what we are witnessing...

First topic message reminder :

I know the claims have been made for a very long time that witness testimony has been changed/suborned. But I honestly don't believe the case for that has ever been all that strong. Suspicion isn't evidence.

I think what we have witnessed 

here
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20354&page=1

here
https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t34-was-eddie-piper-on-the-6th-floor

here
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17269

& here
https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t453-the-rearranged-boxes

to give just some examples, changes all that and is the bones and meat of a prima facie case that Oswald's alibi would not be permitted to stand, and wherever possible, the real story would be turned into a variation on the truth, but leaning towards his guilt.

There is, imo, no longer any justification for defending the WC findings or its methodology.

These threads, among others, contain the real story, or very close to it, about what happened just prior, during and just after the assassination.

The pity is that this story will remain buried in forums. They have no real impact on how the history is written.

It is a large part of my frustration.

Goban Saor wrote:Indeed, Paul, your penultimate post prompted me to google Caroline Kennedy interviews on youtube and she does seem to suffer in comparison with her father in political terms.

And this is the one human that shit-brick-for-brains Charles D says we must pin our hopes on in order to lead the huddled masses to the promised land.

Stan Dane wrote:

Goban Saor wrote:Indeed, Paul, your penultimate post prompted me to google Caroline Kennedy interviews on youtube and she does seem to suffer in comparison with her father in political terms.

And this is the one human that shit-brick-for-brains Charles D says we must pin our hopes on in order to lead the huddled masses to the promised land.

It was in the blocks, Stan. And everyone knows Dragos don't lie!

If the Kennedy family actually wanted the files released, Ted Kennedy was well positioned to make it happen.  He was in the US Senate for 4 decades after Dallas. If he wanted the files declassified, he could have slipped the necessary language into a bill and I doubt even one of his colleagues would have objected.  

The very fact that Ted (and Robert) seemed satisfied with the Warren Commission conclusions really did more than anything to let the murder plot go unpunished. If Jack's own brothers weren't willing to wait in the alley with a steak knife (as Garrison said he'd do if someone got away with killing his brother), you can hardly expect other senators and congressmen to show much enthusiasm in demanding all the files declassified or a second autopsy performed.

beowulf wrote:If the Kennedy family actually wanted the files released, Ted Kennedy was well positioned to make it happen.  He was in the US Senate for 4 decades after Dallas. If he wanted the files declassified, he could have slipped the necessary language into a bill and I doubt even one of his colleagues would have objected.  

The very fact that Ted (and Robert) seemed satisfied with the Warren Commission conclusions really did more than anything than to let the murder plot go unpunished. If Jack's own brothers weren't willing to wait in the alley with a steak knife (as Garrison said he'd do if someone got away with killing his brother), you can hardly expect other senators and congressmen to show much enthusiasm in demanding all the files declassified or a second autopsy performed.

There is some comparison to be made with the Whitlam coup here. 

There is no doubt in my mind that the coup was organized by US intelligence. Yet, Whitlam himself has stuck to the script we have been handed as "official" history. More than that, he has stayed well clear of all political commentary. Yet this is a man whose government raided the offices of ASIO and threatened to close Pine Gap.

The really weird part is that the man who took his place at the top - Mal Frazier - ended up quitting the conservative party that took him there and has since become one of the great voices of dissent.

beowulf wrote:If the Kennedy family actually wanted the files released, Ted Kennedy was well positioned to make it happen.  He was in the US Senate for 4 decades after Dallas. If he wanted the files declassified, he could have slipped the necessary language into a bill and I doubt even one of his colleagues would have objected.  

The very fact that Ted (and Robert) seemed satisfied with the Warren Commission conclusions really did more than anything to let the murder plot go unpunished. If Jack's own brothers weren't willing to wait in the alley with a steak knife (as Garrison said he'd do if someone got away with killing his brother), you can hardly expect other senators and congressmen to show much enthusiasm in demanding all the files declassified or a second autopsy performed.

Fair point, Beowulf.
 
I previously disagreed with you about Robert Kennedy in this regard but since reading James DiEugenio’s account in Destiny Betrayed of the part played by RFK’s sidekick Walter Sheridan in sabotaging Garrison’s investigation and re-reading Brothers by David Talbot, I’m more inclined to agree with you.

PS. Having thought further about it, it now seems to me that what I said in the preceding post was wrong.
 
It is not the responsibility of the victims to redress a crime that has gone unpunished because of the complicity of a wide array of powerful forces including the US government.
 
To suggest that it is the responsibility of the victims to redress such a crime is to blame them for the sins of the many, which is a form of scapegoating.

"It is not the responsibility of the victims to redress a crime that has gone unpunished..."

Its like Theodore Roosevelt said, "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are."

We can't expect a child or even a typical adult to be able to do much to avenge the death of a sibling. Once the crime is brought to the attention of authorities, whether justice is meted out depends almost solely on the actions of public servants.
However here we have a case where the surviving brothers of the victim ARE public servants-- namely, the Attorney General and a US Senator. I would suggest that with what they had and where they were, Robert and Ted could have done a hell of a lot more to seek justice for their brother.
By their flinching from waiting in the alley with the proverbial steak knife, they didn't just let down the brother who loved them, they let down the American people who employed them.

I have lost sight of the wood for the trees along the way here but I don’t want to be too hard on myself because even Greg Parker has been known to make a mistake! Instead I will try to refocus on the essentials of the matter as I see them.
 
Strictly speaking, Beowulf, you are correct. As senior public servants, Robert and Ted Kennedy should have done everything in their power to seek justice for the assassination of their brother. However, such a judgment is simplistic in my view, given the overall context that needs to be considered.
 
In the case of Robert Kennedy, for example, when we discussed this issue about a year ago I wrote the following:
 
‘If RFK knew the assassination was a coup d'état he also knew his authority as attorney general was worthless as far as investigating the coup d'état was concerned. The diabolical entities who murdered the ostensibly most powerful man in the world to seize power for themselves were hardly likely to allow a subordinate, now isolated, call them to account. When you murder the US president other murders after that are matters of mere routine detail – as the pattern of 1960s US political assassinations, including that of RFK himself, seems to illustrate.’
 
I still believe in the validity of that argument. It follows from that argument that Robert Kennedy was almost certainly correct in his judgment that short of his being president the only effect of his seeking redress for his brother’s assassination would be the targeting of himself by the assassins. And so it apparently came to pass.
 
If that holds true for Robert Kennedy as attorney general, it certainly holds true for Ted Kennedy who, as only one of a hundred senators, was small fry in comparison.
 
And that leads back to my thesis that (a) it has been the responsibility of the US government since 1979 to follow up on the HSCA finding that there was a conspiracy involved in the JFK assassination by establishing a judicial enquiry to find out who was involved and (b) insofar as the US government has failed to establish such an enquiry, it is an accessory after the fact to the assassination.
 
The primary responsibility in this regard rests with the president because no other public servant has anywhere near the kind of power or authority required to initiate such action.
 
Blaming the Kennedys is a distraction from the real problem, the failure of the US government and primarily the US president to take the required action.
 
Also, of course, it is immoral to blame the victim(s) in any situation.

Goban Saor wrote:I have lost sight of the wood for the trees along the way here but I don’t want to be too hard on myself because even Greg Parker has been known to make a mistake! Instead I will try to refocus on the essentials of the matter as I see them.

... even Greg Parker made a mistake? Whoa! (But then, he is only a mere mortal like the rest of us here.)
 
Blaming the Kennedys is a distraction from the real problem, the failure of the US government and primarily the US president to take the required action.
 

I concur, Goban. If that's worth anything because I too have made a few mistakes about this case.

Terry W. Martin wrote:

Goban Saor wrote:I have lost sight of the wood for the trees along the way here but I don’t want to be too hard on myself because even Greg Parker has been known to make a mistake! Instead I will try to refocus on the essentials of the matter as I see them.

... even Greg Parker made a mistake? Whoa! (But then, he is only a mere mortal like the rest of us here.)
 
Blaming the Kennedys is a distraction from the real problem, the failure of the US government and primarily the US president to take the required action.
 

I concur, Goban. If that's worth anything because I too have made a few mistakes about this case.

From one who could write a book on making personal mistakes, I concur as well.
 
I don't blame the Kennedys. You must pick the right time to fight your battles. Robert knew this but he was eliminated before he had the chance to demonstrate his values and convictions. Ted lacked the qualities of his brothers. I tried to like him over the years, but he showed me that he was just a hedonistic opportunist.
 
This is why I hate family dynasties in politics. It assumes things are granted simply by birth. Paul recently pointed out the number of times Caroline Kennedy said "you know" in a short exchange. Why should she have a leg up on other better qualified people for a job?
 
I know I'm being naively idealistic here, but I still cling to the American idea that no individual is better than another simply because of who his parents are. That's why I chafe at the thought that our hopes rest solely on RFK Jr. and Caroline.
 
PS: In many ways, the loss of Robert Kennedy was a bigger personal blow to me than was the loss of JFK because I was older and understood/loved his politics. All we ended up with was Nixon.

Yes, Terry, even Homer – and Charles Drago, though I find it hard to believe – nods.
 
We can’t be too forgiving of ourselves or others as we try to make sense of, well, just about anything.
 
Socrates said the wisest man is he who knows he knows nothing and he may have been not too far off the mark.
 
But what do I know.

And Stan, I agree with you about dynasties, nepotism and all of that. It’s the antithesis of what democracy is all about as far as I’m concerned, which is equality.

... even Greg Parker made a mistake?

 
Give me a hammer and a nail, a map, a set of of instructions, a to-do list from the better half, or a recipe and I'll show you how easy it is...
(the mistake part, that is)