|
Post by Argent'horn on Nov 22, 2008 19:39:29 GMT -5
Forty-five years ago today, John F. Kennedy was murdered in Dallas. (I was a college senior in an E & M lab at the time.) I have not heard anything about this on television or radio today, which surprises me a little.
Does this indicate that Americans are totally indifferent to our history? If it does, what does this mean? I have one colleague at my university who thinks that we are indeed indifferent to our history, and that this is good, since Americans do not seem to hold grudges for centuries the way people in some other societies do. What are the downside aspects to this indifference? Or is the indifference not real? Maybe I have just been listening to the wrong radio stations at the wrong time today.
|
|
|
Post by Steven Barnes on Nov 24, 2008 21:47:24 GMT -5
I think we are more apt to remember our victories than our pains. But I'd bet that we will hear a lot on the 50th anniversary.
|
|
|
Post by manilamac on Nov 25, 2008 12:28:11 GMT -5
Actually, the NYTimes had an article about commemorative activity at the plaza in Dallas. I heard the assassination live on the radio while sitting in my car in my high school parking lot. That was about 40 miles west of the site. Conspiracy freaks take note: most of us Texans had almost no doubt that Oswald was a nut-case ex-Marine marksman acting alone and that Jack Ruby was just a different kind of nut-case. Everyone in Texas was too familiar with both kinds of gun-crazed fanatics to ever think otherwise.
“Fuzzing” facts was just coming into its own as propaganda technique in those days and the fact that the local FBI (and others) indeed had things to hide brought the technique into play. In fact, the way the fuzzing got carried so far beyond the wildest dreams of the people responsible amounted to the birth of a whole new level—the FBI and especially the CIA hiring hack (and some semi-respectable) writers to write books and articles designed to so confuse covert operations (with “eye-witnesses” and “on the spot reporting” &c.) that no one would ever know what happened.
|
|
|
Post by Argent'horn on Nov 25, 2008 16:36:21 GMT -5
manilamac, that reminds me...I have a friend in Fort Worth who was acquainted with Oswald as a child. He told me something about him of that sort years ago, but I cannot recall it. If I find out anything worth sharing next time I speak with him, I will share it here.
|
|
|
Post by manilamac on Nov 26, 2008 10:28:30 GMT -5
Now that I think about it, there was also the matter of a state-wide TV broadcast by then Texas governor John Connolly in which he disputed the Warren Commission Report about whether the shot that wounded him was the same shot that hit Kennedy. He made reference to his combat experience and his being a deer hunter to back himself up and obviously was intent enough on his own story to go for the state-wide broadcast. I can’t really recall the details, but there is also the possibility that he was just using the chance at the publicity. (He was still a Democrat back then.)
Strangely enough, I drove by the plaza while the Warren Commission was there rolling inch by inch over the same ground in the same open-topped Lincoln, doing their reconstruction of the shooting—Earl Warren was sitting in Kennedy’s place in the car.
|
|
|
Post by Steven Barnes on Dec 1, 2008 11:25:32 GMT -5
Let's just say that of the four assassinations in the 60's: Kennedy, Kennedy, King, and Malcolm, John Kennedy's assassination stinks the worst in terms of conspiracy.
|
|
|
Post by Argent'horn on Dec 4, 2008 13:12:11 GMT -5
Interesting thought, Steve. I think all of these except maybe Robert Kennedy have the smell of conspiracy. The smell, of course, is not the same as a proof.
|
|
|
Post by nancylebovitz on Dec 9, 2008 11:06:15 GMT -5
Interesting about JKF's assassination not being as big a deal this year. All I can do is guess about what isn't happening, but here are some guesses.
One thing is that I'm seeing more about Pearl Harbor than usual. I don't know if this is a general pattern, but it's plausible that "We were unfairly attacked!" resonates nicely with 9/11, while a president getting killed is something we don't want to think about too intensely at the moment.
Another is that we've had a *lot* of history lately. 9/11, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (next time, when you see a country with a sign on the door that says "death of empires", pay attention), the financial crisis, and the election of the first black president after a very long campaign. When you have enough history, some events are naturally going to slip out of primary attention.
|
|
|
Post by manilamac on Dec 16, 2008 9:03:26 GMT -5
Ah ha! Slipping out of primary attention indeed. I have never doubted a conspiracy in the JFK killing. What I think people get wrong is what the conspiracy was about--I believe it was Oswald acting alone. the conspiracy was about what the authorities knew before and after. IN other words, the real conspiracy was a classic example of good old CYA in action.
Oh, and Pearl Harbor conspiracy fans will be disappointed to see the Dec 7, 2008 NYTimes article on the real date of Japanese radio code transmissions.
|
|