Town flag at half staff to honor the Paris terrorism victims
It is now the middle of three tragically defining moments in American history where none of us who were over the age of 6 will ever forget, right down to the tiniest mundane details.
The stunning sneak attack on Pearl Harbor forever branded December 7th as a "date which will live in infamy."
Just as 9/11 will forever be remembered as the most shocking, sad and frightening event in over a generation.
Fifty two years ago on a most typical Friday in late November, as the Kennedy motorcade ambled through Dealey Plaza, shots were fired. Two of them found their mark.
The world, or maybe just our little part of it, stopped.
Overpowering sadness descended from sea to shining sea. As a naive 8-year-old I wondered when that gloom would lift.
Today, 52 years later, I still wonder.
When you realize that JFK was not only to the political right of GW Bush but actually was & did all of the things "W" was accused of being or having done.
ReplyDeleteFirst, while Bush actually won Florida, Kennedy did not win Illinois. Nixon actually won the 1960 election, but Joe Kennedy (Senior) actually stole it via vote fraud in Chicago. (This made Nixon somewhat paranoid and led to Watergate 12 years later.)
Second, PT 109 was lost in a collision with a Japanese destroyer -- that's poor seamanship, a Captain isn't supposed to let his ship hit things.
There is no way that the destroyer could change course or speed as quickly, nor were her engines anywhere near as responsive as those of the PT boat -- they had three Packard gasoline engines, each driving its own prop. Shift one into reverse and bring back up to full throttle and his boat would have been turning at an angle that the destroyer could never match as hard as she tried. Combat or not, Kennedy exercised poor seamanship, a Captain is supposed to keep his vessel from colliding with things....
Hero in subsequently saving his crew, yes, but he still should have been court martialed...
in the 1960 debate, Kennedy argued for more US Nukes. Kennedy started US involvement in Vietnam. Kennedy -- I believe because then VP Nixon had told Dulles not to tell candidate Kennedy about it -- sabotaged the Bay of Pigs invasion (and history will likely tell us that it was Castro who was involved in Kennedy's murder).
It is an understatement to say that Jack Kennedy wasn't faithful to Jackie...
And then there is the issue of him being on drugs, and the related medical condition and if he'd even have lived through a second term -- or if he would have defeated Barry Goldwater (which he likely wouldn't have...).
GWB actually worked in the oil industry (during good economic times) while JFK said he never knew about the Depression until hearing about it at Harvard -- it was JFK who had grown up with the "silver spoon" in his mouth.
Just saying....
I'm just hoping Larry, that your article here doesn't bring out all the conspiracy nuts. There are roughly 84 different conspiracies involving some 235 people. And not a shred of evidence to show that any of them hold water. Imagine all those people firing at Kennedy and the only bullets that wherever phone came from Oswald's Mannlicher
ReplyDeleteAnon 4:29
ReplyDeleteYeah, those nuts!
"Back and to the left. Back and to the left. Back and to the left."
Kennedy wore a back brace which prented forward movement. The wound in front was an exit wound.
DeleteYou must get your history from Oliver stone. LOL. Stop action enhancements of the zip router film show that Kennedy's head did snap forward at the moment of impact.
DeleteThat was Zapruder, if corse. These infernal iphone microphones!
DeleteEd, you are mentalily I'll. JFK enlisted in WW2 and served with honor in combat. On a moonless night PT109 was on a mission to hunt enemy ships when it was struck and split in two. To denigrate the heroics associated with that tragedy is sick. Anyone who has ever been in combat would be offend by the statements of an armchair know-it-all.
ReplyDeleteWould this include his older brother who died in combat?
ReplyDeleteRemember that on a dark night, the water "fires" -- you would have seen the bow wake.
Would a, could a, should a, right Ed. Second guessers are a dime a dozen. Frankly, you don't know a damn thing about it.
ReplyDeleteFacts matter.
ReplyDeleteThis is an Official US Navy webpage: http://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/bios/kennedy-john-f.html
(NB: Note the .mil in the URL -- a legacy of DARPNET, the US Military owns that domain.)
1: JFK did NOT "enlist in WW2" -- Officers do not enlist, Officers are Commissioned, they are "appointed" and while it likely is largely pro-forma when it gets to them, I believe that the US Congress has to actually vote to approve each and every commission. Unlike an enlisted man (or draftee) who is bound to serve for a specific number of years, (in general) an officer can resign his commission at any time -- that is what Lord Jeffery Amherst did.
Facts matter, and I suspect that anyone who served in uniform knows the distinction between enlisted and officer...
2: JFK was commissioned as an officer in the Naval RESERVE -- (USNR versus USN) and got in via family connections, the advocacy of someone his dad knew -- in spite of the fact that he did not meet the prerequisite qualifications for this commission. (He did not meet the physical fitness requirements due to a pre-existing back injury, something which he would then re-injured clearing a fouled propeller while still stateside -- right or wrong, military doctrine was (and is) that someone such as he was not qualified for military service.)
In the words of the US Navy, in the aforementioned URL:
Despite having a bad back, Kennedy was able to join the U.S. Navy through the help of Captain Alan Kirk, the Director, Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) who had been the Naval Attache in London when Joseph Kennedy was the Ambassador. In October 1941, Kennedy was appointed an Ensign in the U.S. Naval Reserve and joined the staff of the Office of Naval Intelligence.
3A: The Reserve is, essentially, the Federal version of the National Guard. Both can be called to active duty -- but the expectation was that they wouldn't be.
3B: People had living memory of WW-I -- not just the carnage but the misery of trench warfare. Going back to the US Civil War, it was the Army which suffered the casualties, the Navy hadn't -- battleships were called "dreadnaughts" because (before airplanes) there was nothing they need dread.
4: The draft had started on September 16, 1940 -- people were being drafted (into the Army) in early 1941.
Hence my comparison of JFK's commission in the USNR and GWB's commission in the Texas ANG. Both served -- and the ANG's flying up to challenge Soviet penetration of our airspace always had the potential of combat.
But both got into their units because of who their fathers knew...
Frankly, you don't know a damn thing about it.
ReplyDeleteFact: Kennedy did not get the Silver Star for his genuine heroic actions AFTER the collision -- it was downgraded to a Navy and Marine Corps Medal, a non-combat award -- and even then likely wouldn't have been awarded had Secretary of the Navy Knox not died, and been replaced by James Forrestal, a friend of his father.
That seems like some folks in the command -- who DID know about all of this -- weren't so impressed with Kennedy.
Fact: "Crash" Kennedy had gotten that nickname from a prior incident where he had literally crashed into the dock. In peacetime, something like that would end a career -- perhaps not in wartime, perhaps he wasn't worse than most of what was referred to as "Hooligan's Navy, but still....
Fact: Byron “Whizzer” White, a friend whom JFK would later appoint to SCOTUS, wrote the report on the loss of PT 109. (They had met before the war, when White was a Rhodes Scholar and Kennedy was traveling in Europe.)
Fact: Dark night or not, PT-169 saw the phosphorescent wake of the destroyer and while its obsolete torpedoes were not fast enough to hit it, not only fired at it but was able to avoid a collision with the same destroyer that then hit PT-109. Reportedly both she and another PT boat radioed warnings that the destroyers were coming --- Kennedy's radioman was with him in the cockpit, two of his men were asleep and another two "lying down" -- in a situation where they ought to have been on maximum alertness.
Fact: This is what two commanders on the scene allegedly said:
"In the PT fleet, some blamed “Crash” Kennedy for the collision. His crew should have been on high alert, they said. Warfield, the commander at Lumbari that night, later claimed that Kennedy “wasn’t a particularly good boat commander.” Lieutenant Commander Jack Gibson, Warfield’s successor, was even tougher. “He lost the 109 through very poor organization of his crew,” Gibson later said. “Everything he did up until he was in the water was the wrong thing.”"
Now the same issue of Military History Quarterly discusses a subsequent and quite heroic action by JFK 3 months later, then in command of PT-59. Responding to a frantic distress call from badly outnumbered Marines, he went out (with his gas tanks less than half full) to rescue (under fire) more than 50 Marines from a sinking LST.
Badly overloaded, reportedly with Marines clinging to her gun mounts, PT-59 struggled to get out of there with her gas tanks running dry before she got back to base, having to be towed by another boat. But that doesn't negate the loss of PT-109....
He was a U.S. president that was assassinated. That didn't have anything to do with PT 109, PT 59, or PT Barnum. You are just running off at the mouth.
ReplyDeleteJ. M'vemba -- Jackie K climbed back onto the trunk to retrieve a piece of her husband's head.
ReplyDeleteAnon 842/1220 Yoo shood get that mycrophone phicksed.
Yes. The exit wound in front was quite explosive and the car was travelling forward. Awful scene.
DeleteLol. I think i must mumble.
DeleteEveryone meet Dr Ed.
ReplyDeleteHe is the world renowned expert on any subject from soup to nuts. Please be nice to Ed he means no harm, most of us feel he is here mainly for entertainment purposes. He can also be a valuable lesson for children on the results of Puritan inbreeding and drunken laziness. For you see even with all his knowledge and degrees he seems most suitable for unemployment and corrupting facts. One side note; don't use any of his electrical help or you might become homeless or worse.
That is all, resume the conversation.
Ed.
ReplyDeleteI have some plumbing work, can you help me out.
Ed. Just learn to shut the hoe under your nose once in a while. One comment had it right on the money. You have serious mental health issues. Just go get some help.
ReplyDeleteSaid the anonymous coward.
ReplyDeleteI cited facts in defense of my statements, and I don't see these facts being disputed. Kennedy himself was worried about not being re-elected in '64 -- it's really why he was in Dallas that fateful day, he was trying to quiet down a firefight in the TX Dem Party and hence save the state's then-10 Electoral Votes for himself.
Kennedy wasn't really that popular prior to his death -- he was seen as soft on Communism, soft on Civil Rights while concurrently a Yankee Carpetbagger selling out his own Democratic Party, which was the party of Segregation -- remember that Lincoln was a Republican and that Reconstruction had been led by the Radical (Northern) Republicans. Above and beyond this, many saw him as a young rich kid whose (rather infamous) father had purchased him the Presidency -- remember that he followed Eisenhower, those were some pretty big shoes to fill...
Above and beyond this, however, the actual facts regarding the loss of PT-109 do not reflect favorably on him. Yes, I was not there -- but I don't see any contradiction of the facts I cited, which include the perceptions of those who were there. Yes, that whole night was a massive clusterf*** and there are some serious questions that command should have had to answer, both regarding that operation and what they were then tasking the PT boats with attempting to do. (A similar level of stupidity is what cost the life of his brother Joe -- in what arguably was an unnecessary and foolhardy mission.)
I don't see anyone challenging my facts -- only people attacking me personally, libeling me, which would bother me if I had any respect for either them or what they thought.
Conspiracy theorists have not once in 52 years produced a shred of evidence to support their claims. ( And again, there are about 84 different "theories" involving some 235 people.). The evidence againt Oswald is enormous. Some 53 pieces of evidence which prove, not beyond a reasonable doubt, but beyond All doubt that Oswald acted and acted alone. But still there are those who cannot accept let the SuperList explanation is usually the correct one.
ReplyDeleteI admit, my proofreading could be better. "Super list??" No. Simplest.
ReplyDeleteEisenhower was a great war general who was perceived as asleep at the wheel during his presidency.
ReplyDeleteBut Eisenhower was Not asleep at the wheel, was he? Now, Obama-- he's asleep at the wheel.
DeleteActually, the vehicle had slowed nearly to a stop...but that's just physics nonsense. Nothing suspicious there. These aren't the droids we're looking for. And Eisenhower, What was he babbling about? Some warning about the onset of a military industrial complex? ZzzZzzzZzzz
ReplyDeleteThe fatal shot was, as been mentioned previously was explosive. The gore splattered the inside of the windshield. Bullet fragments were also found in the frontseat area. Both of the president's wounds were rear entry and front exit ones. Odd that all the conspirators not only missed the president, but also missed the limo, and no fragments or casings other than those from Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano were or have ever been found. Once again, the siplest explanation is best . And all evidence supports the guilt beyond all doubt of Lee H. Oswald.
DeleteAnd your proof that the military-industrial complex took part? Or the mafia? Or Lyndon Johnson? Oh, I forgot the Secret Service. The Russians! The Cubans.!
ReplyDeleteAsk yourself one question Oswald told lie after provable lie while in police custody., whatever happened to the curtain rods?
Andrew Jackson, Lincoln and JFK all were targets of assassins. Jackson survived by luck. Lincoln and JFK not so much. All three presidents either opposed the central bank, attempted to create their own currency or both. It's said that after the attempt on his life, Jackson was very angry…….And paranoid.
ReplyDeleteYou're not a proponent of the theory that the"central banking" cabal killed Kennedy are you? So easy to say these things. And yet no proof exists. Or can exist. If you have such proof, please present it here.
DeleteDid you know that Oswald's handwriting is on the form with which he ordred the Mannlicher he attempted to assassinate General Walker with and ballistics prove killed the president. The same handwriting (Oswald's to the exclusion of all others) was used to order the pistol with which he killed Officer Tippett. There were many witnesses to that murder. It was the same pistol he used to try to kill one of the arresting officers in the Texas Theater during the scuffle when he was resisting arrest. (He famously said " I am not resisting arrest!" This is another proven lie he told; numerous movie patrons and officers testified to the fight prior to which he also was heard to say "Well, it's all over now."
I'll await the evidence you will present regarding the banking conspiracy...
That Kennedy opposed the Federal Reserve is a complete fiction that was long ago debunked, so your post makes no sense.
ReplyDeleteYou mean 12:53's post, i presume.
ReplyDeleteJoe and company were nothing more
ReplyDeletethan inspired, backstabbing criminals.
I'm with Ed.
Further, they very nearly got us vaporized.
Assholes.
-Squeaky Squeaks
p.s. Forgive me Larry.
Jackie M, I'm afraid im not as big a fan of the warren commission as you are. Funny how as detailed as it is regarding Oswald, it never establishes motive. The House Select Committee on Assassinations was formed by the House of Representatives and concluded in 1979 that the assassination probably involved a conspiracy. Members of the Kennedy family believed there was a conspiracy as did brother, Attorney General Robert Kennedy who was also assassinated (hmmmmmm.....) additionally, studies show that 2/3 of americans believe in some conspiracy regarding JFK's untimely end.
ReplyDeleteAnon 2:11 "EITHER" --- Used before the first of TWO alternatives that are being specified.
Don't make me smack you with my greenback.
The proponents of conspiracy (and Yes, even the family) could not come to grips with the fact that a president could be disposed of so easily by a lone nut. The only motive Lee Oswald had was his quest to BE somebody. His motive, believe it or not was not political, and because of his death, he was never brought to trial.
DeleteThe House Committee in the 70's was a bit of a joke wasn't it? You no doubt saw the limo depicted there with The rear seats not only lined up vertically, but also horizontally. For starters, both things were wrong. Connaly's seat was lower and 6" to the left of where Kennedy was seated. Mo one who testified before HSCA was cross-examined.
The Warren Commission, though it had its flaws, got it right. Most of those who have criticized the WC have never read it. It consisted of 27 volumes. The summary which hit the bookstores was only one volume of this exhaustive report.
Conspiracy theorists (and the families, and the HSCA) can believe anything they like. But I challenge anyone to produce the oroof. Against LHO, there is a mountain of it.
The number of people that believe something can't be used as proof of its truthfulness.
ReplyDeleteYou are correct. This is what escapes the proponents of the 84 theories.
DeleteTell that to the pope.
ReplyDeleteJackie, the one that actually makes sense is the accidental discharge of the Secret Service guy's weapon -- he was hung over, not familiar with the weapon, and allegedly fired it in the process of chambering a round. In the excitement of shots being fired.
ReplyDeleteIf that were true, then why were the only bullets and fragments ever found, including fragments from Kennedy's wound, proven to have been fired from Oswald's weapon TO THE EXCLUSION OF ALL OTHERS? People simply cannot cope with the truth that an angry, sad Marxist rejected by even his wife, needed to prove to the world that he was important by siezing this opportunity to kill a sitting President.
Delete"The proponents of conspiracy (and yes, even the family) could not come to grips with the fact that a president could be disposed of so easily"
ReplyDeleteI think anyone who has ever read Shakespeare, or watched Godfather part two would disagree with you, And no, I don't believe the House Committee was a joke. Especially since the findings and conclusions reached, to date, have never been disproven. The details you provide on Oswald paint a more elaborate picture of a patsy than an assassin.
"I'm just a patsy" is one of the quotes from Oswald in police custody. He told lie after provable lie in custody. Many conspiracy theorists choose to believe this one. Not sure why anything this pathological liar said would be believed. For example he was asked if he owned the rifle. He lied and said "no." The pistol? "No." Provable lies as his handwriting was on both the order form and the PO Box rental. He was photographed by Marina with the weapons. Many think, wrongly that the photos had been doctored by nefarious persons unknown, but the originals were discovered at Ruth Paine's house in Marina's possesion.
DeleteIf there is proof of any conspiracy, no one has, or indeed Can produce it. Because it does not exist. The case against Oswald is airtight. There are some 53 pieces of evidence which demonstrate clearly his guilt.
Well, say what you like, there are a. Great many people who cannot believe that Oswald acted alone. But he was such a loser that it is impossible to believe that any group like the CIA, FBI, The Cubans the mafia ad nauseum would have ever hired a delusional penniless nobody.
DeleteWho says the Secret Service guy's round actually hit JFK?
ReplyDeleteThey wouldn't have initially known it hadn't....
According to the conspiracy community, much of the world was out to get President Kennedy, and the people and groups out to kill him we're apparently literally fighting among themselves over who got to fire the first shot. And, of course, ever since the murder, virtually the whole world, even those who were not involved in the murder, has eagerly participated in the cover-up for those who did conspire to murder Kennedy. It's to laugh, of course.
DeleteA joke told in the comparatively small anti-– conspiracy community about the conspiracy buffs belief that just about everyone was involved in the cover-up of the assassination has them lined up in front of God at the end of time asking him, "tell us, God, who really killed president Kennedy?" When God replies, "listen, I am just going to tell you one time and one time only and then I want you to forget about this matter – Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy and he acted alone," the buffs, in terrible angst, nudge each other nervously and say, "this is a lot bigger than we thought."
ReplyDeleteIf the Secret Service realizes that they have a weapon which was discharged in the general direction of the POTUS, who is dead from GSW, do you honestly think they won't be afraid that it was their round which killed him?
ReplyDeleteAnd hence, do you honestly believe that they wouldn't try to cover that up?
THAT likely is the conspiracy -- and even if they managed to actually (a) find their round AND (b) know that it didn't hurt anyone, it isn't like you can undo the conspiracy of silence at that point....
And your proof? The evidence is that LHO fired the bullets from his weapon to the exclusion of all others. From the TSBD 6th floor. He was seen doing this by several witnesses. The blacks watching the motorcade from the 5th floor heard the casings hit the floor above them. Three casings.
ReplyDeleteBut I'm willing to listen to the concrete evidence you have of the Secret Service coverup. There are 83 other conspiracy theories. 235 people involved. No evidence exixts for any of those. But please, if you have the evidence of this 84th theory, present it here. Better still--go to the New York Times.
Happy Thanksgiving to Vincent Bugliosi who prosecuted the case of Lee Oswald in a mock trial versus defender Gerry Spence. Bugliosi, who successfully prosecuted Charles Manson, presented evidence (roughly 53 pieces) of evidence against Oswald. The trial took 5 weeks. The jury was unanimous in its verdict that Oswals was not only guilty, but had acted alone .
ReplyDelete...And Happy Thanksgiving to Hulk Hogan who beat Andre the Giant in Wrestlemania III. Hogan, who successfully beat King Kong Bundy in Wrestlemania II, presented techniques (scoop slam and his patented leg drop) against Andre. The match took 12 minutes. The crowd was unanimous in its satisfaction that Hogan's victory was not only legitimate, but believeable.
ReplyDeleteBut seriously, Happy Thanksgiving Larry to you, D, K & J!!!!!
Thanks Keith. To you and the family as well!
ReplyDeleteAnd the proof that he was a patsy is ...what? Please tell us what the evidence is. Not just how you feel they are easily recruited.
ReplyDeleteAnon 12:42
ReplyDeleteI've got a better idea...why don't you get caught up and review all of the 50+ comments (please note most of the single shooter theory proponents are going by how they feel) and present the 50+ pieces of evidence (just busy work for you) against Oswald for us. I'm going to go drink beer and eat Turkey.
That is false. The proponents of the single shooter fact that Oswald acted alone, have all the evidence on their side. It is the conspiracy theorists who require you to suspend disbelief. Remember, the motorcade route was announced on Tuesday, November 19, giving any of these 84 secure reticle conspirators groups take your pick, three days to pull it all together. Oswald worked in that building along the route, and saw his chance to become somebody who would go down in history. He succeeded.
Deletehttp://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?topic=6085.0;wap2
DeleteThe 53 pieces of evidence.
"Reclaiming History," a monumental work by V. Bugliosi should be read by everyone interested in anything having to do with the assassination.
Yeah right. Wasn't that book re released sans-conspiracy theory debunks? Gary Mack is the true expert on the JFK assassination, with credentials & knowledge that blow Bugliosi out of the water (acknowledged by Bugliosi himself). and guess which theory he believes? Anything else?
ReplyDelete