It was unlikely that Oswald fired the shots that killed Kennedy.
Kennedy was killed by men who were afraid of him, likley men in our own government, or from the New Orleans Mafia.
THe kicker is that even expert miliary riflemen ( which Oswald was not) could not fire the shots in rapid succession with accuracy required, with the firearm used by Oswald. Only with the greatest difficulty could an expert rifleman duplicate Oswalds alleged shooting pattern. I am talking the best we have, champions.
So as far as I am concerned Oswald could not have done it, he was the patsy, the screen for others who have gotten cleanly away.
So this book is a lot of liberal punk bunk. Liberalism died when Neville Chamberlain waived a paper stating " Peace In our Time." The Kennedy years were simply a last death spasm of it. Piereson has in his writing taken a dead social movement ( liberalism) and attempted to breath new life into it, which is the purpose of his work. In truth liberalism is a Utopian philosophy which prevents people from coping with things as they are. It is a curse upon America.
Liberals want heaven NOW , and can't wait until they die. For that reason the try to create heaven on earth, a blasphemy in the face of God.According to them we humans need to be able to act without consequences to our actions. In essence that is liberalism.We should screw without having children, use drugs without penalty , kill without capital punishment, ad infinitum.
No, liberalism was dead the day it was born. Kennedy had little to do with it, except to give us one more reason as to why it should end as quickly as possible. His personal conduct outside of his marriage is only one manifestation of why that is so, among many others in his presidency.
No liberal has done lasting good, they only APPEAR to do it, and they work very, very hard on appearances, but not on the substance of doing good. True good can only happen when no thank you or acknowledgement for it is expected. That is hardly a liberal talking point, as you all may have noticed.
Piereson is full of himself, and his work is simply a bald attempt at the redefinition of history. He overates Kennedy, who if anything was a sordid, needy, tragic figure who managed to do a few things right when he acted conservatively. Most of what he did ended quite badly.
You present a flawless analysis of “old” and “new” liberalism. Thanks
I distinctly remember watching a TV Special ( CBS w/ Walter Cronkite, IIRC) where they duplicated the shots.
They had a similar rifle, elevated to the same height, moving target, the whole enchilada.
It could and was done.
And seeing the 'missing' frames of the Zapruder film, there is absolutely no question that the wound on Kennedy's right front head was an exit wound.
That shot didn't come from the side or front. It came from the rear.
Suggestion. Read “Case Closed” by Gerald Posner.
Maybe. Kennedy was killed because of executive order #11110, which called for the printing of billions of silver certificates, thus bypassing the Federal Reserve system, and returning monetary control to the US Govt.
Excellent post!
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.
There ARE space aliens among us!