Vanity Fair: Chronicle of a Death Retold

[Douglas Caddy]

Vanity Fair: Chronicle of a Death Retold

“The avalanche of books marking the 50th anniversary of J.F.K.’s assassination is both too much and not enough. The inexplicable loss, the unanswerable questions, the sense of history suspended—they’re all still being fed by the powerful charisma of the man who was America’s first Pop president.”

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2013/11/jfk-assassination-anniversary-books

[Pat Speer]

It's as I feared. So much rehash by so many mainstream vultures cashing in that nothing new will be noticed.

No, it's even worse than that. So much rehash that the taste-makers and name-droppers will ASSUME there is nothing new to be noticed.

[David Von Pein]

There is nothing "new" to be noticed. The evidence is the same today as it was in 1963. And unless it's all been faked, Oswald's guilty. Simple.

[Ian Kingsbury]

Almost correct no proof in 1963

Less proof of Oswalds guilt now

And the AARB DID NOT HAPPEN DAVE!

Have you found out who pm is yet!

[David Von Pein]

The ARRB suddenly made all the "Oswald Did It" evidence vanish into a puff of smoke, eh Ian?

That's curious.

BTW, provide a link to ONE document released through the ARRB which you think proves conspiracy.

I want to see that. Just one.

Edited October 7, 2013 by David Von Pein

[Ian Kingsbury]

Theres is no peice of evidence that will convince YOU!

And never will be.

[David Von Pein]

But just give it a shot, Ian. One document. According to the way Jim DiEugenio talks, there are HUNDREDS of such documents released by the ARRB (particularly with respect to the Garrison investigation) that Jimbo claims seal the deal on a JFK conspiracy. But he never says what those "smoking gun"-type documents are. (At least I've never heard him mention them specifically. Does he do that in his Second Edition of his "Destiny Betrayed" book?)

I find DiEugenio's continual harping on the "ARRB documents" amusing, in light of this interview with one of the 5 ARRB top members:

dvp-potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/01/anna-nelson-of-arrb-october-1998.html

"In truth, Jim Garrison, and hence the Oliver Stone movie, has been discredited by these documents [released by the ARRB]. If you read them, you see he did not have a case. He had nothing to build it on. .... He simply didn't have a case. And for that reason, I think you can discard that conspiracy."

-- Anna K. Nelson

I guess DiEugenio thinks Nelson was yet another lying WC defender.

Edited October 7, 2013 by David Von Pein

[Paul Brancato]

Vanity Fairs recent issue is mostly about Jackie. I hope that there will be another issue devoted to the assassination and its postscript.

[William Kelly]

But just give it a shot, Ian. One document. According to the way Jim DiEugenio talks, there are HUNDREDS of such documents released by the ARRB (particularly with respect to the Garrison investigation) that Jimbo claims seal the deal on a JFK conspiracy. But he never says what those "smoking gun"-type documents are. (At least I've never heard him mention them specifically. Does he do that in his Second Edition of his "Destiny Betrayed" book?)

I find DiEugenio's continual harping on the "ARRB documents" amusing, in light of this interview with one of the 5 ARRB top members:

dvp-potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/01/anna-nelson-of-arrb-october-1998.html

"In truth, Jim Garrison, and hence the Oliver Stone movie, has been discredited by these documents [released by the ARRB]. If you read them, you see he did not have a case. He had nothing to build it on. .... He simply didn't have a case. And for that reason, I think you can discard that conspiracy."

-- Anna K. Nelson

I guess DiEugenio thinks Nelson was yet another lying WC defender.

For the story on Nelson see the Forum Post on her

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15234

Nelson, the distinguished and late professor at American University wasn't just another lying WC defender, she was just mistaken, as she was in the supposedly peer-reviewed book on government secrecy, saying that the Review Board was created to dispel silly theories - it was not - it was created to identify and release all the government records related to the assassination of president Kennedy and release them to the public so they can make up their own minds as to what happened.

She also mistakenly said that JFK was killed and Connally wounded by the third shot, so she didn't know the reason she was on the board and didn't know the basic details of the assassination - has not herself actually read the documents but let the staff take care of that - and was unaware of the records that were released that reflect on the whole New Orleans aspect of the assassination.

And Doug Horne took exception to her remark about there not being any "smoking gun" document - and he wrote a rebuttal that lists quite a few - and Horne's boss - Gunn, and the Prof. from Ohio (Hall) who was on the board both gave talks to conferences that list some of the most important documents released by the ARRB - many of which do reflect on conspiracy.

Dr. Anne Nelson is like most mainstream academic historians who refuse to be bothered by the assassination of JFK, and refuse to look into it even though she was in a very unique position to do so.

Citing her as a source on the documents related to Clay Shaw, Garrison or anybody means nothing if you knew her.

As for the Vanity Fair article, I thought Tony Summers was going to do an article and that for certain would have new items of interest.

Edited October 7, 2013 by William Kelly

[Douglas Caddy]

From the Vanity Fair article: “A familiar piece of Kennedy lore, but after a half-century it’s difficult to dig up nuggets that aren’t familiar, though Larry Sabato promises to release bombshell evidence related to J.F.K.’s assassination that was redacted from reviewer’s galleys of The Kennedy Half Century and will be announced at a press conference coinciding with the official pub date. An “October surprise” or a big tease?—we’ll know soon enough.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iem9zK2cbZI

_______________________________________

One wonders what will be Larry Sabato’s bombshell evidence? His book is scheduled for release on October 15.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Kennedy-Half-Century-Presidency-Assassination/dp/1620402807

Months ago I was informed that there was a second video, long suppressed, of the actual assassination that would be released by the Intelligence Community before November 22, 2013. I was told the video showed Frank Sturgis as a shooter and Howard Hunt as his spotter on Dealey Plaza. Such a video being “found” and released 50 years after the event would could uproar and raise the obvious question why the Intelligence Community kept it secret for such a long time. So I concluded that if such a video does exist and if it is released publicly, the Intelligence Community would have to find an acceptable conduit to handle its sudden emergence.

Edited October 8, 2013 by Douglas Caddy

[Guest Robert Morrow]

The Atlantic has a good issue out on the JFK assassination, according to a friend: http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/09/09/the-atlantic-marks-50th-anniversary-of-jfks-death/

I think it is a lot better than Vanity Fair's take.

While it’s been 50 years since John F. Kennedy was assassinated–Nov. 22, 1963–his political influence still lives on today.

Even before the start of his campaign, President Obama was compared to President Kennedy. Now, on the eve of what may be one of the most historic weeks for Obama in the White House, the comparisons between him and Kennedy continue.

To mark the 50^th anniversary of JFK’s death The Atlantic compiled a special issues of articles dating back to the time before Kennedy took office all the way up to today.

Chuck Todd spoke with The Atlantic’s James Bennet, The Center for American Progress’ Daniella Gibbs Leger, The Washington Post’s Dan Balz, and Republican strategist Katie Burke to look back on Kennedy’s lasting legacy.

Stressing the idea that Kennedy’s influence lives on, Bennet said traces of the former president are evident in Secretary of State John Kerry’s policies.

“You hear echoes of John F. Kennedy, particularly of what you hear from John Kerry today,” Bennet said. “He sees himself, really conscientiously, of carrying the torch of liberal idealistic interventionism.”

Balz points out that Pres. Obama is operating in a much different environment than Kennedy had.

“If you look at Syria versus the Bay of Pigs, which was Kennedy’s catastrophic intervention, there was not a public debate about the Bay of Pigs in the way there is a public debate about Syria today,” Balz said.