Meu comentário ao livro de Posner é simples, sólido e hollywoodiano : como pôde um homenzinho doente como Lee Harvey Oswald (isto é, um lobo solitário agindo como justiceiro) cometer um ato tão horrivelmente monumental? Eis o verdadeiro vórtice da história. Eis minha resposta, em forma de pergunta, à pergunta "quem matou JFK?" A tese de Posner não é, de resto sólida, porque muito poucas ideias, pessoas ou eventos na vida o são. Sim, admito que a teoria conspiratória se encaixa perfeitamente nas minhas ideias, as de um adepto do tradicionalismo conservador, esta corrente anti pós-modernista que defende o elitismo hierárquico no centro da sociedade. As conclusões a que chegaram os membros da Comissão Warren que investigou o assassínio de JFK não foram satisfatórias. Na realidade, indicam que, longe de ser isolado, o crime foi resultado de um complô bem organizado. Cada investigador guardou a íntima convicção de que o atentado havia sido planejado e executado por alguma entidade. Mas… qual? Na ausência de provas, a comissão resignou-se a encampar a tese de um desequilibrado atirador solitário. Todos assinaram embaixo. Tentaram tranquilizar a opinião pública e pôr um ponto final naquele trauma. Guardo a certeza de que John Kennedy foi vítima de um complô. Os mandantes hão de estar todos mortos. Quem sabe, um dia saberemos. Ou não. ( )

A masterful investigation into the assassination, required reading for anyone who wants to know what really happened. The chapter on the forensics of the shooting alone would make this a masterwork. But the author also delves deeply into who Oswald was, who Ruby was, and why they acted the way that they did. He also addresses the common conspiracy theories, including showing who Jim Garrison (hero of the movie JFK) really was and why he shouldn't be trusted. ( )

This is one of the most detailed anti-conspiracy assassination books. Many people will consider it a definitive work in the genre. I have my doubts but he does present a considerable amount of evidence supporting his thesis.

I am troubled that he does not seem to address the third shot in any detail.

However, during an interview he seemed to address the third shot more directly.

“[question]The head wound. Everyone looks at the backward motion of the president’s head and says, “That’s got to mean the shot came from the front and shoved the head back.”[/question]

When I first saw the Zapruder film, I thought that it was evidence of a shot from the front. … I asked the experts, “What does that mean, that backwards head movement?” What they told me is, several things are happening. First, as the cortex of the brain is destroyed, a neuromuscular response shoots down the spine, sending a seizure through the body. The body’s muscles twitch, with the large muscles in the back predominating.

Remember, Kennedy’s wrapped into a back brace. It’s wrapped right underneath his breast all the way down and wrapped around his legs. You can’t tell from that seizure where he’s going to move in the car. But then something happens. Out the right side of his head, an explosion takes place. On the enhanced Zapruder film, you can see a cloud, a red mist of brain and blood tissue moving forward. It’s almost a jet effect. As that propels out his head, it has much more force than the force of the bullet moving in, and it shoots him in the opposite direction. It shoots out to the right front and left, violently.

Two things. As the president’s brain is destroyed, he goes into a neuromuscular seizure. His body starts to stiffen up. At the same time that the wound explodes out the right front side of his head and as that blood and brain tissue moves out, it forces him in the opposite direction, the jet effect, back and to the left, violently. …

[question]In terms of photographs, X-rays, is it absolutely clear where the shots came from?[/question]

No question. The X-rays and the autopsy photographs are conclusive. Kennedy is only hit by two shots, fired from the rear.”

Cf. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/interview-gerald-posner/

https://www.prageru.com/videos/jfk-democrat-or-republican

Picked this one up at the used book store at my local library for a dollar. Came out in 1993, not long after Oliver Stone's film homage to the conspiracy nuts.

Poser wades bravely into the fever swamps of JFK conspiracy theories with an extraordinarily well-documented account of Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby, explaining how Oswald came to kill Kennedy and Ruby came to kill Oswald. I suspect you all know the facts -- they're essentially as the Warren Commission determined them -- so I'll focus on the few exceptions, some other things that were new to me, and some observations on why the conspiracy theories have such tenacity even though they lack any credibility.

The Warren Commission erred in some of its sketches of Kennedy's neck wound location, and in its estimation of when the shots were fired. Better evidence puts the wounds consistently in the same location, supporting the autopsy report, and a modern analysis of the Zapruder film gives Oswald considerably longer to fire his shots than the Warren Commission estimated.

That's it. That's pretty much all they got wrong. Which is remarkable, considering that Warren pushed the Commission to complete its report in something approaching great haste, before the assassination could trigger World War III.

I had not realized just how deeply Oswald was involved in Marxism. He wasn't just a loony who somehow found his way to Russia; he was a committed Trotskyite from about age 15. (Which does not, of course, contradict him being a loony. May even be considered corroborating evidence.) After returning disillusioned to the U.S., Oswald made a determined effort to then defect a third time to Cuba, which he was hoping was the Marxist paradise Russia had turned out not to be, but even Cuba didn't want him. He then returned to Houston and the opportunity to assassinate JKF.

Marina, Oswald's wife, married him essentially because he had his own apartment in Russia, then stayed with him after he returned to the U.S. essentially because she found she liked life in the United States. In spite of the fact that Oswald refused to teach her any English, as a way to control her.

I had not realized what a loser Ruby was. The conspiracy theories that he had mob connections founder on the reality that no mobster with any instinct for survival would have touched him. Ruby was an unbalanced individual who had to be where the action was, and his murder of Oswald was arguably so impulsive and happenstance that he could very well have copped a 5-year "murder without malice" plea if his attorney, Melvin Belli, hadn't gambled on getting him off completely ... by arguing he was delusional. The world can do without lawyers like that.

Finally, I was surprised how many of the "witnesses" used by conspiracy buffs are obvious nut-cases. A surprising fraction (or maybe not) have spent time in mental institutions. It's a little incredible these folks are given any credibility by anyone at all.

An interesting side story is that of New Orleans district attorney Jim Garrison, who conjured up a case against Clay Shaw essentially out of thin air. Shaw vaguely resembled a "Clay Bernstein" made up by a flamboyant New Orleans attorney notorious for his tall tales. Garrison was afflicted by a positively Stalinesque case of paranoia, and even most of the conspiracy buffs have tried to distance themselves from him. (Though not Oliver Stone.) Garrison was actually dropped from the National Guard after being diagnosed as suffering from severe psychopathology, but somehow this didn't derail his political career.

So why do conspiracy theories have such traction? It's really hard to beat the explanation first offered by William Manchester and quoted by Posner, that it just isn't possible for a lot of people to accept that a popular President could be offed by a complete nobody. Yet that's what the facts say. This is just too much cognitive dissonance for a lot of people, apparently. I find myself wondering if the same dynamics aren't behind the 9/11 Truthers: That a handful of young Muslim losers could kill thousands and bring down two great works of civil engineering is just too much cognitive dissonance to accept.

Anyway, Posner's book is highly recommended for anyone who hasn't read it already and is not already burned out on the JFK assassination. ( )

A few years ago I went on a toot of Kennedy assassination books, convinced that there was an evil conspiracy or two or three. The books got more and more bizarre and I got more and more confused. Then I read this one, and it was a "I coulda had a V-8" moment. This one made sense. ( )