Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

In his film, The Assassination of John F. Kennedy Jr., John Hankey alleges that George W. Bush was involved in the murder. And John Hankey is not the only one who says so.  

It's based on the fact that George W. Bush went missing the weekend of JFK Jr.'s death. He was seen flipping pancakes at an Iowa eatery on the Friday, and then he didn't surface again until the Monday. A nervous spokeswoman of his had to express his condolences to the press over the weekend without providing any clue as to his whereabouts. But, there were witnesses who saw Bush and his father at the small New Jersey airport with two Mossad agents in advance of JFK Jr's flight. Here is how investigative reporter Tom Flocco put it:

"Two witnesses said they saw George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush at the Essex County, New Jersey airport with Israeli Mossad agent Michael Harari and another Mossad agent who were both seen standing next to JFK Jr.’s Cessna--all four were at the airport just two days before the doomed plane took off with JFK Jr., his pregnant wife and her sister."

But, my point is that there was a big difference between killing JFK and killing JFK Jr.- in terms of justification. To the plotters in the JFK assassination, JFK was perceived as a traitor. I really think they looked upon his murder as the execution of a traitor during war. The penalty for treason is death. And according to them, Kennedy appeased Castro, where instead of deposing him at the Bay of Pigs, he paid him off millions of dollars, in humiliation of our country. Kennedy also conducted unauthorized negotiations with Khrushchev about disarmament. And Kennedy's whole drive to end the Cold War with the Soviets was perceived by them as treason.

So, when they killed JFK, even though he was a family man with a beautiful wife and two young adoring children, they justified it on the basis of "national security." And that is why OIC senior member Vincent Salandria characterizes JFK's execution as a "national security event." 

But, fast-forward to the killing of JFK Jr. What had he done? And it's not that I am saying that I think there was anything traitorous about what JFK did, but I can at least understand how Cold Warriors might perceive his actions that way. 

But, in the case of JFK Jr., what had he done that could possibly be construed as deserving the death penalty? There was nothing! Not by the wildest stretches of the imagination could his murder be justified as punishment for traitorous acts. There was no remote way to frame any of JFK Jr.'s actions, at any time in his life, as disloyal to the United States. 

And at least when they murdered his father, they went out of their way to avoid killing or harming his wife. But, with JFK Jr., there was no such courtesy. That is, his pregnant wife. 

My point is that when it came to the raw evil of it, there weren't even any mind games they could play to justify it.  They knew exactly what they were doing and what it represented.  It was pure gangsterism. They couldn't dress it up as a patriotic act, as duty to one's country, as I'm sure they did the first time. This was just the case of a crime gone wrong in which they had to double-down 36 years later by killing the son of the man they killed in 1963.