this. if you look at the court historian, look under the index under o and you won t find oswald mentioned. not in the book. this was two years after the assassination. now the narrative that immediately emerged was a streak of violence particularly on the right killed kennedy. we happen to know he was killed by a silly communist. bob, when you look at kennedy half century later, what matters? what endures? well, i think the real message in what george is saying, i mean, the death was so abrupt and so tragic that the real lesson is that awful things can happen that change history and this changed history in a way that was unimaginable. i was in college and there was just this sense of everything is coming apart.
somehow deeply flawed because of this. if you look at the court historian, look under the index under o and you won t find oswald mentioned. not in the book. this was two years after the assassination. now the narrative that immediately emerged was a streak of violence particularly on the right killed kennedy. we happen to know he was killed by a silly communist. bob, when you look at kennedy half century later, what matters? what endures? well, i think the real message in what george is saying, i mean, the death was so abrupt and so tragic that the real lesson is that awful things can happen that change history and this changed history in a way that was unimaginable. i was in college and there was just this sense of everything is coming apart.
somehow deeply flawed because of this. if you look at the court historian, look under the index under o and you won t find oswald mentioned. not in the book. this was two years after the assassination. now the narrative that immediately emerged was a streak of violence particularly on the right killed kennedy. we happen to know he was killed by a silly communist. bob, when you look at kennedy half century later, what matters? what endures? well, i think the real message in what george is saying, i mean, the death was so abrupt and so tragic that the real lesson is that awful things can happen that change history and this changed history in a way that was unimaginable. i was in college and there was just this sense of everything is coming apart.
kennedy dead? the russians had motives, the anti-castro had motive. the kennedy administration was trying to undermine fidel castro s dictatorship. it is clear that the forces of communism are not to be underestimated in cuba or anywhere else in the world. mark lane believes the cia killed kennedy. a motorcycle cop on the grassy knoll confronted a man that had secret service credentials. the cia created all the secret service credentials. gary cornwell offers a different opinion. the committee was saying we take all the evidence about the mafia, we can t discount the possibility that individual members did not have a role in the assassination. is there new evidence linking organized crime to the assassination? and later, why one man insists the clues to solving the
really know exactly what happened, particular lay about his time in mexico city? that s a good question. maybe. i m not sure we ll get it on the 50th anniversary. the question is what does russia have in their archives? a lot of materials in a lot of other places and the soviet union contributed things but there might be more documents down the line. as of now, i think this whole anniversary is going to end and people will still be unclear on who killed kennedy, although i would say 70, 80% of scholars think oswalt acted alone. phil, do you think there was involvement by russia and cuba? we ll never know because those questions really should have been asked aggressively 49 years ago, and the decision was made to hide a lot of this from the warren commission. i should point out secretary kerry is just adding his name to a list of powerful people that doubted the warren commission report including president johnson, president johnson dies believing castro killed