The Speech Never Given and Questions Never to be Answered

There was some excess time before a flight home, so I talked a couple coworkers into heading down to check out Dealey Plaza in downtown Dallas, TX.

There, overlooking three white X’s on the asphalt of Elm Street mark the transformation of several things – a nation of potential into a nation of grief, textbook history into a destination visited, and casual understanding into “… I have questions.”

Noteworthy, however, is a quote from the speech Kennedy was on his way to make at the Dallas Market Center on 22Nov1963:

We in this country, in this generation, are – by destiny rather than choice – the watchmen on the walls of world freedom. We ask, therefore, that we may be worthy of our power and responsibility, that we may exercise our strength with wisdom and restraint, and that we may achieve in our time and for all time the ancient vision of “peace on earth, good will toward men.” That must always be our goal, and the righteousness of our cause must always underlie our strength. For as was written long ago: “except the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain.”

I was compelled to look up the entire speech, which can be found in its entirety here (and is a recommended read, considering some interesting parallels between 1963 and 2022). However, there was one part early on which stood out even moreso than what was overlooking the site of tragedy 59 years ago:

Ignorance and misinformation can handicap the progress of a city or a company, but they can, if allowed to prevail in foreign policy, handicap this country’s security. In a world of complex and continuing problems, in a world full of frustrations and irritations, America’s leadership must be guided by the lights of learning and reason or else those who confuse rhetoric with reality and the plausible with the possible will gain the popular ascendancy with their seemingly swift and simple solutions to every world problem.

There will always be dissident voices heard in the land, expressing opposition without alternatives, finding fault but never favor, perceiving gloom on every side and seeking influence without responsibility. Those voices are inevitable.

…I have questions…

I went into the former Texas Book Depository with a mix of open-mindedness and certainty – I had discussed Oswald’s rifle briefly in one of several parts to an oddly titled (in retrospect) series of posts, and I understood the gist of the event and the controversy and conspiracies surrounding it. However, I left with questions about the relationship between what is known/what is to be known, how things might have been different had a plethora of other variables manifested a different reality, and how information and the desire – and sheer need – for the justification and absolution of certainty can drive folks to extremes… both ideologically and commercially.

• “Questions about the relationship between what is known/what is to be known…”

Years ago, I had a discussion with a family member as we sat and enjoyed a couple beers on my boat at anchor off the infamous sandbar in Kaneohe Bay.  

“Do you think 9/11 was an inside job?” Not the best question for someone who tends to take a grave view on personal motivation and geopolitical participation. Conspiracy theories bug me – they always have:

One topic, however, which rankles me to no end is the whole “conspiracy” angle. You want to believe that, go right on ahead. Ask yourself a couple of questions, though:

1) If you are right, then what?
2) If you are wrong, then what?

More often than not, my biggest issue is the fact that they can often become the noise which smothers the signal.

Going back to the musings on the boat, my response was similar to the discussion a few days ago as we headed from Dealey Plaza to the airport and our trip home:

With the case of [fill in the blank conspiracy], one has to ask one (okay, two) basic question(s): what would the truth do? Who benefits from the lie?

In the case of 9/11 being discovered as an “inside job,” how would the international community react to being dragged into a truly pointless conflict? How would national credibility fare? More importantly, how would folks in the domestic realm react – especially those of us who have served, those who came back physically and mentally different, and those who have lost loved ones?

The same could be said about 22Nov1963 and the conspiracies which followed. How would the world react to the sudden realization that the story sold was a fable told? That it wasn’t one guy but a foreign or domestic cabal who sought to – and effectively could – change policy one way or another… that if favor had fallen with the powers-that-be, then someone else who was more pliable would be placed into favor.

How would we have reacted to the unmasking of such an ugly truth then and in the recent past?

This is the interesting dilemma: at what point does the potential damage of a catastrophic truth eclipse the bliss and deceptive stability of ignorance?

For me, I would rather take the stable ignorance over the implosive revelation. After all… take a minute to consider what the price of truth in either case would buy for the nation and world.

This leads me into the next pondering:

• “How things might have been different had a plethora of other variables manifested a different reality…”  

Oy. I hate speculation and alternative history. “What if” is never a simple thought experiment and can easily launch into theoretical multiverse theory, paradoxes, and complex philosophical self-stimulation with little purpose than making a literal and figurative mess.

However, “what if” is viable in the exploratory sense of where to go from the ever-shifting present – when “then” becomes “now.”

Sure, had Kennedy not been assassinated, the world today would definitely be much different; and if 9/11 had only been the day before 9/12, the world would definitely be much different. However, in the spirit of the previous musing on the ethics of truth, the “what if” becomes almost a preparatory statement rather than idle academic speculation…

• How information and the desire – and sheer need – for the justification and absolution of certainty can drive folks to extremes… both ideologically and commercially.

This is what fascinates me about the “pristine bullet”/“Grassy Knoll” theories – that there is this desire for a level of understanding which fits the expectations of the truth which is most comfortable to the individual or the group… and either end of the spectrum of truth in regards to JFK or 9/11… well, there is a market for confirming those biases.

I stood on those grounds not looking for an answer, but fascinated by the questions… it was a good day.