# JFK the smoking gun



## maxHR (Nov 4, 2013)

Just saw the show "JFK The smoking gun" on SBS TV australia. Crikey! JFK was accidentally shot by his own secret service??? Two bullets from Lee harvey Oswald, one from the secret service guy who lost his balance in the car and fired accidentally. Not new, but based on the book "mortal error" by Bonar Menninger.
   Mulder.


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 4, 2013)

Hi Max, long time no hear....   I have that recorded but haven't watched it yet.  One more go round eh? We never seem to tire of that one do we?  It's almost as big a national past-time as trying to figure out what happened to Harold Holt.


----------



## maxHR (Nov 4, 2013)

Hi Di, we needs ya back in australia, - forum turning into a zombie zone. The show is fan-bloody-tastic. Now i understand why Mulder and X files was such a huge hit.
 Are you moving yet?


----------



## dbeyat45 (Nov 4, 2013)

Harold who?


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 4, 2013)

Yeah, well, zombie zones don't figure highly on my vacation list Max. 

   You can only butt your head on brick walls for so long.  Anyway, I know a couple of the zombies are more than happy with my absence.  They were running short of parroted catch-phrases, and their 'team' lost.  How're they handling that?  



The move looks like around Feb at this stage, they're 'refurbishing' the joint.   
I'll watch the JFK thing tomorrow night and give it an X scale then.  

C'mon DB, you must remember 'Arold?  

 The debates about alien abduction as opposed to the Chinese submarine conspiracy for the sudden vacancy in the PM's office?  He never did wash up did he?  




FTW:  He was the serving Prime Minister of OZ in 1967 when he went surfing and never came out for his towel. 
 You 'mercans might get a few leaders shot but we just plain misplace ours.  
Never did know for sure what happened but it was a rough surf, he was swimming near rock caves, it's prime shark territory, and he was obviously a half-wit to swim there, so guess he drowned or was taken out for dinner. 

 They never did find the body though despite half the Navy donning their best shiny black rubber outfits and searching diligently.
I think they're still looking.

It's all still treated as a bit of a joke, when someone drops out of sight they 'did a Holt' or 'an Arold'.

(We don't get all that attached to our politicians, no 'Camelots' here. 

 )


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 5, 2013)

Watched it Max, and I like the theory.  Mainly because the notion of the Secret Service *ing up royally is so appealing.
As conspiracy theories go I'd rate it around 7 Xs.  That is, the conspiracy to cover it up, not to instigate it. Oswald still wears that part of it. But he only got 2 shots off, not 3.  The 3rd and fatal bullet was from the type of rifle seen in the hands of a Secret Services agent in the following car. Only one photo shows the weapon and the SS subsequently denied it was there at all. Was it a monumental Whoops?!.

No idea if this doco has aired in the States, probably not.  

If anyone is still interested in this 50yo clusterfuffle here's a link to the doco.
 It's an Australian production which covers a retired Australian detective's 'cold case' investigation.  It's a view of the evidence from a new,  and detached perspective, not influenced by US authorities 'coercion' tactics.

  It makes very logical explanations of some of the 'mysteries', the 'magic' bullet etc.  It's trajectory is dead straight taking into account that the Kennedy's seat was higher than the front seats to allow a better view of them by the public.  A fact never mentioned in previous docos.  Makes a lot of sense, but have a look for yourselves at this page.

http://www.sbs.com.au/thesmokinggun/

Keep scrolling down for a rundown of the evidence etc.  Very well put together page, seeking input of opinion based on the evidence presented.  There's also the op to watch it but that may be blocked if it hasn't aired there yet.

I'm too tired to go through it all now, will have a look at the page in detail tomorrow.

btw. if the page won't open, which it didn't for me at first, go to sbs.com.au  then to 'Documentaries' on their home page and then The Smoking Gun.  No idea if Google is 'in on' the cover up.


----------



## Old Hipster (Nov 5, 2013)

I'll check it out from home, at work right now.

A few years ago the BBC had a documentary about the assassination and they really did a great job. 

How about Jackie was MKULTRA and she did it, ok it is really out there, but the proponents of it make a very convincing argument too.

Bascially any explanation other than the Warren Commission Report works better for me. LBJ or Castro or The Mob....


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 5, 2013)

Can't play the video no matter which route I take.


----------



## Old Hipster (Nov 5, 2013)

SifuPhil said:


> Can't play the video no matter which route I take.



It's a conspiracy, they don't want us Uhmericans knowing the truth.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 5, 2013)

Old Hipster said:


> It's a conspiracy, they don't want us Uhmericans knowing the truth.



I think you're right. Oh, well, I just spent a few minutes looking at Kennedy conspiracy films, so all is well.


----------



## Happyflowerlady (Nov 5, 2013)

I cant get the link to play either, but I did find the trailer for the documentary on youtube, and am adding the link, so we can at least get a teaser for the movie. 
I had read that it was a SS agent who shot Kennedy, but they thought it was part of a set up, I think by Johnson, or someone else high up in our government.
I have also read about the possibility of it being Mrs. Kennedy, and the MKUltra indoctrination, and while it IS way out there, the idea was well constructed, and certainly as possible as some of the other theories are.

http://youtu.be/Qn97UF_kfYo


----------



## SeaBreeze (Nov 5, 2013)

Took out the Jesse Ventura book They Killed Our President from the library, haven't read it yet, but hubby says basically the Mafia and CIA were involved. Here's a show on Coast that I missed...

*JFK Assassination*
*http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2013/10/05*



Date:
10-05-13
Host:
John B. Wells
Guests:
Jesse Ventura


John B. Wells was joined by former Governor of Minnesota, Jesse Ventura (book link), for a discussion of his research into the JFK assassination, an event he has been studying since 1985. Ventura voiced his doubt about the findings of the Warren Commission, noting how the circumstances surrounding JFK's death support a conspiracy against the president. Lee Harvey Oswald was not the killer, he declared. 

Ventura spoke about the convenient deaths associated with the assassination, expressing disbelief at how easily Jack Ruby was able to kill Oswald and then himself pass away of a curiously fast acting cancer. Over the course of his interview, Ventura revealed information which showed that the U.S. government not only was behind this egregious plot but took every step to make sure the truth would not come out. 

"When you look at the blood spray evidence, the fatal head shot obviously came from the front, it did not come from the rear [where Oswald was located]," Ventura continued, pointing to the blood covered windshields of two motorcycles behind president's car. Members of the medical team that worked on JFK recalled how the back portion of his head was missing, an injury consistent with a shot fired from the front, he explained. Ventura said he interviewed an ambulance driver who helped place JFK's body in the casket and he also confirmed that the back of the president's head was gone. 

The shot clearly came from behind the picket fence on the grassy knoll and the assassin can almost be made out in the Moormon photo, he disclosed. 

Ventura believes there was at least six shots fired that day and Oswald would not have been able to make them. Oswald was a radar operator in the military and there is no reason to believe he possessed the skills of an expert marksman, he said. In addition, Oswald allegedly would have to had shot at JKF through the branches of a large oak tree, he explained, noting the difficulty involved in making such shots.

According to Ventura, both himself and Marine sniper Carlos Hathcock were unable to replicate the shots credited to Oswald. He also mentioned Oswald's time in Russia as part of a false defector program and how he was never prosecuted for it, as well as how the lone gunman's tax returns remain top secret. These financial documents may show who in the government was paying him, Ventura suggested. 

JFK had many enemies within the government because of his support for civil rights, work to end the cold war and plans to withdrawal U.S. from Vietnam, Ventura theorized.

As evidence, he referred to E. Howard Hunt's deathbed confession, which revealed how the CIA with Lyndon B. Johnson's approval had orchestrated the operation code named "The Big Event." Interestingly, Johnson's first order of business with the cabinet after JFK's death was to discuss war in Vietnam, Ventura said.

He mentioned other problematic details about the assassination, including secret service agents being ordered off the car and the police motorcycle formation changing at the last minute. He also cited a memo in which Nicholas Katzenbach calls for what seems to be a top-level government cover-up of JFK's killing, "We need something to head off public speculation or congressional hearings of the wrong sort." 

*Book(s):* 

They Killed Our President
63 Documents the Government Doesn't Want You to Read
American Conspiracies


----------



## Old Hipster (Nov 5, 2013)

I love Jesse Ventura and think he is just what we need more of and I tend to agree with a lot of his ideas, especially about JFK.

ARGH..still at work and I can't go to some places I'd like to, more later.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Nov 5, 2013)

Time to retire Old Hipster, don't let that work get in the way! layful:


----------



## Old Hipster (Nov 5, 2013)

SeaBreeze said:


> Time to retire Old Hipster, don't let that work get in the way! layful:


Yeah really! it is interferring with my farting around on the internet.
5 more minutes and I am down the tunnel and out the door.


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 5, 2013)

Thought not Phil, we quite often can't play videos from different zones, some form of protection for shows not aired yet perhaps?  



It's all laid out in pics and text down the page anyway.
Just found another way to get to the page, at the bottom of the 'watch now' box in white text is "Interactive:view the evidence" which takes you to the page I mentioned.


Seems to me that it's usually the simplest, and dumbest cause that comes closest to solving history's mysteries. 

All the red herring Mafia, Reds, or LBJ plots (LBJ ? really? He couldn't organize a picnic could he?) conspiracies don't come as near believable as some clutzy, gung ho, highly agitated,  rookie Secret Service space cadet with a big gun in the following vehicle accidentally squeezing off a round in the million to one wrong direction when the car lurched or hit a bump. 
 (Did you know he was little more than a jumped up car polisher seconded from the car maintenance and allocation department because they were short handed that day?   Hell, anyone would give that guy an assault rifle and the job of protecting the current leading light on the planet right?)



It's no stretch of the imagination to envisage the highly tuned cover-your-arse reflexes of the FBI kicking in to avoid blame falling on them.
The real conspiracy came after the shots, not before.  

Who is the most likely contender to have concocted the deal that explains Jack Ruby's actions?   Who was in a position to set that up at such  short notice?   The commos? the Mafia, not their style, LBJ? nup...  the FBI witness protection crew gets my bet. That kind of thing was their stock in trade.

Who else had higher motivation to shut Oswald up than the FBI?  If they had snuffed him quietly in custody it would have focused attention on them.  The public performance of an apparently random 'patriot' shifted suspicion elsewhere.

Could you imagine the effect on the American public's psyche in that time of Cold War tension that the revelation of their 'infallible'  Secret Service spooks being about as much protection as the Keystone Cops would have had?  That fantasy had to be protected at any cost. 

Those of us who were old enough to remember it all, ask yourself how you would have reacted to the news that JFK had been accidentally blown away by his own security detail?  How gutted would you have felt?  
And even more importantly, just how embarrassed would the US itself have been??

It would have been the laughing stock of the world.  Nikita would have popped a vein rofling over it.
'The Emperor's new clothes' syndrome would have kicked in.  The US' power would have been revealed as largely bravado and smoke and mirrors propaganda, just like everyone else's.  The World would lose faith in their 'policeman.'  

That JFK was killed rocked the World.  But if it had known how he really died it would have knocked it fair off the tracks.

Can anyone think of a better reason for an instant and total cover-up? 

I guess LBJ was involved to an extent in the subsequent cover up, he'd  have to be, it was his Government's arse that was exposed to the blowtorch,   but he would have been along for the ride, not orchestrating it.

I file most conspiracy theories under 'entertainment' but I really like this one.  The 'Doh!' aspect especially appeals, and the ballistics evidence, if it's true as presented,  convinces me.  
Oswald's ammo was metal jacket which would have drilled a hole.  The round that blew Kennedy's head apart had to be not only hollow point, but was found to be a different calibre.  The calibre of the rifle the Security detail carried.  Nuff said?

 Personally, and don't take it wrong, I was massively relieved that day that someone had taken JFK out before he started WWIII.
I'd just turned 18 and wanted to live a bit longer.  All we got were newspaper and rudimentary TV reports of JFK playing chicken with Kruschev without much explanation of background that an 18 yo girl was apt to investigate or understand.  

To me, and my peers, he was the most dangerous man on the planet.  I/we saw him much how Kim Jong appears to us now, a posturing egotistical, chest beating nut job.   Not sayin' we were right, just telling it as we saw it at the time.
 We were still used to politicians doing things differently here I guess, and weren't clued up yet to the bias and headline fetish of the press. 
We still swallowed everything at face value and it, and he, all looked pretty damned scary from here.

Anyway, that's got the rambling cobwebs blown away for the morning. Americans no doubt viewed it all in a different light and I'd be interested to hear how you, personally, 'saw' it.


----------



## maxHR (Nov 5, 2013)

I agree Di, there was a rush by the secret service to cover their incompetence after the event. As Jack Nicholson said in "a Few good men", 'you can't handle the truth'. It would have devastated America to know the fatal bullet was fired by their own secret service. The secret service were out partying and womanising til the early hours of the morning, they denied even having a rifle, yet it was clearly photographed. 
   Something i noticed is how security is 'forward looking', - they look ahead for signs of trouble,- no one appears to be looking backwards for signs of trouble.
The tv show guy (Colin McLaren)  has also written a book, "the smoking Gun" , amazon link below with many other conspiracy books listed:
http://www.amazon.com/JFK-The-Smoking-Colin-McLaren/dp/1743179537


----------



## Sid (Nov 5, 2013)

I am suprised at how easily,all you folks are duped into falling for all these conspiracy theories non of which hold any water.
   About the only hint of truth to any of them is the fact that the whole thing was a big put on. The man behind it all was non other than JFK himself. It was the simplest if not the only way he and Marylin could be together. Don't non of you tell me you believed she was dead too.


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 5, 2013)

Well there you go spoiling the fun with facts again Sid.  



Geeze have a bit of consideration for those of us who haven't worked it all out yet.


----------



## Sid (Nov 5, 2013)

Well I am sorry DI. I didn't mean to seem inconciderate but I figured it was about  people knew.





Diwundrin said:


> Well there you go spoiling the fun with facts again Sid.
> 
> 
> 
> Geeze have a bit of consideration for those of us who haven't worked it all out yet.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 6, 2013)

I know what happened. JFK assassinated himself.
I saw it on television. 
Time travel is involved.

http://reddwarf.wikia.com/wiki/RD:_Tikka_to_Ride


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 6, 2013)

The scariest thing about that Warri is that I could follow that plot, it made perfect sense in Lister's universe, and I even had a snigger.  

It must time they repeated it again, has to be at least 6 months since it got a run.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 6, 2013)

Noteworthy dialogue from Tikka to Ride



> *Lister:* _Well, come with us back to Dallas, November 1963, be a second gunman. The gunman behind the grassy knoll._
> *Kennedy:* _You mean, assassinate myself?_
> *Lister:* _Yeah! It'll drive the conspiracy nuts crazy, but they'll never figure it out._



It worked. 
All the conspiracy theorists are nuts crazy.


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 6, 2013)

See it's those kind of attitudes and comments that make us paranoid!  People like you conspire to denigrate our honestly held beliefs in the unknowable and mock our attempts to better understand the true meaning of our place in the great conspiracy that created us.

You attack our faith in the omniscient powers of human chicanery and totally deny the existence of the trinity of the Power, the Money, and the Holy Ego as the creating force behind all conspiracies!  Shame on you, you...you heretic!

'D'ja like that one?


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 6, 2013)

Love it.

:lofl:


----------



## Katybug (Nov 6, 2013)

I have it taped to watch this weekend.  There are more theories to this than imaginable, but the jury is still out for me.  I've always thought the Mafia and CIA (Castro related) were involved, but there are several documentaries upcoming....one they keep advertising on *Sunday, Nov. 10th at 8:00/National Geographic Channel *-- and coming from them, it has to be reputable. But, honestly, we may never know for sure....


----------



## Sid (Nov 6, 2013)

Diwundrin said:


> See it's those kind of attitudes and comments that make us paranoid!  People like you conspire to denigrate our honestly held beliefs in the unknowable and mock our attempts to better understand the true meaning of our place in the great conspiracy that created us.
> 
> You attack our faith in the omniscient powers of human chicanery and totally deny the existence of the trinity of the Power, the Money, and the Holy Ego as the creating force behind all conspiracies!  Shame on you, you...you heretic!
> 
> 'D'ja like that one?



  Di, I would like to address your comment. However it will take a lot of time for me to look up some of those big words you used so stay tuned just in case I get it figgered out.


----------



## Old Hipster (Nov 6, 2013)

Fellow Smegheads! One Christmas I treated myself, well us, to the box set of every Red Dwarf episode, if the house were to catch fire, that would be one of the things I would grab first, well after my doggie.


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 6, 2013)

Don't you go sweatin' it now Sid, 

  I was just messin' with Warri.


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 6, 2013)

Old Hipster said:


> Fellow Smegheads! One Christmas I treated myself, well us, to the box set of every Red Dwarf episode, if the house were to catch fire, that would be one of the things I would grab first, well after my doggie.



I've got that boxed set too, eBay?


----------



## Sid (Nov 6, 2013)

"But, honestly, we may never know for sure...." 

        Katybug, You know I would like to believe the Warren report nailed it but I just can' quite buy it.
        I don't quite know just how to describe it but it just don't feel right. I was only a kid but what I was hearing at the time just didn't feel right.
        I know that isn't scientific but that just didn't feel right has kept me out of a few jams and has proven itself to me many time so I'll stick with it.
        I can't pick one theory over another but If JFK,Ruby, Oswald, Secret Servyce, Jackie and all the others were to come back from the dead and tell us what really happened some one would deny it and explain it all away.
        So I guess for now I'll stick with My JFK and Marilyn theory.

        On the more serious side I took it as a slap in the face of our country wehter from within or without.


----------



## Katybug (Nov 6, 2013)

Diwundrin said:


> Thought not Phil, we quite often can't play videos from different zones, some form of protection for shows not aired yet perhaps?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*I was reading your post thinking how much sense it was making, but then you completely lost me when you said how much you wanted him dead.  I realize you were young and didn't have a good understanding of the situation, but that thought is so foreign to me, I can't wrap my brain around it.  If you regarded him as Kim Jong, I get it, but I'm blown away as to why he would ever be perceived so evil.  Yes, there was the scare of war, but I just can't imagine him being thought of as such.  I'm sure you now know he was more terrified by the prospect of war than any of us, but, of course, you had no way of knowing that at the time. 

My admiration for this man is probably on the same level as the Pope is to Catholics, despite the womanizer he was, so it was a bit of a shock reading that.  At what point did you change your perception of him, assuming that you did?   

I don't mean any of this to sound angry, not at all, just shocked that anyone from a friendly country of the USA felt so threatened by him. That would have been of consolation to me that our countries are so friendly, as we were with everyone at the time other than Russia and Cuba.  I've never heard the slightest hint of the opinion he was considered dangerous, other than by those 2 countries.  

That's what makes this board so amazing to be able to hear the opinions from other countries.  
*


----------



## Katybug (Nov 6, 2013)

Sid said:


> "But, honestly, we may never know for sure...."
> 
> Katybug, You know I would like to believe the Warren report nailed it but I just can' quite buy it.
> I don't quite know just how to describe it but it just don't feel right. I was only a kid but what I was hearing at the time just didn't feel right.
> ...



Didn't, still doesn't, feel right to me either, Sid, and why was so much intentionally kept secret for X number of years?  It truly was a slap in the face in the worst possible way.


----------



## Katybug (Nov 6, 2013)

maxHR said:


> Just saw the show "JFK The smoking gun" on SBS TV australia. Crikey! JFK was accidentally shot by his own secret service??? Two bullets from Lee harvey Oswald, one from the secret service guy who lost his balance in the car and fired accidentally. Not new, but based on the book "mortal error" by Bonar Menninger.
> Mulder.



Mind blowing!!!


----------



## maxHR (Nov 6, 2013)

I was in Australia at the time and did not see JFK as a threat. He drew a line in the sand over nukes in Cuba, calling the soviets bluff. that was the right decision. Every one knew about the MAD scenario, - Mutually Assured Destruction, so i was not expecting the end of the world.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 6, 2013)

Katybug, I don't think Di's 18 year old reaction was at all typical of all Australians. When I heard the news, I wept because I thought JFK offered so much hope to the world and to the advancement of progressive politics. I was very politically naïve then but saw in the Kennedys something that doesn't come around very often in history.

FWIW, I also wept when Churchill died, and I did know all about his many weaknesses but I acknowledged his contribution during WW II to the cause of western freedom and was prepared to overlook all the rest.


----------



## maxHR (Nov 6, 2013)

There is a wiki page on 'Mortal Error' the book by Bonar Menninger. The guy who did the hard work on the ballistics was Howard Donahue. some explanation below:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortal_Error:_The_Shot_That_Killed_JFK

 The guy in the secret service who allegedly fired by accident was George Hickey, he died in 2011.


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 6, 2013)

> Warrigal wrote:  ...Katybug, I don't think Di's 18 year old reaction was at all typical of  all Australians. When I heard the news, I wept because I thought JFK  offered so much hope to the world and to the advancement of progressive  politics. I was very politically naïve then but saw in the Kennedys  something that doesn't come around very often in history.
> 
> FWIW, I also wept when Churchill died, and I did know all about his many  weaknesses but I acknowledged his contribution during WW II to the  cause of western freedom and was prepared to overlook all the rest.



We are still the light and dark side of things aren't we Polly?
I must have been in different company to most I guess. Those I worked with saw it much as I did.

I was always a cynic so didn't see the 'romantic Camelot fantasy', just another politician big-noting himself and flim-flamming the public with the help of his publicity machine.  
If it's any surprise Warri, Churchill was none too popular in our house either, he was, to us, a warmongering old Pom who was using us as cannon fodder. He might have 'saved' England but he didn't do us any favours.  We never did buy the romanticised version of 'heroes' that most did.

Things were as they were so I won't gloss over how and why I thought as I did. It's an explanation of where I was coming from, not an excuse for thinking that way.  To great extent I still think much the same way, differently about some things, and tempered with a lot more understanding of why I think that way now. Also with the ability to recognise how much upbringing biases our thought processes, but overall, still cynical, jaded and suspicious of anything too good to be true.

We're the product of the environment we're raised with to an extent, and I was raised among the descendents of Belfast Irish and Snobby Scots.  Neither of which had any great respect for the trappings of office, especially English office,  and even less for religion in general and Catholics in particular.
Most Australians of that era had at least some English DNA and viewed things from a different perspective. But England was never 'home' to us. If anything, it was the 'enemy' of our forebears.

The mealtime discussion among the men was lefty biased politics,  the manipulations by the Catholics in the unions and in politics, and when they had the spare time, the  shortcomings and plain crookedness of the 'aristocracy' and rich people.  

Poor ole JFK was a rich catholic, he didn't stand a chance in our house.  


Neither did Churchill, but that's another longish story.

An uncle had served for a time attached to American forces in Borneo and while he always mentioned how grateful he was for a share of their rations  (Aussies lived on tinned Bully-beef, hard biscuit, and a handful of tea leaves where he was stationed) and the ordinance they brought in (it was 2 day walk for resupply where he'd been stationed) he brought back some strange tales of their different attitudes and seemingly boastful and somewhat, to him, grating behaviour. 

 They were just so different to how things were done here back then.  He was a country boy of the Great Depression era, he just couldn't stand a 'braggard', that was anethema in our culture back then. 

Patriotism was something you carried in your heart, not your mouth, and you fought if you felt it strongly enough, and most did, and fled if you didn't. End of section. You didn't talk about it.  It wasn't a badge that was worn or proclaimed loudly and publicly as a status symbol.   Political affiliations were proclaimed proudly, patriotism was not, it was taken for granted.
If anyone had announced loudly in a bar that they were a 'proud  Australian' he'd have found himself alone as some kind of nut case. 



Anyone considered a BS artist or bragger was usually dished up behind a  shed somewhere to teach them manners and bit of humility.  We were  quietly respectful of those who deserved it and loudly critical of those  who didn't. No one needed to blow their own trumpet, their peers and  friends would advise them of their status in no uncertain terms. We  pulled no punches and were a largely bullsh*t free zone back then, so  American culture was still more than a little alien to us.

  American  politics was *totally* alien to us!  (We're still trying to get our heads around it. 

 )
 Kennedy, as the leader of that culture,  was presumed to be the biggest brag artist of all and seen, by us, as using patriotism, his military record and cutesy 'Camelot' persona as a marketing tool. 

That's how things were seen in our house around the late 40s to 60s when I was growing up.  Others would have viewed it differently perhaps, depending on what mealtime discussions they were raised with.

Don't take it personal, Royalty was treated with total disdain too.  It  was a very pragmatic family I grew up in, where fantasy and entertainment was enjoyed but  never, ever, mistaken as being the real thing. Nothing was accepted at face value alone.

Soooo...  we/I saw American politicians in that  flag waving, brass band, chest thumping, BS light and  Kennedy was just a poser pretending to be more than he was, to me. 
 Most seem to have seen him as holding the fort against the Commos, I just saw him as challenging the dogs of war to a stoush to protect his vested interest.  To me he wasn't doing that upholding the virtues of freedom thing so much as protecting the business interests of his dynasty and risking the lives of others to do it.  See? Told you I was terminally cynical.



I didn't share Max's faith in "the MAD scenario, - Mutually Assured Destruction," theory as being any deterrent to a psycho general or politician of any Nationality.

As I got better educated than I had been at home and at school I began to view things in more detail and rationalize more but still find it hard to get past that initial opinion of the Kennedys. Sorry.

As I grew older I met more and more Americans and they weren't nearly as 'grating' as those portrayed by my even more cynical uncle, still coming from a slightly different angle to us,  but more like us basically than ever dreamed of back when I was just 2 years out of school.

I still see your politicians as empty posers though, but then I see ours that way too.





> _Katy wrote: *I don't mean any of this to sound angry, not at all, just shocked  that anyone from a friendly country of the USA felt so threatened by  him. That would have been of consolation to me that our countries are so  friendly, as we were with everyone at the time other than Russia and  Cuba.  I've never heard the slightest hint of the opinion he was  considered dangerous, other than by those 2 countries.
> 
> That's what makes this board so amazing to be able to hear the opinions from other countries. *_



Ding Ding Ding.  Ain't that the truth?! We certainly aren't going to learn anything from our media or Governments. 



No offence offered or taken Katy, I consider you a friend so this is an honest expression of how I view things.
You wondered why people in an allied country felt differently, well, obviously not all of us did, just cynics like me.

But why does this documentary's theory surprise you all so much?  Do you ask yourself why this theory is taken as 'a slap in the face for your Country' as mentioned elsewhere?    Why is it a 'slap in the face?' Who is slapping you?
What does that mean exactly?  Was Max right? is it the old "you can't handle the truth" syndrome? 
 I think I'd rather be cynical and never be surprised at the depths people sink to than be a Pollyanna and get devastated that things aren't as pretty as we imagined.  But that's just me.

While I'm being brutally honest I'll add this. .. and this is 'the view from here', not necessarily right or anyone else's just as I see it.
Maybe the hurt surprise is because the World always took a lot more interest in the US than people in the US ever took in the rest of the World.  Your population seemed to dwell on a cloud above, and disconnected to the rest of us.
 America *was* the world and nothing else mattered enough to bother about except if it had scenery.  
Your government was always right. It's motives were always virtuous, in God you trusted so if a gesture of 'liberating' some Country went tits-up then it didn't matter, at least the intentions were good from an American perspective so it must have been the 'right thing' regardless of the opinions of those being liberated.  You believed unflinchingly in the patriotism and 'good' in your Government Authorities.  Well, up until around the 60s anyway. You were the richest and most powerful Nation on Earth so why bother looking anywhere else?

Well, perhaps the World has changed while you weren't watching it ?  
Maybe the shock of waking from the pleasant dream is setting in.

.....You know that's all just generalization to paint a naive picture of a complex issue I hope.
I don't know of any here who actually fit that picture now, but it did  seem the norm until a few decades ago, and judging from what we see on  Facebook sometimes, it still is for some there.

  These differing views of things from other quarters may come as a surprise  to many Americans because they've been living in a bubble of tradition,  propaganda and parochial bullshit for centuries.  The internet has set  you all free it seems.  Hallelujah for that! 
We can speak to each other now as  people that we like and connect with at personal level and not just as walking talking advertisements for our own Countries.   

 I've noticed a radical change in thinking, just on forums,  over the last few years.  Welcome to the REAL world Americans, glad you could join us.  You'll like it here but things aren't always as you're told they are.  We've just had more time to get used to knowing that we are being blatantly lied to than you have.

That 'policeman' that the States has been to the World isn't seen as the ray of hope it was in the past, and it was very real and appreciated in the past.  Sadly, that 'policeman'  is being seen much like an LA cop by many these days.   
Regardless of how you take my honest comments here, you can believe that I am every bit as gutted about how that's gone as any of you are.

I keep hearing amazed tones from posters wondering why the world doesn't 'like' America any more.  Well, maybe it isn't the America we liked any more.  
Maybe America is trying too hard to be something it isn't any more. It's going broke keeping up unnecessary appearances. 
It diddles about with the world's economies over some piddling political point and wonders why the World is losing faith in it's leadership and thinking of switching currency standards. What's puzzling about that?
It blazes into places better left to rot and drags the rest of us in with it and then gets hurt feelings about protests about that form of 'diplomacy.' 
If anyone knows why we are really in Iraq could they please raise their hand?  Is America profiting ethically or financially from that adventure? We sure aren't, but we're there with you.  Excuse our confusion as to why, because it still beats me.  Was the revenge to restore National pride worth the lives paid??

 Maybe it's time for a reality check all round, and a change of attitude from defending traditions of greatness to changing down gears a bit to suit the changing circumstances.  We didn't want to change either, no one does, but it happens eventually to every Nation throughout history. Little quiet ones seem to last longer than bright shiny ones. Empires crumble disastrously, small countries just suffer the ripples and continue on unnoticed.

The internet allows you to learn what is bugging people elsewhere via honestly posted opinions and explanations from other Countries. 
 Most won't do it because they are afraid to offend. 
 I am too, and desperately hope that the above hasn't offended, it wasn't meant to, it was meant to explain reasons for views expressed, nothing more. 
 I'm louder 'mouthed' than most so I've taken the punt to put it out there.
I'm being honestly forthright because I like and respect you too much to patronize you with platitudes and PC politeness.  If you ask me a question on my views then I'll answer it honestly, like it or not.
.
  Feel free to do likewise if we could do with some 'explaining' too.   I'm sure there's plenty to find.
That's what we need to do among friends.  Better them explain feelings about things to us than enemies. 

Don't be surprised or offended that the States isn't perfect.  It never was.  Nowhere is.  The danger lies in believing that it is.  Love it because it's yours and you belong to it, not because it's 'better' than somewhere else. It doesn't have to be.
Oh, and buy yourselves some better bullshit alarms, you're gonna need 'em. Politicians keep breeding!


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 7, 2013)

Diwundrin, you're a rare species where I dwell.
I just hope you're not also an endangered species.

:eek1:


----------



## maxHR (Nov 7, 2013)

MAD has worked so far. Gotta wonder about the 2,468 operational nukes in the USA, been sitting around for 50 years. I mean have you ever tried to start a lawnmower that has been sitting around for 50 years???:lofl::lofl:


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 7, 2013)

Di, I wish you had written my school's history books - it would have made discovering the truth a lot smoother. :applouse:

I've never bought into the whole Camelot schtick myself. I know John came from a family of robber barons and alcoholics. I know he was a womanizer. I realize just how close to the brink he brought us with Cuba. I know how he pandered to minorities to get his precious votes. 

In his 35 months in office he stumbled from crisis to fiasco. When he came in he okayed the Bay of Pigs invasion. Then he got brought to school by Khrushchev at the Vienna summit conference. That led to the Cuban missile crises. He supported the coup in Iraq. 

Then there was a little thing called Vietnam.

His attorney general, brother Bobby, ordered wiretaps on _New York Times  _and _Newsweek_ reporters, along with various congressmen and steel  executives who’d had the nerve to raise prices. At JFK’s instigation in 1961, the Internal Revenue Service set up a “strike force” aimed at groups opposing the administration. 

A 1968 study on “juvenile idealization of the president” quoted a  Houston mother: “When my little girl came out of school she told me  someone killed the president, and her thoughts were — since the  president was dead, where would we get our food and clothes from?” But  “juvenile idealization” isn’t limited to juveniles.

Unfortunately.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 7, 2013)

maxHR said:


> MAD has worked so far. Gotta wonder about the 2,468 operational nukes in the USA, been sitting around for 50 years. I mean have you ever tried to start a lawnmower that has been sitting around for 50 years???:lofl::lofl:



At least with that lawnmower, if you stored it properly it might just need a new spark-plug and some fresh fuel. The worst that could happen is that it won't start.

I shudder to think what would happen to us if they treat those ICBMs the same way.


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 7, 2013)

Well I've never claimed to be normal Warri.  


... and I have the odd brainsnap and live dangerously sometimes too.  I prefer to state things honestly rather than beat about the bush, clears the air and makes further discussion easier.  I don't mind being disagreed with, I'm very used to that. 



I'm not claiming everyone down here thinks my way either. Maybe I read the wrong newspapers and should have stayed with the Woman's Weekly and just absorbed the glorious romance of it all as it appears most women my age did.  



I'm sitting here chewing my nails that they won't toss me out on my ear,for saying it.  But I do know how they must feel.

 Aren't we sad that 'our' old Australia has gone forever?  The land is here but the society we grew up in isn't. And no matter how much we kid ourselves it's never coming back.  Only our generation remember it, let alone really understand the traditions and history that formed it. Our 'old' ways were more like Americas than I realised.  We lived in a bubble of smug too.

We thought only good people got to run things, that politicians were especially smart people that could be trusted to make good sensible decisions. That newspapers reported the truth, that if we were nice to everybody they'd be nice back. 
We re-organized Koori and New Guinea cultures to mimic our own 'for their own good.'  Our intentions were good so we must be appreciated for doing it right?    We were 'civilized', we were more powerful, therefore we must have been doing the 'right' thing.

We were comfy  riding on the sheeps back and Mother England and Uncle Sam would keep us safe. We thought we were self sufficient, until Europe stopped buying our produce and the guts fell out of the mineral industries, and polar fleece was found to be cheaper and as warm as wool and our export wool sat in mountains in warehouses, unsaleable. Oh, and the price of oil went through the roof and that drilling our own oil didn't make it cheaper because we were shipping that to other people for even higher prices. Just as we are with the natural gas!

We looked around us one day and realised that we were the only Australian born person in the whole Mall.  That those from other countries didn't give a toss about our 'Aussie traditions' in the main, and that although some 'assimilated' to a large degree most just didn't 'get' us.  We have assimilated to the new society, the newcomers haven't assimilated to 'ours'.  But to be honest those old ways and principles wouldn't work in today's world anyway, so .....



 Our first real jolt though came before many of us were born,  from the realization that not all our wars would be fought in far away places.  Suddenly Asia existed as more than a quaint but insignificant land mass nearby and we weren't quite as safe as we'd thought.  Uncle Sam was still with us but Mother England had fled to protect her own shores. Fair enough I suppose but it was a massive wake up as to our importance in the UK scheme of things.  We were just too far away to matter any more. We were expendable.

A few decades ago the Asian politician who was brave enough, and said it best, and shocked us to us our core, was Singapore's PM Lee Kwan Yew. 
 He referred to us as needing to change our direction or risk becoming the 'White Trash of Asia."   ... And he was right, and we did change, and while we're still in danger of drowning under Asia's influence at least we have gotten over ourselves as being bullet-proof and are taking our business to them instead of relying on Europe as we were.  We are learning to compete in their World now, we're adapting just as fast as we possibly can.

We've made the change of culture more gently perhaps than America is experiencing but changed we have. We survived letting it go, so will Americans, I just fear they're leaving it a little late.  It's going to be tough to handle it all at once.
Hanging on until the last minute pretending it isn't happening until the rug gets pulled is a harder shock to take than looking at the changes and why they're happening and adapting to them.  Accepting things as they are is my position on it, no surprises and disappointments and feelings of betrayal that way.

   I'm afraid the whole world is a different place than 50 years ago, and not too many societies have survived unscathed. Only cynical ones.


----------



## Katybug (Nov 7, 2013)

Diwundrin said:


> We are still the light and dark side of things aren't we Polly?
> I must have been in different company to most I guess. Those I worked with saw it much as I did.
> 
> I was always a cynic so didn't see the 'romantic Camelot fantasy', just another politician big-noting himself and flim-flamming the public with the help of his publicity machine.
> ...



*You make many valid points, my friend.  Some I totally agree with as in our being Savior of the world,(why the hell are we in Iraq, or any place else we foolishly jumped in the middle of ??!!) and others points I question.  I continue to remind myself how boring it would be if we all agreed on these issues.   

But I just woke up and waiting for coffee to perk, cobwebs galore.   I want to address your post when I have more time, after grandaughter, who is arriving shortly, goes home on Sunday.  And then I would like to respond in more detail.  Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I certainly respect yours.  I appreciate your response and understand more where you were coming from, but originally reading it stated so blatantly (as I saw it), I found myself very offended, I have to say.    It made me extremely defensive of my hero, someone whom in life I loved and admired, and in death became a martyred hero above all the rest -- at least to a great majority of us. 

I'll be back later in the wk-end with more comments and questions, which I know you will be happy to answer, and I sincerely appreciate your honesty.

Have yourself a good weekend!
*


----------



## Katybug (Nov 7, 2013)

maxHR said:


> I was in Australia at the time and did not see JFK as a threat. He drew a line in the sand over nukes in Cuba, calling the soviets bluff. that was the right decision. Every one knew about the MAD scenario, - Mutually Assured Destruction, so i was not expecting the end of the world.



*Thanks, Max and Warrigal.  Everyone has their own opinion and it's wonderful that we're in countries where we can express ourselves.  Di explained exactly where she was coming from and I get it, I'm just way overly sensitive on the subject.  

Look at the unending dissenting opinions in our gov't, everyone's gov't, enough to make you sick thinking about it.    *


----------



## Katybug (Nov 7, 2013)

SifuPhil said:


> Di, I wish you had written my school's history books - it would have made discovering the truth a lot smoother. :applouse:
> 
> I've never bought into the whole Camelot schtick myself. I know John came from a family of robber barons and alcoholics. I know he was a womanizer. I realize just how close to the brink he brought us with Cuba. I know how he pandered to minorities to get his precious votes.
> 
> ...



I'm not going to read this because I like you too much and I'm super sensitive when it comes to this family who despite their multitudes of sometimes huge warts, dedicated their lives to the service of our country.  Going forward, I'm accentuating the positives and eliminating the negatives on this thread and wishing you a wonderful weekend, dear Phil!! (wink!)


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 7, 2013)

Don't let it wreck your weekend Katy, have a great time with your grand-daughter, sorting out the problems of World among ourselves can wait.   If we can do it without going to war we can sell the trick to the UN.


----------



## Katybug (Nov 7, 2013)

Diwundrin said:


> Don't let it wreck your weekend Katy, have a great time with your grand-daughter, sorting out the problems of World among ourselves can wait.   If we can do it without going to war we can sell the trick to the UN.



Thanks, Di and wishing you a peaceful and contented weekend.


----------



## Jackie22 (Nov 7, 2013)

Diwundrin, I read both of your last post with much interest ( btw..I am not offended at all) and like Katy I agree with some...you are right about the international opinion of the US in recent years, we have many fences to mend in that department...there are those in our Country that recognize and want to change this... I am not amazed at all at the hostility toward our country.

I disagree with your opinion on JFK, I know he had many faults and warts, and believe it or not I am not a romantic pollyanna..lol.  One thing, the election process makes braggarts of ALL politicians from all countries....The Kennedys have done a lot of good for this Country and sacrificed greatly for their efforts.  I do not see the Bay of Pigs affair as Kennedy protecting 'his' vested interest....I think he made the right move to protect our country and deter hostility at our doorstep.

While I think being a cynic to some degree is good, I think we have to also realize the positive, sometimes we have to really look for it though lol, I believe the positive is still out there.

So, I do appreciate your honest thoughts and you taking the time to post them,  what I'm trying to saying is don't paint us all with the same brush.


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 7, 2013)

> So, I do appreciate your honest thoughts and you taking the time to post  them,  what I'm trying to saying is don't paint us all with the same  brush.



That was never the intention or even my opinion Jackie. My view of the Kennedy thing from here was the opposite of how Warri and other saw it, so I realise that America has as many viewpoints as it has people too. We don't all think the same, and we don't all get it right.  But there are a lot of shades of right and wrong in opinions anyway and a lot of different reasons to think we have nailed it, so who gets to judge? 

Unfortunately we don't often hear from the people we should hear from, the World's view is formed from they see on TV these days more than ever, but even back in the 60's.  We can't know the background to every decision made nor how many actually agree with those decisions.  All the indication of what the people of a Nation is thinking that we have is what we see portrayed by the leaders they elect and by the traditions they value most.  .. and now, the internet which is the greatest window of all.

Try a quick test. Think of a country and look at what instant 'mind picture' the name of it conjures up.  Is that picture entirely true of how that country really thinks and is? 

 I admit that my picture of the word China is of a China that hasn't existed for a century.  I picture Australia as a gum tree in a desert with roos under it, and Egypt as a Pyramid in the moonlight, England as a snapshot of the guards at Buck Palace, Italy as a Roman ruin in Tuscany, I picture the US as a brass band parade with spangles and flags. (sorry

)  

We only form National pictures from what we see as symbolic of the Nation.  The impression we got of the old America was only what we saw in movies, and what we heard of how it operated politically was gleaned from what the media chose to tell us.  The more media we watched, or 50 years ago, the more different journalists we read, the more details and insight we got. 

It was harder work back then and most just settled for the pretty wrapping and didn't look at the whole package.  I didn't see the whole thing either, it was more an instinct than knowledge that put me off him.  As time went on and things got ramped up to boiling point I got more and more convinced that something was up with his diplomacy skills and it made me very nervous.

My view of the Kennedys is a view from 50 years ago, formed from the available information,of 50 years ago. 
 I can't change how I processed that information back then.  It is done and dusted and that decision was relevant to me at the time.  It has no bearing on how I view things now.  It was asked why I didn't see JFK as the shining light most did, I answered why by explaining the various bits and pieces of info I had access to and how they formed a mind picture of it all.  Maybe I had different pieces to others and my picture wasn't as pretty.  But it's a 50 year old picture now. The pieces have changed, and the Kennedys are long gone.  

What was relevant then isn't now. The US is different now in many ways, and so are we.
I honestly don't give a toss either way about Obama, I don't know or care to research enough to form an opinion.  I leave that to you who elected him.  You don't need to care a tuppenny about what makes our less than illustrious leaders tick either.  
Unless they decide to take on China and ask you to join us.  That would no doubt peak your interest right? 

 

JFK and the Camelot thing was rammed down our throats, nothing anywhere near as interesting as the Cuban missile crisis was going on and the media was flooded with it. We saw more of him than we saw of our own leading lights.  We had to take notice of what he was up to, and I added 2 + 2 and kept coming up with 5.  Something just didn't gel with me.  I'm sorry that I can't placate his fans by suddenly seeing him differently but whether my summation was right or wrong about his motives doesn't matter does it?  It's hardly an attack on the whole population, I hadn't even met more than one or two Americans back then.  

As to anyone taking offence at my misconception of your country 50 years ago,  how do think we feel knowing that some Americans still  think there's nothing here but crocodiles and kangaroos and we're a pack of rubes living in bark huts?  

How offended would you be if an Australian was amazed to learn that you actually had cities over there?  
Would you be offended to learn that they also thought you were a still a British colony with no government of  your own at all and the Queen ruled us directly?  Well, it wasn't 50 years ago that I've heard exactly that about us from American tourists.  
Talk about an offensively outdated and warped 'view' eh?  But I wasn't offended, I have to admit i was pretty damned amused that they were so clueless about anything outside of their own Country. I felt free to 'educate' them. 

 
They were in the minority though, I know too well most are not like that at all.

  ... and in case you're embarrassed about them, how do you think we feel about our own Australian tourists who behave like drunken louts and the impression that leaves of all of us in the minds of other Nations?  No wonder Asians, particularly in Bali, see us as 'white trash.'

Anyway,  there's no reason to get offended if I get some things wrong, explain nicely why they're wrong and how things are different to what I envisage. Feel free to 'educate' me.  
Of course you'll be 50 years too late to sort me out about Kennedy though. 



Well I'm rambled out for the day, night all.


----------



## Sid (Nov 7, 2013)

"Love it because it's yours and you belong to it,"   I do, in spite of it all, I do because It is mine and I am It's .


----------



## Jackie22 (Nov 8, 2013)

Diwundrin said:


> That was never the intention or even my opinion Jackie. My view of the Kennedy thing from here was the opposite of how Warri and other saw it, so I realise that America has as many viewpoints as it has people too. We don't all think the same, and we don't all get it right.  But there are a lot of shades of right and wrong in opinions anyway and a lot of different reasons to think we have nailed it, so who gets to judge?
> 
> Unfortunately we don't often hear from the people we should hear from, the World's view is formed from they see on TV these days more than ever, but even back in the 60's.  We can't know the background to every decision made nor how many actually agree with those decisions.  All the indication of what the people of a Nation is thinking that we have is what we see portrayed by the leaders they elect and by the traditions they value most.  .. and now, the internet which is the greatest window of all.
> 
> ...



Good Morning Di, I think we all tend to bristle when we hear criticism of our country, after all home is home and where the heart is and all that jazz and we've all had misconceptions at one time or other I certainly have, the only way we can grow as a country or as an individual is to recognize that they are just that...misconceptions.    I agree that the opinions of our country and leaders are formed from the output of the media.  We have a really BIG problem with that here, but I think people are realizing more and more that this output is coming directly from the owners of the media or other big money to further their agenda, regulations on the media were cut way back a few years ago and what we have now is the results.

Again, I'm not offended and I hope I haven't offended...certainly don't mean to offend.  I appreciate your thoughts...you have a very insightful way of writing to express your view, something that I lack.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 8, 2013)

Awww, that's nice, when everyone plays so well together!

Now ... about that Lincoln guy ... I heard it was actually his old hardware store clerk that shot him, and it was actually done by a steam-powered remote control pistol ... layful:


----------



## Old Hipster (Nov 8, 2013)

Diwundrin said:


> I've got that boxed set too, eBay?


 A bookstore was going out of business and had it half price. 

And I loved that JFK episode. But it would be impossible to pick a favorite episode, because they were all brilliant.


----------



## drifter (Nov 8, 2013)

There's another something (documentary or movie) on television showing something about JFK, this coming Sunday night. Has anyone seen anything on this?


----------



## Katybug (Nov 9, 2013)

Oh yes, I have it set to tape via DVR in case I'm not home.  It's going to be a biggie and I can't wait to see it.  It will be on Nat'l Geographic Channel at 8 or 9, can't remember, but check your listings.  Should be a good one!


----------



## Jackie22 (Nov 10, 2013)

Katybug said:


> Oh yes, I have it set to tape via DVR in case I'm not home.  It's going to be a biggie and I can't wait to see it.  It will be on Nat'l Geographic Channel at 8 or 9, can't remember, but check your listings.  Should be a good one!



Thanks, for the heads up here, I'll watch it.


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 10, 2013)

They're having a bit of a Kennedy fest here too for the anniversary, running a different doco every Sunday for weeks.  Last night's was one called 'Jackie without Jack' and it really did them no favours.  

 Don't know who produced it but it focused on the interviews Jackie did with some journo after the assassination, and how she was dishing dirt on foreign leaders, boosting her own input into decisions she had nothing to do with,  and glossing over their less than real Camelot marriage etc.  Avowing her undying love for Jack which didn't stop her marrying Onassis, whom she knew well before JFK was out of the picture.
It painted her as more intent on cementing herself, through JFK, in history as more than they ever really were, than anything approaching the truth.  She wanted the Camelot myth to continue possibly to ensure advantage for her kids, which I suppose is fair enough.  Shame that didn't pan out well for her either.

It mentioned too how addicted JFK was to various painkillers and was effectively a junkie.  I remember reading about that so it must have been reported in the press somewhere here at the 'missile crisis' time, which is another reason I considered him dangerous.

It was a very cynical doco.  You'd almost think I wrote it. 

 

Don't watch that one if you wanna hold onto the dream.


----------



## That Guy (Nov 10, 2013)

http://www.jfkapresidentbetrayed.org

JFK -- A President Betrayed.  Watched it yesterday.  Excellent!  Pretty obvious why whoever killed him wanted him gone...


----------



## Katybug (Nov 11, 2013)

SifuPhil said:


> _Now ... about that Lincoln guy ... I heard it was actually his old hardware store clerk that shot him, and it was actually done by a steam-powered remote control pistol ..._ layful:




Between watching too many Kennedy documentaries, my awful morning and all these heartwarming war photos, I was in a funk!  I went looking for ya and found it -- a post to make me laugh!  Thanks, buddy.


----------



## Katybug (Nov 11, 2013)

Diwundrin said:


> They're having a bit of a Kennedy fest here too for the anniversary, running a different doco every Sunday for weeks.  Last night's was one called 'Jackie without Jack' and it really did them no favours.
> 
> Don't know who produced it but it focused on the interviews Jackie did with some journo after the assassination, and how she was dishing dirt on foreign leaders, boosting her own input into decisions she had nothing to do with,  and glossing over their less than real Camelot marriage etc.  Avowing her undying love for Jack which didn't stop her marrying Onassis, whom she knew well before JFK was out of the picture.
> It painted her as more intent on cementing herself, through JFK, in history as more than they ever really were, than anything approaching the truth.  She wanted the Camelot myth to continue possibly to ensure advantage for her kids, which I suppose is fair enough.  Shame that didn't pan out well for her either.
> ...




Thanks for the heads up, DI, because I would have tuned it in. I can promise it would have been switched in no time. This man and his family is one of whom the majority of Americans adored and idolized, and their deaths, including John, Jr., martyred them even more so.  As for me, it's a bit like it being a member of your family....(and I am gonna say it like I heard it,) "They may be a bit of a POS, but they're your POS," and you don't want to hear anything negatively said about them... whether or not it's true.  Harsh analogy, as the Kennedys were hardly that, but you get my point.  

When you're on a forum, that's entirely different than having a remote in your hand.   People are free to say whatever they feel and be proud to share their opinions. (How did ya like that CMA on our previous conversations? )   LOL and have a good day, Di.


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 11, 2013)

"None so blind as those who will not see" eh Katy ? 

  Don't blame you, sometimes we need the fantasy to make life bearable and cover up the warts on our heroes.  I must be a masochist, I prefer to know about and accept  the warts as part of the picture,  but most don't.  No harm done in that I guess as long as the dreams aren't shattered too harshly.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 11, 2013)

I heard that Woodrow Wilson was gay, bi-polar and liked to dress up as Fanny Brice on the weekends ... 

Now Katy, you can't get mad at me _this_ time - I'm _not_ talking about JFK and his penchant for drowning puppies ...


----------



## Katybug (Nov 11, 2013)

Diwundrin said:


> *"None so blind as those who will not see" eh Katy ?*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Katybug (Nov 11, 2013)

Okay, this is a new one....he drowned puppies? After all these years, they've wisely left that out.....good thing!  But you're saying that he did that, right?  I am going to be heartsick if I find this to be true, but it's midnight and I turn into a pumpkin shortly.

Chat with you guys later.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 11, 2013)

Katybug said:


> Okay, this is a new one....he drowned puppies? After all these years, they've wisely and carefully left that out.....good thing!  But you're saying that he did that, right?  I am going to be heartsick if I find this to be true, but it's midnight and I turn into a pumpkin shortly.



Oh, sure. They have photos. It was on some bridge near some place called Marty's Scrapyard or something like that - name of the town was Chappasticka, I think.

He got drunk on elderberry wine, put the puppies in paper sacks and tossed 'em into the water to see if they would float. If they did, he pronounced them innocent. 



> Chat with you guys later.



Sweet dreams!


----------



## Anne (Nov 11, 2013)

Umm...Phil............






*sigh*  nevermind.


:lofl:


----------



## That Guy (Nov 12, 2013)

With all the JFK stuff going on, I'm going to continue pushing "JFK - A President Betrayed".  An excellent documentary.


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 12, 2013)

I'm about JFK'd out the more Docos I watch the less the info makes sense.  They all come in from some angle, some fanning the fantasy, some pushing the conspiracy theories, some continuing to decorate the cover-up,  some just plain confused and many present different time lapses, ammunition, angles,sequence of shots etc as facts.  They can't all be 'facts' if they're different.

The reason I like  the 'Smoking Gun' one is that it has no axe to grind.  It was an investigation done by a retired Australian detective.  A very good one in his day. It was a 'hobby' that he chose to pursue when he retired.
It was produced by a partially Government funded, but independent public channel.
 He used the evidence as it stood and examined the assassination as a crime scene. 
 The incident held no special meaning to him, he isn't American, it was just another murder to be solved. 
He was disconnected from it's cultural meaning.  He had no political agenda nor any connection to the US security games. He had no motivation to promote a defensive cover-up.
He had no interest in the shooting's motive, and by extension no interest in conspiracies.
 He had no bias toward a 'preferred' outcome. 
 He treated no evidence as irrelevant because it didn't fit a pre-conceived assumption.  
He took nothing at face value, including the 3 cartridge cases found in the Depository.  On close examination he detected an anomaly that has never been mentioned in other docos I've seen.  
One of the cartridges was damaged, slightly dented. It appeared 'old'.  He surmised that it had been used as a 'plug slug' to keep dust out of the firing chamber rather than as a cast off from the shots fired. He posited that this was common among shooters but I'll take his word for that, not in a position to judge, never heard of it, but then why would it be a common topic?

It was found in a different position to the two ejected cartridges.  
A doco the other night explained this by 'repositioning' Oswald between shots to account for it's position rather than accept that perhaps he really had only fired twice and the 3rd casing was an anomaly. They made no examination of the actual cases, just their positions.  They even managed to extend the time between the 1st and 3rd shots to accommodate their explanation that Oswald had actually had time to move several feet and reposition himself for 2 more shots!

He addressed the 'autopsy'.  Very few docos do.  They gloss over the actual massive skull damage that was done.  They also neglect to mention that the brain was not only removed but almost immediately 'vanished'.  Had the rounds Oswald used hit where the final shot did it would have drilled through, it would not have exploded leaving particles throughout the skull and brain.  Only a cursory mention was made of 'pelleting' before the evidence was whisked away.  Only a hollow point could have done that damage, but Oswald's rounds weren't.  That alone should be enough to merit a mention surely?  It would in any doco that didn't primarily serve the purpose of promoting the legend rather than the truth.

The FBI acted illegally in removing the body and evidence from the Dallas hospital.  It was done before more than a rudimentary examination could be done there.  People there at the time attest they were threatened and overruled by the FBI agent in charge who simply went ahead with the removal in full knowledge of the illegality.  Why? To remove evidence of their own accidental involvement?

I have no idea if this doco is the definitive answer, I just like it best.  It makes the most logical and hyperbole free conclusions. I like that kinda thing in a doco, but to each his own.


----------



## Sid (Nov 12, 2013)

Katybug said:


> Okay, this is a new one....he drowned puppies? After all these years, they've wisely left that out.....good thing!  But you're saying that he did that, right?  I am going to be heartsick if I find this to be true, but it's midnight and I turn into a pumpkin shortly.
> 
> Chat with you guys later.





  Just Google "JFK puppy drowner"


----------



## That Guy (Nov 13, 2013)

JFK - A President Betrayed.  Watch it!  That's an order.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 13, 2013)




----------



## Old Hipster (Nov 13, 2013)




----------



## Katybug (Nov 13, 2013)

That Guy said:


> JFK - A President Betrayed.  Watch it!  That's an order.



Yes. Sir!


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 13, 2013)

Katybug said:


> Yes. Sir!



I _love_ it when he's forceful, don't you? :love_heart:


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 13, 2013)

Well, since we're on the subject of "what happened to a national leader?", have any of you got any ideas about missing Australian Prime Minister Harold Holt?



> On the 17th December 1967, Harold Holt, Prime Minister of Australia, went for a swim on Cheviot Beach near his holiday home at Portsea in Victoria. He disappeared beneath the waves and was never seen again. His companions raised the alarm, and what ensued was one of the largest search and rescue operations Australia has ever witnessed.
> 
> Holt’s body was never found, fuelling many theories regarding his disappearance, ranging from suicide to abduction by a Chinese submarine.


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 13, 2013)

My money's on him being taken out to dinner by Bruce.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 13, 2013)

Willis ?


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 14, 2013)

Nah. The Great White.  I think the one in Finding Nemo was Bruce, but they nicknamed the dummy one used in Jaws 'Bruce'.
Sorry, bit obscure.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 14, 2013)

Yeah, haven't watched Finding Nemo.
My grand kids are too big to come with me for animation movies.
Last one we saw together was Babe.


----------



## Katybug (Nov 14, 2013)

I wish I were more on top of national politics. I keep up with ours and our worst enemies (which is pretty much everyone at this point) as best I can, but poor PM Harold Holt slipped through the cracks.  How long ago did this happen?


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 14, 2013)

Back in 1967,  I think they're still looking for him.


----------



## SifuPhil (Nov 14, 2013)

Diwundrin said:


> Back in 1967,  I think they're still looking for him.



Hope you enjoyed that can of tuna fish you had back in '68 ...


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 14, 2013)




----------



## maxHR (Nov 14, 2013)

I have been assured a by a police diver that crabs are very partial to dead bodies in the ocean...mg:


----------



## Katybug (Nov 16, 2013)

Diwundrin said:


> Back in 1967,  I think they're still looking for him.



I'm thinking he and Jimmy Hoffa are hanging out somewhere together, ya think?


----------



## Katybug (Nov 16, 2013)

I totally understand the overdosing on all the JFK programs.  I still have 4 to watch, all documentaries, but only watched 1/4 of the movie last Sun w/Rob Lowe.  He did an outstanding job!  I love the actress, Gennifer something, but to me she didn't capture Jackie at all.  I probably won't watch the rest of it, far prefer the old footage (and tons of it there is) of his real life.  I'm not nearly as interested in anything written as the real thing.


----------



## Diwundrin (Nov 17, 2013)

They reran that doco The Smoking Gun here tonight, yep watched it again.  I picked up this reference to a book that was written about 10 years ago with the same theory, probably what triggered the detective's line of investigation.  
It's called Mortal Error by Bonar Menninger.  Looked it up and found this page which gives a good review/overview of it so if anyone is still interested..

http://booknotes.home.mindspring.com/Mortal Error.htm


----------



## SeaBreeze (Nov 23, 2013)

They had a show about it on the Coast radio program last night, but I didn't stay awake to listen to it...http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2013/11/22


----------



## GDAD (Nov 23, 2013)

Katybug said:


> I'm thinking he and Jimmy Hoffa are hanging out somewhere together, ya think?



Wasn't HOFFA supposed to be buried under a baseball Homebase in some stadium?


----------



## Katybug (Nov 23, 2013)

I think that's the best they can do on Hoffa, GDAD, but no one's digging.  

If it's true that it was "our" accidental, the guy knew.  I can't even imagine how he got through the rest of his life.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Nov 24, 2013)

Paul McCartney on JFK...http://thepessimist.kinja.com/paul-mccartney-conspiracy-theorist-1459181521


----------



## SeaBreeze (Nov 24, 2013)

All the president's killers...http://www.themorningnews.org/article/all-the-presidents-killers


----------



## RedRibbons (Nov 24, 2013)

I don't believe the Real Truth is ever going to be known. Theories abound, but they are just theories.


----------

