Creepy Assassination Coincidences...Or Are They?

This myth has been debunked to death, but its a good one, so I am going to debunk it again...my thanks (and apologies) to all of those who have already done it...

There is a list constantly doing the rounds of so-called 'coincidences' between the assassinations of JFK and Abe Lincoln. When you first read them, the similarities do seem uncanny. A spot of further analysis, though, soon puts them into perspective.

Coincidence 1:

Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846 Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946

True, true, true. But when you consider that these two men had careers and lives roughly a century apart, then it's not so amazing - especially when congressional elections are only held every other year.

Coincidence 2:

Lincoln was elected President in 1860
Kennedy was elected President in 1960

Again, these guys were enjoying political careers about a century apart. Plus, presidential elections are only held every four years (1948, 1952, 1956, 1960, etc) - so you would expect Kennedy to stand for Prez say, about 10-15 years after being elected to Congress - why, in about 1960! (And - what's so special about a 100 year difference anyway?)

Coincidence 3:

Lincoln's name has 7 letters
Kennedy's name has 7 letters

So does Bill Clinton's! And Johnson's. And Harding's. And Jackson's. And Madison's. And...

(We didn't even mention their first names or Lincoln's non-use of his middle name...)

Coincidence 4:

Lincoln had a secretary named Kennedy

Kennedy had a secretary named Lincoln

Patent nonsense. The second statement is true - there was a lowly-ranked PA named Lincoln who served Kennedy, but no record of the reverse...

Coincidence 5:

War was thrust upon Lincoln almost immediately after inauguration
War was thrust upon Kennedy almost immediately after inauguration

If you want to count the Civil War (1861-1865) and the Vietnam War (1964-1975) as occurring roughly 100 years apart...but then, Vietnam didn't even get going until Johnson was in office.

Coincidence 6:

Lincoln was succeeded, after assassination, by vice-president Johnson
Kennedy was succeeded, after assassination, by vice-president Johnson

True, but you have to admit, 'Johnson' is a pretty common name.

Coincidence 7:

Andrew Johnson was born in 1808
Lyndon Johnson was born in 1908

We're back to the 100-year coincidence again.

Coincidence 8:

Lincoln was sitting beside his wife when he was shot
Kennedy was sitting beside his wife when he was shot

Pretty expected as presidents don't tend to go out in public without their spouse in attendance...

Coincidence 9:

Lincoln was shot on a Friday
Kennedy was shot on a Friday

A massive one-in-seven shot, undermined even further by the fact that you'd expect most public functions to happen sometime between Friday and Sunday.

Coincidence 10:

Lincoln was shot in a theatre named Ford
Kennedy was shot in a car made by Ford

Only the biggest American car company of the 20th century, which had been producing vehicles for decades.

Coincidence 11:

Lincoln didn't die immediately after being shot
Kennedy didn't die immediately after being shot

Pretty normal for a gunshot victim, one would think.

Coincidence 12:

John Wilkes Booth was born in 1839
Lee Harvey Oswald was born in 1939

Nonsense again. Booth was born in 1838.

Coincidence 13:

Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.

Slavery was a major concern of the 1850s, and civil rights had bamboozled the three presidents before Lincoln. The Civil War occurred on his watch, so he kind of had to deal with the issue. As for Kennedy, civil rights was again an issue that had flared up before he came to power, and it was not an issue he could ignore.

Coincidence 14:

Both Presidents were shot in the head.

That's where I'd aim too, if I was assassinating a president.

Coincidence 15:

Both were assassinated by Southerners.

Hardly incredible (they must make up a fair whack of the US population, plus the South would have been anti- both presidents due to their stances on civil rights). However, the fact that Booth was from Maryland doesn't really make him a dinky-di southerner - more a border-creature of some sort.

Coincidence 16:

Both were succeeded by Southerners.

Northern presidents often have southern vice-presidents - its a way of winning elections.

Coincidence 17:

Both assassins were known by their three names.

Apparently, Booth was often known simply as J.Wilkes Booth. And as we all know, once someone has murdered someone, the courts and the media often attach their full label when describing them.

Coincidence 18:

Booth ran from the theatre and was caught in a warehouse.
Oswald ran from a warehouse and was caught in a theatre

Booth was actually caught some days later, at a tobacco shed on a farm - hardly a warehouse. Oswald was caught in a cinema, hours after fleeing a book depository.

Coincidence 19:

Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials.

Booth died in a gun-battle; maybe died before their trials would be more accurate, but remember - these guys shot two presidents, so they were pretty much Public Enemy No.1 in a country full of guns.

Coincidence 20:

A week before Lincoln was shot, he was in Monroe, Maryland.
A week before Kennedy was shot, he was in Marilyn Monroe.

This is the jokey one people always throw in. I'll bust it anyway. There is no Monroe in Maryland. And Marilyn Monroe died in 1962 - a full year before Kennedy was assassinated.

"Laura Bush Killed a Guy"

Watching Family Guy the other night, I was astounded to hear (three times) the phrase, 'Laura Bush killed a guy'. What the hell? Did she really? Could the former First Lady really have killed someone? Why had I never heard about this?

I paused the DVD and zipped around the net for a while. And yes, the team at Family Guy were correct. Laura Welch (as she then was) really did kill a guy - not on purpose, not vindictively, but in a tragic accident.

It seems that the then 17-year old was driving to a party in her Chevy sedan at 50mph in a 55mph zone, near Midland, Texas. She drove through a stop sign, and collided with a car being driven by one Michael Douglas, who was thrown from his vehicle, and died of a broken neck.

Laura and the teenage girl passenger in her car were treated in hospital for minor injuries; a police investigation occurred, and no charges were laid. Neither driver was tested for their blood-alcohol reading.

The coincidences in the case are quite spooky. There is some evidence that Laura and the dead driver had been romantically attached, or at least that she had been interested in him. He was a top athlete, as well as being likeable and intelligent. He had also been voted Most Popular Junior a few years before at school.

Also, the boy's father was apparently in a car behind his son, and he witnessed the whole accident. Pretty tragic stuff.

There have been mumblings about the suspicious circumstances of the crash - that Laura Welch had shot through the stop sign on purpose, to crash into the side of the car being driven by the studly guy who jilted her. However, this sounds like a pile of nonsense. The most likely explanation is that Laura, just two days after her 17th birthday, excited and on her way to a party with her best mate, on a dark Texas road, stuffed up and accidentally ploughed into a vehicle also being driven by an inexperienced person.

Was she drinking? Possibly, but probably not.
Was there a cover-up of the whole event? Unlikely, as it happened before Laura was a famous person, and before she was linked to the powerful Bush clan.
Did she cause the accident? Well, she did fail to stop at a designated stop sign, so she was at least partly to blame.
Was it all just a terrible coincidence? Most likely.
Why did we never hear of this? The media, probably out of respect for the First Family, did not make big beans out of a story from 1963. And I'm sure that Mrs Bush has had some pretty massive guilt weighing on her conscience since that fateful night.

So, there you go: Laura Bush did kill a guy...but it's not as sinister as it sounds.

What's In a (Country) Name?

After recently travelling in Myanmar (Burma), I realised that country names are not quite as innocent as they seem - pretty much every label will piss off someone, somewhere, for its bias, for its refusal to recognise history, for its air of cultural superiority.

I love the eytmology (great word) of country names. Here are some of my favourites:

Argentina (Land of Silver) - far from such with its recent monetary troubles
Australia (originally Terra Australis Incognita, or Unknown Southern Land) - all those bastards who wrap themselves in flags on January 26th have no idea what it means
Bahamas (Shallow Seas) - Pretty much describes the Caribbean
Britain (Painted Ones in Celtic) - Named after the tattooed early inhabitants.
Burkina Faso (Homeland of the Incorruptible) - Nine out of ten military dictators would dispute that title...
Cameroon (River of Shrimps) - That's a lot of prawns.
Canada (Village in Iriquois) - Maybe a little bigger than a village, now.
Chad (Lake) - Named after Lake Chad. Or Lake Lake.
China (Centre Country) - In the middle, according to the Chinese.
Cuba (Centre Palce) - Don't tell the Chinese.
Ecuador (Equator) - Original.
Ethiopia (Of Burnt Visage) - Racist.
Gambia (Exchange, from the Portuguese, Cambio) - Obviously a trading area, then.
Guatemala (Place of Many Trees) - Not since United Fruit raped the place.
Honduras (Depths) - Opposite of Bahamas.
Hungary (Alliance of the Ten Tribes) - Sounds pretty ancient to me.
Iran (Land of the Aryans) - Don't tell Hitler.
Ireland (The Fertile Place) - Well, they don't like using condoms.
Israel (He Struggles With God) - And all of his neighbours.
Kazakhstan (Land of the Cossacks) - And also Borat jokes.
Kuwait (Fortress Built Near Water) - Easily captured by Saddam Hussein.
Leichtenstein (Light Stone) - Or Land of One Thousand Tax Scams.
Luxembourg (Little CasSouth)tle) - Little country, too.
Madagascar (End of the Earth) - Certainly a long way from anywhere.
Mali (Hippopotamus) - Fair enough.
Mongolia (Brave or Fearless) - Genghis? Yep.
Namibia (Area Where There is Nothing) - Good name for a desert country.
Palestine (To invade) - Probably a better name for the Israelis, at this juncture in history
Romania (Roman Realm) - And indeed it was.
Samoa (Place of the Moa) - Named after a now extinct bird.
Spain (Land of Hyraxes) - The Phoenicians mistook Spain's hares for hyraxes...
Sudan (Land of the Blacks) - Yep, pretty close.
Tonga (South) - Of Samoa, that is.
Uruguay (River of Shellfish) - And no mention of steak at all.

"I wish I'd never been to bloody Memphis."

A bit of a frivolous post today. You see, I've locked myself out of the house, and I'm stuck for something to do for the next twenty minutes. So I thought I'd draw your attention to one of my favourite Priministerial (my own word) myths: the Memphis Trousers Affair.

It's not really a myth, but more of an amusing anecdote that has acquired an air of mystique. The story is simple, and goes like this:

Malcolm Fraser, former Australian PM, and a man of undeniable gravitas and decorum, was visiting the USA three years after his election loss to Bob Hawke. He was there in his capacity as chairman of the Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group. His presence would have barely elicited interest, were it not for the fact that he was found wandering in the lobby of his hotel, clad only in a towel. And that he was in a dazed and confused state. And that he had lost his trousers. And that his hotel, the Admiral Benbow Inn, was of the type preferred by society's seedier individuals.

The 'Memphis Trousers Affair', as it became known, has become steeped in mystery, since Mr Fraser himself refuses to comment on the episode. Those who witnessed the former Australian premier wandering, pantsless, around a Tennesseean hotel, are of the opinion that he was most probably drugged by a lady of the night, who then stole his trousers; or that he was the victim of an elaborate practical joke by his colleagues on the commonwealth junket.

This begs several questions. If the former occurred:-

1) Why did the woman steal his trousers?
2) How did she drug a former Australian Prime Minister?
3) Where are the trousers now?

If the latter:-

1) How do you become a member of the Eminent Persons Group, if you are capable of stealing another man's trousers for the purpose of humiliating him?
2) Where are the trousers now?

I could go on analyising this story, but I just love re-telling it. I'd welcome any other amusing priministerial anecdotes too.

Quantum Theory

Those people who know me are probably well aware that I'm something of a James Bond tragic. Whether its Sean, George, Roger, Tim, Pierce, or Daniel appearing in the film, I suck them down like three measures of gin, plus one of vodka, poured over half a measure of Kina Lillet, shaken till ice-cold, and served with a large, thin slice of lemon peel.

I watched Quantum of Solace today. Great movie, with plenty of bone-crushing fight scenes, pant-searingly awesome chases, sexy, sultry women, and another ice-cool performance from Daniel Craig.

The bad guys in the film are a bunch of shadowy transnational terrorists known as Quantum. Not your Al-Qaeda types, but white guys in suits with lots of guns and money.

Now, a few years ago, I wrote my History Honours thesis on the first 19 Bond films. I analysed the historical accuracy of each one, especially in regards to how they dealt with the pressing geopolitical issues of the time.

The myth was that Bond was the ultimate Cold Warrior, the perfect defender of the capitalist West: wealthy, educated, sophisticated - a jet-setting executive supplied with all the technological marvels the capitalist boffins could muster.

However, once I watched the movies again, I realised how far from the truth this was. Far from being an ideological defender of the faith, Bond is actually a defender of the status quo. He does not go out seeking trouble with the villain of the moment - Communist Russia, Red China, the Ayatollah's Iran, or Osama's foot soldiers. He reacts when the globe's stability is threatened - usually by a lone maniac, or imaginary terrorist organisation. He neutralises the threat, so that the world can get back to where it was before - even if that means going back to having the West and the East fighting a Cold War.

As an example: Bond did not directly battle a representative of the Russian government until nineteen years into his film career!

Hell, in some movies he even helps the Soviets.

I could bore you with the 20,000 words I wrote on this for my thesis...but instead, I think it may be most instructive to look at who exactly Bond faces in each of the films, to give you an idea of just how apolitical and non-ideological our dinner-suited friend really is:

1) Dr. No (1962) - crazy half-Chinese doctor, working for SPECTRE, a transnational terrorist organisation
2) From Russia With Love (1963) - mad Irish assassin and rogue Russian agent, both working for SPECTRE
3) Goldfinger (1964) - mad British millionaire intent on robbing Fort Knox, plus his hat-throwing Korean sidekick
4) Thunderball (1965) - mad SPECTRE number two, determined to steal some NATO missiles
5) You Only Live Twice (1967) - maniacal SPECTRE head, Blofeld, stealing rockets from the Russians and the Yanks
6) OHMSS (1969) - Terrorist Blofeld again, this time planning to spread a virus around the world
7) Diamonds Are Forever (1971) - Blofeld now plans to use a giant laser to blackmail the whole world
8) Live and Let Die (1973) - tinpot Caribbean dictator tries to flood the US with cheap drugs
9) The Man with The Golden Gun (1974) - lone gun Scaramanga plays off the Chinese and the West for his own gain
10) The Spy Who Loved Me (1977) - mad terrorist tries to destroy Moscow and New York
11) Moonraker (1979) - mad industrialist plans to destroy the world
12) For Your Eyes Only (1981) - Greek commie stooge working with the KGB - finally, a socialist villain!
13) Octopussy (1983) - renegade Russian agent tries to plunge Europe into war (so he's not working for the Russkis)
14) A View To A Kill (1985) - crazy industrialist plans to drown Silicon Valley
15) The Living Daylights (1987) - rogue KGB general does lots of bad stuff, in league with an American arms dealer
16) Licence to Kill (1989) - South American drug baron
17) Goldeneye (1995) - Treacherous former British agent aims to create world financial meltdown (we didn't need 006 - the banks did it for us!)
18) Tomorrow Never Dies (1997) - mad British media mogul plays the Chinese and Brits off so he can sell newspapers
19) The World Is Not Enough (1999) - anarchist terrorist villain steals nuclear device from former Soviet republic
20) Die Another Day (2002) - rogue North Korean officer takes on bond without the permission of Kim Jong-il.
21) Casino Royale (2006) - financier of global terrorism plays baccarat with Bond
22) Quantum of Solace (2008) - shadowy international terrorist group

So - there you have it: only once does Bond directly face villains owned and operated by a rival international power. The other 21 times, he saves the world by taking on terrorists, rogue agents, greedy capitalists, and treacherous Brits.

Makes you love him even more, doesn't it?

Heil Ranga!

I received my weekly online gossip email today, popbitch, which has recently been revealing some famous redeheads from history. A few we know: Winston Churchill, Alexander the Great, Eisenhower. A few are more surprising: Lenin, for example, who must go down as the most important ranga in the annals of history.

Apart, that is, from popbitch's famous redhead today: Adolf Hitler.

Could it be? Was Adolf really a ginge?

I have nevr encountered this myth before, and I have been scouting the net all evening for some tidbit to support this assertion. but I have found just one comment, on one dodgy blog, that backs it up. This blogger reckons that Hitler was a reddie, and that he died his hair black to cover it up.

This would make sense, considering Hitler's view of redheads. There is a fair bit of evidence that says he thought gingers were unnatural and were not to be tolerated bypeople from good Aryan stock.

However, I have never read or heard anything about the fuhrer's predilection for black hair dye. So I decided to look at the photographic evidence. Surely, if Hitler was ginger, he would have been so as a youngster, and surely, he wouldn't have started dyeing his hair until he was an adult.

Here's the earliest photo of our Adolf:


His toddler's mop does look pretty dark, doesn't it?

How about as a school boy? (I do love his arrogant gaze in this photo, it speaks volumes of the person behind the eyes...):


Again, unless Frau Hitler was colouring his locks, I reckon he was a brunette. I'm definitely calling popbitch on their Adolf Ranga claim.

Now, a very quick one...was Hitler actually a fanatical vegetarian, as we are so often told?

This one is interesting, and pretty easy to dispute. Despite his claim to be a vegetarian from at least the early 1930s to his death, there are ample sources indicating that he (albeit infrequently) partook of animal products over this time. Cooks, secretaries, doctors, and eyewitnesses have mentioned episodes where Hitler ate liver, sausage, squab (young pigeon, if you didn't know), animal fat, pork, caviar, and medicines derived from animal products.

So, even though he delighted in disgusting dinner guests by describing his visit to a slaughterhouse in the Ukraine, it seems that Hitler would occasionally enjoy a morsel of the meaty stuff. True, he didn't eat much (mainly for health reasons, it seems, though there is a crackpot theory that conjures up the philosophy of Richard Wagner), but he was not a true veggo by today's standards.

Alright, that's enough Adolf. Auf wiedersehn.

Burning Questions

Hi folks. It's been a while since last I wrote, and there are many topics on my mind for the next few Histbusters. But today I am feeling very contemporary, so I thought I'd answer a couple of myths currently doing the rounds...

1. Is Barack Obama a Muslim?

This isn't even a real question. All the shock jocks in the US are implying it is true, as though the implication that you are of the Islamic faith is some sort of badge of shame. The true answer - it doesn't matter one iota.

Sadly, Barack seems to think it does. His official website for denying untrue rumours about him, states quite plainly:

"Barack Obama is a committed Christian, not a Muslim." (Their emphasis)

Just to sate your curiosity - because we are all dying to know just where he got that interesting name: 'Barack' was his dad's name; 'Hussein' was his grandfather's name; his dad was 'atheist' according to Obama (although he would say that, for electability purposes, but again, does it matter?); his mum's side were strict Protestants; he discovered Christianity in the 80s, and has been a devotee ever since.

However...one, perhaps more interesting myth...

2. Did Barack Obama attend a madrassa (religious college) when he lived in Indonesia?

I didn't even know that Barack had lived in Indo until the other night. I knew all the other stuff - Kenyan dad, white mum, grew up in Hawai'i, befriended terrorists, desires the forcible takeover of the US government by the faithful martyrs of Allah - but the Indonesian link had passed me by. And apparently, those very same shock jocks who keep going on about Obama forging his birth certificate, and being a closet Islamist, have been telling their listeners all about his attendance at a devout Islamic school, of the type frequented by the Bali bombers or the Taliban.

According to Newsweek, and various other journals, this is patent bollocks. During his five years there, he attended a Catholic school, then a public primary school, where religion was taught once a week. Of course, being a Muslim country, this would have been the basics on Islam.

That's enough Obama. One final question from this week's news...

3. Is Kim Jong-Il dead?

Apparently, the Dear leader is on his deathbed, or completely well, or has been dead for ages. That's the best I can come up with from scanning the web for info on this crazy character.

We all know that someone thinks they saw his son maybe contact a French doctor who has perhaps gone to Pyongyang, where possibly he is treating the leader for a mystery illness.

We have also recently heard that he groomed four lookalikes to impersonate him in public, for fear of an assassination attempt, and that, since his death in 2003, one of these has stood in for him.

Plus we know that he hasn't been seen in public for a couple of months.

So is he dead?

First, the idea that he has been replaced by an impersonator is pure, deluded, spybook fantasy. Discount it immediately.

And the fact that he could have died, but the world has not found out? Again, far from possible, in this day and age. There would be someone in North Korea with something to gain from such information leaking out. If any world leader dies today, we will all know tomorrow. That goes equally for Kim Jong-Il. Just because he is a crackpot, doesn't mean his nation believes it can't go on without him. They managed well enough after the death of his infinitely more popular and indispensable father, Kim Il-Sung, back in 1994.

When Kim finally kicks the bucket, this is what will happen: an announcement will be made, a grotesquely massive funeral service will be held, some general will be promoted to President, and Kim will recieve the same accolade as his dear, dead, dad:

"Eternal President of the Republic (2)"