Zapruder II

Fishermen are braggarts.  Hunters are braggarts.  It’s not too far fetched to speculate that the person who shot John Kennedy was the same.  He was hunting too.  Taxidermy is a big business here in the Ozarks where the biggest bucks are displayed at the local farm supply outfit.  When I checked in to Hq. Co. 24th Marines in Kansas City after boot camp, there, above the colonel’s desk, was a framed VC scalp.  Professional killers collect it all: hair, noses, and ears.  I remember seeing three shrunken heads in the Kansas City museum when I was a kid.  I suggest in the killing of John Kennedy there is something the TV specials and all the experts have overlooked – intentionally or not.  It’s something very basic to the nature of man and I’m surprised of all the silly and far-out JFK conspiracy theories no one has mentioned a logical extension of how killers behave and what their peculiar mindset suggests.

The Abraham Zapruder film proved to me a front shooter was involved and I wrote a piece about the “front sniper’s nest” which became my most popular post on Ray N. Cherry Blog.  Putting aside the influence of the mob, UFOs, Castro, the Russians, (ad infinitum), could there be new evidence consistent with the nature of man?  Is there a second undiscovered “Zapruder” film?  I specifically mean a trophy film of the assassination shot by the assassins.  Why hasn’t even the possibility of one existing ever been considered?  “Gee boss, if we’re going to go to all that trouble, can I at least have a memento of shooting Kennedy?”

I guess the answer lies in convenient operation and the brazenness of the assassination itself.  A barrel mount camera would be a simple procedure.  The Signal Corps used to do that sort of filming all the time during WWII.  Filming the grassy knoll by the book depository could have been easily done from the windows or roof tops of the near-by buildings.  Because there was a conspiracy in the assassination of John Kennedy, the logistics of filming the event aren’t difficult.  A tourist could have filmed it on the ground.  Again, I speculate that the operational philosophy might have been: “You might as well be hung as a ram as a lamb.”  Do it!  Zapruder II, to be shown in the twilight years of the assassins, would give them their life’s trophy mount.  If it was taken out of the hands of the assassins by the Agency we’ll never know except for the primal nature of man which suggests Zapruder II does exist.

Book Review: Killing Kennedy

Whenever two or three are gathered together there is a committee and that’s what Killing Kennedy: The End of Camelot is all about.  It’s never been more popular for a nationally known celebrity like Bill O’Reilly to take the credit for actually writing a book and to attach his name for marketing purposes in order to cover for poor scholarship and elevate a cotton candy story.  Every time Bill tells the world that his book is the best thing since sliced bread, he should mention that Martin Dugard is the co-author and the writer who, I suspect, did the heavy lifting.

 

There are telltale signs that O’Reilly and Dugard are at odds concerning critical elements of the story like who actually shot JFK.  Bill says on TV that Lee Harvey Oswald absolutely was the shooter, but Dugard is pretty vague about it.  Look for it.  Concerning the Zapruder film; “We watched it time after time after time to understand the sequence of events . . . .”  What part of “head snap backwards, means front shooter” don’t they understand?  The head shot was not a “sequence”, but the proof of conspiracy.

 

Of course, there’s the bountiful photos eulogizing and endearing John Kennedy to the non-critical masses: family portraits, Jackie with John-John, JFK in the Oval Office or on PT109, Carolyn and John-John dancing in front of Kennedy’s desk, a photo with Frank Sinatra and more.  There was not one photo of Dealey Plaza or the crime scene, just black and white maps similar to the Warren Commission’s substitute drawings of the official autopsy.  Killing Kennedy is full of tributes, fond memories, and anecdotes of JFK.  It’ almost as if Bill O’Reilly was a Kennedy himself in mourning, but one should remember the word, “killing” in title of the book.  It implies the act of murder involving motive, capabilities, and bad guys.  The generation contemporary to the assassination wants to know “Who and why?”  If you do, don’t buy the book.

 

If Killing Kennedy was my term paper, I’d get an “F” because even though there are plenty of quotes, there are no footnotes supporting them, just general bibliographical sources.  Perhaps the authors are so distinguished they need no documentation.  There’s not even a Table of Contents (TOC).  Perhaps it was an editorial concession for possible e-Book conversion.  Nonetheless, scholarship means references supported by footnotes.  Bill O’Reilly and Conspiracy Deniers in general fail to understand or admit that time and its mountain of accumulated evidence by people smarter than themselves have made the lone gunman assertion ridiculous.  The least O’Reilly could do for the rest of us is to rename the book Praising Kennedy.