I don't think interest will ever die re: JFK assassination

[Vince Palamara]

I don't think interest will ever truly die with regard to the JFK assassination. Oh, I used to think it would: after Posner's book came out (late 1993/early 1994); when the 20th century gave way to the 21rst century (2000); especially after 9/11/2001; after the 40th anniversary (2003); and after the 50th anniversary (2013).

Then it dawned on me: there have always been periods of inactivity (lulls) in the case, along with ambivalence or worse.

I remember being excited, during the lead up to Oliver Stone's film JFK, to attend my very first conference (as a speaker, too): the June 1991 Third Decade conference with Jerry Rose. Yet, only 60 people attended. In addition, there was a local newspaper story that stated something to the effect that "Roughly 60 interested persons showed up for Prof. Jerry Rose's JFK assassination conference at SUNY Fredonia College, knowing full well that few in the outside world really cared."

Ouch.

Then the Stone film came out- things couldn't be better. And yet, there was still another side of the coin: equally long lines for the children's movie Hook competing with JFK and people giving what I thought were somewhat derisive looks at our line. Then came the avalanche of negative media commentary on the film (actually, this began BEFORE the film even came out!). I also remember a humbling experience for me: I was on a business trip in early 1992. In the midst of a dinner break, I was regaling my group with conspiracy details on the case. Then some guy burst my bubble: he said "You know who I think killed Kennedy? Bullwinkle killed Kennedy!" The rest of them all laughed and changed the subject.

Ouch.

Probably the biggest reality check was the attention--or lack thereof--given to the 1992 film Ruby (starring the recently-departed Danny Aiello as Ruby). After seeing JFK three times in the theater and experiencing standing-room-only attendance and rapt attention to the film (never before or since have I felt such an "electric" feeling from a film), Ruby was quite humbling, to put it mildly: I was one of THREE people in attendance at the premiere (and one guy was certifiably goofy haha). Everyone was packing the adjoining theater to see Basic Instinct! The bloom was definitely off the rose a little.

Also, while the JFK movie spawned many tabloid television show programs on the subject (Geraldo, A Current Affair with Maury Povich, Jenny Jones [!], etc.) and several actual pro-conspiracy specials (with James Earl Jones stumbling and fumbling his narration; Robert Conrad hosting a mafia-did-it show, etc.), there was a for-dramatic-entertainment-only feel to these shows. In addition, while there were whole "JFK assassination" shelves at Walden Books, Borders, and Barnes and Noble, there was a lot of crap reissued and new books with many competing and confusing (to John Q Citizen) theories---an agent accidentally shot JFK (Mortal Error), "Saul" shot JFK (Hugh McDonald's Appointment in Dallas reissued), the Weisberg books (brilliant research, poor writing), etc.

No wonder that it felt like a lot of people were confused, threw up their hands, and seemed to move on.

Then again...

The Stone film created the ARRB---millions of files were released that we are still going through; a tremendous achievement.

Fast-forwarding to 2003, the television ratings for THE MEN WHO KILLED KENNEDY were massive and the sales of the VHS and DVD copies exceeded 50,000 (at 19.95 a pop, too [and, no--I didn't see one dime haha]). Yet, the negative controversy over the Liggett story (part of number 7, the one I was on), Judyth Baker's episode (number 8), and especially the LBJ-did-it episode (number 9), overshadowed the ratings and interest, as all three were buried thanks to the LBJ family and their cronies. NOTE: Newsmax television has aired (and will continue to air into the new year) episodes 7 and 8 (episode 9 apparently is still banned).

Fast-forwarding to 2016, a massive amount of press went towards the notion that Ted Cruz's dad worked with Oswald. Whether silly or not, it drew a lot of attention back to the case. All of a sudden, tabloid magazines began an almost regular circulation of pro-conspiracy cover stories that continues to this day.

2017 brought the "Trump" JFK file releases and, again, the press was massive; even "regular" folks were talking about the case once again!

Finally (keeping in mind the 60 researchers who attended the 1991 pre-Stone movie conference and the negative article that greeted it), roughly 150 researchers attended the Trine Day ("Judyth") conference, while about that many attended the CAPA conference; the plaza was heavy with people, researchers and regular folk alike, 11/22-11/23/19, and a Japanese film crew was there filming a documentary for a major Japan television network.

I guess the moral to the story is: time marches on and cynicism can sometimes overtake us, but I believe interest will never die for this case. Part of the (major) appeal to the case is the still-huge interest in the Kennedys, in general, and JFK, in particular. Also, never underestimate the (fortunate) fact that President Kennedy was our last assassinated president and was "only" ten presidents ago;  not ancient history, at least from an historian's standpoint. Also, look at the massive interest that greeted the 2012 movie Lincoln...and that subject matter is over 150 years ago! It was "deja vu all over again": packed movie houses (I saw it twice in the theater and it is the only movie that rivaled JFK's enraptured feeling), a slate of new Lincoln books and television programs, etc.

Just my two cent's worth.

Vince

Edited December 26, 2019 by Vince Palamara

[Joe Bauer]

Vince, your "two cents" is worth the equivalent of two hundred ( aw heck...two thousand ) dollars in my book.

By the way, I too remember "well" my attendance at the first showing of Oliver Stone's "JFK" at one of our local theaters.

And you are exactly correct in describing the raptness of the audience - a packed house.

From the very first second of the film to the last.

This film was made to effect viewers emotional connection to the tragic brutal murder of our 35th president. An event that most American adults in 1992 still had a personal visceral connection to.

The way Stone's JFK was put together was a brilliant achievement in this regards.

It's nervous pacing and switching to black and white, louder and louder tension building military drum rolls leading up to the final horrific climax ( although not actually depicted on the screen ) of JFK's head being blown apart, etc., etc.

Even the way the shots in Dealey Plaza were injected ... loud, shocking, powerful ... they startled audience members with a jolt as if they were felt in live time!

It was as if you were transported right back into Dealey Plaza just past noon on 11,22,1963 to see and feel the nightmarish event yourself in person.

Stone built up a growing motorcade tension as well as any horror film so that when his JFK head blast scene finally hit, the horror power of this with screaming eye witnesses just shook you. And he knew that the horror and shock and pain felt by Jackie Kennedy had to be a part of this scene as it was truly a great emotional part of the reality of the event.

If not for Stone's JFK, I think the entire story would have been hugely forgotten much more than it has been today.

Edited December 27, 2019 by Joe Bauer

[Vince Palamara]

2 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

Vince, your "two cents" is worth the equivalent of two hundred ( aw heck...two thousand ) dollars in my book.

By the way, I too remember "well" my attendance at the first showing of Oliver Stone's "JFK" at one of our local theaters.

And you are exactly correct in describing the raptness of the audience - a packed house.

From the very first second of the film to the last.

This film was made to effect viewers emotional connection to the tragic brutal murder of our 35th president. An event that most American adults in 1992 still had a personal visceral connection to.

The way Stone's JFK was put together was a brilliant achievement in this regards.

It's pacing, switching to black and white, military drum rolls, interjected horror of JFK's head being blown apart etc., etc.

Even the way the shots in Dealey Plaza were injected ... loud, shocking, powerful ... they startled audience members with a jolt as if they were felt in live time!

Stone built up a growing motorcade tension as well as any horror film so that when his JFK head blast scene finally hit, the power of this just shook you. And he knew that the horror and shock and pain felt by Jackie Kennedy had to be a part of this scene as it was truly a great emotional part of the reality of the event.

If not for Stone's JFK, I think the entire story would have been hugely forgotten much more than it has been today.

Thanks, Joe. Very well said.

Yes, Stone's movie achieved (with the general public) what a slew of books did not and could not have ever achieved. Just imagine if it would have been a poorly-made film- that could have been the death knell for the case (no ARRB, no further media interest, etc.)

You are so right about the JFK movie. I am from Pennsylvania and, every time Senator Arlen Specter's name was mentioned, a gasp went throughout the crowded theater (same with the "back and to the left" scene, as well). The fact that former CIA Director George H.W. Bush was president + Jackie, Teddy, JFK Jr. and even the Connallys were still alive loomed large when this was out in theaters. In fact (I have it on my You Tube channel), the Connallys appeared on Larry King and disputed the single bullet theory and conceded that a conspiracy could have taken place.

[Vince Palamara]

P.S. Imagine if PARKLAND would have come out instead of JFK-----yuck!

[Joe Bauer]

Parkland?

A film I actually paid money to see in our local theater with my bored, suffering wife and one other person - a big bellied, bearded, hairy fellow who fell asleep twenty minutes into the film and snored loudly throughout until it's end?

I wouldn't doubt that Tom Hanks has a caveat in his interview appearance contracts that forbids the interviewers from mentioning "Parkland" and his involvement with it.

Seriously, one of the all time lowest ticket sales films in major theater distribution history.

A "bomb" extraordinaire.

[Vince Palamara]

2 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

Parkland?

A film I actually paid money to see in our local theater with my bored, suffering wife and one other person - a big bellied, bearded, hairy fellow who fell asleep twenty minutes into the film and snored loudly throughout until it's end?

I wouldn't doubt that Tom Hanks has a caveat in his interview appearance contracts that forbids the interviewers from mentioning "Parkland" and his involvement with it.

Seriously, one of the all time lowest ticket sales films in major theater distribution history.

A "bomb" extraordinaire.

Wow!

Yes, indeed- a huge bomb and a truly awful, boring-as-hell film.

One GOOD thing came from it, though- it's horrible box office returns was one major reason why Gerald Blaine's THE KENNEDY DETAIL feature film (with Stephen Gyllenhaal, Jake and Maggie's father, directing) did not come out (they used to have a fancy website with the many technical people involved, including Oscar-winning audio and visual technicians and the Life of Pi co-director). A nice lady sent me a pirated copy of part of the script and (hold back your vomit) there was a scene where Gerald Blaine is crying and saying "Oswald killed our President...and our President killed himself! He ordered us off his car!! He ordered us off his xxxxing car!!"

P.S. The other major reason: me. I got a hold of Gyllenhaal's private e-mail address and sent him bullet points demonstrating that Blaine and Hill were lying. This email coincided with the website being massively trimmed down (all the many technical people disappeared off it within 48 hours!!!) and I was told the film was dead (and that was back in 2012--!). It also led to petty harassment by Blaine's friends, but it was worth it.

[Denny Zartman]

6 hours ago, Vince Palamara said:

Wow!

Yes, indeed- a huge bomb and a truly awful, boring-as-hell film.

One GOOD thing came from it, though- it's horrible box office returns was one major reason why Gerald Blaine's THE KENNEDY DETAIL feature film (with Stephen Gyllenhaal, Jake and Maggie's father, directing) did not come out (they used to have a fancy website with the many technical people involved, including Oscar-winning audio and visual technicians and the Life of Pi co-director). A nice lady sent me a pirated copy of part of the script and (hold back your vomit) there was a scene where Gerald Blaine is crying and saying "Oswald killed our President...and our President killed himself! He ordered us off his car!! He ordered us off his xxxxing car!!"

P.S. The other major reason: me. I got a hold of Gyllenhaal's private e-mail address and sent him bullet points demonstrating that Blaine and Hill were lying. This email coincided with the website being massively trimmed down (all the many technical people disappeared off it within 48 hours!!!) and I was told the film was dead (and that was back in 2012--!). It also led to petty harassment by Blaine's friends, but it was worth it.

Wow! It sure does sound like your email played a role in the decision not to move forward with the project, Vince. I had also heard that a producer of the adaptation of Stephen King's 11-22-1963 eventually came to the personal conclusion that Oswald didn't act alone. It's telling that so many of these projects have been dramatically downscaled or cancelled outright, and even those associated with with produced projects have expressed doubt with the official story after exposure to the facts of the case.

[Joe Bauer]

Vince, the JFK interest stirring events you cited did indeed help keep the JFK truth mission subject alive in our national consciousness despite a natural waning over 56 years of time and new generations who have no personal emotional connections to the event.

And I am sure when the huge majority of us Americans who were older than 9 or 10 on 11, 22, 1963 pass on it will be even harder to keep the historical event and it's truth search importance alive.

Many disparage the 10 part documentary "The Men Who Killed Kennedy."

It's said it to be an overly dramatized and overly crammed and scattered hodge-podge of every wild JFK assassination theory and publicity seeking character pushing these.

My reasoning however is that you might as well hear as many witness testimonials related to the JFK event as you reasonably can ( I think most of us can discern which one's are so crazy it's an obvious waste of time ) because my life experience has shown that doing so with any highly suspicious and major damage and injury causing criminal event ( JFK is the ultimate case ) often produces unexpected gems of relevant information.

Any competent and experienced police criminal investigator would tell you the same thing.

Who among these many JFK event related story tellers do we totally dismiss? Not all mentioned in "TMWKK."

Rose Cheramie/Officer Francis Kruge'? Julia Ann Mercer? Roger Craig? William Somersett and the Miami police department tape of Joseph Milteer? Fletcher Prouty? Sylvia Odio? LBJ mistress Madeline Brown? Virginia Murchison housekeeper Mae Newman? Retired Special Forces Colonel Dan Marvin? A funeral director who stated men with finger printing equipment came into the funeral home in the middle of the night and inked up a dead Oswald's palms and fingers?

Parkland Drs. Crenshaw and McLellan? Lee Bowers? Seth Kantor?

The entire New Orleans cast of characters at the time? Billy Sol Estes? Barr McClelland? Jack Ruby club waitress/police informant Nancy Hamilton, Carousel Club performer memory expert Bill DeMar, Beverly Oliver, Ilona Marita Lorenz, E. Howard Hunt himself... and on and on and on and on?

The list of characters and their suspicious and implicating stories is incredibly long.

But by sheer logic and numbers not "all" of their stories are made up nor mistaken nor all the story tellers nutcases and XXXXX.

I believe at least half of all these JFK related stories whether shown or related in the documentary "TMWKK" or elsewhere.

Cumulatively, in my mind, it all simply, logically and clearly adds up to others being involved in JFK's and Oswald's murders. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 27, 2019 by Joe Bauer

[Steve Thomas]

10 hours ago, Vince Palamara said:

Then it dawned on me: there have always been periods of inactivity (lulls) in the case, along with ambivalence or worse.

 

Vince,

Interest will dwindle and fade into the dim recesses of time.

Look what happened to interest in Lincoln's assassination. How many people never get past John Wilkes Booth?

It's inevitable and part of human nature.

*shrug*

 

Steve Thomas

[Vince Palamara]

4 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

Wow! It sure does sound like your email played a role in the decision not to move forward with the project, Vince. 

thanks- yes, I agree!

[Vince Palamara]

1 hour ago, Steve Thomas said:

Vince,

Interest will dwindle and fade into the dim recesses of time.

Look what happened to interest in Lincoln's assassination. How many people never get past John Wilkes Booth?

It's inevitable and part of human nature.

*shrug*

 

Steve Thomas

The only thing that prevents me from giving in to that sentiment is past precedent. As I outlined above, there has been both a feeling of interest and a feeling of "who cares" that has permeated for decades. However, whenever something of note comes around (Stone film, major anniversaries, 2016 Ted Cruz's father story, 2017 file releases), the public is reignited once again.

A couple things separate Lincoln from Kennedy: looks (image matters a lot, whether that is a good thing or bad thing), the fact that the Lincoln case is much older, and, perhaps most importantly, we have countless (color) photos and films of JFK. Also, Caroline is still living, as are the extended Kennedy clan. Finally, there are still millions who were alive when it happened.

Having said that, once we get up to the 75th year threshold, then it is anyone's guess. I do feel the audio/visual side will keep things alive longer, but there will be a natural attrition (of interest) in the case.

Interesting aside: the vast majority of Kennedy images (still and motion) have only been digitized and available since around 2011 on! If you go back to the previous decade, so much of the visual images of Kennedy were not yet available, as Cecil Stoughton (the White House photographer) was still living and his images were not yet released and public domain. I can personally attest to having discovered thousands of photos since around 2011 (from many sources, not just the JFK library) that were not available before then! 2011 is pretty darn recent: iPhones were around and our last president (Obama) was in office! In fact, the vast majority of my visual materials re: motorcades, etc. I did not have 10 years ago.

[Vince Palamara]

Another thing: I belong to several Facebook JFK groups (about his life, not his death) with thousands of members. Whenever I post photos of Kennedy, I received hundreds of "likes" and positive comments (and shares), not just from members but many of my 4700+ "friends", as well; no "get a life" or negative comments ever. I am only bringing this up to demonstrate the interest in his life (and death) remains.

When I posted several nice photos of Reagan and his wife-crickets. Same with other presidents. Nothing but love and positivity with regard to JFK.

As another aside: our current president aside, I believe LBJ is our most despised president. Whenever I occasionally post a photo of him, there is an avalanche of hate, including from "regular" folks.

[Joe Bauer]

On 12/25/2019 at 9:34 AM, Vince Palamara said:

 

As another aside: our current president aside, I believe LBJ is our most despised president. Whenever I occasionally post a photo of him, there is an avalanche of hate, including from "regular" folks.

LBJ just 'LOOKED' mean, ruthless, devious and crooked.

[Douglas Caddy]

     If I were a young university graduate student today and chose to write my thesis on the subject of a conspiracy in the assassination of President John Kennedy, I would be puzzled at what I found. I would discover that dedicated researchers for decades had promulgated that the CIA and its leaders Allen Dulles and James Angleton were the conspiracy’s principal decision makers and planners. That is up until now.

     Then I would find that a new belief is taking hold among these dedicated researchers, led by renowned scholar John Newman, that the old conspiracy theory was not correct, that everyone had been looking in the wrong direction for all these years, and that this required reorienting research efforts by 180 degrees. The real principal conspirators were in the U. S. Military, not the CIA, and the Pentagon had labored successfully to keep itself clear of the entire tragic saga.  Chief among those Pentagon conspirators was General Lyman Lemnitzer, who served as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1960 to 1962 and then as Supreme Allied Commander Europe of NAT0 from 1963 to 1969.

     As I continued to work on my thesis I would discover that President Kennedy was intrigued by a 1962 book titled, Seven Days in May, and had even made the White House available for filming to lend authenticity to the movie based on the book. The movie was released three months after JFK’s assassination.

     I would then read the book and view the movie that is about a military-political cabal’s planned takeover of the U.S. government in reaction to the president’s negotiation of a disarmament treaty with the Soviet Union. After that I would wait for the dust to settle among the dedicated researchers into the JFK assassination about this new controversial theory before I finished writing my graduate degree thesis.

 

 

[Douglas Caddy]

https://larryhancock.wordpress.com/2019/12/22/jfk-at-risk-3/?fbclid=IwAR1bSOMvH3S3O-dPGIejjlqZ23ga-jCETzSae1RYCNM3qNhpJnyD9whwB1s