I can't believe I'm wasting one of my blog posts before reaching the 2000th article on this, but dammit this needs mentioning (via Michael Williams at Dallas Morning News (paywall)):
Weeks after they first gathered near Dealey Plaza, dozens of believers in the furthest fringe of the QAnon conspiracy theory remain in Dallas, expecting long-dead John F. Kennedy Jr. to reveal himself in the city where his father was assassinated and usher in the reinstatement of Donald Trump as president.
While their beliefs are patently absurd, the fervency and devotion of this particular group, along with their loyalty to a leader known as Negative48 and unwillingness to leave Dallas, is unique — and cause for alarm and concern, according to an expert who has followed QAnon for years.
“I think what you’re seeing here is really, undeniably a cult,” said Mike Rothschild, author of The Storm Is Upon Us, which chronicles the rise of, and fallout from, QAnon.
The leader of the group is Michael Brian Protzman, a Washington man who amassed a following on social media with his version of gematria, a Hebrew numerology language. Interpreting codes that include numbers and letters, and using elements of Christianity and QAnon, his followers have come to believe that Kennedy, who died in a plane crash in 1999, will reappear in Dallas and commence a new Trump administration.
Some of Protzman’s followers believe President John F. Kennedy wasn’t assassinated in 1963; others believe he was, but then resurrected as a messiah shortly thereafter. Despite the failure of either Kennedy — or other dead celebrities who were expected, including Michael Jackson and Princess Diana — to appear during the initial Nov. 2 rally that drew hundreds to downtown Dallas, a hardcore group of Protzman’s followers remain in Dallas, expecting their arrival...
Part of this does read a lot like the Rapture-type fringe groups who pray for Apocalypse, waiting for a Messiah figure to pop up, grant them boons while laying waste to this poor corrupt world, and bring about a new era of peace of prosperity for the REAL True Believers.
These QAnon cultists pining away in Dealey Plaza aren't waiting for a Jesus to preach to them the Gospels again: They are waiting for a sign from two long-dead historical figures - one of them who left Dealey Plaza 58 years ago with a gaping head wound! - to grant them the license to go on a rampage to put trump back in a White House he lost by both Popular and Electoral votes.
This isn't funny. This is scary shit.
And this ain't a First Amendment issue, this is a Baker Act moment. Those crazies need to get taken in for psychiatric evaluation right fucking now.
The crazy train for the entire Far Right faction of our nation has been on this downward spiral for years now, and it's not stopping until they are stopped.
I might not be on this blog much this month because National Novel Writing Month is back and I really really really need to focus on that.
Also, I'm a little pissed at Virginia voters right now and writing that whole state out of my will, WTF Virginia anything Youngkin (sp?) does to screw up your state is going to be on you now.
Also also also, the Qanon nutjobs not only believe now that JFK Jr. is still alive and well and supporting trump but also that John-John's dad JFK (you know, the guy with a fcking rifle shot hole in his fcking head since Nov. 22 1963) faked his public assassination and was set to return this past weekend to publicly support trump for 2024 as well. Never mind the fact that EVERYONE'S SEEN THE ZAPRUDER FILM DOCUMENTING JFK'S GAPING HEAD WOUND, if Jack was still alive he'd be 107 YEARS OLD, which is kind of very very very very very fcking rare to see in a dead guy.
/headdesk
Some Novembers, the shit in the real world can't compete with the sci-fi fantasy stuff I try to write.
There's also this live app - Apollo 11 In Real Time - running that simulates the Mission Control for the launch and mission.
The John F Kennedy Library - as JFK was the one who pushed for the moon landings as a decade-ending goal - is doing their own launch app.
EXCITING TIMES AGAIN, HEWMONS.
Yet the vows of this Nation can only be fulfilled if we in this Nation are first, and, therefore, we intend to be first. In short, our leadership in science and in industry, our hopes for peace and security, our obligations to ourselves as well as others, all require us to make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them for the good of all men, and to become the world's leading space-faring nation.
We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people. For space science, like nuclear science and all technology, has no conscience of its own. Whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man, and only if the United States occupies a position of pre-eminence can we help decide whether this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theater of war. I do not say the we should or will go unprotected against the hostile misuse of space any more than we go unprotected against the hostile use of land or sea, but I do say that space can be explored and mastered without feeding the fires of war, without repeating the mistakes that man has made in extending his writ around this globe of ours.
There is no strife, no prejudice, no national conflict in outer space as yet. Its hazards are hostile to us all. Its conquest deserves the best of all mankind, and its opportunity for peaceful cooperation many never come again. But why, some say, the moon? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountain? Why, 35 years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas?
We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.
It is for these reasons that I regard the decision last year to shift our efforts in space from low to high gear as among the most important decisions that will be made during my incumbency in the office of the Presidency...
Soon, those who remember the assassination of John F. Kennedy will fade into history. All who remain behind will know only of the Buttfumble this dark day (It already has its own separate Wiki entry!).
Feast well, this coming day of pagan sacrifices to elder gods seeking the meat of turkey. I will post more on that when the time comes.
Also, I'm currently at 40,000 words on NaNo and aiming for 42,000 by tonight.
ADDED BELOW
I'm of the belief that you need to ask an American just three questions to ever figure out exactly who that person is: ask about the American's name; ask about what he/she does for a living; and ask what he/she thinks happened to JFK in Dallas Nov. 22 1963...
The assassination of John Kennedy
remains one of the most traumatic moments in American history. Up
there with the Civil War, Pearl Harbor, 9/11 attacks, and the rollout
of New Coke.
As a librarian I can tell you the
importance of a historical event by the number of books filling up
the shelves. Civil War books, usually the biggest section of the
900s (DDC) alone can take up a full shelf (with six packed rows of
books) in a small library, and take up an entire stack of shelves in
a big library.
The Kennedy assassination is getting up
there in the number of books written. It's been the cornerstone of
conspiracy thought ever since the Warren Report came out and people
hooked onto certain flaws found in it. It's been 50 years of arguing
over the assassination, over the report, over how history got screwed
(the number of What If plotlines and time-travel-to-save-JFK stories
are pretty numerous).
For myself, I grew up in the shadow of
the Sixties, a young child of the Seventies and a teen of the
Eighties. I was engulfed with the conspiracy talk ever since we got
to this part of U.S. history in the classroom. Having grown up
reading non-fiction books about mysteries – UFOs, witchcraft,
ghosts, Bigfoot, the Bermuda Triangle – the allure of conspiracy
about JFK's death was pretty irresistible.
So. Shall we play a game of Whodunnit
and argue over the various conspiracies over who shot JFK?
Lone Gunman
The official take. Oswald, ex-Marine
who defected to Russia and returned disillusioned, acts alone in the
planning of the assassination and is the only one pulling the
trigger. He kills a police officer while fleeing on foot before
getting captured in a movie theater. Oswald himself is killed by a
lone gunman, a paranoid club owner Jack Ruby.
Why this theory works: all the official
evidence points this way. What is known of Oswald fits into the
psych profile of other assassins. There are other parts of Oswald's
activities before the assassination – an attempted shooting of a
retired right-wing general – that points to a man desperate to
prove himself via Propaganda of the Deed.
Why this theory falls apart: the
“official evidence” could have been manipulated: there have been
enough complaints about the Warren Report having errors and
unfinished tangents deserving of investigation to make that report
suspect. While Oswald fits the profile of an assassin, he's unique
among all of the other shooters and would-be assailants in that he
refused to take credit. He's the only one on record saying he didn't
do it, and that he was a “patsy”. Having Oswald killed prevents
any truth of his actions from getting out. Considering the number of
political enemies Kennedy acquired over the years, having some nobody
be the one killing him just doesn't seem kosher.
The Russians/Commies Did It
The first possibility, considering we
were at the height of the Cold War. Kennedy had just stared down the
Russians from putting nuclear warheads in Cuba, and the Berlin Wall
had just gone up. Eliminating a political opponent wouldn't be out
of the question for the KGB.
Why this theory works: Oswald had
defected to the USSR and had just returned, reportedly kicked out by
a Soviet Union that found him useless. He could have been
conditioned or encouraged by his Soviet handlers to pull the trigger
on Kennedy.
Why this theory doesn't work: If this
were true, we'd have started launching nukes at the Soviets inside of
thirty minutes of finding out. This would have been such an act of
aggression that war would be the only logical response. The Soviets
may have been cunning, but they weren't crazy. They could deal with
Kennedy, and they didn't need to kill him.
The Castro Cubans Did It
Independently of their Soviet allies.
Castro had been surviving attempts on his life and was probably
pissed off enough to turn the tables. Oswald had been positioning
himself as a fan of communist Cuba, and may have shot Kennedy to
curry favor with Castro.
Why this theory works: It actually
doesn't. Because...
Why this theory doesn't work: There has
never been any conclusive proof that Castro or Cuban communists were
in contact with Oswald. The FBI and CIA made serious efforts to find
one, but never could (the possibility of Oswald going to the Cuban
embassy in Mexico is disputed with the fact that the documented
photos of someone claiming to be Oswald doesn't match the real
thing). Castro pulling something like this without the knowledge of
the Soviets is unlikely; and if found out would have forced Soviet
Russia to either cut ties to Cuba while the US invaded out of
revenge, or else sign on to nuclear Armageddon.
The Anti-Castro Cubans Did It
While there were a lot of people angry
at Kennedy, none of them were as driven as the exiled Cuban
community. They considered themselves twice betrayed: first when JFK
refused to provide air support for the failed Bay of Pigs, second
when JFK refused to invade Cuba over the missile crisis. It hurt
that Kennedy's deal with Khrushchev included a full stop to all
covert attempts to overthrow Castro.
Why this theory works: As noted, these
guys were PISSED at Kennedy. That fateful trip through the southern
states originally had Kennedy stopping in Miami (the center of
anti-Castro activity), but that was canceled when it was deemed
security wouldn't be tight enough. Given some of the evidence of
Oswald being involved with some elements of the anti-Castro covert
ops, it's possible Oswald got recruited by a small band to assist
either directly or indirectly with the shooting. As part of of this
conspiracy theory, they then get Ruby to shoot Oswald to cover their
tracks.
Why this theory doesn't work: There's
little evidence that the anti-Castro Cubans had this amount of power
to pull of an assassination like this. Or have this much control over
the investigation. If it ever got out that the anti-Castro groups
killed our President, the American people would have turned against
the anti-Castro crowds and their government handlers like the CIA.
The only way this theory works is if you add it to the larger
conspiracy theory such as...
The CIA/FBI/Shadow Government Did It
What quickly became the most prominent
theory among conspiracy buffs. Somehow, Kennedy was a threat to
their covert operations and overt attempts at starting World War III.
It's common knowledge nowadays that the Joint Chiefs and other key
government officials viewed Kennedy as soft on Communism (it was more
that Kennedy refused to ignite a nuclear war, something the war-hawks
viewed as survivable). Kennedy had threatened to dismantle the CIA
after the Bay of Pigs fiasco, blaming them for misleading him with
false intel.
Why this theory works: If Kennedy had
enemies within the government, it was most likely here. The heads of
the CIA and FBI both disliked JFK along with the upper echelon of the military. The CIA could have been in
contact with Oswald as part of the theory that Oswald was an attempt
to infiltrate the Soviet Union. The FBI had tabs on Oswald right up
to the assassination. And the FBI basically had control of the whole
investigation that created the Warren Report, meaning they could hide
any incriminating evidence they didn't like.
Why this theory doesn't work: a
conspiracy of this size and scope would have had to involve hundreds
of people through various agencies, any one of whom could have
slipped up on a detail or betray the secrecy in some fashion. Having
this covert group pull off a very public assassination would have
drawn too bright a light on their activities. And this shadow
government would have had other means of killing Kennedy – through
poisoning to make it look like a natural death. How many people knew
about Kennedy's Addison's Disease? Did his Vice-President know...?
Johnson Did It
As part of the government conspiracy
theory, where the CIA and FBI didn't do it, but Vice-President
Johnson did and the government merely helped cover it up. There'd
been stories that Kennedy was thinking of dropping LBJ from the
ticket in 1964, that Johnson's ties to a crooked land developer was
the key reason, although the Kennedys (including Bobby, Jack's
confidant) and Johnson didn't get along very much to begin with. As
Johnson desired the Presidency, if he got booted off the ticket
that'd be the end of that hope, so killing Kennedy to get promoted
sounds like motive...
Why this theory works: It really
doesn't. Because...
Why this theory doesn't work: There's
no direct or indirect link between Johnson, nor Johnson's people to
Oswald. We'd be better off thinking it was a massive government cabal with Johnson on the side benefittng from the results. Kennedy may have disliked LBJ but he needed Johnson's
negotiating skills to keep Congress in line. If Johnson knew about
Jack's Addisons, he could have easily created a situation that would
have triggered the illness and have Kennedy die of natural causes...
Cabal of Business Leaders Did It
Kennedy wasn't popular among various
business leaders, especially the oil men in Texas. One major
conspiracy theorist leaned on this as his go-to theory, even making a
rather dull movie about it.
Why this theory works: These men would
be far enough outside of government to avoid accountability, while
having enough ties to various agencies to ensure they would cover
their tracks. They would be able to hire the best assassins and
covert ops types of the day.
Why this theory doesn't work: Again,
there would be too many people involved in the planning, staging, and
execution of the attempt, let along the hundreds more needed to cover
up something of this scope.
The Mafia Did It
Stories abound of how Kennedy relied on
help from mobsters to secure certain election results to win the
Presidency... and then unleashed his brother Bobby as Attorney
General to hunt the Mafia down. Feeling betrayed by someone who was
literally in bed with them (well, in bed with one of the mob boss'
mistresses), the mobsters would have felt the need to strike back...
Why this theory works: The Mafia tended
to be a group that, when confronted with a problem, uses bullets to
remove said problem. There were ties to the New Orleans mob with
some of the more interesting characters in the various conspiracy
theories, although ties to Oswald are tenuous at best.
Why this theory doesn't work: Again,
anything on the scale of what the mob is accused of doing involves
too many people, any one of whom could have blown the whole deal.
The risks of trying were too high, even if they did succeed.
Aliens Did It
Why not?
Why this theory works: Aliens hated
Kennedy for some yet-unrevealed reason.
Why this theory doesn't work: Haven't
found any aliens at all, let alone aliens with a grudge against JFK.
You and Me Did It
The Rolling Stones argument. WE are
the ones who killed the Kennedys.
Why this theory works: Society is to
blame.
Why this theory doesn't work: You first
have to believe the Rolling Stones were capable of waxing
philosophical.
The truth?
We can never be really sure of it now.
It's been fifty years: most of the people involved with that tragic
day are dead, and while some documents have been released over the
years there's still a ton of evidence locked away for a long time.
For myself, I tend to lean towards the
Anti-Castro elements being the culprit as they had the greatest
motive and opportunity, but to prove that would require getting to
the bottom of whether Oswald was a serious attempt by the CIA to
infiltrate the Soviets, and what ties Oswald might have had to any of
the Anti-Castro groups operating along the Gulf of Mexico.
The more I've looked at the Warren
Report, the more I see an investigation that was more cover-up than
revealing, but not for sinister reasons: a lot of it seemed to be an
attempt to hide any failures of inaction on the FBI itself. The
conspiracy theory about the government behind it all doesn't the
basic scrutiny test of Why? Why commit an action fraught with risk
when simpler, more subtle methods were at hand?
Although I still have a question about one thing: when Oswald got kicked out of the USSR and came back to the US, why didn't anyone arrest him for desertion from the Marines when he fled to Russia? He was technically AWOL when he did that. The House UnAmerican Activities congressional committee was still operating at the time: why didn't any eager Congressman looking for media interest bring Oswald up on charges and make a public show of it? I'm still kinda bugged about this point. If someone can point me to a detailed answer to this question, I'd be grateful.
So, until next time, when we unravel
the possibility that the emerging American Football League of that
decade were in cahoots with Oswald after all...
ADDED: I know this is a bit sick to point out on the anniversary and all, but this bit from Red Dwarf just nails it...
They sat on the stony ground/ And he took out a cigarette out/ And everyone else came down/ To listen./ He said "In winter 1963/ It felt like the world would freeze/ With John F. Kennedy/ And The Beatles..." - "Life In a Northern Town" Dream Academy Let us sit upon the ground and tell sad stories of the death of kings. - William Shakespeare I grew up in the shade of the John F. Kennedy administration.
Oh, I was born in 1970 but by the time I was in school and learning history JFK had been inserted into the textbooks, which makes it ancient history to me. But it was still recent enough, much like the Eisenhower years, that I personally knew people - hi Dad, hi Mom! - who were living in that era and coping with the moments as they happened then.
And as I grew up, talking about history at the dinner table or watching the TV shows and the movies and the anniversary specials about Nov. 22nd, it got to be pretty clear that Dad was not a huge fan of JFK. When I got older to be braver about asking Dad's opinions on JFK I did, and Dad gave a few points on Kennedy's dissembling and dishonesty which to be fair fit a good amount of the textbook materials I'd read to that point.
What did surprise me was when I got to University of Florida and ran into a college history professor who shared the same disdain for Kennedy. Having gone in with the stereotypical view of professors as liberals, and informed by my Old School Republican Dad of how liberal JFK was, I was just a tad shocked. And I found myself raising a hand and interjecting that while Kennedy's administrative goals were not as grandly achieved as the hagiographers would make it, I argued that Kennedy was an effective President as someone who inspired action in others, a form of leadership through oratory and forward thinking.
This was about the time I learned of James David Barber's Presidential Character textbook - it might have been the same class - but it was awhile before I read up on Barber's review of Kennedy's tenure to see if I could be right about Kennedy's inspirational qualities.
Was Kennedy a liberal, a conservative, or what? His energy was apparent, its direction obscure. He seemed detached, cool, reluctant to commit himself ideologically... Kennedy's priorities - the causes he would be willing to go to the wall for - were unclear... (p.342)
There was not a great deal of talk about "style" in politics before the Kennedys. The campaign had an elan, a dash and flair... People saw in him what they wanted to: the Irish lad made good, the crisp Harvard mind, the battle-scarred veteran, the scion of unfathomable wealth, the handsome humble fellow destined for mysterious greatness. Whatever it was, it added up to charisma... For all his apparent modesty - perhaps in part because of that - Jack left people feeling they could do better and enjoy it. Even then, Kennedy and the Kennedys went around enspiriting people, calling forth their hope... (p.357)
Kennedy as the Inspiration figure: he had crafted for himself a mask of sorts upon which other people's beliefs could find reflection. The mask itself projected the image of Kennedy being motivated towards accomplishments - fixing the economy, fighting the Russians over Berlin and Cuba, working on civil rights, pushing a space race program to reach the Moon by the end of the decade "not because these things were easy but because they are hard." To that persona, Barber determined JFK to be an Active-Positive character, considering above all the Adaptive trait that such a veiled identity allowed Kennedy more flexibility in his decisions.
But that mask was also infuriating for people who had to deal with Kennedy, and for both his allies who expected so much more and his enemies who felt his youthful inexperience and weakened Presidential mandate: He barely won a close race against Richard Nixon in 1960, and was balanced by a Congress that was more conservative and demanding than an A-P President would like.
For all the efforts of presenting himself as an ardent defender of the growing Civil Rights movement under Martin Luther King, Kennedy moved about as fast as Eisenhower did during the first few years of his tenure: it wasn't until the lid blew off the cauldron with Birmingham in 1963 that Kennedy got more out in front on the issue. For all his being a Cold Warrior fighting the Soviets, the Far Right types pushing for a hot war - especially JFK's own Joint Chiefs of the military - were frustrated that Kennedy wouldn't invade Cuba outright nor stop the Soviets from building the Berlin Wall. And for all of Kennedy's inheritance of the New Deal from FDR and Truman, Kennedy's economic platform seemed more pro-business than even Ike's tenure.
What seemed - still seems - like ineffectiveness to observers was really Kennedy's Active-Positive traits of being Adaptive, Compromising, and less-discussed but more subtle trait of Game-Playing (read Barber's review of the Kennedy family traits that JFK grew up in, p.343 to 347 and elsewhere). By Game-Playing I mean "being a chessmaster," someone who looked at the board, figured out how the pieces moved, better still figured out why those pieces move that way, and game out a situation (including deal-making compromises) that would lead to wins. It's also known as "Playing the Long Game," and some of the more successful A-P Presidents are masters of it.
Where the generals wanted war, Kennedy saw the larger picture of global disaster (Mutually Assured Destruction) if the U.S. and U.S.S.R fought each other directly. Kennedy wasn't too thrilled either to find he'd been lied to about the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba: the estimations of support were way off, and the organizers were really operating on the belief that once committed in part (the landing) the U.S. would commit in total (air support) if the invasion floundered. When Kennedy didn't bite, they felt betrayed... even though they betrayed him first with unrealistic projections.
Like Truman, Kennedy was not keen on war as the ends of any engagement with our Cold War opponents. When the Soviets began their Wall around Berlin to stop the out-flowing tide of refugees, it was another call to action for the hardliners... but Kennedy held it in check, showing action through calling up more troops to show Khrushchev he was serious, but letting the Soviets finish their wall because it ultimately kept the peace (if more people kept fleeing Eastern Europe it would well have been war).
The biggest test was of course the Cuban Missile Crisis: for all intents the closest the entire planet got to nuclear war. The United States was still backing exile Cubans to overthrow Castro even with the fiasco of the Bay of Pigs on everyone's mind: the Soviets also weren't thrilled with a set of nuclear warheads placed within Turkey figuratively a stone's throw away from Moscow. In response, the Soviets sent missiles into Cuba, a figurative stone's throw from Washington DC. Literally a stone's throw away from Florida.
When the U.S. found out... when the spy plane came back with photographic proof... we entered the 13 most panicked days in American (and global) history. The generals - Air Force General LeMay in particular - wanted to invade Cuba and hit the missile strikes with air and land assaults before they felt the missiles could be deployed (they didn't know or didn't care to know that some of the missiles were ready to go). Taking the diplomatic route without a show of strength would have taken too long, given the Soviets and Cubans more time to obstruct and hide their efforts.
Kennedy took the third option (A-Ps usually do): he formed a naval blockade instead, daring the Soviets to cross it in such a way that the burden would be on them. It wasn't full war, but it was hardline enough to convince Khrushchev and the rest of the Soviets that Kennedy had strength to follow through. And even as that played across the TV sets, the White House kept communications open with the Soviets, and then jumped on an opportune moment when two different proposals had been floated to take the earlier better deal. When the crisis ended with a public agreement that the Soviets will remove the missiles and that the U.S. would not invade Castro's Cuba (and a secret arrangement to remove those ICBMs from Turkey), everyone - except the war hawks who wanted to fight the dirty Commies - breathed a sigh of relief.
In all other matters, Kennedy kept playing the long game, stringing out decisions ranging from Vietnam - neither fully committing to efforts there, nor pulling completely out - to the Civil Rights movement. While not as Confident as Truman had been to make the Big Decision, JFK was more content to work behind the scenes and wait for the right moments. Even though such moments were running out for him.
As for Kennedy's assassination... well, now is not really the time to discuss it. A more appropriate moment will be the 50th anniversary - yes it has been that long - coming up this November 22nd. I'll talk more about it then... and discuss my arguments for one of the conspiracy theories - yes I am a conspiracy nut, I hope I am honest enough to admit to that...
The thing about Kennedy in the final analysis is that he's a mirror to us, to the nation, to our psyche. We see of him what we want to see: the hopes or fears he generated, the weakness or strength he conveyed, the nobility or the crassness his fans admired and his haters despised. We apply our theories and our conspiracies on him and his administration, which ended all in "What Ifs" and "Never Weres". The best we can say is that Kennedy's New Frontier - a dazzling dream of ongoing progress into a shiny chrome future - died with him that day in Dallas: neither of Kennedy's immediate successors had the vision or the skill to pull it off the way Kennedy could (even LBJ, who tried but had his own personality flaws trip him up, but that comes later). A practical review of the Kennedy years would be doable, but no one would notice because they'll still insist on seeing the ghosts of their beliefs.
We may not get a clear-sighted view of JFK's tenure for another 50 years.
Next Up: The Best Horse-Trading Brow-Beater You'd Ever Meet Who Could Sell You Anything... Just Not The Idea Of Him As President
