American Pravda: The JFK Assassination, Part I - What Happened?
About
a decade ago, I got a Netflix subscription and was amazed that the
Internet now provided immediate access to so many thousands of movies on
my own computer screen. But after a week or two of heavy use and the
creation of a long watch-list of prospective films I’d always wanted to
see, my workload gained the upper hand, and I mostly abandoned the
system.
Back
then, nearly all Netflix content was licensed from the major studios and
depending upon contract negotiations might annually disappear, so when I
happened to browse my account again in December, I noticed that a
couple of films on my selection list included warning notices saying
they would no longer be available on January 1st. One of these was
Oliver Stone’s famous 1991 film JFK, which had provoked quite a stir at the time, so thinking now or never, I clicked the Play button, and spent three hours that evening watching the Oscar winner.
Most
of the plot seemed bizarre and outlandish to me, with the president’s
killing in Dallas supposedly having been organized by a cabal of
militantly anti-Communist homosexuals, somehow connected with both the
CIA and the mafia, but based in New Orleans. Kevin Costner starred as a
crusading District Attorney named Jim Garrison—presumably
fictional—whose investigation broke the assassination conspiracy wide
open before the subtle tentacles of the Deep State finally managed to
squelch his prosecution; or at least that’s what I vaguely remember from
my single viewing. With so many implausible elements, the film
confirmed my belief in the wild imagination of Hollywood scriptwriters
and also demonstrated why no one with any common sense had ever taken
seriously those ridiculous “JFK conspiracy theories.”
-----------
Despite
its dramatic turns, the true circumstances of President John F.
Kennedy’s death seemed an island of sanity by comparison. Lee Harvey
Oswald, a disgruntled young marine had defected to the USSR in 1959 and
finding life behind the Iron Curtain equally unsatisfactory, returned to
America a couple of years later. Still having confused Marxist
sympathies, he’d joined public protests supporting Fidel Castro’s Cuba,
and gradually turning toward violence, purchased a mail-order rifle.
During the presidential visit, he had fired three shots from the Dallas
School Book Depository, killing JFK, and was quickly apprehended by the
local police. Soon, he too was dead, shot by an outraged Kennedy
supporter named Jack Ruby. All these sad facts were later confirmed by
the Warren Commission in DC, presided over by the U.S. Chief Justice
together with some of America’s most respected public figures, and their
voluminous report ran nearly 900 pages.
Yet
although the film seemed to have affixed an enormous mass of incoherent
fictional lunacy on top of that basic history—why would a murder plot in
Dallas have been organized in New Orleans, five hundred miles
distant?—one single detail troubled me. Garrison is shown denouncing
the “lone gunman theory” for claiming that a single bullet was
responsible for seven separate wounds in President Kennedy and Texas
Gov. John Connolly, seated beside him in the limousine. Now inventing
gay CIA assassins seems pretty standard Hollywood fare, but I found it
unlikely that anyone would ever insert a fictional detail so wildly
implausible as that bullet’s trajectory. A week or so later, the memory
popped into my head, and I googled around a bit, discovering to my
total astonishment that the seven-wounds-from-one-bullet claim was
totally factual, and indeed constituted an absolutely essential element
of the orthodox “single gunman” framework given that Oswald had fired at
most three shots. So that was the so-called “Magic Bullet”
I’d occasionally seen conspiracy-nuts ranting and raving about. For the
first time in my entire life, I started to wonder whether maybe, just maybe there actually had been some sort of conspiracy behind the most famous assassination in modern world history.
Any
conspirators had surely died of old age many years or even decades
earlier and I was completely preoccupied with my own work, so
investigating the strange circumstances of JFK’s death was hardly a high
personal priority. But the suspicions remained in the back of my mind
as I diligently read my New York Times and Wall Street Journal
every morning while periodically browsing less reputable websites
during the afternoon and evening. And as a result, I now began noticing
little items buried here and there that I would have previously ignored
or immediately dismissed, and these strengthened my newly emerging
curiosity.
Among
other things, occasional references reminded me that I’d previously
seen my newspapers discuss a couple of newly released JFK books in
rather respectful terms, which had surprised me a bit at the time. One
of them, still generating discussion, was JFK and the Unspeakable
published in 2008 by James W. Douglass, whose name meant nothing to me.
And the other, which I hadn’t originally realized trafficked in any
assassination conspiracies, was David Talbot’s 2007 Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years,
focused on the relationship between John F. Kennedy and his younger
brother Robert. Talbot’s name was also somewhat familiar to me as the
founder of Salon.com and a well-regarded if liberal-leaning journalist.
None
of us have expertise in all areas, so sensible people must regularly
delegate their judgment to credible third-parties, relying upon others
to distinguish sense from nonsense. Since my knowledge of the JFK
assassination was nil, I decided that two recent books attracting
newspaper coverage might be a good place to start. So perhaps a couple
of years after watching that Oliver Stone film, I cleared some time in
my schedule, and spent a few days carefully reading the combined
thousand pages of text.
I was
stunned at what I immediately discovered. Not only was the evidence of
a “conspiracy” absolutely overwhelming, but whereas I’d always assumed
that only kooks doubted the official story, I instead discovered that a
long list of the most powerful people near the top of the American
government and in the best position to know had been privately convinced
of such a “conspiracy,” in many cases from almost the very beginning.
The Talbot book especially impressed me, being based on over 150 personal interviews and released by The Free Press,
a highly reputable publisher. Although he applied a considerable
hagiographic gloss to the Kennedys, his narrative was compellingly
written, with numerous gripping scenes. But while such packaging surely
helped to explain some of the favorable treatment from reviewers and
how he had managed to produce a national bestseller in a seemingly
long-depleted field, for me the packaging was much less important than
the product itself.
To
the extent that notions of a JFK conspiracy had ever crossed my mind,
I’d considered the argument from silence absolutely conclusive. Surely
if there had been the slightest doubt of the “lone gunman” conclusion
endorsed by the Warren Commission, Attorney-General Robert Kennedy would
have launched a full investigation to avenge his slain brother.
But
as Talbot so effectively demonstrates, the reality of the political
situation was entirely different. Robert Kennedy may have begun that
fatal morning widely regarded as the second most powerful man in the
country, but the moment his brother was dead and his bitter personal
enemy Lyndon Johnson sworn in as the new president, his governmental
authority almost immediately ebbed away. Longtime FBI Director J. Edgar
Hoover, who had been his hostile subordinate, probably scheduled for
removal in JFK’s second term, immediately became contemptuous and
unresponsive to his requests. Having lost all his control over the
levels of power, Robert Kennedy lacked any ability to conduct a serious
investigation.
According
to numerous personal interviews, he had almost immediately concluded
that his brother had been struck down at the hands of an organized
group, very likely including elements from within the U.S. government
itself, but he could do nothing about the situation. As he regularly
confided to close associates, his hope at the age of 38 was to reach the
White House himself at some future date, and with his hands once again
upon the levels of power then uncover his brother’s killers and bring
them to justice. But until that day, he could do nothing, and any
unsubstantiated accusations he made would be totally disastrous both for
national unity and for his own personal credibility. So for years, he
was forced to nod his head and publicly acquiesce to the official story
of his brother’s inexplicable assassination at the hands of a lone nut, a
fairy tale publicly endorsed by nearly the entire political
establishment, and this situation deeply gnawed at him. Moreover, his
own seeming acceptance of that story was often interpreted by others,
not least in the media, as his wholehearted endorsement.
Although
discovering Robert Kennedy’s true beliefs was a crucial revelation in
the Talbot book, there were many others. At most three shots had
allegedly come from Oswald’s rifle, but Roy Kellerman, the Secret
Service agent in the passenger seat of JFK’s limousine, was sure there
had been more than that, and to the end of his life always believed
there had been additional shooters. Gov. Connolly, seated next to JFK
and severely wounded in the attack, had exactly the same opinion. CIA
Director John McCone was equally convinced that there had been multiple
shooters. Across the pages of Talbot’s book, I learned that dozens of
prominent, well-connected individuals privately expressed extreme
skepticism towards the official “lone gunman theory” of the Warren
Commission, although such doubts were very rarely made in public or on
the record.
For a variety of complex reasons, the leading national media organs—the commanding heights of “Our American Pravda”—almost
immediately endorsed the “lone gunman theory” and with some exceptions
generally maintained that stance throughout the next half-century. With
few prominent critics willing to publicly dispute that idea and a strong
media tendency to ignore or minimize those exceptions, casual observers
such as myself had generally received a severely distorted view of the
situation.
If
the first two dozen pages of the Talbot book completely overturned my
understanding of the JFK assassination, I found the closing section
almost equally shocking. With the Vietnam War as a political millstone
about his neck, President Johnson decided not to seek reelection in
1968, opening the door to a last minute entry into the Democratic race
by Robert Kennedy, who overcame considerable odds to win some important
primaries. Then on June 4, 1968, he carried gigantic winner-take-all
California, placing him on an easy path to the nomination and the
presidency itself, at which point he would finally be in a position to
fully investigate his brother’s assassination. But minutes after his
victory speech, he was shot and fatally wounded, allegedly by another
lone gunman, this time a disoriented Palestinian immigrant named Sirhan
Sirhan, supposedly outraged over Kennedy’s pro-Israel public positions
although these were no different than those expressed by most other
political candidates in America.
All
this was well known to me. However, I had not known that powder burns
later proved that the fatal bullet had been fired directly behind
Kennedy’s head from a distance of three inches or less although Sirhan
was standing several feet in front of him. Furthermore, eyewitness
testimony and acoustic evidence indicated that at least twelve bullets
were fired although Sirhan’s revolver could hold only eight, and a
combination of these factors led longtime LA Coroner Dr. Thomas Naguchi,
who conducted the autopsy, to claim in his 1983 memoir that there was
likely a second gunman. Meanwhile, eyewitnesses also reported seeing a
security guard with his gun drawn standing right behind Kennedy during
the attack, and that individual happened to have a deep political hatred
of the Kennedys. The police investigators seemed uninterested in these
highly suspicious elements, none of which came to light during the
trial. With two Kennedy brothers now dead, neither any surviving
members of the family nor most of their allies and retainers had any
desire to investigate the details of this latest assassination, and in a
number of cases they soon moved overseas, abandoning the country
entirely. JFK’s widow Jackie confided in friends that she was terrified
for the lives of her children, and quickly married Aristotle Onassis, a
Greek billionaire, whom she felt would be able to protect them.
Talbot
also devotes a chapter to the late 1960s prosecution efforts of New
Orleans DA Jim Garrison, which had been the central plot of the JFK
film, and I was stunned to discover that the script was almost entirely
based on real life events rather than Hollywood fantasy. This even
extended to its bizarre cast of assassination conspiracy suspects,
mostly fanatically anti-Communist Kennedy-haters with CIA and organized
crime ties, some of whom were indeed prominent members of the New
Orleans gay demimonde. Sometimes real life is far stranger than
fiction.
Taken
as a whole, I found Talbot’s narrative quite convincing, at least with
respect to demonstrating the existence of a substantial conspiracy
behind the fatal event.
Others certainly had the same reaction, with the august pages of The New York Times Sunday Book Review
carrying the strongly favorable reaction of presidential historian Alan
Brinkley. As the Allan Nevins Professor of History and Provost of
Columbia University, Brinkley is as mainstream and respectable an
academic scholar as might be imagined and he characterized Talbot as
the latest of many intelligent critics who have set out to demolish the tottering credibility of the Warren Commission and draw attention to evidence of a broad and terrible conspiracy that lay behind the assassination of John Kennedy — and perhaps the murder of Robert Kennedy as well.
The
other book by Douglass, released a year later, covered much the same
ground and came to roughly similar conclusions, with substantial overlap
but also including major additional elements drawn from the enormous
volume of extremely suspicious material unearthed over the decades by
diligent JFK researchers. Once again, the often bitter Cold War era
conflict between JFK and various much harder-line elements of his
government over Cuba, Russia, and Vietnam is sketched out as the likely
explanation for his death.
Summarizing
a half-century of conspiracy research, the Talbot and Douglass books
together provide a wealth of persuasive evidence that elements of
organized crime, individuals with CIA connections, and anti-Castro
Cubans were probably participants in the assassination plot. Oswald
seems to have been working with various anti-Communist groups and also
had significant connections to U.S. intelligence, while his purported
Marxism was merely a very thin disguise. With regard to the
assassination itself, he was exactly the “patsy” he publicly claimed to
be, and very likely never fired a single shot. Meanwhile, Jack Ruby had
a long history of ties to organized crime, and surely killed Oswald to
shut his mouth.
Many
others may have suffered a similar fate. Conspirators daring enough to
strike at the president of the United States would hardly balk at using
lethal means to protect themselves from the consequences of their
action, and over the years a considerable number of individuals
associated with the case in one way or another came to untimely ends.
Less
than a year after the assassination, JFK mistress Mary Meyer, the
ex-wife of high-ranking CIA official Cord Meyer, was found shot to death
in a Washington DC street-killing with no indications of attempted
robbery or rape, and the case was never solved. Immediately afterwards,
CIA counterintelligence chief James Jesus Angleton was caught breaking
into her home in search of her personal diary, which he later claimed to
have destroyed.
Dorothy
Kilgallen was a nationally-syndicated newspaper columnist and
television personality, and she managed to wrangle an exclusive
interview with Jack Ruby, later boasting to her friends that she would
break the JFK assassination case wide open in her new book, producing
the biggest scoop of her career. Instead, she was found dead in her
Upper East Side townhouse, having apparently succumbed to an overdose of
alcohol and sleeping pills, with both the draft text and the notes to
her Jack Ruby chapter missing.
Shortly
before Jim Garrison filed his assassination charges, his top suspect
David Ferrie was found dead at age 48, possibly of natural causes,
though the DA suspected foul play.
During
the mid-1970s, the House Select Committee on Assassinations held a
series of high-profile hearings to reopen and investigate the case, and
two of the witnesses called were high-ranking mafia figures Sam Giancana
and Johnny Rosselli, widely suspected of having been connected with the
assassination. The former was shot to death in the basement of his
home one week before he was scheduled to testify, and the body of the
latter was found in an oil-drum floating in the waters off Miami after
he had been subpoenaed for an additional appearance.
These
were merely a few of the highest-profile individuals with a connection
to the Dallas assassination whose lives were cut short in the years that
followed, and although the deaths may have been purely coincidental,
the full list is rather a long one.
Having
read a couple of books that completely upended my settled beliefs about
a central event of twentieth century America, I simply didn’t know what
to think. Over the years, my own writings had put me on friendly terms
with a well-connected individual whom I considered a member of the
elite establishment, and whose intelligence and judgment had always
seemed extremely solid. So I decided to very gingerly raise the subject
with him, and see whether he had ever doubted the “lone gunman”
orthodoxy. To my total astonishment, he explained that as far back as
the early 1990s, he’d become absolutely convinced in the reality of a
“JFK conspiracy” and over the years had quietly devoured a huge number
of the books in that field, but had never breathed a word in public lest
his credibility be ruined and his political effectiveness destroyed.
A
second friend, a veteran journalist known for his remarkably courageous
stands on certain controversial topics, provided almost exactly the same
response to my inquiry. For decades, he’d been almost 100% sure that
JFK had died in a conspiracy, but once again had never written a word on
the topic for fear that his influence would immediately collapse.
If
these two individuals were even remotely representative, I began to
wonder whether a considerable fraction, perhaps even a majority, of the
respectable establishment had long harbored private beliefs about the
JFK assassination that were absolutely contrary to the seemingly uniform
verdict presented in the media. But with every such respectable voice
keeping so silent, I had never once suspected a thing.
Few
other revelations in recent years have so totally overturned my
understanding of the framework of reality. Even a year or two later, I
still found it very difficult to wrap my head around the concept, as I
described in another note to that well-connected friend of mine:
BTW, I hate to keep harping on it, but every time I consider the implications of the JFK matter I’m just more and more astonished.The president of the US. The heir to one of the wealthiest and most powerful families in America. His brother the top law enforcement officer in the country. Ben Bradlee, one of his closest friends, the fearless crusading editor of one of the nation’s most influential media outlets. As America’s first Catholic president, the sacred icon of many millions of Irish, Italian, and Hispanic families. Greatly beloved by top Hollywood people and many leading intellectuals.His assassination ranks as one of the most shocking and dramatic events of the 20th century, inspiring hundreds of books and tens of thousands of news stories and articles, examining every conceivable detail. The argument from MSM silence always seemed absolutely conclusive to me.From childhood, it’s always been obvious to me that the MSM is completely dishonest about certain things and over the last dozen years I’ve become extremely suspicious about a whole range of other issues. But if you’d asked me a couple of years ago whether JFK was killed by a conspiracy, I would have said “well, anything’s possible, but I’m 99% sure there’s absolutely no substantial evidence pointing in that direction since the MSM would surely have headlined it a million times over.”Was there really a First World War? Well, I’ve always assumed there was, but who really knows?….
Our
reality is shaped by the media, but what the media presents is often
determined by complex forces rather than by the factual evidence in
front of their eyes. And the lessons of the JFK assassination may
provide some important insights into this situation.
A
president was dead and soon afterward his supposed lone assassin
suffered the same fate, producing a tidy story with a convenient
endpoint. Raising doubts or focusing on contrary evidence might open
doors better kept shut, perhaps endangering national unity or even
risking nuclear war if the trail seemed to lead overseas. The highest
law enforcement officer in the country was the slain president’s own
brother, and since he seemed to fully accept that simple framework, what
responsible journalist or editor would be willing to go against it?
What American center of power or influence had any strong interest in
opposing that official narrative?
Certainly
there was immediate and total skepticism overseas, with few foreign
leaders ever believing the story, and figures such as Nikita Khrushchev,
Charles DeGaulle, and Fidel Castro all immediately concluded that a
political plot had been responsible for Kennedy’s elimination.
Mainstream media outlets in France and the rest of Western Europe were
equally skeptical of the “lone gunman theory,” and some of the most
important early criticism of U.S. government claims was produced by
Thomas Burnett, an expatriate American writing for one of the largest
French newsweeklies. But in pre-Internet days, only the tiniest sliver
of the American public had regular access to such foreign publications,
and their impact upon domestic opinion would have been nil.
Perhaps
instead of asking ourselves why the “lone gunman” story was accepted,
we should instead be asking why it was ever vigorously challenged,
during an era when media control was extremely centralized in
establishmentarian hands.
Oddly
enough, the answer may lie in the determination of a single individual
named Mark Lane, a left-liberal New York City attorney and Democratic
Party activist. Although JFK assassination books eventually numbered in
the thousands and the resulting conspiracy theories roiled American
public life throughout the 1960s and 1970s, without his initial
involvement matters might have followed a drastically different
trajectory.
From the very first, Lane had been skeptical of the official story, and less than a month after the killing, The National Guardian,
a small left-wing national newspaper, published his 10,000 word
critique, highlighting major flaws in the “lone gunman theory.”
Although his piece had been rejected by every other national periodical,
the public interest was enormous, and once the entire edition sold out,
thousands of extra copies were printed in pamphlet form. Lane even
rented a theater in New York City, and for several months gave public
lectures to packed audiences.
After
the Warren Commission issued its completely contrary official verdict,
he began working on a manuscript, and although he faced enormous
obstacles in finding an American publisher, once Rush to Judgment
appeared, it spent a remarkable two years on the national bestseller
lists, easily reaching the #1 spot. Such tremendous economic success
naturally persuaded a host of other authors to follow suit, and an
entire genre was soon established. Lane later published A Citizens Dissent
recounting his early struggles to break the total American “media
blackout” against anyone contradicting the official conclusion. Against
all odds, he had succeeded in sparking a massive popular uprising
sharply challenging the narrative of the establishment.
According
to Talbot, “By late 1966, it was becoming impossible for the
establishment media to stick with the official story” and the November
25, 1966 edition of Life Magazine, then at the absolute height
of its national influence, carried the remarkable cover story “Did
Oswald Act Alone?” with the conclusion that he probably did not. The
next month , The New York Times announced it was forming a
special task force to investigate the assassination. These elements
were to merge with the media furor soon surrounding the Garrison
investigation that began the following year, an investigation that
enlisted Lane as an active participant. However, behind the scenes a
powerful media counterattack was also being launched at this same time.
In 2013 Prof. Lance deHaven-Smith, past president of the Florida Political Science Association, published Conspiracy Theory in America,
a fascinating exploration of the history of the concept and the likely
origins of the term itself. He noted that during 1966 the CIA had
become alarmed at the growing national skepticism of the Warren
Commission findings, especially once the public began turning its
suspicious eyes toward the intelligence agency itself. Therefore, in
January 1967 top CIA officials distributed a memo to all their local
stations, directing them to employ their media assets and elite contacts
to refute such criticism by various arguments, notably including an
emphasis on Robert Kennedy’s supposed endorsement of the “lone gunman”
conclusion.
This
memo, obtained by a later FOIA request, repeatedly used the term
“conspiracy” in a highly negative sense, suggesting that “conspiracy
theories” and “conspiracy theorists” be portrayed as irresponsible and
irrational. And as I wrote in 2016,
Soon afterward, there suddenly appeared statements in the media making those exact points, with some of the wording, arguments, and patterns of usage closely matching those CIA guidelines. The result was a huge spike in the pejorative use of the phrase, which spread throughout the American media, with the residual impact continuing right down to the present day.
This possible cause-and-effect relationship is supported by other evidence. Shortly after leaving The Washington Post in 1977, famed Watergate journalist Carl Bernstein published a 25,000 word Rolling Stone cover story
entitled “The CIA and the Media” revealing that during the previous
quarter century over 400 American journalists had secretly carried out
assignments for the CIA according to documents on file at the
headquarters of that organization. This influence project, known as
“Operation Mockingbird,” had allegedly been launched near the end of the
1940s by high-ranking CIA official Frank Wisner, and included editors
and publishers situated at the very top of the mainstream media
hierarchy.
For
whatever reason, by the time I came of age and began following the
national media in the late 1970s, the JFK story had become very old
news, and all the newspapers and magazines I read provided the very
strong impression that the “conspiracy theories” surrounding the
assassination were total nonsense, long since debunked, and only of
interest to kooks on the ideological fringe. I was certainly aware of
the enormous profusion of popular conspiracy books, but I never had the
slightest interest in looking at any of them. America’s political
establishment and its close media allies had outlasted the popular
rebellion, and the name “Mark Lane” meant almost nothing to me, except
vaguely as some sort of fringe-nut, who very occasionally rated a
mention in my mainstream newspapers, receiving the sort of treatment
accorded to Scientologists or UFO activists.
Oddly
enough, Talbot’s treatment of Lane was also rather dismissive,
recognizing his crucial early role in preventing the official narrative
from quickly hardening into concrete, but also emphasizing his abrasive
personality, and almost entirely ignoring his important later work on
the issue, perhaps because so much of it had been conducted on the
political fringe. Robert Kennedy and his close allies had similarly
boycotted Lane’s work from the very first, regarding him as a meddlesome
gadfly, but perhaps also ashamed that he was asking the questions and
doing the work that they themselves were so unwilling to undertake at
the time. Douglass’s 500 page book scarcely even mentions Lane.
Reading
a couple of Lane’s books, I was quite impressed by the enormous role he
had seemingly played in the JFK assassination story, but I also
wondered how much of my impression may have been due to the
exaggerations of a possible self-promoter. Then, on May 13, 2016 I
opened my New York Times and found nearly a full page obituary
devoted to Lane’s death at age 89, the sort of treatment these days
reserved for only the highest-ranking U.S. Senators or major rap stars.
And the 1,500 words were absolutely glowing, portraying Lane as a
solitary, heroic figure struggling for decades to reveal the truth of
the JFK assassination conspiracy against an entire political and media
establishment seeking to suppress it.
I read this as a deep apology by America’s national newspaper of record. President
John F. Kennedy was indeed killed by a conspiracy, and we are sorry we
spent more than a half century suppressing that truth and ridiculing
those who uncovered it.
===============
Both
patsies Harvey Lee Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan were selected with respect
to the legends, real or synthetic, that could be used in the post
assassination story spin off. In both cases the legends were to deflect
the attention form the actual conspirators. In the case of Oswald it
was his defection to the USSR. Involvement of Soviets in the
assassination was an option that was not played in the media in the end
but it could have been if the lone nut assassin narrative for some
reason could not gain the traction. In the case of Sirham his legend as
a disgruntled Palestinian who was upset with RFK’s alleged support for
Israel was played to the full extent. It was done for two reasons: (1)
to decouple JFK assassination from RFK assassination; crazy lone nut
Texan American and crazy lone nut Arab Palestinian had only one thing in
common: being a crazy lone nut, and (2) paint RFK as a martyr for his
pro Israel views. The second spin off was risky because it brought
Israel into the story, nevertheless the conspirators thought it was
important and took the risk so the could make out of RFK the first (and
the only one so far afaik) American politician who died for his pro
Israel position. This certainly pushed away any suspicions that Israel
might have been involved or could have benefited from his
assassination. Sirhan Sirhan legend was also used to foreshadow
Palestinian terrorism that began to grow in the wake of the Six Day War
of 1967.
-------------------------------
-------------------------------
Follow the Jack Ruby trail:
If Oswald was “just a patsy,” the first thing to do is to investigate
on the man who silenced Oswald, thereby preventing any doubts being
raised in a court case. Strangely enough, no one (not even Ruby’s
biographer Seth Kantor) seem to care that Jack Ruby’s real name was
Jacob Leon Rubenstein. Allow me to quote from my earlier article, and
add a few details: Ruby, the son of Jewish Polish immigrants, was a
member of the Jewish underworld. He was a friend of Los Angeles gangster
Mickey Cohen, whom he had known and admired since 1946. Cohen was the
successor of the famed Benjamin Siegelbaum, aka Bugsy Siegel, one of the
bosses of Murder Incorporated. Cohen was infatuated with the Zionist
cause, as he explained in his memoirs: “Now I got so engrossed with
Israel that I actually pushed aside a lot of my activities and done
nothing but what was involved with this Irgun war”. Mickey Cohen was in
contact with Menachem Begin, the former Irgun chief, with whom he even
“spent a lot of time,” according to Gary Wean, former detective sergeant
for the Los Angeles Police Department. So there is a direct line
connecting Jack Ruby, via Mickey Cohen, to the Israeli terrorist ring,
and in particular to Menachem Begin, a specialist in false flag terror.
We also know that Ruby phoned Al Gruber, a Mickey Cohen associate, just
after Oswald’s arrest; no doubt he received then “an offer he couldn’t
refuse,” as they say in the underworld. Ruby’s defense lawyer William
Kunstler wrote in his memoirs that Ruby told him he had killed Oswald
“for the Jews,” and Ruby’s rabbi Hillel Silverman received the same
confession when visiting Ruby in jail.
Probably as a cryptic message to Johnson, whom he expected to pardon him, Ruby made the following odd statements to the Warren Commission: “There will be a certain tragic occurrence happening if you don’t take my testimony and somehow vindicate me so my people don’t suffer because of what I have done.” He said that feared that his act would be used “to create some falsehood about some of the Jewish faith.”
According to a declassified US State Department document, Israeli Foreign Minister Golda Meir reacted to the news that Ruby had just killed Oswald with this sentence: “Ruby is alive, Oy vaaboy if we get caught!” (quoted in Alan Hart, Zionism, vol. 2, p. 279).
---------------------------------------- Probably as a cryptic message to Johnson, whom he expected to pardon him, Ruby made the following odd statements to the Warren Commission: “There will be a certain tragic occurrence happening if you don’t take my testimony and somehow vindicate me so my people don’t suffer because of what I have done.” He said that feared that his act would be used “to create some falsehood about some of the Jewish faith.”
According to a declassified US State Department document, Israeli Foreign Minister Golda Meir reacted to the news that Ruby had just killed Oswald with this sentence: “Ruby is alive, Oy vaaboy if we get caught!” (quoted in Alan Hart, Zionism, vol. 2, p. 279).
Make it three assassinated Kennedys, with JFK Jr. Hell, make it four, counting his unborn child: On July 20, 1999, the New York Daily News
published a piece by Joel Siegel titled: “JFK Jr. Mulled Run for Senate
in 2000”. The page seems to have just been deleted, but I had saved it,
so I reproduce the first lines : “A private poll in 1997 found that
John F. Kennedy Jr. was by far the state’s most popular Democrat, and
two friends said yesterday they believed he would have run for office
some day. Earlier this year, in one of the best-kept secret in state
politics, Kennedy considered seeking the seat of retiring Sen. Daniel
Moynihan…” Moynihan was a former Kennedy associate, so it is likely that
he would have supported JFK Jr.’s bid. And recall that the same seat
had once been held by RFK. So JFK Jr. was walking on his father’s and
his uncle’s footsteps. They saw him coming, and decided to eliminate
him before his ambitions even became public. Guess who won the seat,
after JFK Jr. died in a mysterious plane crash: Hillary Clinton.
What would JFK Jr. have done next if he had been allowed to walk this path? Well, if you want to know what was on his mind, check some of the covers of his magazine George on https://www.vfiles.com/vfiles/16372 You will see that he was obsessed with “conspiracy theories”:
In a special “Conspiracy Issue”, October 1998, George published a piece by Oliver Stone, director of the film JFK, titled “Paranoid and Proud of it”. Earlier in December 1996, the cover announces an article on “TWA Conspiracy Theories” (about TWA 800). And in March 1997, another conspiracy theory under the title “Who was behind the killing of Yitzhak Rabin?”. And so on.
Considering that JFK Jr.’s unborn child also died with him, and if we follow the logic of Ronald Kessler, author of The Sins of the Father: Joseph P. Kennedy and the Dynasty He Founded (1996) (a message to JFK Jr.?), then three generations of Kennedys were punished for “the sins of the father”. That fulfills Exodus 20:5: “I, Yahweh your God, am a jealous god and I punish a parent’s fault in the children, the grandchildren, and the great-grandchildren among those who hate me.”
----------------------------------
What would JFK Jr. have done next if he had been allowed to walk this path? Well, if you want to know what was on his mind, check some of the covers of his magazine George on https://www.vfiles.com/vfiles/16372 You will see that he was obsessed with “conspiracy theories”:
In a special “Conspiracy Issue”, October 1998, George published a piece by Oliver Stone, director of the film JFK, titled “Paranoid and Proud of it”. Earlier in December 1996, the cover announces an article on “TWA Conspiracy Theories” (about TWA 800). And in March 1997, another conspiracy theory under the title “Who was behind the killing of Yitzhak Rabin?”. And so on.
Considering that JFK Jr.’s unborn child also died with him, and if we follow the logic of Ronald Kessler, author of The Sins of the Father: Joseph P. Kennedy and the Dynasty He Founded (1996) (a message to JFK Jr.?), then three generations of Kennedys were punished for “the sins of the father”. That fulfills Exodus 20:5: “I, Yahweh your God, am a jealous god and I punish a parent’s fault in the children, the grandchildren, and the great-grandchildren among those who hate me.”
----------------------------------
I think we all know the JFK-assassination was a conspiracy. Oswald was the patsy.
But, we do not know for sure who participated in the conspiracy.
The report by the Warren commission was a cover up. CIA Director McCone was “complicit” in a Central Intelligence Agency “benign cover-up” by withholding information from the Warren Commission, according to a report by the CIA Chief Historian David Robarge released to the public in 2014.[24] According to this CIA report, CIA officers had been instructed to give only “passive, reactive, and selective” assistance to the commission, in order to keep the commission focused on “what the Agency believed at the time was the ‘best truth’ — that Lee Harvey Oswald, for as yet undetermined motives, had acted alone in killing John Kennedy.”
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/10/jfk-assassination-john-mccone-warren-commission-cia-213197
Witholding evidence in order to cover up a crime is usually done because of involvement in the crime. Thus, it is most likely that the CIA was involved in the Kennedy Assassination.
-------------------------------------------- But, we do not know for sure who participated in the conspiracy.
The report by the Warren commission was a cover up. CIA Director McCone was “complicit” in a Central Intelligence Agency “benign cover-up” by withholding information from the Warren Commission, according to a report by the CIA Chief Historian David Robarge released to the public in 2014.[24] According to this CIA report, CIA officers had been instructed to give only “passive, reactive, and selective” assistance to the commission, in order to keep the commission focused on “what the Agency believed at the time was the ‘best truth’ — that Lee Harvey Oswald, for as yet undetermined motives, had acted alone in killing John Kennedy.”
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/10/jfk-assassination-john-mccone-warren-commission-cia-213197
Witholding evidence in order to cover up a crime is usually done because of involvement in the crime. Thus, it is most likely that the CIA was involved in the Kennedy Assassination.
In considering whether or not there was a conspiracy to kill JFK on Nov. 22, 1963, two hard facts are paramount :
1) The average store bought weight of the “pristine” bullet that entered Kennedy’s back, from behind, was 162 grains. The bullet, which was found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital, was only slightly misshapen at its end and weighted 158 grains and free of all blood matter. According to the Warren Commission, this 158 grain bullet hit Kennedy in the back, traveled upwards and popped out of the front of his neck, then traveled downwards, hitting Gov. Connelly in the back, then exited at Connelly’s right nipple, then hit the radius bone of Connelly’s right wrist, and then finally bounced off Connelly’s left thigh, near the groin. (According to the Parkland surgeon, who operated on Connelly on Nov. 22, pre-op X-Rays showed that Connelly’s left thigh was full of tiny pieces of shrapnel. The 158 grain bullet was an obvious plant on that Parkland stretcher.
2) On Nov. 23, 1963 at 10:45PM, “lone’” gunman Oswald tried to telephone John Hurt, who lived in Raleigh, NC. Hurt’s most recent job in 1963 was that of a “contractor” for the US Defense Dept. There were two operators on the Dallas County jail switchboard that night. One of the operators claimed, in 1970 or 1971, that the Secret Service would not let Oswald’s call go through to John Hurt in Raleigh. Oswald would be truly alone until Ruby shot him the next morning. Then Oswald was silent and dead. No more desperate telephone calls to employees of the Deep State for Lee Harvey!
--------------------------------------------
1) The average store bought weight of the “pristine” bullet that entered Kennedy’s back, from behind, was 162 grains. The bullet, which was found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital, was only slightly misshapen at its end and weighted 158 grains and free of all blood matter. According to the Warren Commission, this 158 grain bullet hit Kennedy in the back, traveled upwards and popped out of the front of his neck, then traveled downwards, hitting Gov. Connelly in the back, then exited at Connelly’s right nipple, then hit the radius bone of Connelly’s right wrist, and then finally bounced off Connelly’s left thigh, near the groin. (According to the Parkland surgeon, who operated on Connelly on Nov. 22, pre-op X-Rays showed that Connelly’s left thigh was full of tiny pieces of shrapnel. The 158 grain bullet was an obvious plant on that Parkland stretcher.
2) On Nov. 23, 1963 at 10:45PM, “lone’” gunman Oswald tried to telephone John Hurt, who lived in Raleigh, NC. Hurt’s most recent job in 1963 was that of a “contractor” for the US Defense Dept. There were two operators on the Dallas County jail switchboard that night. One of the operators claimed, in 1970 or 1971, that the Secret Service would not let Oswald’s call go through to John Hurt in Raleigh. Oswald would be truly alone until Ruby shot him the next morning. Then Oswald was silent and dead. No more desperate telephone calls to employees of the Deep State for Lee Harvey!
--------------------------------------------
Ever
go to Dallas, Ron? I was down for two weeks for a school with Nortel in
1984. I spent the weekend between classes in Dallas, snooping about. I
spent a day down there at Dealy, the Grassy Knoll (a tiny strip of grass
barely the size of a suburban front lawn with a Memorial of some sort
at the top) and I bought a 6 dollar ticket to the Book Depository museum
on the 6th floor, complete with the cardboard boxes Oswald supposedly
hid behind. While the ‘nest’ itself was glassed in, they allowed the
view toward the street to Oswald’s right and it was indeed a tiny window
of opportunity. I believe the car was past Oswald’s view when the shots
that killed Kennedy were fired based on Lane’s work. Plus, the weapon
was a POS. He would have had to be hanging from his toenails out that
window to have even SEEN the car, let alone shoot at it. From the
museum, convinced now that the School Book Depository story was
bullshit, it was off to the scene on the ground. Armed with Mark Lane’s
Rush to Judgement, I went to the Knoll, the overpass and examined the
curbing where there were storm drains in the street that would have
concealed the shooter that provided the star of the Zapruder film, the
up-and-to-the-left head shot.
All around the Plaza are perches with EZ-escape routes that still exist on that Plaza. Oswald, if he had killed Kennedy, would never have selected the 6th floor of the Depository, he would have used another perch. MAYBE at the hard left turn at the Plaza, had Kennedy been shot THERE, in the face, I’d buy the Depository story, but Kennedy got his AFTER the turn and while headed down the hill toward the overpass. By then it was too late for the 6th floor of the Depository. It was on the ground that were the best lines of sight, the best routes of egress. If I was going to shoot Kennedy in that day and age at that moment, that’s exactly how I would have done it. It’s how it was DONE. The Oswald/Book Depository caper is fiction, always was. No one would have selected that window from which to shoot Kennedy, in particular a rifleman from the Marines. But in this fiction, exit wounds are entrance wounds, one bullet did the work of several, the witnesses and anyone prominent all dead inside fo a few months and years. And of course 5 years later, RFK, dead of more magic bullets, from a puny, eight shot .22 that created 20 holes in people, walls and ceiling panels.
If you’ve ever hunted, if you’ve ever fired a rifle with a scope and if you ever go to Dallas and look things over you’ll understand that Oswald wasn’t the guy, no way, no how. The who of Kennedy’s murder can be debated. Mob, MIC, CIA, pissed off Cubans, Fidel, rogues, the Soviets, name the shooter, but the shooter didn’t do it from the 6th floor.
Go to Dallas. walk the walk, step off the distances, read the clock on the shots, go to the museum. If you haven’t done so, do so. I’m a pretty reasonable guy, happy to come to whatever conclusions are reasonable. Oswald’s perch isn’t. Unless you have mush for brains.
----------------------------------------------
All around the Plaza are perches with EZ-escape routes that still exist on that Plaza. Oswald, if he had killed Kennedy, would never have selected the 6th floor of the Depository, he would have used another perch. MAYBE at the hard left turn at the Plaza, had Kennedy been shot THERE, in the face, I’d buy the Depository story, but Kennedy got his AFTER the turn and while headed down the hill toward the overpass. By then it was too late for the 6th floor of the Depository. It was on the ground that were the best lines of sight, the best routes of egress. If I was going to shoot Kennedy in that day and age at that moment, that’s exactly how I would have done it. It’s how it was DONE. The Oswald/Book Depository caper is fiction, always was. No one would have selected that window from which to shoot Kennedy, in particular a rifleman from the Marines. But in this fiction, exit wounds are entrance wounds, one bullet did the work of several, the witnesses and anyone prominent all dead inside fo a few months and years. And of course 5 years later, RFK, dead of more magic bullets, from a puny, eight shot .22 that created 20 holes in people, walls and ceiling panels.
If you’ve ever hunted, if you’ve ever fired a rifle with a scope and if you ever go to Dallas and look things over you’ll understand that Oswald wasn’t the guy, no way, no how. The who of Kennedy’s murder can be debated. Mob, MIC, CIA, pissed off Cubans, Fidel, rogues, the Soviets, name the shooter, but the shooter didn’t do it from the 6th floor.
Go to Dallas. walk the walk, step off the distances, read the clock on the shots, go to the museum. If you haven’t done so, do so. I’m a pretty reasonable guy, happy to come to whatever conclusions are reasonable. Oswald’s perch isn’t. Unless you have mush for brains.
----------------------------------------------
The
“magic bullet” theory is mocked because it is simply grotesque; nobody
with a scientific background can ever believe this cornerstone evidence
of the Warren report and of the “lone gunman” theory.
Link below is to a sketch, showing the miraculous bullet changing its trajectory in both vertical and horizontal directions, as a controlled drone would do.
http://triblive.com/csp/mediapool/sites/dt.common.streams.StreamServer.cls?STREAMOID=78YYjuADdv3YutdWIyOYmJM5tm0Zxrvol3sywaAHBAlHN$rjGwyADZhGTgRYwhVvE0$uXvBjavsllACLNr6VhLEUIm2tympBeeq1Fwi7sIigrCfKm_F3DhYfWov3omce$8CAqP1xDAFoSAgEcS6kSQ–&CONTENTTYPE=application/pdf&CONTENTDISPOSITION=ptr-gx-jfk2-111713.pdf
After causing 7 wounds and breaking 3 bones, the “magic bullet” exited unscathed, and was found intact on a Parkland hospital sketcher. The Warren commission was never able to replicate the bullet’s pristine condition: similar bullet shot through a cadaver’s wrist came out completely deformed.
-------------------------------------------------------- Link below is to a sketch, showing the miraculous bullet changing its trajectory in both vertical and horizontal directions, as a controlled drone would do.
http://triblive.com/csp/mediapool/sites/dt.common.streams.StreamServer.cls?STREAMOID=78YYjuADdv3YutdWIyOYmJM5tm0Zxrvol3sywaAHBAlHN$rjGwyADZhGTgRYwhVvE0$uXvBjavsllACLNr6VhLEUIm2tympBeeq1Fwi7sIigrCfKm_F3DhYfWov3omce$8CAqP1xDAFoSAgEcS6kSQ–&CONTENTTYPE=application/pdf&CONTENTDISPOSITION=ptr-gx-jfk2-111713.pdf
After causing 7 wounds and breaking 3 bones, the “magic bullet” exited unscathed, and was found intact on a Parkland hospital sketcher. The Warren commission was never able to replicate the bullet’s pristine condition: similar bullet shot through a cadaver’s wrist came out completely deformed.
My
red pilling occurred when I finally looked deeper into the Building 7
collapse. Up until that point, I could never believe that a conspiracy
so grand could exist to pull off 9/11 or the Kennedy assassinations.
The freefall collapse of Building 7 was the smoking gun that I needed to
prove conspiracy does exists.
I mention this because on a previous thread some of those UNZ readers, still bitterly clinging to the CIA narrative, were arguing something to the effect that: “just because one little piece is proved wrong doesn’t mean that there is narrative collapse”.
I disagree, once the official propaganda organs have been caught in such as malicious and criminal lie as covering up for 9/11 or the Kennedy assassinations, then their entire narrative and all their credibility collapses too. From then on, each datapoint along the narrative’s path has to be re-proven without the benefit of power of the narrative or the benefit of the doubt.
We also then have to discard the narrative back to the point that we can be satisfied that the truth had been told and that “consent” and “social contract” had some kind of meaning. The problem is that likely there has never been a point in time where there wasn’t a narrative that was made of lies. In that sense we are all Chinese coolies now, because centuries of lying narratives have left us unable to find the truth.
-------------------------------------------------
@utu
I mention this because on a previous thread some of those UNZ readers, still bitterly clinging to the CIA narrative, were arguing something to the effect that: “just because one little piece is proved wrong doesn’t mean that there is narrative collapse”.
I disagree, once the official propaganda organs have been caught in such as malicious and criminal lie as covering up for 9/11 or the Kennedy assassinations, then their entire narrative and all their credibility collapses too. From then on, each datapoint along the narrative’s path has to be re-proven without the benefit of power of the narrative or the benefit of the doubt.
We also then have to discard the narrative back to the point that we can be satisfied that the truth had been told and that “consent” and “social contract” had some kind of meaning. The problem is that likely there has never been a point in time where there wasn’t a narrative that was made of lies. In that sense we are all Chinese coolies now, because centuries of lying narratives have left us unable to find the truth.
-------------------------------------------------
@utu
“Some correspondence of JFK with PM’s of Israel is available on line.”
From a letter of President Kennedy to Levi Eshkol, Israeli PM, on July 5th 1963,with regard to activities at the Dimona nuclear plant:
” As I wrote Mr. Ben-Gurion, this Government’s commitment to and support of Israel could be seriously jeopardized if it should be thought that we were unable to obtain reliable information on a subject as vital to the peace as the question of Israel’s effort in the nuclear field.”
Very significantly, the threats made by President Kennedy in his letter seem to have been “re-classified” and are redacted from the official archives available to the public.
https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v18/d289
Why is official correspondence of President Kennedy with Israeli authorities still classified?
What is there to hide, 55 years on?
---------------------------------------------------------------- From a letter of President Kennedy to Levi Eshkol, Israeli PM, on July 5th 1963,with regard to activities at the Dimona nuclear plant:
” As I wrote Mr. Ben-Gurion, this Government’s commitment to and support of Israel could be seriously jeopardized if it should be thought that we were unable to obtain reliable information on a subject as vital to the peace as the question of Israel’s effort in the nuclear field.”
Very significantly, the threats made by President Kennedy in his letter seem to have been “re-classified” and are redacted from the official archives available to the public.
https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v18/d289
Why is official correspondence of President Kennedy with Israeli authorities still classified?
What is there to hide, 55 years on?
Like
all such official stories, the “lone nut theory” of the Kennedy
assassination is a narrative constructed from the top down by official
pronouncement as opposed to a fact and evidence based investigation and
legal due process. The official conclusion is reached within a day- or
even in hours- with a convenient cookie cutter suspect as lone
perpetrator or mastermind (as in 9/11). There is no trial according to
the proper rules of evidence, only a “commission” which offers a vacuous
official pronouncement which the corporate Mockingbird media
immediately proclaims as definitive and ironclad.
-------------------------------------------
@Hamlet's GhostWhen I log on to Unz now, I get diverted to an odd webage that says its checking my browser. Then my post from last night produced a blank white page and never showed up here. Same thing this morning using a different computer. Just a FYI to whoever.
Oswald is the smoking gun. The only reason Oswald was never arrested after returning to the USA must be because he was a CIA plant. The Soviets were not fooled, so Oswald came home, then got a government job in Texas too? As Col. Prouty pointed out, one could buy a rifle at a gun store without showing any ID back then. Why didn’t Oswald do that, instead of buying a crappy rifle mail order that could be traced to him? And why did he shoot that policeman much later? And how did they “find” him in a movie theater? And now we recently learned the FBI lost the fingerprints from the rifle.
Here are more detailed posts from my blog:
Dec 8, 2009 – Lee Harvey Oswald
One of the little known oddities of the 1963 assassination of President Kennedy is Oswald’s strange life, as partly described here:
“…in October 1959 he became the first Marine to defect to the Soviet Union. In Moscow, he delivered a letter stating: “I affirm that my allegiance is to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.” Not only did he publicly renounce his American citizenship, but he told the U.S. consul that he intended to turn over to the Soviet Union military secrets that he had acquired while serving in the Marines [he was a radar operator], adding that he had data of “special interest” to the Russians. Since he indeed had exposure to military secrets such as the U-2 spy plane, his defection had serious espionage implications. Oswald thus had not only compromised the secret data he had come in contact with in the Marines, but put himself firmly in the hands of another country. He was now completely dependent on Russia for financial support, legal status and protection.
Before disappearing into the Soviet hinterland for a year, Oswald spelled out his operational creed in a long letter to his brother. From Moscow, he wrote presciently of his willingness to commit murder for a political cause: “I want you to understand what I say now, I do not say lightly, or unknowingly, since I’ve been in the military …. In the event of war I would kill any American who put a uniform on in defense of the American Government –”, and then ominously added for emphasis, “Any American.” His willingness to act as an assassin was now known to anyone who read this letter, which included not only his Russian hosts but American intelligence, since his letter was intercepted by the CIA and microfilmed. Oswald returned from the Soviet Union in June 1962, joined by his Russian wife Marina, and settled in Dallas.”
The author continues with his story, but wait one minute! Oswald deserted from the Marines, defected to the Soviets, and openly bragged that he gave them top secret information, which some suspect helped the Soviets shoot down the U-2 with Gary Francis Powers. Then Oswald simply “returns home” and is not arrested and imprisoned for decades! Oh, he wants a visa to bring his Russian wife too! No problem, you Marine Corps deserter and traitor!
Dec 18, 2017 – Another JFK Coup Fact Revealed
Congress created the five-member Assassination Records Review Board in 1992 as part of a law requiring the release of all Kennedy assassination documents within 25 years. The law authorized the president in office in 2017 to block releases if he deems it would harm US intelligence, law enforcement, military, or diplomatic interests. President Trump had no plans to block anything and the Deep State threw a fit and refused to obey the law. To avoid a confrontation, Trump allowed a few more months to “review” most files. Just under a third of the materials were released on December 15th, an estimated 85,000 pages worth, which had long been categorized as irrelevant to the JFK assassination.
Among these “irrelevant” documents is a July 1978 memo to an attorney on the staff of the House Select Committee on Assassinations. It stated that the FBI was unable to locate the original fingerprints lifted from the rifle found at the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. Dallas Police turned those over a few days after the assassination and never got them back. Top FBI officials told House investigators that finding the prints would be a “mammoth research effort” and refused. So either the FBI bungled its most important case by losing key evidence or someone intentionally destroyed that evidence because the fingerprints on the rifle didn’t match Oswald’s.
Last October, President Donald Trump gave agencies six more months to finish this 25+ year review of material that might damage national security. Upcoming deadlines:
March 12: FBI, CIA and other agencies must report to the archives any material they want withheld
March 26: National Archives makes its recommendations to the president on what material warrants further withholding
April 26: The president’s deadline for release of all remaining records.
The best stuff will never be released because the truth about the JFK coup will never be revealed, unless Trump sends General Kelly and US Marines to these federal offices to rough up some people.
------------------------------------------------------
@Technomad
-------------------------------------------
@Hamlet's GhostWhen I log on to Unz now, I get diverted to an odd webage that says its checking my browser. Then my post from last night produced a blank white page and never showed up here. Same thing this morning using a different computer. Just a FYI to whoever.
Oswald is the smoking gun. The only reason Oswald was never arrested after returning to the USA must be because he was a CIA plant. The Soviets were not fooled, so Oswald came home, then got a government job in Texas too? As Col. Prouty pointed out, one could buy a rifle at a gun store without showing any ID back then. Why didn’t Oswald do that, instead of buying a crappy rifle mail order that could be traced to him? And why did he shoot that policeman much later? And how did they “find” him in a movie theater? And now we recently learned the FBI lost the fingerprints from the rifle.
Here are more detailed posts from my blog:
Dec 8, 2009 – Lee Harvey Oswald
One of the little known oddities of the 1963 assassination of President Kennedy is Oswald’s strange life, as partly described here:
“…in October 1959 he became the first Marine to defect to the Soviet Union. In Moscow, he delivered a letter stating: “I affirm that my allegiance is to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.” Not only did he publicly renounce his American citizenship, but he told the U.S. consul that he intended to turn over to the Soviet Union military secrets that he had acquired while serving in the Marines [he was a radar operator], adding that he had data of “special interest” to the Russians. Since he indeed had exposure to military secrets such as the U-2 spy plane, his defection had serious espionage implications. Oswald thus had not only compromised the secret data he had come in contact with in the Marines, but put himself firmly in the hands of another country. He was now completely dependent on Russia for financial support, legal status and protection.
Before disappearing into the Soviet hinterland for a year, Oswald spelled out his operational creed in a long letter to his brother. From Moscow, he wrote presciently of his willingness to commit murder for a political cause: “I want you to understand what I say now, I do not say lightly, or unknowingly, since I’ve been in the military …. In the event of war I would kill any American who put a uniform on in defense of the American Government –”, and then ominously added for emphasis, “Any American.” His willingness to act as an assassin was now known to anyone who read this letter, which included not only his Russian hosts but American intelligence, since his letter was intercepted by the CIA and microfilmed. Oswald returned from the Soviet Union in June 1962, joined by his Russian wife Marina, and settled in Dallas.”
The author continues with his story, but wait one minute! Oswald deserted from the Marines, defected to the Soviets, and openly bragged that he gave them top secret information, which some suspect helped the Soviets shoot down the U-2 with Gary Francis Powers. Then Oswald simply “returns home” and is not arrested and imprisoned for decades! Oh, he wants a visa to bring his Russian wife too! No problem, you Marine Corps deserter and traitor!
Dec 18, 2017 – Another JFK Coup Fact Revealed
Congress created the five-member Assassination Records Review Board in 1992 as part of a law requiring the release of all Kennedy assassination documents within 25 years. The law authorized the president in office in 2017 to block releases if he deems it would harm US intelligence, law enforcement, military, or diplomatic interests. President Trump had no plans to block anything and the Deep State threw a fit and refused to obey the law. To avoid a confrontation, Trump allowed a few more months to “review” most files. Just under a third of the materials were released on December 15th, an estimated 85,000 pages worth, which had long been categorized as irrelevant to the JFK assassination.
Among these “irrelevant” documents is a July 1978 memo to an attorney on the staff of the House Select Committee on Assassinations. It stated that the FBI was unable to locate the original fingerprints lifted from the rifle found at the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. Dallas Police turned those over a few days after the assassination and never got them back. Top FBI officials told House investigators that finding the prints would be a “mammoth research effort” and refused. So either the FBI bungled its most important case by losing key evidence or someone intentionally destroyed that evidence because the fingerprints on the rifle didn’t match Oswald’s.
Last October, President Donald Trump gave agencies six more months to finish this 25+ year review of material that might damage national security. Upcoming deadlines:
March 12: FBI, CIA and other agencies must report to the archives any material they want withheld
March 26: National Archives makes its recommendations to the president on what material warrants further withholding
April 26: The president’s deadline for release of all remaining records.
The best stuff will never be released because the truth about the JFK coup will never be revealed, unless Trump sends General Kelly and US Marines to these federal offices to rough up some people.
------------------------------------------------------
@Technomad
“The kinds of scenarios I’ve seen from conspiracy believers”
Following the evidence is usually the simplest thing.
There may have been a bimbo who tried to off Kennedy, but so far I am not aware of any such evidence. And if such an attempt had been made, it might have been hard to off the bimbo quickly and then for the Navy to get control of the corpse and control the photo and autopsy evidence, as did occur.
However, there is evidence that the killing shot came from a very obvious, “simple” place:
through a grating in the road over an underground utility corridor. Easy peasy.
The main point is that the whole Oswald narrative is the “legend.”
It is the professional skill set of the CIA to manage covert operations and part of that process is creating the legends that misdirect attention. Very simple. You could call them red herrings, false trails. this concept is so pathetically simple and obvious that I am surprised how supposedly sophisticated “conspiracy theory” debunkers consistently fall for it. The perfect targets for Three Card Monte operators in (the old) Times Square!
It is part of the skill set of the mobster to kill efficiently and hide the traces, use an untraceable weapon and make it disappear. On hindsight I think we can say that the immediate production of Oswald as the assassin is comparable to the miraculous discoveries of passports lying in rubble and on car seats that lead law enforcement directly to the perp. Again, the “conspiracy” debunkers are happy to swallow such miracles hook, line, and sinker. In fact, I would call the smart-ass debunkers “miracle theorists.” Becuase their acceptance of official narratives in both the JFK assassination and 911 depends on miracles.
------------------------------------------
@Dube
@Achilles“Here is a clip from a documentary using computer simulation techniques with the actual limousine configuration and dimensions to model the path of the bullet, completely debunking the ridiculous and dishonest Stone JFK movie contention about the magic bullet:”
In this animation it is claimed that the magic bullet came on Zapruder frame 223. In that frame and before it JFK is completely invisible, so it is totally impossible to say where he was sitting. After being shot, his position most probably changed at lest a bit. He can be seen in the frame 225, but we cannot assume that we know his position in the frame 223. This means that the maker of this animation is intentionally trying to confuse the viewer into believing that the position of the two men was obtained from the film and corresponds to the magic bullet theory. The problem with the theory is that the bullet did not get much deformed. If a bullet gets deformed, it probably would turn when it has slowed down and do more damage. Another problem with this animation is a claim that the first bullet (a miss) came in the frame 167. Nothing happens in that frame and it is not blurred. According to the blurred frame theory, the first shot should cause the cameraman to shake the camera so the frame is blurred. That would put the first shot to the frame 197.
----------------------------------------------
@Achilles
Following the evidence is usually the simplest thing.
There may have been a bimbo who tried to off Kennedy, but so far I am not aware of any such evidence. And if such an attempt had been made, it might have been hard to off the bimbo quickly and then for the Navy to get control of the corpse and control the photo and autopsy evidence, as did occur.
However, there is evidence that the killing shot came from a very obvious, “simple” place:
through a grating in the road over an underground utility corridor. Easy peasy.
The main point is that the whole Oswald narrative is the “legend.”
It is the professional skill set of the CIA to manage covert operations and part of that process is creating the legends that misdirect attention. Very simple. You could call them red herrings, false trails. this concept is so pathetically simple and obvious that I am surprised how supposedly sophisticated “conspiracy theory” debunkers consistently fall for it. The perfect targets for Three Card Monte operators in (the old) Times Square!
It is part of the skill set of the mobster to kill efficiently and hide the traces, use an untraceable weapon and make it disappear. On hindsight I think we can say that the immediate production of Oswald as the assassin is comparable to the miraculous discoveries of passports lying in rubble and on car seats that lead law enforcement directly to the perp. Again, the “conspiracy” debunkers are happy to swallow such miracles hook, line, and sinker. In fact, I would call the smart-ass debunkers “miracle theorists.” Becuase their acceptance of official narratives in both the JFK assassination and 911 depends on miracles.
------------------------------------------
Bravo, Ron. I have followed a path similar to yours–from ignorant (or perhaps lazy) acceptance of the WCR to total rejection.
Anyone who starts to examine the facts in the most cursory manner is quickly overwhelmed by the numerous things that just don’t make sense. Here are a few off the top:
- The limousine in which JFK was riding, the principal “crime scene,” was immediately shipped off to Detroit, where it was cleaned up and renovated. This was done by the FBI which had to be acting on the instructions or at least with the approval of LBJ.
- The doctors and nurses at Parkland Hospital, where JFK was taken, uniformly said that the back of his skull was missing and that the wound on his throat was a small entrance wound. Jackie reached backward onto the trunk of the car to retrieve pieces of JFK’s skull/brains. This could not have happened from shots fired from the rear (the Book Depository Building).
- Abraham Zapruder, who was standing in front of the grassy knoll when he took his famous film clip, said that the shots seemed to come from behind him, as did other witnesses who were in the same area. The WC ignored or rejected their testimony.
-The Zapruder film shows JFK being violently thrown to his left and rear by the fatal head shot. Incredibly, this film was kept under wraps for 12 YEARS. IMO the WCR would have been a joke if the film had been available to the public when it was released.
I prefer to deal in facts, not labels like “conspiracy.”
----------------------------------------------------- Anyone who starts to examine the facts in the most cursory manner is quickly overwhelmed by the numerous things that just don’t make sense. Here are a few off the top:
- The limousine in which JFK was riding, the principal “crime scene,” was immediately shipped off to Detroit, where it was cleaned up and renovated. This was done by the FBI which had to be acting on the instructions or at least with the approval of LBJ.
- The doctors and nurses at Parkland Hospital, where JFK was taken, uniformly said that the back of his skull was missing and that the wound on his throat was a small entrance wound. Jackie reached backward onto the trunk of the car to retrieve pieces of JFK’s skull/brains. This could not have happened from shots fired from the rear (the Book Depository Building).
- Abraham Zapruder, who was standing in front of the grassy knoll when he took his famous film clip, said that the shots seemed to come from behind him, as did other witnesses who were in the same area. The WC ignored or rejected their testimony.
-The Zapruder film shows JFK being violently thrown to his left and rear by the fatal head shot. Incredibly, this film was kept under wraps for 12 YEARS. IMO the WCR would have been a joke if the film had been available to the public when it was released.
I prefer to deal in facts, not labels like “conspiracy.”
@Dube
You
generally zero a scope at a range, before going hunting. It is not
uncommon for a properly zeroed scope to come loose after some shooting,
particularly if the mounting mechanism is of poor quality. If this was
mail order rifle from the ’60s, I would not think it unusual for the
scope to be loose after several rounds. On the other hand, if you are
assassinating the POTUS, you have military training, and you are a crack
enough shot to have made the shot Oswald is argued to have made, you
would think a little extra care would have been taken to make sure your
scope, THE MOST IMPORTANT PART of the rifle for accurate long range
shooting, was in good working order. Not the place to go cheap. Seems a
loose scope could be argued either way.
----------------------------------------------@Achilles“Here is a clip from a documentary using computer simulation techniques with the actual limousine configuration and dimensions to model the path of the bullet, completely debunking the ridiculous and dishonest Stone JFK movie contention about the magic bullet:”
In this animation it is claimed that the magic bullet came on Zapruder frame 223. In that frame and before it JFK is completely invisible, so it is totally impossible to say where he was sitting. After being shot, his position most probably changed at lest a bit. He can be seen in the frame 225, but we cannot assume that we know his position in the frame 223. This means that the maker of this animation is intentionally trying to confuse the viewer into believing that the position of the two men was obtained from the film and corresponds to the magic bullet theory. The problem with the theory is that the bullet did not get much deformed. If a bullet gets deformed, it probably would turn when it has slowed down and do more damage. Another problem with this animation is a claim that the first bullet (a miss) came in the frame 167. Nothing happens in that frame and it is not blurred. According to the blurred frame theory, the first shot should cause the cameraman to shake the camera so the frame is blurred. That would put the first shot to the frame 197.
----------------------------------------------
@Achilles
Former
Navy marksman Jesse Venture did a TV show about him trying to hit a
stationary target with Oswald’s exact rifle type at the same angle and
distance by quickly firing three rounds, and failed repeatedly. He also
paid a world famous sniper to try, and he failed dozens of times.
Ventura also mentioned the limo windshield had a bullet hole at Parkland
hospital that was replaced the next day and never discussed again.
If someone wants to try this themselves and post a youtube video about successfully firing three rounds in less than six seconds to hit a moving target, do it! Otherwise, respect the reality proven by Ventura. I’ve fired bolt action rifles many times. After firing it takes at least four seconds to work the bolt and aim to fire an accurate shot at a moving target.
---------------------------
If someone wants to try this themselves and post a youtube video about successfully firing three rounds in less than six seconds to hit a moving target, do it! Otherwise, respect the reality proven by Ventura. I’ve fired bolt action rifles many times. After firing it takes at least four seconds to work the bolt and aim to fire an accurate shot at a moving target.
---------------------------
