thought the case was well presented. If you don't know what I'm talking about here's the short version:

 

[Sentry]

I can't take it seriously. An accidental shot from one moving vehicle into another that hits the target of an in-progress assassination attempt- that's too much. In the full length program did he work out where the bullet (traveling on a flat plane) went after hitting the president? I'm sorry, but this just has too many moving parts. It also requires the immediate crowd to fail to notice, and dodges the fact that the others riding in the shooters car would have been temporally deafened.

 

[Randall]

I can't take it seriously. An accidental shot from one moving vehicle into another that hits the target of an in-progress assassination attempt- that's too much. In the full length program did he work out where the bullet (traveling on a flat plane) went after hitting the president? I'm sorry, but this just has too many moving parts. It also requires the immediate crowd to fail to notice, and dodges the fact that the others riding in the shooters car would have been temporally deafened.

The full program makes quite a convincing case.

 

[Randall]

More importantly, the bullet fragment from the head wound and the recovered bullet was shot from the Oswald rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons.

There are lots of other reasons but I thought I would just highlight one showstopper.

@polter...

I am just talking about stuff that has evidence one way or the other. Because someone could have done something is a long ways from someone actually doing that thing and requires evidence to prove.

Lance

In the full show, the investigator does review the evidence and makes a compelling case. I'm not sure how the detail you mention was handled, but I suggest that you check it out if you can, because it's not simply an off-the-cuff theory without any rationale or supporting evidence. I'll also see if I can find where the bullet fragment you mention comes into play, but I saw the show on TV, not online, so I'll have to dig around a bit.

Of course, the conspiracy theorists might also say, "So what if the bullet fragment matches the gun Oswald allegedly owned. If Oswald was a patsy then the gun was planted, the real shooter left the building, and if it was some kind of inside job, then the records can't be trusted either.

 

[ViperPilot]

The full program makes quite a convincing case.

I'd like to see the full version. Is it available on the internet?

 

[Randall]

I'd like to see the full version. Is it available on the internet?

Not yet, but you might find this interview interesting: http://on.aol.com/video/an-in-depth-look-at-jfk--the-smoking-gun-518033750