DBWI: The truth about the Nixon assassination!

I know this fascist board bans so called 'conspiracy' theories, but I just saw a great movie called 'RMN' about the assassination of President Richard Milhous Nixon in Boston in 1963, and I just have to say that there is some fishy stuff regarding the assassination. If you replay the footage, you can hear the 'first shot' clearly a few seconds before Nixon is actually shot. I know the investigation showed that the the so called 'loony' Joe Tuttle-who was conveniently shot escaping!--only shot from his sniper once, but this could still mean that there was a second shooter. Maybe it was a police officer who then shot Tuttle! It makes so much sense! And we all know about how shitty the investigation was, which was obviously a result of meddling from anti-Nixon forces from inside the government, which could have been behind the assassination in the first place. This makes sense too-I heard that the military and the CIA didn't like how Nixon accepted the new government of Cuba and his policy in Vietnam. Actually, it is really obvious that is wasn't just one crazy guy who shot Nixon, but a conspiracy. Don't you guys agree?

WAKE UP SHEEPLE!
 

Keenir

Banned
I know this fascist board bans so called 'conspiracy' theories, but I just saw a great movie called 'RMN' about the assassination of President Richard Milhous Nixon in Boston in 1963, and I just have to say that there is some fishy stuff regarding the assassination. If you replay the footage, you can hear the 'first shot' clearly a few seconds before Nixon is actually shot. I know the investigation showed that the the so called 'loony' Joe Tuttle-who was conveniently shot escaping!--only shot from his sniper once, but this could still mean that there was a second shooter. Maybe it was a police officer who then shot Tuttle! It makes so much sense! And we all know about how shitty the investigation was, which was obviously a result of meddling from anti-Nixon forces from inside the government, which could have been behind the assassination in the first place. This makes sense too-I heard that the military and the CIA didn't like how Nixon accepted the new government of Cuba and his policy in Vietnam. Actually, it is really obvious that is wasn't just one crazy guy who shot Nixon, but a conspiracy. Don't you guys agree?

WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

it was A MOVIE!

frankly, I'm surprised you didn't mention any of the friends of the guy (what was he, an auto mechanic?) who tried to fly a prop plane into the White House.

(ooc: yep, real guy, real try)
 
Actually, it is really obvious that is wasn't just one crazy guy who shot Nixon, but a conspiracy. Don't you guys agree?

Definitely. The Republican Party had always been att odds with Military-Industrial Complex, thus when JFK lost to Nixon it was clear the clock was running until Nixon got assasinated. The man was one of the most honest, straightforward and industrious presidents ever, no wonder he has been considered to be so charismatic. His murder truly ended the wonderful 1950's.

It's clear that with Nixon continuing presidency we would see end of the Cold War before his second term was over, together with manned mission to mars and ice cream produced with atomic power for all men, women and children in the world.
 
You're all nuts. It was obviously the notorious Edwin Blair, erstwhile known as The Joker in official government documents (and a close confidant of Kennedy) who pulled off one of the greatest political crimes in American history. It's no coincidence JFK was in the same city as Nixon on the day of the assassination, is it? And that Blair was seen with Kennedy, as well?

(OOC: The Watchmen, reversed. I figure it fits in well when it comes to conspiracy theorizing. :p)
 
Definitely. The Republican Party had always been att odds with Military-Industrial Complex, thus when JFK lost to Nixon it was clear the clock was running until Nixon got assasinated. The man was one of the most honest, straightforward and industrious presidents ever, no wonder he has been considered to be so charismatic. His murder truly ended the wonderful 1950's.
OOC: Politicians and those in the know already thought of Nixon as a power hungry and lying little SOB by the election of 1960, and for a politician that is exceptionally power hungry and lying, you know it's bad. Kennedy said at one point that the reason the election was important was that he was the only thing standing between Nixon and the White House. As another example, Nixon himself only became a lawyer because he thought it would give him enough credit on which to run for office (which is ironic as I read a Saturday Evening Post article once which said "Nixon wanted to become a lawyer, but one that helped people and worked for people" which was the biggest crock the Post could muster...or they were listening to Nixon's own press on that one. The rest of the article painted him as a boyscout no less, btw). If anything, history would work against any public notions of a truthful man of the people, not for it.
 
Historical studies, perhaps, but how about popular portrayals? After all, there is JFK, man of peace... :rolleyes: Getting killed only boosts popularity.
OOC:
You're not gonna get a popular portrayal that'll go out of it's way to shine Nixon as a truthful man. Nor charismatic. You can polarize him in Nixonian traits which would make him look good, but not taking alternate traits and schlopping them onto him willy nilly which extravegant and highlighted honesty and charisma and all that are. Nobody, in a world where Nixon is shot, will think of him as charistmatic. And very few will think of him as honest (I doubt that'd even come up). You have to go off the actual person here, and popular portrayals, in en masse amounts (IE, more than one media), come from traits of the actual person.
 

Keenir

Banned
OOC:
You're not gonna get a popular portrayal that'll go out of it's way to shine Nixon as a truthful man. Nor charismatic. You can polarize him in Nixonian traits which would make him look good, but not taking alternate traits and schlopping them onto him willy nilly which extravegant and highlighted honesty and charisma and all that are. Nobody, in a world where Nixon is shot, will think of him as charistmatic. And very few will think of him as honest (I doubt that'd even come up). You have to go off the actual person here, and popular portrayals, in en masse amounts (IE, more than one media), come from traits of the actual person.

ooc: no? how many people, over the last two decades, when they hear "JFK", think "irresponsible womanizer"?
 
ooc: no? how many people, over the last two decades, when they hear "JFK", think "irresponsible womanizer"?
OOC: Quite a few. What's your point? There was no charisma in Nixon that somehow people are gonna magically think he had charisma, regardless the circumstance. Nostalgia isn't strong enough to cause delusion. And there was no honesty to Nixon (to put it bluntly) to say he had great honesty or anything of that sort. And that's all the point to be made. If people remember him fondly in this alternate universe, they'd likely glaze over honesty altogether, either by ignorance and thinking he had bare minimum truthfulness and nothing horrific nor extravagant, or by just not wanting to deal with it.

The former point is trying to jimmy in a Kennedy feature rather poorly onto Nixon (no offense). Nixon was not charismatic. The latter is trying to do an ironic swap of ideas, but it falls flat on it's face because there wasn't anything exceptionally honest to Nixon for the public to take notice of it as a grand feature, and people called Nixon a liar too and fro long before he got impeached and ever since he came to the public spotlight, and for good reason to boot.

Similarly, lying defines Nixon far more than womanizing does Kennedy. Womanizing was a section of Kennedy's life. Lying, as it were, informed all sections of Nixon's life.

And we don't need to make a mountain out of a molehill here at the critique.
 
Last edited:

Keenir

Banned
And there was no honesty to Nixon (to put it bluntly) to say he had great honesty or anything of that sort. And that's all the point to be made. If people remember him fondly in this alternate universe, they'd likely glaze over honesty altogether, either by ignorance and thinking he had bare minimum truthfulness and nothing horrific nor extravagant, or by just not wanting to deal with it.

ooc: that IS NOT the point! read the OP again, please - this is a thread for wondering if there was a conspiracy behind Nixon's assassination, or if it was a lone gunman.
 
ooc: that IS NOT the point! read the OP again, please - this is a thread for wondering if there was a conspiracy behind Nixon's assassination, or if it was a lone gunman.

Yes it was a conspiracy! Think about what military-industrial-complex thought when their candidate (Kennedy) lost the election: another defence sceptic right after Eisenhower who had cut the gigantic Truman programs. Nixon was one tough SOB who may have been devising a deal with Soviets and/or even ChiComs to cut off American deployment to Vietnam. What the world got instead was the Henry Cabot Lodge presidency when the US and her allies crept into quaqmire of Vietnam. And what about JFK when he was finally elected in 1968? He ended the war in Vietnam - true, after almost five years. Military-industrial complex boomed while Nixon's program of "peace and prosperity" was forgotten. No wonder JFK's president ended up in scandal when his mafia connections surfaced after hotly contested 1972 elections.

Although I personally think that the late 1960's produced some excellent music, for example, one wonders how things would have been different if a true realpolitik handler like Nixon was allowed to continue. What the world got instead was the messed up Lodge presidency followed by that idiotic inbred JFK helped by RFK and rest of his family - spoiled nepotistic brat instead of a competent US president.
 
OOC:
You're not gonna get a popular portrayal that'll go out of it's way to shine Nixon as a truthful man. Nor charismatic. You can polarize him in Nixonian traits which would make him look good, but not taking alternate traits and schlopping them onto him willy nilly which extravegant and highlighted honesty and charisma and all that are. Nobody, in a world where Nixon is shot, will think of him as charistmatic. And very few will think of him as honest (I doubt that'd even come up). You have to go off the actual person here, and popular portrayals, in en masse amounts (IE, more than one media), come from traits of the actual person.

How about this:

-Truly self-made man, someone who achieved an American dream instead of being a spoiled brat (JFK)
-Someone who had cool head in diplomacy instead of being a hothead (Venezuela incident during vice presidency, perhaps some crisis during his presidency)
-Got his presidency due to his talent, not because of good looks

Naturally, when writing above I'm only trying to imagine how the world might portray an assasinated US president.
 
How about this:

-Truly self-made man, someone who achieved an American dream instead of being a spoiled brat (JFK)
-Someone who had cool head in diplomacy instead of being a hothead (Venezuela incident during vice presidency, perhaps some crisis during his presidency)
-Got his presidency due to his talent, not because of good looks

Naturally, when writing above I'm only trying to imagine how the world might portray an assasinated US president.

That actually sounds pretty close to the mark. A positive portrayal of Saint Nixon would focus on his drive, ambition, capability, personal courage, shrewd judgement, decisiveness and level-headed pragmatism. I can't see him as a man of vision or charismatic leader because he ran against one, so if he won, it would have to be due to opposing traits (you can't out-Kennedy a Kennedy).

Make him a populist all-American populist without grandiose dreams and with clear policy goals. If he manages to go through Berlin and Cuba without blowing everything to bits, he could well more effectively curtail military spending and avoid Vietnam.
 
You're all nuts. It was obviously the notorious Edwin Blair, erstwhile known as The Joker in official government documents (and a close confidant of Kennedy) who pulled off one of the greatest political crimes in American history. It's no coincidence JFK was in the same city as Nixon on the day of the assassination, is it? And that Blair was seen with Kennedy, as well?

(OOC: The Watchmen, reversed. I figure it fits in well when it comes to conspiracy theorizing. :p)

Wait, what? You're telling me that not only did the Warren Commission fail to identify a plot to kill Nixon, not only have the investigative journalists who've spent years looking into this failed to uncover the real story, but that Neil Gaiman and Dave McKean, a pair of British comic book writers, no less, stumbled onto the truth, and rather than unveil the cover-up and become world famous heroes to millions, they thought "Hey, this would make a great background twist for Sentries"? I've heard some crazy theories in my time, but this is an impressive one. So, what's next on the docket? Inkblot's diary coming to light, or do we need to be on the lookout for carcinogenic radiation from Dr. Oakridge?

OOC: This is a fantastic idea. Now I'm half-tempted to figure out the other Watchmen analogues who'd be part of Sentries.
 
Top