Meaning of JFK assassination calls - J. Edgar (2011) Discussion

[–] Vincenzo19 13 years ago

So you think J Edgar Hoover took part in the JFK assassination?

http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=23952071

reply

[–] kaiserdurden 13 years ago

I was thinking the same thing! Also, wasn't the assassination televised? I could only assume that this was the tone the film was trying to take...

"Man, you shoulda seen 'em, kicking Edgar Allen Poe."

reply

[–] doug65oh 13 years ago

No, the shooting in Dealey Plaza was not televised live. Oswald's murder by Jack Ruby on the 24th, however, was televised live by NBC.

reply

[–] kaiserdurden 13 years ago

Ok, that's right.

"Man, you shoulda seen 'em, kicking Edgar Allen Poe."

reply

[–] stephendwoodfin 13 years ago

I was wondering some of the very same questions! And i think you are correct. I don't necessarily think Hoover Actually had anything to do with it JFKs assassination, but it does seem like that is what the movie is implying. And your theory certainly brings some clarity to the RFK call, which i didn't quite understand at the time.

I did however pick up on the implication that he had hand in The MLK assassination.

reply

[–] doug65oh 13 years ago

Actually it's not at all far-fetched. Consider the timeline and circumstances:

President Kennedy is shot at 12:30, and the limousine takes off for Parkland Hospital immediately. Meanwhile, Smith & Bell, the two primary wire service reporters in the motorcade start fighting for possession of the radiotelephone in their car. The argument, won by Smith of UPI, lasts approximately 4 to 5 minutes. Cronkite broke the news on national television for CBS at about 12:38-'40 CST.

All it would take for Hoover to get the word first (or very early) is a single agent on scene monitoring Dallas Police radio channels.

As for Hoover's call to the Attorney General, Bob Kennedy himself said later that Hoover seemed to enjoy informing him of the shooting.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] missoulaman1979 13 years ago

Thank You! That totally threw me for a loop!

reply

[–] joezeph 13 years ago

I was thinking this too, but at the time Hoover made that phone call, he did not know that JFK was shot by a communist.

Oswald wasn't arrested for an hour or so after the shooting, but Hoover made the call in the first few minutes after it happened.

reply

[–] loco_serenata 13 years ago

it doesn´t matter if Oswald was arrested one hour later or so. In the conspirative mind of JEH, if JFK had been shot, it was a communist, without hesitation.

reply

[–] joezeph 13 years ago

Oh, that makes sense then.

reply

[–] TTboy-33 13 years ago

The call was a personal reminder to RFK of J.Edgars first meeting with him. J.Edgar was adamant that a tide of violent communist activity was coming to america, again (like the bolshovik bombings in the 20's) and that it would strike at our leaders.

RFK disputed J.Edgar saying the communist threat is international threat, and to focus on organized crime (which J.Edgar never believed was an issue).

So the call was sort of a personal vindication/'I told you so' sort of thing.

reply

[–] alrodbel 13 years ago

That's a reasonable explanation of Hoovers call to RFK, but not the curt hang up after the news. And I found out Manchester's book on JFK murder described the call, but a bit more cordial.

Still no explanation for the depiction in the film of the agent saying, "Only you know about" Since the news of JFK shooting was flashed to the world, and by the time he got through it was known, or soon to be, by millions. So it's reasonable to seek a subtext, a meaning in this. I gave my speculation of Eastwood's purpose. It would be great to hear his explanation.

I wrote a more extensive article based on this IMDB comment on dailykos at this link

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/15/1036285/-J-Edgar,-Clint-Eastwoods-Calumny?showAll=yes&via=blog_475686

reply

[–] martytamu27 13 years ago

news was not spread instantansously in 1963 as it is now.
TV was just becoming more commonplace, but still no one had it on all the time. there was no internet or cell phones or tv coverage of the motorcade.
it is very possible that someone notified hoover from the scene and hoover, quick thinking and opportunistic as always, called bobby immediatly to inform him and offer the implication of eithe his involvement in his death or a told you so.

reply

[–] Tobey 12 years ago

martytamu27 - very well put. I would also go as far to say it would be rare for most people at work to have a radio on during the work day. Even at home TV viewing was still an 'event'. People didn't just come home and turn on the TV like we do now. They sat down to watch specific programs.
CBS did break into As the World Turns, Nancy Hughes was in the kitchen, as usual, and on the set they didn't know they had been interupted and finished the rest of the show. I asked my mother once where she was when Kennedy was shot and she said watching Nancy on ATWT.
Something else to consider is that the media did not blast items that they could not confirm. If someone had just phoned CBS news and said the president was shot they wouldn't report it until they got confirmation from a source they trust. Today you can tweet or post anything you want and it might get picked up and sent worldwide in no time and many will think it's true.
The films we see of the actual assasination were taken by a private citizen and the most famous, the Zapruder film, was first snapped up by a magazine (Life if I'm remembering right). Live TV connections at these kinds of events, especially a random point along a motorcade, were extremely rare. Any photographers on scene would have to rush their film back to the lab to be processed before it could be aired.

reply

[–] awastie 12 years ago

My opinion is that the movie was told from the point of view of Hoover's reflections over his career for his memoirs. At the end Tolson says that after he read the manuscripts it was mostly exaggerations and straight out lies. So lots of what we saw in the movie is pure speculation for us to judge what really happened and what didn't. The call re JFK is how JEH recalls it, but it may not necessarily have happened that way.

reply

[–] blackno31 11 years ago

If you truly want to see live television coverage "coming of age" you should see the actual footage of NBC News "As It Happened". It aired on A&E on the 25th anniversary of the assassination and I taped it (I believe it has run in its entirety since then). Remember this was an age of no 24-hour news-only cable channels. In fact it took 11 minutes for NBC to realize the importance of the event and start rolling tape on their live broadcast so they would have an archival account. Some of the devices employed by those at the news desk and reporters in the field are laughable. And just like in "Mad Men", nearly every anchorman (I don't recall seeing a single woman reporter) and a lot of the reporters in the field are all smoking cigarettes!

My mom was watching a soap opera, too, trying to get my 20-day old brother to take his bottle, when she saw the news. I'm guessing it was NBC because I think the summer she was pregnant with him was when "Another World" premiered...?

reply

[–] kino66 9 years ago

So the call was sort of a personal vindication/'I told you so' sort of thing.

I don't think so. There's a lot of back story re: JFK, RFK & Hoover.

reply

[–] mrjjmac22-1 13 years ago

It would have been nice if the telephone call scene was accurate since RFK was actually at his home Hickory Hill and not in his office as the film portrays.

reply

[–] miss_cliche 13 years ago

That's the first thing I noticed too when I saw the scene.

reply

[–] racafella9024 13 years ago

Maybe Eastwood had RFK in his office to remind us of the conversation between RFK and Hoover when Hoover warned him about the threat of communism in America. It could have been a plot device, just to emphasize the "i told you so" aspect people on this board are talking about. Just a thought

reply

[–] martytamu27 13 years ago

hoover called bobby to give the impression that Hoover had something to do with the assasination. Because he did give that thin, veiled threat earlier in the film when bobby wouldnt work with him. it was just somehting convenient that fell in his lap so he used it.
or it could have been implied that hoover had somethign to do with his death, but dont think so. he didnt have that much power

reply

[–] pjpoconnell 13 years ago

In the chaos of the moment, people in Dallas were focused on observing what was happening, but a very disciplined FBI agent on the scene would call J. Edgar immediately, perhaps a few minutes before anyone else in Washington--the meaning of "who knows?", i.e., who in D.C. knows. RFK did later say that J. Edgar's call was very curt.

reply

[–] R_Meyer 13 years ago

Yes I think the history is RFK did hear the news first from J. Edgar Hoover.

Hoover despised the Kennedy boys. I'm a lifelong Democrat and I thought JFK was a great President. But on a personal level.........I'm afraid I tend to agree with Hoover.

They were pretty despicable.

reply

[–] doug65oh 13 years ago

But on a personal level, was J. Edgar Hoover any better, or different??

reply

[–] R_Meyer 13 years ago

I'd say he was a LOT different!

But that's not the point.

I'm just adding that J. Edgar Hoover despised the Kennedys, especially Bobby. But in phoning Bobby to tell him JFK had been shot I think this was also Hoover -- as the Nation's Number One Law Enforcement Official -- WANTING to be the first to tell RFK because RFK was ALSO U.S. Attorney General AND Hoover's Boss.

But did Hoover ENJOY telling Bobby --haha your bro just took one in the head -- I'm sure he did, sad to say.

reply

[–] jen-963-30749 11 years ago

On a personal and professional level, J. Edgar Hoover was a dangerous megalomaniacal narcissist. He was truly crazy and he ruined countless lives for no good reason. That being said, he did built the FBI to be the envy of the world.

reply

[–] pjpoconnell 13 years ago

I was making myself a cheese and lettuce sandwich on rye at about 12:35 p.m. on November 22, 1963, with the radio playing in the background. I was not paying much attention to it until I heard an interruption and the words "President" and "shot." This shocking juxtaposition caused me to drop my sandwich on the floor and listen to the radio for hours, until they stopped reporting and simply played classical and patriotic music through the night. (I did not have a TV at the time.) That day has haunted me ever since. A few years later, doubts about "the official story" led me to work with a group called the Kennedy Assassination Investigation Committee. Still later, the Zapruder film was released, and I saw it. It seemed impossible to me that, as the film showed, JFK's head could go backward when hit if he were shot from behind (by Oswald in the Texas School Book Depository). But a few years ago, the Discovery Channel, or some similar venue--I forget, did a "CSI"-type reenactment in which a dummy with a head filled with a simulacrum of brain matter and placed in the same position as JFK was shot in the head with a Mannlicher-Carcano from the front (as from the grassy knoll) and then from the rear. The head moved forward and exploded exactly as in the Zapruder film when shot from the REAR. This, and other evidence, convinced me to accept that Oswald was the assassin, probably acting alone out of alienation.

J. Edgar Hoover had nothing to do with letting Oswald back into this country. It was handled by other agencies. Hoover had little or no regard for the Constitution, but he was not pointlessly paranoid. The 1917-1921 period did see a tremendous amount of radical (also reactionary) violence. That does not justify the arbitrary deportations, but it does contextualize them. Also, in the 1990s, the release of the Venona transcripts and the opening of the Soviet archives revealed that there was in fact a widespread network of Soviet spies and agents in the U.S. government in the Stalin years. Again, that does not justify whatever infringements of individual rights may occur, but it does point out something that should never be forgotten: Communist totalitarianism was a very real and very grave threat to the world in the 1940s and 1950s.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jen-963-30749 11 years ago

it could have been implied that hoover had somethign to do with his death, but dont think so. he didnt have that much power

I don't believe that J. Edgar Hoover did have anything to do with JFK's assassination, but I disagree that he did not have enough power to do so. He had a ton of power, way more than any man should. I think he easily could have had anyone killed that he wanted killed; his mind just went more to destroying people than killing them.

reply

[–] internationalmoves45 13 years ago

I long accepted the official Warren Commission findings until I saw this film. Now I wonder just how he was involved. I didn't know Hoover was responsible for deporting or incarcerating nearly 10,000 suspected communists or anarchists during the 1920s. I realize he was possibly more obsessed with communist infiltration of our government and society than anyone - including McCarthy.
I say the phone call to RFK is but a small clue but his communists-under-every-bed paranoia is the real clue. Why would Hoover allow a military sharp-shooter like Oswald back into the country especially after he made a very public display of denouncing his US citizenship and moved to the USSR? Hoover who claimed King was allied with communists let Oswald back into the country?? Really??

And come to think of it, the 3 most notorious US political assassinations in the 20th century took place under Hoover's watch in 1963 and 2 in 1968.

Remember it took CBS at least 20 minutes to flash this news across the our screen and radio too. It could be possible Hoover probably had to be notified before the press could release any information. The famous Zapruder film didn't surface until years later. So no picture was immediately flashed on our screens although pictures may have made it into the special evening newspaper editions. The government carefully controlled the release of such news in those days.

reply

[–] alrodbel 13 years ago

It may have taken CBS 20 minutes, but Dallas radio, with reporters right there, had it in a few minutes. So "Nobody knows" wasn't accurate.

And yes, William Manchester's book did confirm that it was Hoover who broke the news to RFK, but while curt with more humanity.

The thrust of my observations are what Eastwood was perpetuating, a conspiracy with Hoover in a main actor, something I happen to reject. This does not mean that Hoover, some in the Military or CIA did not wish JFK killed, only that his death was not a conspiracy rather the actions of a lone nut. There are hundreds of books pro and con on this, so take your pick.

Here's a link to a more extensive article I wrote on this film and this point.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/15/1036285/-J-Edgar,-Clint-Eastwoods-Calumny?via=user

reply

[–] internationalmoves45 13 years ago

According to wiki, ABC radio first reported @ 12:36 CT 6 minutes after he was shot . Local radio KLIF reprted @12:39 and KFA @ 12:45 several minutes behind national media reports. CBS had the first breaking TV report @ 12:40 CT. So the FBI field agent would have had a couple of minutes to phone Hoover.

Now I do agree with your assessment that Eastwood hints at Hoovers involvement. But if he had never shown why Hoover was so rabidly anti-communist, I would not have thought much of this. While Hoover accused JFK of dallying with an enemy agent and King associating with "pinkos", Oswald's re-entry to the U.S. escaped his notice especially after a widely publicized denunciation of his US citizenship. True the movie wasn't really about the assassination but still it got me thinking. I had always agreed with Warren Commission findings-until last night. Sometimes subtle messages are ones that scream.

While Oliver Stone screamed conspiracy, Eastwood simply whispered.

reply

[–] alrodbel 13 years ago

Go to the link in my comment above this one. It includes a link to a conversation between Hoover and LBJ, which may help you decide whether this sounds like a talk among co conspirators or two men who wanted to get to the truth.

reply

[–] doug65oh 13 years ago

If you'll visit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlaHYlb2o0M, that coverage begins about 5 minutes or perhaps a bit less before the shooting. The on-air reporter was KRLD's Bob Huffaker.

reply

[–] internationalmoves45 13 years ago

Thank you very much Doug. I sifted through all the officially -timed media reports. It appeared as if Dallas was very slow reporting the shooting with a 3-minute time lag behind national media. For the most part Kennedy was quite unpopular in Dallas which is why he felt compelled to visit Dallas in the first place.

I still agree with the idea a focused FBI agent had time to call Hoover who then called RFK. Even if the news flashed it doesn't mean Kennedy had heard it. Did National Security measures include a temporary widespread communications blackout in Washington? Some say the phones were off in Washington except for Cabinet members, Joint Chiefs, and Congressional leaders. So maybe that phone call was necessary. And central to Eastwood's plot. Hoover just had to say: Told you so!

Now for that recorded "post mortem" conversation between LBJ and Hoover: It is entirely possible these two seasoned and clever Machiavellians were in the habit of recording conversations. The conversation could be one of great concern. Neither would dare implicate himself in a phone call.

I for one don't believe Johnson was involved in a conspiracy. And as I have stated didn't believe in one until I saw how obsessed Hoover was with arresting, prosecuting, executing and deporting thousands of people he considered communist/anarchist subversives.

How could a military sharp shooter, the Soviet Union's newest citizen and poster boy, Lee Harvey Oswald, even set foot again in the United States? It's just curious how Hoover let him get off the boat, unless these communist witch hunter tales are pure fiction.

I would like to address the supposition that Eastwood is a conservative right wing police state believer. Or that he panders to the faction of the GOP that detests government watchdogs. I disagree. I would expect the film to be a pure whitewash to appeal to aging conservatives who still believe Hoover was a god. This is the same crowd who still won't acknowledge Thomas Jefferson had biracial children with his slave.

I would think this movie would bring shrieks of disapproval that it is disrespectful and a lie Hoover was anything but good for our nation. And that this movie is trash. I was surprised Eastwood would even address the homosexuality and cross-dressing rumors. You can bet pastor Mike Huckabee would never honestly expose our Founding Fathers indiscretions on his silly US history website. Right wingers don't care about truth. They systematically purge truth from history. With Eastwood, to his credit, he didn't.

reply

[–] R_Meyer 13 years ago

I still agree with the idea a focused FBI agent had time to call Hoover who then called RFK.

If you check I think you will find Robert Kennedy spoke of first learning of the shooting from a Hoover phone call.

From The Death of a President by William Manchester (pp. 195-196). Manchester describes the phone call where J. Edgar Hoover called to inform Bobby Kennedy that his brother had been shot.

A White House operator connected [Hoover] with extension 163, at the end of the swimming pool behind the Virginia mansion. In response to the ring Ethel Kennedy left the men. The operator told her "The director is calling." Ethel didn't have to ask which one. In official Washington there were many directors, but only one Director. She said, "The Attorney General is at lunch."

At the other corner of the pool her husband had just glanced at his watch. It was 1:45 P.M. They had been away from the office for over an hour. He picked up a tuna fish sandwich and said to Morgenthau, "We'd better hurry and get back to that meeting."

"This is urgent," the operator told Ethel.

Ethel held out the white receiver. She called, "It's J. Edgar Hoover."

Robert Kennedy knew something out of the ordinary had happened; the Director never called him at home. Dropping his sandwich, he crossed to the phone, and as he took it Morgenthau saw the workman with the transistor radio whirl and run toward them, gibbering.

The Attorney General identified himself.

"I have news for you. The president's been shot," Hoover said tonelessly.

There was a pause. Kennedy asked whether it was serious.

"I think it's serious. I am endeavoring to get details," said Hoover. "I'll call you back when I find out more."

Questions of historical record aren't like questions about your favorite rock group. Either it's been documented or it hasn't been.

Like you could say the Beatles are better than the Stones -that's fine, that's your opinion.

If you say the Beatles consisted of six members it's wrong. Doesn't matter whether people agree.

See the difference?

reply

[–] doug65oh 13 years ago

Aye …the description above is absolutely correct, although I don’t recall it specifically from Manchester’s book. I’ve seen the same account published in two or three sources, and it never varies.

reply

[–] wildbillharding 13 years ago

International Moves - you doubt LBJ's involvement in the Dallas conspiracy. Please see the lengthy filmed interview with Madeleine Duncan Brown, which is easily viewed online. She was LBJ's mistress and had a son with him. She says, a little nervously, that LBJ confessed to her that he was behind the JFK killing. She died in June '02, but her statement deserves much more scrutiny than it has received so far. She even recalls the details and tone of LBJ speaking to her on the night of November 21st, 1963.

Another item that deserves attention is the confession by a Native American called Loy Factor. He admits to being one of the shooters and was on the sixth floor of the Book Depository. A little known book by a British journalist, whose name escapes me, backs up the claim and appears conclusive. I have a copy somewhere and if anyone would like me to post the author's name I will seek it out.

reply

[–] Petronius Arbiter II 13 years ago

"Now for that recorded "post mortem" conversation between LBJ and Hoover: It is entirely possible these two seasoned and clever Machiavellians were in the habit of recording conversations. The conversation could be one of great concern. Neither would dare implicate himself in a phone call."

LBJ taped everything. At least in the Oval Office, that is. That's what gave Richard Nixon the idea, which fortuitously turned out to be essential to Nixon's downfall.

My guess would be, Hoover knew it, too.

I'm about 90% certain there was a conspiracy of some kind or another behind the JFK assassination. I'm still keeping an open mind about who all was involved, and to what extent, and how much was conspiracy before the fact, and how much was conspiracy to cover up and obfuscate that only began after the fact. If I were a betting man, I'd bet on rogue elements in the CIA was being far more likely to have been involved before the fact, than Hoover and/or anybody in the FBI. Hoover was one of the most morally corrupt and destructive figures in American history, but vis-a-vis the Kennedy assassinations, I doubt he was involved. But that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK, I have almost no doubt.

On the other hand, J. Edgar Hoover was probably deeply involved in letting most of the people involved in the Martin Luther King assassination get off scot-free, and that's bad enough, wouldn't you say? Even on that one, though, I rather doubt Hoover would have conspired before the fact to have MLK shot. Doesn't seem like his style. But then again, maybe, just maybe. Hoover may have viewed King's opposition to the Vietnam War, and his support of the Memphis garbage worker's strike, as violations of his understanding of the blackmail contract he imposed on Martin after he learned of Martin's marital infidelity. Hoover hated MLK so virulently, it's difficult to say for sure that he would have stopped short of authorizing a mafia-style hit.

When John Dillinger was shot by FBI agents in 1934, it was basically a mafia-style gunning down of a man who just might have been unarmed. That story is a bit more complicated than I have time to detail, unfortunately, and besides, many people would argue that Dillinger really had it coming, and I'd have a hard time disagreeing with them. (Or ever fully agreeing with them, for that matter, but as I just wrote, it's kind of a long story.)

"I don't deduce, I observe."

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]