Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

vanityfair.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 403 posts

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#91

Post by shadowgovt »

morby wrote: post #80
shadowgovt wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Precisely. They list of groups that might have pulled the trigger on Kennedy is dozens long. Knowing which one did, decades later, really changes nothing.

Well why study history at all? Nothing in it has any more impact on us, no? Why try to determine who murdered a person even if it was decades later and the killer might be alive? It doesn’t matter anymore right? I’m not in the conspiracy theorist crowd, but the “doesn’t matter anymore” crowd is disappointing.

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

History is extremely important. It can help us make predictions about the future and understand circumstances in the past.

This specific incident has been researched to death. There is very little we will be able to understand about the sociopolitics of the past that we don't already know if the hand on the trigger changes. Every hypothetical scenario has been gamed to exhaustion, and which one reflects the reality we happen to be living in isn't going to change modern sociopolitics very much. What would change in a relationship with Russia if we found out a USSR plot killed Kennedy? The USSR is gone. What would change in people's trust in the FBI if we found out they killed Kennedy? That institution's reputation is already tarnished, and the people who would have made the decision to have him killed no longer work there. What would it matter if there was a conspiracy of a few people working with Oswald? We already know that it doesn't take more than one actor to kill a President from other assassination attempts.

Similarly, there is little to be gained studying this topic to exhaustion in terms of future predictions. Kennedy was a singular President existing in a singular time. A series of fairly unique circumstances led him to be universally hated and loved at the same time... Immensely popular, but his combination of willingness to challenge entrenched power and brash indifference to consequences made him dozens of enemies who would have had the resources to eliminate him.

Whether he was killed by a secret FBI project or a lone, angry man with firearm training changes none of those facts.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#92

Post by morby »

shadowgovt wrote: post #91
morby wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well why study history at all? Nothing in it has any more impact on us, no? Why try to determine who murdered a person even if it was decades later and the killer might be alive? It doesn’t matter anymore right? I’m not in the conspiracy theorist crowd, but the “doesn’t matter anymore” crowd is disappointing.

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." History is extremely important. It can help us make predictions about the future and understand circumstances in the past. This specific incident has been researched to death. There is very little we will be able to understand about the sociopolitics of the past that we don'…

That rules quote does not apply in the slightest. Perhaps I was glib about it, but I replied directly to the message at hand. He questioned the validity of studying a (massive) historical event (it “changes nothing”, much like studying a lot of history). You continue the exact same line of reasoning (“isn’t going to change modern sociopolitics very much”, though I find the use of “very much” an interesting use of words in this case). That there is nothing to gain. You make two assumptions a) that if there was a second gunman that they couldn’t possibly be put to justice and b) there is no historical value to knowing the truth or understanding the truth that would come to light had a potential third actor that was tied. For example say the Soviet Union somehow was toed (I’m not saying they are) there is an incredible value to knowing that it is fact. And if the FBI was involved? You thinking the FBI reputation is tarnished now is opinion, the effect could even have legal repercussions to people still alive and to regulating agencies. You don’t know , but if you have some “war game” about the impact I would love to see it. But the biggest of all is understanding the history of our country and world history. Historians don’t pretend that knowing more about the military maneuvers of Alexander will effect us today even though his battles have been studied to death. But when we contradict that denial of understanding some truth of our own history we are told, “doesn’t matter”, there’s no modern sociopolitical gain.

Your opinion on JFK as a president is moot. The fact he could not continue being president is what changed the world. LBJ succeeded him and the rest is “history”. It doesn’t need to play out in todays politics but as I said, why study history at all if the only point is to gain insight into how it effects us directly today??

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#93

Post by bluGill »

knowingowl wrote: post #83
bluGill wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oswald was a marine sharpshooter, and it took him 3 shots with a scoped rifle (probably at point blank range, though I don't know the ballistics of that gun). That suggests it wasn't Oswald. Though even then Oswald clearly would have been standing next to the unknown shooter urging him to do it.

For the record, a "marine sharpshooter" is an almost meaningless term. Virtually any physically healthy person is capable of meeting this bar with an hour or two of practice. It sounds way more impressive than it is. Oswald was in no way a highly skilled shooter. In fact, he had extremely basic firearms skills.

He won awards for marksmanship. I agree it isn't a hard skill to learn, but it's still takes some effort.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#95

Post by mannyv »

PrimeMcFly wrote: post #7

I don't know why people are so obsessed with this conspiracy theory. Occam's Razor says it was Oswald. Why invest time speculating and arguing over it when there is no way to verify anything? This new revelation doesn't change anything, it's just hearsay.

[flagged]

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#96

Post by JohnBooty »

gordian-not wrote: post #77
JohnBooty wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I highly doubt that a secret in the caliber of “let’s kill the President” can be kept by so many people for such a long time. Agree. However, what if that wasn't the conspiracy? What if the conspiracy was, "let's avoid war with the USSR"? If the US Government knew of or suspected USSR involvement in JFK's assassination: their choices were essentially "war with the USSR", "look like fools who bowed down to the USSR",…

This is very close to my feeling on the matter, and if I remember correctly there was even a case of cover up related to the fact that he visited the embassies (which can also be interpreted as not wanting to divulge their intelligence sources). However, it seems like the well known facts about Oswald (the communist background) weren't a major issue at the time (at least from what I gathered), so maybe there wasn't a…

    I do not think the soviets were involved, I think this 
    is an extremely risky move no one would do. I do think 
    there were probably fears it would be perceived as a 
    foreign assassination which drove some actions in the 
    US government.
I was vague on that because my post was overlong already and I don't have a clue or guess about who (if anybody) was involved besides Oswald.

But I agree with you: I cannot imagine that Khrushchev or the leadership of the USSR wanted open war. For the same reasons the USA didn't.

There is definitely a middle ground sort of possibility, where Oswald was involved with the USSR to some extent (informant, or whatever) but they truly had no idea he was going to shoot JFK. That seems completely possible.

Of course, the Soviet government was enormous and not monolithic. Maybe some within it wanted war, maybe some thought that they could prod Oswald into an assassination without getting "caught."

Seems possible, but zero idea how likely that is.

The simplest scenario is: Oswald worked in tandem with a second rando guy who had a rifle and wanted the president dead. No shortage of those in America, a land with cheap rifles and ~16 million WWII vets who were trained to use them.

    Anyway, if the US government doesn't want to 
    stir the cold war issues around the assassination, 
    is it a conspiracy or just common sense statesmanship?
Definitely common sense statesmanship.

Arguably a conspiracy as well but that depends on our definition of "conspiracy."

The only thing I'm really sure of is that it was in the US government's best interests to sell the idea that Oswald was a lone crazy guy. That was the least-bad scenario for America.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#97

Post by Ylpertnodi »

circumlocution wrote: post #51

To those who haven't seen it, I'd really recommend Lemmino's video on the assassination https://youtu.be/5u7euN1HTuU?feature=shared He dives pretty deep into the details, and it helped me form my own opinion of what probably happened

What is your own opinion of what probably happened?

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#98

Post by kelnos »

Even if Landis is being honest to the best of his ability, this account seems suspect for one simple reason: human memory is incredibly unreliable even in routine cases. Considering the stress and trauma around witnessing and being so close to an awful event like that, as well as the amount of time that has passed, I don't see how we can consider this story to be even remotely reliable.

He may truly remember these events as he is describing them, even if what he's described never actually happened. That's unfortunately how (poorly) human memory works.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#99

Post by nprateem »

jdthedisciple wrote: post #16
PrimeMcFly wrote: post #7

I don't know why people are so obsessed with this conspiracy theory. Occam's Razor says it was Oswald. Why invest time speculating and arguing over it when there is no way to verify anything? This new revelation doesn't change anything, it's just hearsay.

Yea let's also convict people using Occam's Razor. "What's all the fuzz about? The dude was near the murder site at the time, it's obvious it was him, duh"

I heard if you ever want to get out of jury service, just make a comment to the foreman/judge that you just think there's no smoke without fire.

Re: New JFK assassination revelation could upend the lone gunman theory

#100

Post by kelnos »

JackFr wrote: post #79
bluGill wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oswald was a marine sharpshooter, and it took him 3 shots with a scoped rifle (probably at point blank range, though I don't know the ballistics of that gun). That suggests it wasn't Oswald. Though even then Oswald clearly would have been standing next to the unknown shooter urging him to do it.

TIL what “point blank” actually means. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point-blank_range

Same; I always thought it essentially just meant "shot at such a close range that you can't miss". (Though I expect most people do actually use it that way, even if it's incorrect.)
Post reply on HN