Fecklessness From Cuba to Al Qaeda

A long time ago, I was fascinated by the notion that there was some vast government conspiracy behind the assassination of President Kennedy. Let's face it. Conspiracy theories are a lot sexier than a lone gunman. After reading Gerald Posner's book and seeing a few television specials featuring scientific research into the various aspects of the case, I have come to realize that the most reasonable explanation is that Oswald was the only gunman. I have no interest debating this point. I'm just stating my own conclusions. However, I always left open the possibility that Oswald was recruited to kill the President.

On Friday, German television will broadcast a documentary which suggests that the Cubans recruited Oswald. You can read the Telegraph's article for yourself.

What I found interesting was the following excerpts from the article:

One of the main witnesses is a retired FBI agent, Lawrence Keenan, now in his eighties. Keenan was sent after the assassination to trace Oswald's footsteps in Mexico . . . Mexico City was considered a "Pandora's Box" by the Johnson administration, which feared a war with Cuba were the truth to be revealed to the American people. "They were afraid of what will happen. They didn't want to. . . know the truth for fear it would mean we go to war. Johnson sincerely feared for his own life." It was convenient therefore for the administration to paint Oswald as a loner.

It seems curious that Johnson feared going to war with Cuba for assassinating a U.S. President, but had no problem escalating the war in Vietnam. The second explanation (that he feared for his own life) seemed to make more sense. Then, I read the following which, I think, is the best explanation of all (emphasis is mine):

Alexander Haig, a military adviser to Kennedy and Johnson who became secretary of state in 1981, said in the film that Johnson was terrified his people would learn the truth. "He [Johnson] said 'we simply must not allow the American people to believe that Fidel Castro could have killed our president'. And the reason was that there would be a Right-wing uprising in America, which would keep the Democratic party out of power for two generations."

So, it is better to let a Communist dictator get away with assassinating our President than risk losing political power. It certainly puts the Democrat Party's opposition to the GWOT in an historical context, doesn't it?