Skip to main content

View Diary: John Kennedy smiled at me. Five minutes later, he was dead. (176 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Some CTs are about ideology... (0+ / 0-)

    some are based in not wanting to believe one person could cause so much damage; and some CTs are based on a skeptical, but rational, view of the evidence that has been presented.

    It's easy to dismiss all CTs as unfounded - some are.  Have you actually read the Warren Commission report? Some of the CTs are based on what's actually in the report.

    Your attitude might be understandable in the early 60's; but given all that's happened since then, to continue to think that the Warren Commission report is the one and only true account is incredibly naive.

    Or, as you might say, WC woo-woo.

    •  I did a book manuscript on the JFK (3+ / 0-)

      assassination back in the early 80's.  I not only read ther entire Warren Report, but all of its 26 volumes of testimony and exhibits---as well as the House Assassination committee report and its 12 volumes of testimony and evidence.  I also corresponded extensively with Reps Bob Edgar and Henry Gonzalez, who were on the committee.

      given all that's happened since then
      What, exactly, could have happened since then that could possibly change any of the evidence and data that happened in 1963.  Please be as detailed as possible.

      Or are you confirming your ideological agenda, by declaring "now we know the government is evil !!!"?

      What could have happened in 1970 or 1990 or 2010 that could change what happened in 1963?

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Sun Nov 17, 2013 at 06:41:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, time doesn't change facts or evidence. (0+ / 0-)

        When the WC report was made public in 1964, it seemed almost unthinkable to many people that the government might lie to them or do anything illegal.   Today, I think that's changed.  That was what my statement about "What's happened since" was referring to.  I think way more people now believe that the government can be evil - whether it's Gulf of Tonkin, the Allende coup or Iran-Contra.  It needs checks and balances.

        If you've read all of the WC documents, and still think the majority's conclusions hold together; then I'm not going to waste time trying to change your mind.

        The best face I can put on the WC report is that they thought it was better for the country to put this tragedy behind us and move strongly forward.  They didn't want any lingering uncertainty about the assassination. They avoided digging too deeply and glossed over any inconsistencies to help the country move forward.  I don't really believe that, but that's the kindest interpretation I can come up with.

        There are just too many pieces that don't fit, from Oswald's early history and work as a government asset, to the planning of the motorcade route and the behavior of the SS detail, to the mail-order rifle and the Hidell identification, to the original medical testimony, to the cleaning of the car, to the naval autopsy.

        Even with people like Dulles, Ford and McCloy on the commission, and the omission of a great deal of testimony that did not comport with the central theory; there were desperate last-minute negotiations to avoid the release of a minority dissenting opinion.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site