Posted on 11/21/2007 4:31:55 PM PST by forty_years
The mind is a terrible thing to waste tell you the highly intelligent dupes of KGB disinformation. KGB’s job was simple: sow the seeds of doubt. They succceeded better than expected. Instead of focusing on the Communist agents in the State Department, in Congress, in the White House, in the media, the dupes have been playing their children’s mystery games with the grassy knoll fantasies, outdoing each other with lame theories about Oswald’s shooting skills. Wow, impressive! Highly intelligent, indeed.
Despite that emotion about Kennedy then, later I read his history and his personal life. I do not beliebve that Kennedy was much more than a messianic icon for an already doomed Utopian liberal movement. Utopianism is dangerous for our nation. It prevents us from coping with conditions as they are. We see things only darkly through such idealism, and make many mistakes which hurt our nation badly. Thuis we take a woman Jew, and send her to negotiate trade agreements with conservative traditional Saudi monarchs, and feel smug and good about ourselves while OPEC does the nasty with Saudi concurrence. ( Madelaine Albright)We should be more skilful than that, and less smugly idealistic. The task at hand needs to outweigh this weakness for a vaunted style dictated by liberal Utopianism, no matter how ideologically laudable. Thats one reason liberals literally suck at power politics.
Thats what Kennedy now represents to me.
And likewise the Islamofascists. I had not thought of it in this way, but I like the approach. Utopians are so easy to use in this way, naivete.
Nor I, on his monetary policies. His personal life was a total abyss, but the same can be said for most of his successors.
Anyone with even the slightest knowledge of ballistics can look at the Zapruder film and understand where the shots came from.
Do a little research.
That's what he was scripted to be, but he forgot to read the script. On the important issues, such as national security, taxes and monetary policy, he was a solid patriotic conservative. That is what got him assasinated; EO #11110.
Like I said, my knowledge of ballistics - interior and exterior - is quite adequate. Just a bit presumptious of you to think otherwise..
Given all that has taken place since 1963, and my impressions at the time, I will never cease believing that the assassination of JFK was caused precisely by that lurch leftward within his own party - and the left's embrace of FDR's manipulation of information.
RFK's assassination was a foretaste of what we've reaped by underestimating the pathology that deforms the middle east - and the left's embrace of those infected most by that pathology.
Amen!
On that note, I think it speaks highly of him as a president of this country in spite of it. If we don't have a sound currency, we ain't got nothing. He must of understood that. Fast forward 44 years.
The Bay of Pigs still haunts Cuban Immigrants today.He was disloyal and peripatetic in his committment to retaking Cuba, which he could have done if he had committed to it. If he had done so, communism would not have spread so widely throughout the Carribean and South America. We are still paying for that today. One of my friends ins an indipendent contractor with the CIA, held by FARC in Colombia since 2002. None of that would have happened if Kennedy had truly moved on Cuba, and there are very personal consequences for me in that failure.
So I do not believe one can see Kennedy was all that great , despite the messianic emotion his alleged martyrdom generates in many Americans.
He was thoroughly solid on economic and monetary policy, and was a fiscal conservative thanks to training from businessmen relatives in his family.I agree with you on that.
GO HUNTER 2008
The time is fast approaching for us to " Mount up."
Hunter's Ranger here!
The reason an all points bulletin was made on Oswald was he was the only one to leave work and not return and there was an eyewitness who described him to the police. The only mistake the witness made was the description of the rifle.
Oswald didn’t accomplish any work all that morning. The boxes for the sniper’s nest was constucted that morning. Oswald’s fingerprints were all over those boxes. The wrapping paper that held the fictional “curtain rods” was left in the sniper’s next.
All three shots came from the sixth floor according to the trajectories.
In the last 45 years, three presidents have taken action to pull our fat out of the fire: Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush43; while six have failed to do so when they could have: Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Bush41, and Clinton.
Yeah but he looked good on that new fangled thing, T and V, I think they called.
JFK was a "great" president because he was telegenic. Period.
He was more celebrity than anything. Vaughn Meador's comedy album "The First Family" was wildly popular among people who adored the Kennedys, as I recall. The White House, however, let Meador know that the Kennedy's would not appreciate anymore albums.
JFK could not have beaten Nixon in 1960 without TV.. and even with (color) TV he needed voter fraud. Celebrities or not the Kennedy's were ruthless, especially Robert.
As for the assassination, who had the most to lose if JFK was elected to a second term? And I mean lose big time! Everything. Ans: LBJ.
And how difficult would it have been for a professional to dress the scene with that stuff, make the shots, and leave the scene in the confusion?
If Oswald did happen to be a government informant, he would have been sent somewhere during that time period and then be just as surprised as he seemed to be, pointing at his black eye and complaining about how rough the cops had been with him - and looking forward to his goverment handlers coming forward straighten the situation out.
Looks like they did when Ruby showed up.
Can you point me towards a source for this?
The Federal Reserve Banks. He was gunning for them, even without the support of Congress, and was determined to do the job by executive orders if necessary.
Precisely!
JFK was the first president for whom I ever voted, and his assassination was felt as, first and foremost, a loss of energy driving what portended to be the advancement of a truly progressive (not at all in the Communist or socialist sense or Hillary's use of the word to hide a liberal) coming of age for a new and idealistic generation. The political persuasions of the assassin(s) were of little interest while the answer to the question, "Why?" was of first concern and, "Who?" followed in second place for prominence among us. Oswald was portrayed, and accepted, as a nut-case with ambiguous and irrelevant ideology and, most prominently, a tool. Johnson was high on the list of populous suspects, as was Nixon---and the putative "ideology" here was reduced to largely "personal" motives.
So, the author's intellectualizing is a distant, post-hoc confabulation of sensible events arranged to falsely suggest a cause and its effects.
At the time, it was plain and simple as Why?, Who? and, the one not yet settled, How?
It was not the Death of Kennedy, per se, that fueled the anger, one which was not directed at his assassin either. And, the anger of that young generation turned, not against Conservatives (as opposed to Liberals, and as the author suggests), but toward "The Establishment." The reason for this being the focus was not the ideology of Oswald, or anybody for that matter, but rather the fact that post-mortem machinations pulled the curtains back to expose the really seamy core of the then political and cultural establishment. The last straw was the sealing of the Warren Report from any form of public inspection. From that moment on, those "in power" were no longer trusted. That was the spawning of the american radical movement of the '60's.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.