Skip to main content

On this 50th "anniversary" of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the corporate media in collusion with elements in the federal government continues to perpetuate the "lone assassin" cover-up. Chris Matthews once again displayed why I seldom attach much credibility to him by having Vincent Bugliosi plugging his 2007 book--20 years in the research and writing--attempting to prove all conspiracy theorists are nutjobs. He claims there are about 53 points which prove beyond a shadow of a doubt Oswald did it alone. He rattled off five points with absolutely no proof as to why we should accept them. 3 of the points were: 1. Oswald was the only on the sixth floor of the Texas Book Depository building at the time of the shooting. 2. Oswald shot Officer J.D. Tippit. 3. Oswald pulled a gun on the arresting officer inside that Dallas movie theater. Then Bugliosi cavalierly dismissed all the conspiracy theories claiming every one of them falls apart and has been proven false. Matthews gets his two cents in by ridiculing Oliver Stone's "JFK" movie. Neither one of the mention the The United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations which found in 1979 there was a 4th gunshot picked up by a Dallas Police motorcycle radio microphone and the assassination was very likely due to a conspiracy. Nope, we're supposed to accept that all conspiracy theories are hogwash just because they say so.

I've got the Bugliosi book on hold at the local library because I want to read how he attempts to weasel out of the stockpile of debunked Warren Commission evidence and false testimonies as well as all the evidence and witnesses that were overlooked. Also want to see if he explains the "accidental" deaths of all those witnesses and people who were involved that day. And, can he explain why volumes of unreleased Warren Commission and other materials are still locked away in the National Archives until 2020? I think the corporate media is no longer trying to sell this pig slop to people of my generation but instead targeting the younger adults and kids who are most likely willing to ignore the whole thing for the rest of their lives.

What Bugliosi and no one else has explained is why it no other president since JFK has been assassinated by a lone gunman? Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme couldn't kill Gerald Ford from a few feet away, and John Hinckley, Jr. couldn't finish the job on Ronald Reagan from roughly the same distance. The truth is it's freaking impossible for one person to kill a president, or a presidential candidate, or a Nobel-prize winning black civil rights leader all by themselves. The RFK and MLK, Jr. assassinations were never proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that there were the works of lone killers. In fact, plenty of doubts populate both cases.

JFK himself told Jackie a few weeks before he was murdered that if a assassin placed himself in an upper story window to shoot him, nothing could be done about it. I think when he said that he was thinking of a professional hit man, not a Lee Harvey Oswald.

The corporate media can line up every Chris Matthews, Vincent Bugliosi, Tom Brokaw, et al., they want in an attempt to Fox News (perpetuate the lie about) the Kennedy assassination. Their problem is, unlike Fox viewers, 61% know how to think for ourselves and can detect bullshit when it's shoveled in our faces.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  HR'd for CT (Conspiracy Theory) (8+ / 0-)

    CT is an automatic HR - and BOJO.

    They don't win until we quit fighting!

    by Eyesbright on Fri Nov 22, 2013 at 01:26:33 PM PST

    •  breaking! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ...the Republicans have perfected the art of fixing votes in a way that will remain unquestioned by the corporate media and the Democratic Party.

      ...Republican secretaries of state control the registered voter databases and/or the allotment of  custom-programmed voting machines in Colorado, Nevada, Arizona, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Texas, and other states where Karl Rove, the Kochs and company need to disappear and otherwise wipe out or prevent Democratic votes.

      This is excellent news for Mitt Romney! Shrug.

      "I am not sure how we got here, but then, I am not really sure where we are." -Susan from 29

      by HudsonValleyMark on Fri Nov 22, 2013 at 02:44:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  this is old and I don't know the nuances (0+ / 1-)
      Recommended by:
      Hidden by:

      in replying to an old diary. Probably it's just that no one knows your reply is there.

      It is wrong to HR a diary that agrees with the most recent official findings of a government investigation. Which apparently you don't know about or discount for some incomprehensible yet common reason.

      The US House Select Committee on Assassinations (1970s) ruled that there was a conspiracy in killing JFK. They found evidence of a forth shot coming from an area in front right of the President, the grassy knoll. This Committee's findings were meant to supplant the Warren Commission's findings you support (Oswald was lone gunman). But human nature being what it is, people have clung to the first idea.

      My above comment isn't wild imagination. It happened. And when an official government investigative body calls it a conspiracy it is NOT RIGHT to punish a diarist for agreeing with that government report.

      The "conspiracy theory" rule needs to apply, and I think is MEANT to reply, to looney tune theories. WE now use the term "conspiracy theory" as something crazy and far out.

      Problem is, if you take the words at face value, a conspiracy theory is an idea or hypothesis that more than one person was involved in...whatever. A theory is just a supposition which we look for supporting facts. Evolution for example is a theory.

      Official position of US government, after careful investigation, is that more than one person shot JFK. Ergo, a conspiracy.

      I am constantly re-astounded that people don't know about this or ignore it. You don't know what you don't know I guess.

      •  More CT from you - where's the cite?? (0+ / 0-)

        you said:

        The US House Select Committee on Assassinations (1970s) ruled that there was a conspiracy in killing JFK. They found evidence of a forth shot
        You state that as if we should just take your word for it - and posted it in an old diary where it would normally go unnoticed.  Fortunately, it showed up in the list of replies I've received.

        You need to come up with some valid cites for your statement.  "Valid" means no blogs, especially no CT blogs, no rightwing sites, etc., but since you say it's "The US House Select Committee on Assassinations," it shouldn't be that difficult for you.

        I'll be waiting - and giving you the chance to prove your assertions (CT though they are) before I do anything further.

        They don't win until we quit fighting!

        by Eyesbright on Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 01:29:15 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  How about google? (0+ / 0-)

          I did not think I'd have to. The report itself is well known. I'm surprised you would not bother to look into it before hr-ing someone. Seems lazy. This is YOUR error.

          I'm on a tablet and will link for you when I'm on my laptop. Maybe I will link the google search page.Or in the meantime go read the report yourself.

          You are wrong to hr me when I simply site data from the US government that apparently you do not know about or care to check out. It is rude.

          •  My last comment about this old diary (0+ / 0-)

            First, in case you didn't notice, the diary was HR'd for conspiracy theory (CT).  

            Second, the reason the diary was HR'd is because CT is not tolerated on DailyKos.  This is a long-standing rule that came from Kos himself.  

            Third, commenting on old diaries is frowned upon here.  Don't do it.  It makes you look clueless (at best).
            I'm only replying to you because you posted your comment as a reply to me.  

            Fourth, you posted more CT (earning your a comment an HR, see above) and, as I said, seemed to think that your word is good enough without any cite to back it up.  Always post a cite when you make a statement that is supposedly from (or based on) another site.  
            NOTE:  when you make the assertion, the burden is on you to post back-up (a cite).  That's a widely held rule, one you'll find on many sites (i.e. not just on DK) but is especially strong here.  Asking someone else to do your work for you (e.g. googling what you wrote) kills any credibility you might have had (also a widely held rule).

            Fifth, whining about an HR on your comment, a comment that clearly violates DK rules against CT, is the epitome of bad form, also killing your credibility.

            Because you haven't been on DK for all that long, it's possible you don't know any of the above.  Now you do.

            Incidentally, now that you've finally supplied the cites, I've read them but it still doesn't belong in an old HR'd diary about CT.

            There's so much to read and learn from and talk about on DK.  Let's please move on.

            They don't win until we quit fighting!

            by Eyesbright on Sat Nov 30, 2013 at 12:17:49 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  here it is-First and second Google entries (0+ / 0-)

          if you simply google "House Select Committee on Assassinations". They are, as often is the case with  mainstream things, the Wikipedia entry and the source of the primary data.


           "The Committee investigated until 1978 and issued its final report, and concluded that Kennedy was very likely assassinated as a result of a conspiracy."

          I assume Wikipedia is a good general source. They of course aren't perfect but you can at least believe they don't MAKE UP this government committee.


          Note the .gov ending of that address. This is the primary source.

          People who believe the "Oswald was a lone gunman" conclusion of the 1964 Warren report did not let the conclusions of the later commission trump their belief. It is true that it is much more comforting to believe that a lone crazy did it. I started with that view, until I read about the HSCA conclusion. I did some investigations (primary sources mostly) directed by the research the HSCA pursued that did not make it into the final report-which does not include who they think the conspirators were. I have a research science background so tried to be open to wherever the data lead me.

          When I came to believe that the HSCA was right, at least that more than one person fired the shots, I had nightmares. It is/was so uncomfortable and scary for me. I envy those who don't know what I found out for my research.

          IT IS WRONG TO HR ME FOR THIS POST because I am ANSWERING a QUERY OF YOURS. IF you dont' like it you shouldn't have asked for links. TO HR me would be an unfair set up. I've answered in good faith. Surely it is to your benefit to at least KNOW about the existence of this committee. I vaguely remember the committee in real time though I was only 12. I'm from MA and Kennedy was our Senator before he was President. My parents believed the Warren commission. I don't remember knowing about the conclusion of the HSCA until I was an adult.

        •  what do you mean "anything further"? (0+ / 0-)
  •  Looks like Kos people have bought (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BigAlinWashSt, HeartlandLiberal

    it all hook line and sinker too.

    Check out Russ Baker's website. He just posted all the major points in his book about the Bush family (Family of Secrets) that certainly has another point of view to offer... with sources and footnotes.  Can you spell C-I-A and b-i-g  o-i-l?

    •  Nobody's bought anything. Conspiracy theory (13+ / 0-)

      diaries are not allowed. It's not what people do here.

      You can't make this stuff up.

      by David54 on Fri Nov 22, 2013 at 01:38:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  So does that mean that no one (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BigAlinWashSt, rmx2630

        could write a diary based on a book like Russ Baker's?

        •  Pretty much. Anything can be said about the (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Kingsmeg, rmx2630

          Bush's here, except about that.  Funny ain't it.
          P.S.  I bought the book, what is it, 2-3 years ago.  Excellent.  Didn't know he had a website, I'll check that out.

          "It is easier to pass through the eye of a needle then it is to be an honest politician."

          by BigAlinWashSt on Fri Nov 22, 2013 at 03:09:26 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Let's correct this: (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Diaries about conspiracy theories you do not like are not allowed here.  On the other hand, if it is a conspiracy theory you do like, that's OK.

        •  I almost never HR anyone for any reason. (0+ / 0-)

          As for the assassination, when I'm kind of looking at it peripherally without focusing on the details, I find it very hard to believe the "lone assassination theory". It's the least plausible of the options. However, people who put forth the various CT have not adequately conclusively proven their theory or there would be a single theory that eventually convinced everyone and crowded out all the rest.
          Someday that may occur. Someday we may have incontrovertible proof of what happened.
          I''m generally aware of the bad record of the CIA, the Bush family, etc.

          From what I've observed, this site is dedicated to straight up politics and the service of a progressive community.
          We have enough fights here as it is without opening the Pandora's box.
          If you allow CT about JFK, then you wind up getting CT about all sorts of other crap. That seems to be the official position of the site.

          You can't make this stuff up.

          by David54 on Sat Nov 23, 2013 at 04:16:33 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  My theory is "punk got lucky" (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            and everyone else freaked out and went into CYA mode.

            Doesn't take a "conspiracy theory" to believe that.

            If it's
            Not your body,
            Then it's
            Not your choice
            And it's
            None of your damn business!

            by TheOtherMaven on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 09:59:26 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You don't understand! The real CT is (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              that there was only one gunman but he planned it to look like multiple gunen to throw doubt into everyone's minds, while his future self came back and "killed" his past self and making it all tie up in one neat package to look like a conspiracy in the future so he could retire off the royalties of his someday-to-be-published book. Or something like that...  :P

              Or maybe I watched too much Dr Who yesterday...

              ''The guarding of military and diplomatic secrets at the expense of informed representative government provides no real security for our Republic.'' - Justice Hugo L. Black of the Supreme Court

              by geekydee on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 11:28:32 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  House Select Committee on Assassination (0+ / 0-)

        said more than one gunman was involved. THis was in the 70s and it was meant to supplant the Warren Commission's findings from right after the murder. Conspiracy is simply defined as "more than one person involved".

        How can you penalize some diary for agreeing with the official investigation?

        I think it is because so many people don't realize the official position after investigation. For some reason people feel better about clinging to the debunked Warren commission report.

        When DK speaks of "conspiracy theories", as in common usage, we mean way out there things. That's what the phrase has come to mean...looney tunes. Yet the words themselves just mean that more than one person was involved in planning/execution. That is the REAL meaning of the phrase as well as the official conclusion of government investigation.

        The way you are using the conspiracy theory DK rule...or the way the rule is written,is wrong. Official government findings, when parroted by diarists, should be excluded from the rule. By reason that official findings are not "way out there"at all. It isn't a crazy thing to believe the official conclusion.

  •  To pre-empt the expected discussion here: (12+ / 0-)

    From the FAQ:

    Diaries advancing 'Conspiracy Theories' are subject to ridicule and derision from the community at the very least. Repeat offenders can and will be banned.
    So, yeah, you can expect the admins to censure you for putting forth a "conspiracy theory" diary.  Now, of course, in real life conspiracies do happen.  And in real life we ought to be discussing conspiracies, because they do play a role in actual politics.  This is not to say that is an appropriate location for this discussion.

    A lot of the enforcement of "the rules" in this regard depends upon definitions of the term "conspiracy theory," and as regards who is doing the defining of the term "conspiracy theory."  And there's no doubt a proper debate about what is and what isn't a "conspiracy theory."  I don't know if that debate should be taking place here, either.

    I do know, however, that the whole "lone gunman" theory skates on some rather thin ice.  Oh well.  See you somewhere else!

    “All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out.” – I.F. Stone

    by Cassiodorus on Fri Nov 22, 2013 at 01:29:45 PM PST

  •  I looked and looked but didn't see a snark tag. (14+ / 0-)

    It's because of logic like this:

    The truth is it's freaking impossible for one person to kill a president, or a presidential candidate, or a Nobel-prize winning black civil rights leader all by themselves.
    that I concluded that it must be snark. Even Louis Gomert is smarter than that.

    Most of the people taking a hard line against us are firmly convinced that they are the last defenders of civilization... The last stronghold of mother, God, home and apple pie and they're full of shit! David Crosby, Journey Thru the Past.

    by Mike S on Fri Nov 22, 2013 at 01:29:53 PM PST

    •  Well, it's because of the... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mike S, grover

      ...invisible floating bullet deflector that all presidents (and presidential candidates, and Nobel-prize winning black civil rights leaders) since FDR have used.  As we know, it's remarkably effective, but can only deflect one bullet at a time.  Hence, the necessity of multiple shooters.  

  •  Superbly stated! (3+ / 0-)

    Alas, what should now be a given, that indeed this was a conspiracy of some sort, is yet dismissed by the MSM.  You are correct of course in presuming that those currently composing the MSM are thinking of the perpetuation of the myth for future generations.  

    Respecting all the rest of us with indelible memories of that fateful day and weekend events, well, witnessing so many addlepated fossils (described as "senior news analysts") still parroting the Warren Commission findings can be a real hoot, knowing that the clear majority of us who remember cannot be dissuaded from our common sense.   It is at such times that I have faith yet in the broader still reasoning middle of the American citizenry.  

  •  I have grown to accept the legend (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I think that it is OK that so many people want to believe the [Lone Nut]^2 Formula.  Everybody's dead now.  

  •  Get the Bugliosi book (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Yes, it explains everything and you'll feel like an idiot for posting up this mess.

    Cynicism is what passes for insight among the mediocre.

    by Sky Net on Fri Nov 22, 2013 at 01:55:19 PM PST

  •  Well hell if we're going all CT: (8+ / 0-)

    Bigfoot, a Soviet spy and cigar smoking chum of Fidel Castro's, shot and killed President Kennedy in a speed (supplied by the Jack Ruby) fueled jealous rage over Marilyn Monroe (who is a space alien and still very much alive having retired to Venus).

    Elvis was one of Bigfoot's lovers (someone gets around). He convinced Bigfoot to do it while they were doing speed in Ruby's nightclub.

    Now, we know that Lee Harvey Oswald was merely a patsy put in place by the Russian mob (a branch of the CIA) to protect Bigfoot. As to the magic bullet (made from unicorn horn), it was a gift from Che Guevara to Castro. Che had stolen it from a leprechaun one night in Miami. Bigfoot won it from Castro after a night of strip poker, cigars and whiskey.

    But why would the CIA, through their Russian mob branch, protect a Soviet spy who had just shot the president you ask? This is where it gets interesting. He has dirt on everyone. He is a hell of a lover, and had screwed his way through the top branches of both the US and Soviet governments. No one wanted his 'hit it' list to get out.

    Though a sasquatch whore, Bigfoot fell madly in love with Marylin Monroe. She was his one true love. So when he found out about Marylin and JFK, he (thanks to Elvis, who was jealous of Bigfoot's affection for Marylin) sought to kill the man he saw as a rival.

    But, you might ask, why not just kill Bigfoot? He disappeared into the woods soon afterwards and now spends his time fucking with people, leaving footprints and dung piles all over the place. While we know he is still out there, no one seems to be able to catch him, as reality TV has proven to us. One day he may come forward and tell his tale, but until then the conspiracy continues.

    Or not.

    "The next time everyone will pay for it equally, and there won't be any more Chosen Nations, or any Others. Poor bastards all." ~The Boomer Bible

    by just another vet on Fri Nov 22, 2013 at 01:56:59 PM PST

  •  Too late - Mick Jagger already confessed. nt (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Dick Cheney 2/14/10: "I was a big supporter of waterboarding"

    by Bob Love on Fri Nov 22, 2013 at 02:09:04 PM PST

  •  I was listening to talk radio in the car today,... (10+ / 0-)

    ... WWL radio in New Orleans.  They were interviewing Roger Stone, who was peddling his conspiracy theory about JFK's assassination.  He closed his interview with the following line - (I swear to G-d): "If the government can lie about Benghazi, and they can lie about healthcare, then they are lying about who killed JFK".  Even though it is incredibly dangerous to do so, I had to give Mr. Stone a facepalm while driving.  Then, I changed the radio station.

    Looking through the bent backed tulips, To see how the other half lives, Looking through a glass onion - John Lennon and Paul McCartney

    by Hey338Too on Fri Nov 22, 2013 at 02:26:36 PM PST

  •  The REAL Truth about JFK and Elvis (3+ / 0-)

    Bubba Ho-tep

    FREEDOM ISN'T FREE: That's why we pay taxes! Find me on Linkedin.

    by mole333 on Fri Nov 22, 2013 at 03:44:11 PM PST

  •  I looked and looked (4+ / 0-)

    but couldn't find any snark attack.

    I've actually READ the Warren Commission Report. It was required for my Political Science class in college. Are there remaining questions? Yes. But the Conspiracy Theories are completely ridiculous.

    "I was not born for myself alone, but for my neighbor as well as myself."--Richard Overton, leader of the Levellers, a17th C. movement for democracy and equality during the English Civil War. for healthcare coverage in Kentucky

    by SouthernLeveller on Fri Nov 22, 2013 at 06:20:21 PM PST

  •  Blah, blah, blah, CT. (0+ / 0-)

    Thus, HR.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site