CBS News reports (video) that the Lemon family of Texas are the only known ones with color film of the restaging (for the investgation) of JFK's assassination six months after it happened. Tomorrow is the 49th anniversary of the assassination.
Jefferson Morely offers distractions at The Atlantic:
For one thing, we can use the Internet. The World Wide Web has birthed many conspiracy theories (most of them easily debunked), but it has also made the historical record of JFK's murder available to millions of people outside of Washington and the federal government for the first time. I have to believe this diffusion of historical knowledge will slowly clarify the JFK story for everybody.
For now, though, many American cultural elites continue to ignore the widely available facts. Earlier this year, in an exchange with sports columnist Bill Simmons, Malcolm Gladwell endorsed baseball statistician Bill James' theory that the fatal shot was fired by one of Kennedy's own Secret Service men. "When you have lots of trigger-happy people and lots of guns and lots of excitement all situated in the same place at the same time," Gladwell wrote, unburdened by evidence, "sometimes stupid and tragic accidents happen."
We can likewise treat with skepticism the CIA's latest interpretation of Kennedy's murder, proposed by Brian Latell, a former Cuba specialist at the Agency. In a new book, Latell has updated and modified the unconvincing "Fidel Castro did it" theory that was that was first put forward by the CIA within hours of JFK's death and is still believed by some.
Latell now argues that Castro knew (via his DGI intelligence service) that Oswald posed a threat to JFK, but he did nothing. The heartless Cuban communist, he says, played a "passive but knowing" role in JFK's murder. As I reported in Salon last spring, the most basic corroboration for these claims is lacking, as even an otherwise approving reviewer had to acknowledge in the CIA's Studies in Intelligence publication.
Latell is on firmer ground when he suggests that the media's obsession with "conspiracy" obscures other more nuanced explanations of JFK's death. But his allegations advertently highlight a truth that the CIA and my friends in the Washington press corps prefer not to acknowledge: There is a lot more evidence of CIA negligence in JFK's assassination than Cuban complicity.
What an ass. The media does not have an obsession with conspiracy. It runs to avoid even using the term. What a load of nonsense.
He wasn't a saint and I go crazy when I hear people try to make him into one.
I don't know, maybe it's being Catholic, but I never expected perfection.
I do think he had goodness (like most people do).
Would the world have been different if he had lived?
I like to think so but the reality is that we will never know the answer to that.
And I don't think he would have done awful but I'm also not one of those people who thinks everything would have been perfect.
Reality probably is that nothing would have changed.
Because if JFK survived November 22nd, they would have just tried to kill him again. They were determined to do so.
Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"