Kennedy assassination in the news
Lately - it seems everywhere I turn, there's some story related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Here are some snippets of note:
At Lawrence Livermore Labs in Berkeley, California, Metallurgist Erik Randich and forensic scientist Pat Grant have studied the infamous "neutron activiation analysis" used by the FBI in 1964 (and for many years before and since) and concluded that the test cannot be used to prove, as had been thought, whether bullet fragments could be matched to a particular bullet based on their chemical composition. They determined that 1) not enough lead was missing from the only recovered bullet to account for all the fragments and 2) there could have been one to five bullets used, based on the composition of the fragments. Because the shooter would not have had time, given the clock set by the Zapruder film, to fire four shots in the time allotted, if the magic bullet didn't give off all the fragments, then there were at least two shooters. Case wide open.
Vaughn Ververs at CBS News, which has a well-documented aversion to the truth in the case of the Kennedy assassination, predictably had this to say:
The Kennedy assassination is also being invoked in this AP story on the "War on Terror":
Lastly, before I leave this topic, if a KGB officer sends you an email offering documents on the Kennedy assassination, it's a scam. Spend your money instead on real information in my new Real History Store (note the permanent link on the right). Enjoy.
At Lawrence Livermore Labs in Berkeley, California, Metallurgist Erik Randich and forensic scientist Pat Grant have studied the infamous "neutron activiation analysis" used by the FBI in 1964 (and for many years before and since) and concluded that the test cannot be used to prove, as had been thought, whether bullet fragments could be matched to a particular bullet based on their chemical composition. They determined that 1) not enough lead was missing from the only recovered bullet to account for all the fragments and 2) there could have been one to five bullets used, based on the composition of the fragments. Because the shooter would not have had time, given the clock set by the Zapruder film, to fire four shots in the time allotted, if the magic bullet didn't give off all the fragments, then there were at least two shooters. Case wide open.
Vaughn Ververs at CBS News, which has a well-documented aversion to the truth in the case of the Kennedy assassination, predictably had this to say:
Conspiracy theories surrounding the Kennedy assassination are largely rooted in the breakdown of trust Americans had in their government through World War II and the 1950s and they were fueled by the tumultuous years that followed.Uh, wrong, Vaughn. See the above. See the over 40 years worth of accumulated evidence that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was, in fact, a conspiracy that killed Kennedy. We can argue forever over who exactly was involved, but we cannot pretend Oswald killed Kennedy. The facts of the case preclude that. Randich and Grant are just adding another, albeit important, nail in the coffin of the always preposterous single bullet theory.
The Kennedy assassination is also being invoked in this AP story on the "War on Terror":
Fear of another terrorist attack remains real for many Americans. For people who lived in the two cities struck by the terrorists on Sept. 11, 2001 - New York and Washington - the fears are intensely personal and vivid.In another story, Katrina is being put into this same bucket as a traumatic national event:
...Much like the bombing of Pearl Harbor during World War II and President Kennedy's assassination in 1963, Sept. 11 has become one of the nation's defining days.
A year ago I was sitting in my parents living room, my father and I transfixed on the Weather Channel. We were watching a gigantic cyclonic blob slowly creep directly toward New Orleans. I was working on my column at the time, whatever it was I had been working on I erased and began to write about this storm crawling through the Gulf of Mexico knocking on the Coast's back door. We all knew it would be bad, but I don't think anyone dreamed just how bad it would be.I have argued for years that by not demanding the truth about the past, we're giving people permission to lie to us about the present, and the future. The comparision is apt. By not demanding accountability from the government for the failure of government at every level to protect the citizens hit by Katrina, we're essentially giving the government a blank check to fail us again.
The worst natural disaster in America's history would be Katrina. Hundreds dead, thousands displaced, and billions of dollars worth of damage. We would be fed pictures and hear stories of people taking refuge on rooftops and living on interstates, the nation standing back aghast. The public consciousness would not remember Katrina as a storm, but as something else entirely. For the rest of our lives we will talk about her the way we talk about the World Trade Center or the Kennedy assassination. Where were you when Katrina hit? Where were you when New Orleans almost drowned?
Lastly, before I leave this topic, if a KGB officer sends you an email offering documents on the Kennedy assassination, it's a scam. Spend your money instead on real information in my new Real History Store (note the permanent link on the right). Enjoy.
posted by Real History Lisa at 1:06 AM - Permanent Link -
4 Comments:
Lisa,
It's good news that the Kennedy assassination is making headlines again, especially for the right reasons, i.e. refuting the lone gunman theory. And you're point about not demanding the truth then makes it easier for our leaders to lie to us about events now is absolutely correct.
However, it is difficult not to feel some kind of despair when you see what "news" people are prepared to swallow.
Well, I would feel more despair if this was a unique or unique-to-our-time problem. But the reality is, most people are very honest, and expect that others around them are equally honest. That's why the "big lie" technique works - and why the BIGGER the lie, the more easy it is to believe, because "they wouldn't lie about THAT" or "it must be true, or someone would have refuted it."
I'd like to think the Internet allows press people to help educate themselves, but unfortunately, there's not a lot of evidence to support that. Still, I remain hopeful, because of people like this:
- Lou Dobbs and Robert Kennedy are both talking loudly and often about electronic voting.
- Olbermann must have seen "Good Night and Good Luck" and been inspired by the ghost of Edward Murrow.
- Jeff Morley of the Washington Post has pursued the Kennedy assassination history and found some important information along the trail of George Joannides.
So try not to despair. Some days are harder than others. But some days, the sun shines brightly, the water sparkles turquoise, and all is right, momentarily, in the world. Try to enjoy the Labor Day vacation, if you have time off!
Btw - a day after I wrote this, Nellie Connally - the last witness to the shooting from up close, in the car with Kennedy - died. Nellie said all her life, consistently, as did her husband, that separate bullets hit Kennedy and Connally. If they were hit by separate bullets, there had to be at least two shooters. Nellie said the shots came from her right. That would be the grassy knoll area.
Lisa,
The bigger question is who had the power to cover-up the murder of JFK? We all know there were at least 2 shooters. However, whoever ordered his death, also had the power to cover it up and all were sworn to secrecy. What did Earl Warren, J. Edgar Hoover, Gerald Ford, Allen Dulles, and Lyndon B. Johnson have in common. Coincidence that fired former C.I.A. Deputy Director Charles Cabell (by JFK) and Dallas Mayor Earle Cabell at the time of the assassination were brothers. Not sure if Cabell brothers were also sworn to secrecy.
Nothing but the Truth
Post a Comment
<< Home