Tim Gratz Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 Justin wrote: I find it interesting the character assassination of JFK that still goes to this day. Telling the truth is not character assassination. Ron Ecker had the courage to state that Kennedy rightly should have been removed from office because of his affair with Judith Campbell. Now with the caveat that I give statements by mafiosos no more credit than statements by Communists, in the Bonanno book "Bound By Honor" he states that Hoover used the Campbell affair to "blackmail" JFK to keeping him on as FBI Director. So JFK's affair with Campbell did indeed affect his conduct in office. That JFK probably should have been impeached over Campbell (and probably over Rometsch as well) in no way minimizes the horror and the illegality of his murder. Nor should it in any degree affect the vigor of our search for the truth. That being rightly said, as I have mentioned before, I regret ever learning about Campbell, Rometsch and his other adulteries. I prefer the image of JFK as a family man with his wife and children. Despite my disagreement with his policies, I greatly admired his style and wit and I will never forget those terrible "four days in November". I note the irony, however, that these matters would probably never have surfaced but for the rejection of the "lone nut" WC theory, which was fueled primarily by people who were the strongest Kennedy admirers. RFK's concerrn over "the dark side of Camelot" may very well have been what prompted his participation in the cover-up. But they must be discussed since there may be a relation to his murder. Obviously, any time a married person is murdered the question of his or her intimate involvement with others must be considered. Now I consider this theory even more ridiculous than many posted here, but it is theoretically possible that Joe DiMaggio financed the assassination because he was certain the Kennedys had Marilyn killed. (Again, I don't think there is an iota of evidence to suspect him.) My point is simply Kennedy's affairs open up a whole new "cast of characters" with motive to kill Kennedy. With respect to the discussion of JFK's policies, and the issue of whether the Kennedys' "vendetta" against Castro precipitated the missile crisis, the suggestion that no one should question the "mythology" of Kennedy lest it be considered "character assassination" is, IMO, preposterous. Kennedy should be idolized and his policies not subject to criticism merely because he was murdered? Is criticism of Bush's policies "character assassination"? The best word to describe my view of JFK is "nuanced". Back in the sixties, I strongly disagreed with many of his policies. And I still do. But he was a charismatic leader winning friends for the US. His speech in West Berlin was magnificent and I think that speech alone could have been sufficient to motivate the KGB to kill him! The Peace Corps and the moon landing (sorry, Jack) are two of his enduring accomplishments. And the tax cut that he proposed proved to be great economics. And I also think RFK's crusade against the MOB may have been the beginning of the end of the Mafia (and may have played a role in the assassination.) And I truly believe that had he not been killed, Castro would have been history before November of 1964, and what a difference that would have made! My feeling is Kennedy was most likely killed by someone acting to benefit Castro (probably with his knowledge), but perhaps, and less likely, by anti-Castro exiles (who may have been manipulated without their knowledge of JFK's more guarded plans to oust Castro). Clearly there was Mob participation. If there was KGB involvement, it may have been motivated by the friends JFK was making for the free world. So his assassination may well have been fueled by the policies and programs for which he deserves great credit. On the other hand, at least the Kennedy participation in the cover-up was no doubt motivated in part by the fear of disclosure of the "dark side of Camelot"--a fear by RFK that was certainly prescient. It is ridiculous (if not a calculated ploy to stifle dissent) to label the revelation of the "dark secrets" of Camelot as "character assassination". Indeed they must be a part of a search for the truth of the REAL assassination. But unless they lead to the discovery of the conspirators, it is regretful that an unsuccessful search led to those disclosures. My feelings are best summed up by a phrase from Bob Seger's "Against the Wind": "Wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then." (John hates it when I use song lyrics to make a point.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now