Robert F. Kennedy Jr., now nearly 50 years since the death of his uncle, President John F. Kennedy, has come forward to criticize the Warren Commission report on the Kennedy shooting, calling it a “shoddy piece of craftsmanship.” He advanced these remarks in an interview Friday night to CBS host Charlie Rose. No historical incident has had as great an array of conspiracy theories put forward as that fatal shooting in November of 1963.
John F. Kennedy, well-loved and highly respected president of the United States, was shot to death
while riding with his wife, Jacqueline, in a motorcade in Dallas, Texas, on November 22, 1963. None who were then alive will ever forget those highly emotional days. All media that day halted as it was announced that the president had been shot. The nation was in attendance as doctors at Parkland Hospital tried in vain to address the cruel wound to Kennedy's throat and a massive, bleeding gouge in the back and side of his head. The president's death was announced at 1:36 P.M. CST. On reaching the hospital short moments after the shooting, doctors said he was "Critically ill... moribund and near death."
John Kennedy, rugged and youthful, will perhaps be best remembered for his brave stand in 1962, when it was discovered that the Soviet Union was constructing missile sites on the Island of Cuba. Kennedy kept America’s knowledge of the installation secret for several days while he met with advisors. The presidential team decided on a blockade, a ring of ships, around Cuba to end the incoming armaments. He warned Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev that the missiles must be removed. Americans at this time felt war was imminent. Then, recognizing the potential for nuclear war, the Soviets began dismantling the structures in exchange for a pledge that there would be no U.S. invasion of Cuba.
At the time of the standoff with the Soviet Union, JFK's wife, Jackie, was staying at their weekend house in Virginia, when he called her, asking her to come home. Biographer Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. reports that the first lady could “…tell that something was wrong." "Why don’t you come back to Washington?” her husband asked, without explanation. When she learned that the Soviets were installing missiles aimed at American cities in Cuba, she begged her husband not to send her away. “If anything happens, we’re all going to stay right here with you,” she says she told him in October 1962. “I just want to be with you, and I want to die with you, and the children do, too — than live without you.”
Article comments
1 - peter petterson
Of course Oswald was the tip of the iceberg, a patsy for organised crime and other shadowy figures. Kennedy and his brother were out to target rascism, and organised crime. The kennedy boys were not chips off the Joseph kennedy Snr figurehead.
JFK was as much loved Down Under as in America. We know he was contracted out of existence. Dallas was a hotbed of rascism too - Texans were and still are rascist from the blacks to latinos now.
2 - John Lake
Texas might have been more racist than some cities, back in the 20th century.
I hope that your native New Zealand is doing well in ending notorious discrimination toward the indigenous M?ori and non-M?ori Polynesians.
3 - pablo
What a load of crap this article is. Particularly in lieu of the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA)who over 35 years ago ruled that the assassination of JFK was more than likely the result of a conspiracy.
The author talks about the Texas Theater where Oswald was apprehended but makes no mention of another man that was taken by the police there.
No mention is made by John Lake of Oswald's numerous connections to both the FBI and the CIA, or the fact that during the height of the cold war, a so called defector from the USA could come back home and not be debriefed (bullied) by the FBI.
Nor does the author of this absurd article mention anything other than the official debunked Warren Commission pablum, or the fact that over 80% of the American people do no believe the official story to this day.
The one link that the author does provide in this article is to the Warren Report!
You should be ashamed of yourself Mr. Lake to write such obvious BULLSHIT 50 years later, when those of us that have taken the time to look deeply into this case know that the Warren Commission was a coverup. Hey I got an idea! Lets appoint to the Warren Commission Allen Dulles who was just fired by JFK! Give me a fucking break Lake.
4 - John Lake
Pablo you occasionally skim over an article and vent your wrath. You have not absorbed the material, and I do take interest in your suggestion of a connection of Oswald (did you mean Ruby?) to the FBI and CIA. In either case, that's news to me.
For your convenience, here is a copy of the Report of the Warren Commission.
THE ASSASSINATION of John Fitzgerald Kennedy on November 22, 1963, was a cruel and shocking act of violence...
5 - Igor
I remember the JFK assassination well. Even as a republican I was concerned that JFK went to Dallas because it was a hotbed of JFK hatred. He went to the lions den, so when he was shot I left work immediately to avoid the riot I expected to erupt. I discovered that my employer was anti-JFK when he refused to honor the day of mourning that followed.
Tempers were running very high in those days. No less vicious attacks than what we see today.
Most of us were glad when Oswald was fingered. If it had been a rightist there would have been an open revolution in America.
We knew that the Warren commission would issue a whitewash to pacify the populace. We fervently hoped for it.
Everyone had a conspiracy theory. My own conspiracy theory was quite simple: JFK was shot by American patriots (possibly the FBI and CIA) who were afraid that JFKs close ties with the Mafia made the USA susceptible to takeover by criminals. At that time he was deeply involved with Sam Giancanas playgirl empire, especially Judith Exner (Campbell?).
Probably not a good theory: nobody else ventured it. That's just the first thing that occurred to me. FWIW.
6 - John Lake
Thank you Igor. It seems that an impeachment in that situation would have been more reasonable than a murdering gunshot.
You do provide considerable insight. As it happens, I remember Sam Giancana.
7 - Igor
Impeachment seemed like a forbidden move at that time. We had impeached few presidents but assassinated several, so assassination seemed more likely. And JFK was openly threatened with violence, ala the "second amendment remedies" talked about today.
And the idea was re-enforced as gunshots rang out across the political arena in the 60's.
We were very bloodthirsty then. I remember the account of a young Kent state co-ed who protested to her Dad after the shootings: "But dad, it could have been me". And he replied "and you would have deserved it!".