JFK conspiracy theorists seek inclusion in anniversary ceremony
“It’s absurd to move the discussion of his death to another moment,” said John Judge, executive director of the Coalition on Political Assassinations, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit that studies 1960s murders of public figures. “Our First Amendment rights are being violated.”
Mr. Judge, 65 years old, said conspiracy-theory proponents have gathered at Dealey Plaza every Nov. 22 since 1964. Next year, he added, will be the first that Dallas hasn’t granted a permit for the meeting, which usually involves a moment of silence and a few speeches. He said the city should move its ceremony elsewhere, adding that his group’s members would find a way to disseminate their theories during the city event, possibly even dropping protest banners from nearby buildings.
Mayor Mike Rawlings said in an interview that he would meet with Mr. Judge’s group, as well as with others who object to the city’s plans, to hear their concerns. But he is determined to keep the tone of the event reflective of the “international, cosmopolitan, arts-centered city” Dallas is today, he said, while focusing on President Kennedy’s life and accomplishments. “For 40 minutes, we need to be focusing on the man, not the moment 50 years ago,” Mr. Rawlings said.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I hope they get Bill Clinton to do this. So much irony.
Shy Guy on December 26, 2012 at 10:22 AM
Reading the “70% of Americans” stat, I wonder how that translates to the HA community. Has such a poll ever been conducted at HA? Just curious…
hungrymongo on December 26, 2012 at 10:27 AM
What conspiracies? Oswald was a patsy and the Mafia whacked JFK. Old man Kennedy befriended the mob to move his bootlegged liquor from Canada to US. Then he called on them again to deliver the votes in Illinois to put JFK over the top in the 1960 elections. JFK himself used them as tools in the Bay of Pigs invasion. Then little bro AG Bobby declares war on the Mafia. Oops.
Little wonder why they whacked him.
fogw on December 26, 2012 at 10:27 AM
Why?
OldEnglish on December 26, 2012 at 10:28 AM
That stat, more than any other stat I’ve ever read, confirms my suspicion that most Americans (at least 70%, apparently) live their lives in full retard mode.
CoffeeMan on December 26, 2012 at 10:29 AM
The lone gunman theory has been utterly debunked. There clearly was a conspiracy and Earl Warren with his laughable Warren report was in on it.
CorporatePiggy on December 26, 2012 at 10:32 AM
As long as we can hear more about Marilyn Monroe stripping in the Oval Office, I’m all for it.
Bishop on December 26, 2012 at 10:32 AM
That 70% percent is more than anything simply ignorant of the facts of the case and the sheer weight of the evidence against Oswald. But they probably saw Oliver Stone’s JFK, which is a great movie but it’s terrible history. The only way Oswald did not shoot and kill Kennedy is if Kennedy simply wasn’t shot and killed.
JohnBrown on December 26, 2012 at 10:33 AM
Keep ‘em coming. I’ll compile until we reach a statistically representative sample.
hungrymongo on December 26, 2012 at 10:37 AM
Please tell me you’re kidding.
hawkdriver on December 26, 2012 at 10:40 AM
OF COURSE, it wasn’t the embittered Marxist Loser, it was the Mob/CIA/LBJ…puh-leese.
JFKY on December 26, 2012 at 10:48 AM
If you want to focus on the life and accomplishments of the man, why don’t you stage that on the day of his birth instead of the day of his death?
Dusty on December 26, 2012 at 10:48 AM
Oy, I hope that’s sarcasm because otherwise the average IQ of the people posting here just dropped a full 10 points.
Oswald killed JFK. All of his actions before the assassination, the day of the assassination and immediately afterward point to him.
Why do you think he was the only person who left the building after the shooting? He showed no interest in what happened right outside the place where he worked. He said he thought everyone would have the day off and he wanted to go watch a movie and that’s why he left.
Right.
SteveMG on December 26, 2012 at 10:51 AM
The truth is that Kennedy sucked as a president and a role model, but that won’t be any part of the “celebration” of his life. Tell the world how he was fooling around with a known enemy sympathizer and was transferred to the Pacific to avoid a scandle. Or how his incompetence got PT-109 destroyed. Don’t forget about the Bay of Pigs and his mismanagement of the Cuban Missle Crisis. If he would have lived, he might have faced impeachment.
DAT60A3 on December 26, 2012 at 11:02 AM
Why?
[OldEnglish on December 26, 2012 at 10:28 AM]
It’s not about Kennedy. It’s about Dallas. Kennedy is as good sales pitch as anything. Unfortunately, if it isn’t about the assassination, Dallas has squat.
But the pitch is too hard to give up, and the circumstance too uncomfortable, so they need to change the theme.
Dusty on December 26, 2012 at 11:03 AM
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0005a.htm
Mitoch55 on December 26, 2012 at 11:03 AM
The committee was wrong. They relied on a tape that was shown to be a recording of the shooting AFTER it had occurred.
They believed it was a recording that took place DURING the shooting. They were wrong.
SteveMG on December 26, 2012 at 11:07 AM
Spending 40 minutes focusing on JFK’s accomplishments seems about 39 minutes too long. I’m sorry if it sounds insensitive, because it was absolutely horrible what happened to him, but JFK was not a particularly noteworthy president if not for his assassination. Yes, he could give a good speech, and yes he did a few good things. But by and large, there’s not much of note to come from his administration.
Shump on December 26, 2012 at 11:15 AM
Definitely a conspiracy…Oswald was one of the shooters, but there were others involved. My theory: rogue CIA agents, who didn’t like JFK, and the idea that he might have dissolved/revamped the CIA after the Bay of Pigs fiasco.
There are just too many loose ends to this that have never been answered. I’m not going to go through them all here, and they have been disseminated in far more sources than Oliver Stone’s movie.
The only plausible argument I’ve ever read about it only being Oswald is that if it was a conspiracy, why hasn’t anyone credible come forward in the past 50 years on it? Granted, many witnesses strangely died after the assassination, but there have to be some who know what happened. I always thought Ted Kennedy knew exactly what happened, but could never say.
RFK, on the other hand, is Sirhan Sirhan only. I don’t believe those conspiracy theories.
asc85 on December 26, 2012 at 11:24 AM
So, “who shot JR” was really a metaphor?
BL@KBIRD on December 26, 2012 at 11:26 AM
Nixon and his crew couldn’t pull off a two bit burglary. All kinds of people talked, all kinds of evidence was revealed (money being transferred, notes, tapes). People talked, evidence was found.
Any JFK conspiracy would make the Watergate break-in look like a picnic. It would involve money and weapons and coordination and meetings, et cetera, et cetera.
If there was a conspiracy it would have been revealed.
SteveMG on December 26, 2012 at 11:28 AM
It is time to stop “celebrating” Kennedy’s life, and his unimpressive presidency.
Pork-Chop on December 26, 2012 at 11:29 AM
If you check the list of assassinations and attempted assassinations on the president you’ll see that with the exception of a handful, they were all done by lone individuals.
In fact, some nut wanted to kill JFK shortly after his election. He loaded a car with explosives and was going to drive it into JFK but changed his mind when he saw JFK with his family.
Oswald and Oswald alone killed JFK. He was a nut.
SteveMG on December 26, 2012 at 11:43 AM
JFK was Americas first forced* affirmative action President. I remember the declaration of Americas progress in electing its first Catholic President of Irish Bootlegger descent. How proud America was of itself, much like electing the first Black President (also, coincidentally, of Irish descent with a touch of Black Muslim slaver thrown in for diversity).
I suspect it was a sins of the father thing. Old Joe made enough enemies that many would want to see his house destroyed.
*bought
BL@KBIRD on December 26, 2012 at 11:44 AM
Invite them…and just happen to have a whole bunch of of portable, self-contained, soundproofed electroshock units handy. And plenty of riot police.
MelonCollie on December 26, 2012 at 11:53 AM
Lee Harvey did it, and he did it alone.
Believing otherwise is nothing more than the Trutherism of the last half of the 20th century.
So maybe in forty years, when they commemorate the 50th anniversary of 9-11, Van Jones can say a few words.
Typhoon on December 26, 2012 at 11:56 AM
Really, to believe that there was a major conspiracy – and not that Oswald perhaps had a lone accomplice – would mean that you believe that hundreds of Americans would silently go along with this crime. None would protest, none would reveal it (accidently or on purpose), none would have any remorse.
All of these people would silently go alone. Until their deaths. Never talk, never tell a loved one, never have second thoughts and reveal their involvement.
For almost 50 years?
Impossible.
SteveMG on December 26, 2012 at 12:03 PM
The idea that Oswald had one lone accomplice is ludicrous, if you know anything at all about Oswald. If you accept Oswald as who he is, then the idea of him sharing the spotlight with anyone is nonsense.
No. Oswald bought the rifle long before the motorcade. He tried to kill Major General Edwin Walker with it some weeks prior. Fate put Kennedy in his path, and he seized his chance to become an immortal.
That’s all there is to it. The Zapruder film confirms the “magic bullet” and the shot itself has also been recreated. So if this “lone accomplice” did exist, wherever he was, if he took any shots, he missed.
Hardly makes any sense.
Beyond that, there’s no conspiracy you can work up that doesn’t include a goodly number of rank and file Dallas cops. How do you go to them as the mob or the CIA and suggest they take part in killing the President? And how do you keep every single one of them silent all these years?
Not happening.
Lee Harvey did it. And he did it alone.
Typhoon on December 26, 2012 at 12:15 PM
Lee Harvey did it. And he did it alone.
That’s just what “They” want you to think, Sheeple…
It’s really pointless to argue with the Troofers on this (Yes I know “Troofer” is a term of art, but really ALL “conspiracy nutz” are Troofers of some sort). It’s just a matter of belief, it’s a part of their worldview and a portion of how they view themselves.
It’s religion-like and to argue it is to assault their world and their view of themselves; it just tends to drive them deeper into their shell. To change is to admit to error and to under-cut their sense of superiority.
You might as well argue with an Imam about the “Pillars of Islam.”
JFKY on December 26, 2012 at 12:31 PM
I’m not getting the ‘strange’ factor that many people might possibly die over a 50 year span.
anuts on December 26, 2012 at 12:36 PM
I live in Dallas and beg to differ. The city has done an excellent job developing cultural attractions, museums etc. Not just “flyover country.”
Although the legacy of this event has crafted a weird sub-culture–a night spot called “Lee Harvey’s,” a roller derby league called “Assassination City,” etc.
hungrymongo on December 26, 2012 at 12:49 PM
There’s a “non-profit” that just studies 1960′s political assassinations? Really?
GWB on December 26, 2012 at 12:57 PM
Sorry, but this report and its conclusions are more flawed than any critique of the Warren Commission. The entire finding was based on one piece of evidence which has been called into intense scrutiny.
As someone who used to subscribe to conspiracy theories in youth, I ask for something more substantive. Until then, I adhere to Occam’s Razor regarding Oswald.
hungrymongo on December 26, 2012 at 1:01 PM
SteveMG you are an idiot. There are literally dozens of people involved or with knowledge of details of that case that died under mysterious circumstances. Stop displaying your ignorance. I am not saying there was or was not a conspiracy, I am saying that you are an idiot for believing and espousing such certainty over the matter, and then comparing those who believe in a conspiracy, or even entertain the idea, to be equal to 9/11 truthers. You’re a fool.
SuperBunny on December 26, 2012 at 1:04 PM
I’m surprised nobody has mentioned the film The Parallax View, with Warren Beatty. Great movie.
SuperBunny on December 26, 2012 at 1:05 PM
anuts, then you simply didn’t look at the circumstances, or even what the statistical comparison is of a random sample of the same number of people, and those that were witnesses to various aspects of the case.
What I see here is the dawn of the enlightened, who are not so much enlightened. You are not many steps from those who blindly believe whatever Obama tells them. Think for yourself. By all means decide that there was no Kennedy conspiracy, but only after you’ve done the leg work. I see here nothing but cognitive dissidence.
SuperBunny on December 26, 2012 at 1:07 PM
Anti-conspiracy theorists are the same as pure conspiracy theorist. No amount of evidence of a conspiracy can convince them that one could exist, because conspiracy theories themselves cannot exist in their mind.
Yet they claim that they are enlightened. Too funny. I prefer the more objective approach, each case should be evaluated on its merits. Without concern for the likelihood of conspiracy theories over a broader swath of time.
For the record, I do not know enough about the Kennedy case to decide, but I know enough to know not to decide one way or the other. The fact that the Kennedy case files are locked up until far into the future is enough to give any sensible person pause.
SuperBunny on December 26, 2012 at 1:10 PM
Ha! I bet it’d be a real hoot to sit with you on a jury.
anuts on December 26, 2012 at 2:00 PM
The HSCA on assassinations examined the so-called “mysterious deaths” argument and found it to have no substance.
Second, the government has released hundreds of thousands of pages of documents involving the matter. All of the documents will be released by the year 2017.
They’re not locking up files into the future.
Part of the problem discussing this issue is that some people uncritically accept allegations without examining them. Read the Warren Commission report. Read Vincent Bulgliosi’s book. If you think Mr. Bugliosi is an “idiot” because he believes there was no conspiracy then I think you need to re-examine your thinking process.
Think for yourself. Use your brain.
Here’s a good site that goes over everything including the “mysterious deaths” claim: Vectorsite and JFK.
SteveMG on December 26, 2012 at 4:34 PM
anuts, grow a brain. Oh wait, too late.
SuperBunny on December 26, 2012 at 7:31 PM