The Shocking Nature of an Assassination a Serving President in the Middle of the Cold War - Essay Example

?The John F. Kennedy Assassination. The assassination of President John F. Kennedy on Friday 22nd November 1963 is etched on the memories of all who were old enough to understand the world of politics at that time. He was an iconic and charismatic figure, respected in the United States and abroad for his youth and energy and particularly for his patient negotiations on issues such as nuclear deterrents and cold war tensions. He was perhaps not the most innovative president in terms of domestic policies, but his sudden death by shooting ensured him instant renown, projecting him to a status he probably never could have reached if he had lived out his presidential term or terms of office. That moment in American history has lived on in popular memory, not just because of the shocking nature of an assassination a serving President in the middle of the Cold War, but also because there were many questions raised about the way the police, FBI, CIA, the justice system and the press handled the event. Many people believed then that there was more behind this event than the official verdict that the President was killed by a gunman acting alone, and in the years since then theories, and also large amounts of new evidence, have been put forward to support the view that some kind of conspiracy lies at the heart of this tragic event. The day began as usual for the President and his entourage with a morning arrival by plane into Dallas airport followed by a visit to his hotel, and then a journey by motorcade towards a lunch appointment at the Trade Mart. The car carrying the President came under fire when it turned into Elm Street, and many witnesses who were present confirmed that several shots were heard. One gunman was observed in a nearby building and he was quickly arrested and taken away for questioning. That man was Lee Harvey Oswald, born in 1939 in New Orleans some two months after his father’s death. He and his two brothers were brought up by their mother, living in different places including Texas and the Bronx. Biographers speak of an averagely intelligent school student, hampered by truancy, “personality pattern disturbance with schizoid features and passive-aggressive tendencies”, and having learning difficulties which we would nowadays classify as dyslexic. (Benson: 1993, pp229-330) With two older brothers pursuing careers in the military, Lee Harvey Oswald had similar ambitions and from the age of about 17 he developed an interest in all things communist: “It is suspected that, even at this early age, Oswald was already preparing himself for a life in the world of counterintelligence.” (Benson: 1993, p. 331) He was accepted into the Marine Air Control Squadron at Atsugi Air Force Base in Japan, as a radar operator, and from there continued his interest in Russia. This background lends weight to suspicions that there was a political motivation, and perhaps even some kind of conspiracy involving espionage and international intelligence forces with whom Oswald had contact over the years before the assassination, and many researchers conclude that Oswald was involved at some level in espionage. (Marrs, 1989, p. 189) The subsequent shooting of Lee Harvey Oswald has also been construed by many as further evidence that there was a conspiracy afoot, since it conveniently removes the one person who could give information to the authorities on involvement of other individuals, and provides a scapegoat who can attract all of the responsibility and blame, thus releasing any other co-conspirators from being hunted down and prosecuted. It is astonishing that such a high profile suspect as this one was left to the mercy of a raging mob, and another “lone gunman”, and this extraordinary lapse in protocols adds to the mounting evidence that a number of agencies and individuals, including possibly also local police and other law enforcement agencies might have been involved in staging, or at the very least, condoning such an event. One piece of evidence has provided food for thought on the whole event on that late November Dallas day. The so-called “Grassy Knoll” was a spot about seventy five feet from the northern side of the Triple Underpass and it was from this vantage point that a man called Abraham Zapruder made a twenty two second, 8mm home movie just at the moment when the motorcade was passing and he caught on film the moments when the president was killed. Interestingly he also had views on where the shots were coming from: “In fact during his testimony Zapruder indicates on four separate occasions that he thought the shots came from behind him in the direction of the picket fence on the Grassy Knoll.” (Marrs: 1989, p. 66) Supporting evidence comes from other eyewitnesses who observed Zapruder filming with his camera: “Just down the slope of the Grassy Knoll from Zapruder was the Bill Newman family. They not only noticed Zapruder with his camera, but in later years, Newman told this author [=Marrs]; ‘At first I thought he shot the President… At that time I was looking right at the President and I thought the shots were coming from directly behind us.’” (Marrs: 1989, p. 70) Bill Newman was not invited to testify to the Warren Commission and he reflected later: “Someone told me that the reason I wasn’t asked to testify was that I was talking about shots from someplace other than the Depository building…” (Marrs: 1989, p. 70) Marrs goes on to list several more witnesses who all believe that they saw or heard shots coming from the Grassy Knoll area: Cheryl McKinnon noted that “puffs of white smoke still hung in the air in small patches” and Emmett J. Hudson noted that shots came from “above and behind him” which would be in the location of the picket fence on the Grassy Knoll. (Marrs: 1989, p. 71) Various other shadowy figures appear to have been present in that particular area at the crucial moments just before, during and after the shooting, but their identify has never been confirmed and therefore their testimony has also not been located and contributed to the gathering store of evidence that shots were coming from a location other than the Depository, namely from the picket fence area of the Grassy Knoll. Critics disagree as to whether the missing persons are witnesses or possibly perpetrators and accessories, but the fact remains that vital evidence contradicting the lone gunner theory appears to have been withheld from the investigation into the shooting. There is considerable eyewitness evidence that shots came not only from the place where Lee Harvey Oswald was standing, but also from an entirely different direction, namely the Grassy Knoll area. Twyman’s well-argued book Bloody Treason (1997) accepts that the Zapruder film is vital evidence which should have helped law enforcement agencies to work out the exact sequence of events especially in working out the origin and location of each shot fired and judging the speed of the motorcade vehicles before, during and after the shootings. Unfortunately, however, the evidence from the film conflicts with the evidence gathered from the eye witnesses. It is usual for people to report slightly different versions of the same event, especially when there is great emotional turmoil and everything happens very quickly. Nonetheless Twyman homes in on some very clear details that just do not add up. One of them is the statement from many eye witnesses, including the police patrolmen with the motorcade, that the car carrying the president slowed down, came to a stop briefly and then sped off towards the hospital. The Zapruder film shows minimal slowing down, and no stopping. Twyman concludes (pp. 158-165) that someone has tampered with the film and has cut out small sections, and cites evidence from a film specialist, claiming that study of the background details shows a discontinuity of the film. These deeply suspicious details have led some to speculate on possible motives and opportunity to murder the President in cold blood. Any public figure, and especially high profile politicians like the Kennedy family, are in constant danger of becoming targets of individuals who are unstable and potentially violent. There is also a lot of envy and competition around the White House for access to influence and power. Twyman identifies Lyndon B Johnson, J. Edgar Hoover (who was at the time director of the FBI), Mafia plots and and Cuban connections as only some of the possible sources of animosity towards Kennedy. James W. Douglas spells out in even greater detail the tension between Johnson and Kennedy over how to deal with the Russians in the negotiations over nuclear weapons treaties. The involvement of security agencies such as the CIA and the FBI in the Kennedy assassination is particularly noticeable, especially since many people believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was an undercover CIA agent and the man who killed Lee Harvey Oswald was demonstrably a former FBI informer. Hoover was a very powerful figure, who could manipulate the criminal justice system through his agency, and who exerted a great deal of influence over Lyndon B. Johnson, a man who was desperate to take over the Presidency from John F. Kennedy. Evidence to support a conspiracy involving Hoover and the FBI to remove Kennedy and instate the more amenable Johnson can be seen perhaps in the way that the investigation of the shooting constantly tries to peddle the story of a lone gunman, despite evidence of other shooters in the vicinity: “On November 24, 1963, Hoover wrote, in a memo to LBJ [Lyndon B. Johnson] “The thing I am concerned about … is having something issued so we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin.” (Benson, 1993, p.197) Marrs explores the idea that the CIA used mind control techniques on Lee Harvey Oswald but concludes that this “admittedly unlikely” and that “It is more likely that conspirators at that time would have resorted to a less sophisticated method – they would simply have hired the mob.” (Marrs, 1989, p. 186) In the murky underworld of New Orleans there was plenty of overlap between crime and politics, many strands of which reached event to the business interests of top level politicians like Nixon and Lyndon B. Johnson. The real truth about the John F. Kennedy assassination will probably never be known, because so many unrecorded interviews took place and top secret documents have disappeared from the record. The evidence that does remain is contradictory and leads a neutral observer to conclude that whatever happened, various powerful interest groups made every effort to ensure that the lone gunman explanation was the one that the official Warren Commission published in the end. This deliberate manoever distracted the public from any suspicion of the government agencies who, it seems, certainly colluded with criminal and or foreign intelligence forces, and perhaps even collaborated with them to ensure that Kennedy was removed. It was, in the end a huge cover up, but what exactly it is that was covered may never be fully known. References Benson, Michael. Who’s Who in the JFK Assassination: An A-to-Z Encyclopedia. New York: Citadel, 1993. Douglas, James W. JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why it Matters. New York: Touchstone, 2008. Kurtz, Michael L. The JFK Assassination Debates: Lone Gunman versus Conspiracy. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2006. Marrs. Jim. Crossfire: The Plot that Killed Kennedy. New York: Carroll & Graf, 1989. Twyman, Noel H. Bloody Treason: On Solving History’s Greatest Murder Mystery: The Assassination of John F. Kennedy. Rancho Santa Fe: Laurel Publishing, 1997. Read More