.

.
Library of Professor Richard A. Macksey in Baltimore

POSTS BY SUBJECT

Labels

Thursday, July 5, 2018

Ron Unz: the JFK Assassination, Comments 2





Ron Unz: the JFK Assassination, Comments 2

COMMENTS
===============

www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-jfk-assassination-part-i-what-happened/#comment-2379170

-------------------------
Mulga Mumblebrain says:
June 19, 2018 at 11:43 am GMT

Bertrand Russell, among others, at the age of 91, saw through the cover-up immediately. His ’16 Questions on the Assassination’ published in September, 1964, are very interesting.

------------------------
“The Single-Bullet Theory”

D. K. says:
June 19, 2018 at 5:30 pm GMT • 500 Words

The linchpin of the Warren Commission’s much-maligned “Lone-Nut Theory”– the conclusion that Lee Oswald, acting wholly on his own, had conceived and planned the assassination of President John Kennedy, and then had successfully carried out that plan, during the former’s lunch hour at the Texas School Book Depository– is Arlen Specter’s notorious brainstorm: “The Single-Bullet Theory.” The Commission had decided that only three shots had been fired, during the assassination, because three spent bullet casings had been found in the so-called “sniper’s nest,” inside of a corner window on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. The third shot was the fatal head shot, as captured on Mr. Zapruder’s famous “home movie.” Another, probably the first, was the missed shot that indirectly wounded onlooker James Tague, standing well down the street, when it hit the curb, causing his cheek to be bloodied by a small piece of flying concrete. The other, probably the second, therefore had to be responsible for both the original wounding of the president and all of the wounds of Governor John Connally. Thus, Arlen Specter’s notorious solution: “The Single-Bullet Theory.”

According to the Warren Commission, courtesy of the future long-time United States Senator for Pennsylvania, a single bullet, later found at Parkland Hospital by an attendant, who turned it over to the authorities, had entered at the base of the rear of the president’s neck, exited through his throat, wounded the governor in several parts of his body, and finally lodged in his leg. The bullet then was presumably dislodged during the governor’s treatment in the ER, remaining on his stretcher. While that stretcher was resting against the wall, in the hallway outside of the governor’s ER treatment room, the aforementioned attendant pushed another stretcher against the wall, which inadvertently jarred the governor’s stretcher, knocking the previously dislodged bullet off of that stretcher and onto the floor, which the attendant had noticed, causing him to pick it up, and then to turn it over to the authorities as possible evidence.

A fatal flaw in “The Single-Bullet Theory” is that the president had not been shot at the base of the rear of his neck. He had been shot, instead, about five and a half inches down his back, a couple of inches to the right of its midline. That bullet wound was probed by both Dr. Humes and another doctor, during the autopsy, using both their fingers and a metal probe. It went to a depth of only about two inches, and the bullet was no longer in the president’s body. Applying Occam’s Razor, the nearly pristine bullet that was found at Parkland Hospital, as recounted above, was not somehow dislodged from the governor’s leg wound, during his ER treatment; instead, it was dislodged from the president’s back wound, during resuscitation efforts in the ER. At any rate, none of the governor’s multiple wounds were caused by the same shot as the president’s back wound, and “The Single-Bullet Theory” is disproved, along with the theory of Lee Oswald’s having carried out the entire attack with just three shots from his badly aligned surplus rifle.
------------------------

Hu Mi Yu says:
June 19, 2018 at 6:10 pm GMT • 300 Words
@Anon

    -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.

It was shown twice on Los Angeles TV station KCOP before being sent in for evidence. The Hollywood people who developed it were so shocked they wanted the public to view it before the government could edit it. Which they did.

What I saw in the original implicated the secret service and the President’s wife. They came to a pre-apointed spot and jammed on the brakes so hard the you could see under-sprung Lincoln rocking back and forth. The drivers stared straight ahead while at least three shots are fired. The only person who turned around was Governor Connally. He was immediately shot and ducked under the seat. The passengers were under instructions not to turn around and look.

The first shot struck the President in the throat from the rear. He tried to duck, but his wife Jackie held him up poised like a statue for the fatal shot from the front.
 

To understand how they turned Jackie you need to check out old newspapers from 1963. The President’s affair with Marilyn Monroe was front page news. A Catholic divorce was impossible; marriage was “until death do us part.” According to one of the conspirators all Jackie wanted was another husband even richer than JFK.
-------------------------------

James N. Kennett says:
June 19, 2018 at 6:15 pm GMT • 100 Words
@Bombercommand

    Therefore the rifle could only be in front, and above the target. There is only one place the rifle shootist could have made that shot from: on top of The Triple Underpass.

As you say, Kennedy was looking down after the throat shot. If the head shot came from the front, it didn’t necessarily come from above.

There were spectators on the Triple Underpass who would have seen and heard a shooter there:

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/explorer/galleries/explorer-jfk-the-lost-bullet-pictures/at/triple-underpass-39917/

-------------------------------------

Sam J. says:
June 19, 2018 at 6:47 pm GMT • 100 Words
@Dillon Sweeny

“…Which of the 400 comments presented verifiable evidence of another weapon? Did all the bullets that tattered Kennedy’s corpse — you know … the Mafia .45s, the Israeli Uzis, the Cuban surplus FALNs — did all those bullets just evaporate?…”

This is just a smoke screen as the body was under control of people who could have removed whatever bullets were there and replaced them with whatever they wanted. The real “Evidence” is that audio recording recorded shots from more than one position. What kind of bullets is irrelevant.

I can’t remember where I read it but I read that this was the gun that killed Kennedy from the grassy knoll.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_XP-100

Easy to hide. Very high velocity and a super accurate shooter.

---------------------------------------
renfro says:
June 19, 2018 at 8:17 pm GMT • 1,300 Words
@Wizard of Oz

    You used a quote from the Jerusalem Post as if to add weight and authority to your case but you left out part of it, notably the 1967 date which was essential for understanding precisely and making sense of what the JP article was saying. I won’t repeat what I have already demonstrated about that but if you offer any more obfuscatory smoke I hope readers will refer back.

First…. I didnt quote the JP piece utu did.

Second…..lets look at article shall we? It is the typical Israeli chest beating puff piece pretending they are big and bad and can stare down US Presidents.

The article itself confirms utu’s point that Kennedy was a threat to Israel’s survival and nuclear capabilities ….as in this paragraph from the article:

But history shows that some issues are so critical that even the president of the United States cannot force Israel’s hand. Important examples include Menachem Begin’s rejection of Jimmy Carter’s demand for an indefinite settlement freeze in the 1978 Camp David summit, and Ariel Sharon’s refusal to accept George W. Bush’s demand to end anti-terror operations in March 2002, following the Passover attacks, including the Park Hotel. The sharpest example took place almost 50 years ago, when John F. Kennedy demanded that David Ben-Gurion end Israel’s nuclear deterrent program, deemed necessary to ensure Jewish survival in a very hostile world.

Also confirming utu’s point in the article:

”’When president Kennedy took office in 1961, the disagreement became a full-blown crisis.

And this:

”Finally, Kennedy had enough, and in a personal letter dated May 18, 1963, the president warned that unless American inspectors were allowed into Dimona (meaning the end of any military activities), Israel would find itself totally isolated.

You said:
but you left out part of it, notably the 1967 date which was essential for understanding precisely and making sense of what the JP article was saying

All the article said re 1967 was:

”Before 1967, the IDF was not seen as a formidable power, and the economy depended on massive aid from Diaspora Jewry. If the US government were to impose tax restrictions, the costs would have been very high. Ben-Gurion avoided saying no by dancing around them for two years.”

Which had once again nothing to do with Kennedy’s actions re Israel and only points up that only after Kennedy was murdered and Johnson took over did the heat on Israel go down.

You Jews for Israel really are morons….we get that you are here to just toss hasbara crap, similar to little boys pulling a girls pigtails in grade school,…..but you don’t realize that that just gives us the opportunity to put out more actual information on Israel.

Enjoy…lol

When Ben-Gurion said no to JFK
The “don’t ask, don’t tell” compromise served both Israel and the US well.
By Gerald Steinberg
March 28, 2010 23:23
------------------------------

Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
June 19, 2018 at 8:58 pm GMT • 200 Words
@Hu Mi Yu

Really!!! And here I thought the second husband Onassis acted alone without Jackie’s knowledge. Now we know why she consented to go to Texas with him.

The drs at the Dallas hospital had to unwrap a complicated hip and back brace. Some say it was the back brace that held him up. You say Jackie held him up. Very interesting

Some say she and Onassis got engaged September 1963 2 months before Kennedy died. Onassis was a guest in the White House during the body viewing funeral and until she moved out.

5 pregnancies, 2 miscarriages and 1 premature baby who died a few days after birth; all due to JFK’s incurable chronic chalymadia and other chronic STDs that he passed on to his wife.

Have you heard about the retired Australian cop who claims the secret service driver of the car turned around and fired the head shot ?

If the driver stopped the car that would disprove the endless theories that Oswald couldn’t shoot a moving target.

If Oswald couldn’t shoot the moving target, how could the grassy knoll overpass and numerous other shooters hit the moving target?
-----------------------------

Iris says:
June 19, 2018 at 9:44 pm GMT

Jack Ruby told an FBI informant to “watch the fireworks” a few hours before President John F Kennedy was assassinated, the latest release of JFK files reveals.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/jfk-files-release-john-f-kennedy-jack-ruby-fbi-watch-for-fireworks-lee-harvey-oswald-assassination-a8063826.html

---------------------------

MacNucc11 says:
June 19, 2018 at 10:03 pm GMT • 100 Words
@Dillon Sweeny

So you would expect to find every bullet fired? He ran but only after the police immediately targeted him as planned. He was sitting in the lunchroom. But why would he run? Was his plan to run to Mexico? He was hung out to dry. Why would a policeman question him? It is all suspicious. Most likely I think the policeman was to gun him down, case closed and a lot neater than what we ended up with don’t you think? Jack Ruby was damage control when Oswald got the policeman. Think about it. If Oswald is gunned down by the policeman on the streets then we have way less reason to believe in conspiracies. If this happened today we would just never hear from Oswald, like we will never here the explanation of Tsarnaev.
----------------------------

MacNucc11 says:
June 19, 2018 at 10:15 pm GMT
@Anon

“If Oswald couldn’t shoot the moving target, how could the grassy knoll overpass and numerous other shooters hit the moving target?”

Because a moving target that is moving toward you is more or less the same as a stationary target.
--------------------------

Iris says:
June 19, 2018 at 10:53 pm GMT • 200 Words

Did Jack Ruby and Lee Harvey Oswald know each other?
That would constitute a very improbable “coincidence”, and would in turn make the “conspiracy” very probable.

1- Comedian and MC Bill DeMar, who worked at Ruby’s nightclub “The Carousel”, saw Oswald there a week before the assassination.


2- Another MC, Wally Weston, who worked at the nightclub before DeMar, remembered Oswald coming at the Carousel on at least two occasions, with Ruby saying: “I told you never to come in here”. Wally Weston later testified at the HSCA.

http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/N%20Disk/New%20York%20Daily%20News%206-76/Item%2001.pdf

3- (I love this one ) During the press conference where Chief Henry Wade announces Oswald has been arrested for killing the President, and is part of a pro-Cuban communist organisation, Jack Ruby corrects him (!!!!) and gives the correct name (Fair play for Cuba). At 11:20.

-------------------------------

Yneews Nollid says:
June 19, 2018 at 11:17 pm GMT • 100 Words

Dillon Sweeny is adopting CIA last-ditch rearguard line of defense No. 1493(b), which is try to keep everyone arguing about the minutiae of one single aspect of the evidence (ballistics, for this crime) to distract people from the overwhelming probative evidence of CIA coup d’état based on documented government statements and actions as shown repeatedly inter alia in Douglass.

https://off-guardian.org/2017/11/19/book-review-jfk-and-the-unspeakable-how-he-died-and-why-it-matters/

CIA killed Jack Kennedy and everybody knows it. Nobody does anything about it because CIA will kill you too if you move to make them pay. They set themselves up with impunity from inception. CIA is your regime. They control the executive with moles. When Congress or the courts step out of line CIA removes them, terrorizes them into compliance (Daschle, Leahy) or kills them (Robert Vance, Paul Wellstone.)

CIA is your totalitarian state. What are you gonna do about it?
--------------------------------------

renfro says:
June 19, 2018 at 11:33 pm GMT • 200 Words

This call to a reporter 25 minutes before Kennedy assassination telling him to contact the US Embassy for big news .

From the CIA files . You can view the CIA memo at the link.

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32389606.pdf

It says a reporter on the UK’s Cambridge Evening News received an anonymous call telling him to ring the US embassy for some big news, 25 minutes before the assassination of JFK, according to a memo from a deputy director of the CIA to the director of the FBI.
The caller said only that the Cambridge News reporter should call the American embassy in London for some big news and then hung up. After the word of the president’s death was received the reporter informed the Cambridge police of the anonymous call and the police informed MI5.

Reminds me of this,…..

‘Odigo Says Workers Were Warned of Attack
Odigo, the instant messaging service, says that two of its workers received messages two hours before the Twin Towers attack on September 11 predicting the attack would happen, and the company has been cooperating with Israeli and American law enforcement, including the FBI, in trying to find the original sender of the message predicting the attack.

https://www.haaretz.com/1.541023

Could two pranksters have been so coincidencely lucky about two monumental events? I doubt it.
But if the people who did it were ever traced the results have not been reveled to the public.

-------------------------------

republic says:
June 20, 2018 at 12:06 am GMT • 200 Words
@Skeptikal

no it was in NY state.

Last September I posted a reply here on Unz that I had discovered for the first time the very interesting detail regarding the presence abroad that AA flight 11 of an ex Israeli commando named Daniel Lewin. This man was a super zionist, he seemed to be going on a mission which he did not expect to return alive, as he got all his affairs in order and had just received a visit from his long estranged father who hated America but had made his first trip there to see Daniel Lewin just before 9/11.

Roth states in that video interview that based on her many years as a flight attendant that the phasing of the long 20 minute or so telephone conversations to the ground made by two different flight attendants were very oddly phrased and appear to her to have been dictated by someone else. Oddly very unemotional and very quiet in the background.
these conversation were crucial in make the narrative that arabs were involved.

Roth also states that some odd wording indicates that those calls were made on a the ground and not in the air.
So based on Roth’s interview and her book it seems that Lewin was on that flight not by accident as his standard wiki entry indicates but on purpose as he directed that complex ground operation at Steward airport.
---------------------------------

 American Friends Service Committee

Anon[171] • Disclaimer says:
June 20, 2018 at 2:54 am GMT • 700 Words
@Skeptikal

I developed my opinion of the American Friends Service Committee about 30 years before I learned Ruth Paine was a Quaker.

I was in college when Kennedy was killed and the leftist profs claimed that although Oswald was a pro Castro self proclaimed communist that wasn’t why he killed Kennedy.

The left claimed that Oswald killed Kennedy because the “ atmosphere of right wing hate” somehow got into Oswald’s brain and cause him to kill Kennedy.

I worked for a city&county of San Francisco agency that was under siege by every radical revolutionary group from Charles Garry Faye Stender prison law project to black panthers weather underground who bombed Park Pokice station killing one officer and invaded Ingleside police station killing a secretary.

I saw a convicted murderer made under sheriff.

I knew Bernadette Dorhn under a false name when she bombed Park police station. She, weather underground founder, was on the run from bombings and murders on the east coast.

She came to San Francisco and worked for one of those do gooder federally funded agencies under a false name.

Her agency was an off shoot of the prison law project. Prison law project was White liberals trying to foment a revolution by black criminals.

The Black Muslim zebra killers, the black guerilla revolutionary movement, prison law project; the American Friends Service Committee worked hand in glove with all those deeply revolutionary movements including the police station bombers.

If you don’t know who they are, google Jim Jones People’s Temple Johnstown massacre.

Did you know that many of the White people involved in that atrocity were Quakers of the American Friends Service Committee? I know because I was there in San Francisco.

Some of those Peoples Temple Quakers were working with Charles Garry in the early 1960s when he started the People’s Law Project which spent a great deal of time at nearby San Quentin prison recruiting for the violent revolution the liberals wanted.

Last horrible thing the American Friends Service Committee did was when the city wanted to close down the gay bathhouses at the start of the AIDS epidemic. By wallowing around in each other’s germs the gays created AIDS and other nasty STDs such as both venereal warts and veneral mushrooms

The gays massively protested against closing the bathhouses and American Friends Service Committee was right there with them.

I don’t know about the Vatican Masonic Illuminati conspiracy.

But I do know that San Francisco was the heart of the revolutionary movement from 1960 on. And I know that east coast Jews and American Friends Quakeres were the Whites leading it.

I didn’t learn that Marina’s friend and caretaker Ruth Paine was a Quaker till about 1999 or 2000 when someone gave me several cartons of books. About 30 of those books were Kennedy assassination books. I started reading them and learned Ruth Paine was a Quaker who studied Russian.

But by 1970 I had formed my opinion of American Friends by observing their support of violent revolutionaries like the black panthers black guerilla family prison law project and the weather underground.

They were involved with Jim Jones and People’s Temple for God’s sake.

And you can’t deny that black revolutionary CPUSA heroine Angela Davis, purchaser of the guns used in the Marin county shoot out that killed 11 people was sponsored by, and lived with Quakers from age 14 to 22.

There’s a lot you don’t know about your religion.

Ruth Paine married a man whose father was head of the Trotskyite faction. She sought out Marina from the first few months in the US. She moved the Oswalds from New Orleans to Dallas. Marina lived with her apart from Lee
She found Lee the job right on the motorcade route.

I believe the job really was a coincidence.

But I saw the American Friends inserting themselves deep into violent revolutionary movements in San Francisco for 20 years. So I don’t believe American Friends are a benign do gooder organization any more than I believe SPLC or BLM are benign do Gooder organizations.

I saw what American Friends Service Committee did in San Francisco for 20 years. You didn’t.
--------------------------------

peterAUS says:
June 20, 2018 at 6:10 am GMT • 400 Words
@Wizard of Oz

    …he key factor was comfortable balance so there was nothing to do but operate one’s [right] arm and hand smoothly. Does that figure?

It does, for that particular rifle (the fastest bolt action design, rear locking), that type of target (stationary, same level) and that position.
That’s the very basics of the marksmanship with full bore rifle.

It would be good to say what was your group on the target too…..

I really didn’t want to get involved in this discussion here, for several reasons.

The element which puzzles me, and apparently nobody here can answer that, is that timeframe.
It’s very simple: Oswald could not have done those 3 shots in 7 seconds. Very hard in 8. Getting easier with 9. Etc.
I was hoping that somebody would clear that for me.

There are a couple of, say, “rules” in cases like this.
First one is of type we can’t really discuss in public. Bottom line, a proper conspirator would have practiced on exactly that target. Exactly….that…..target.
I simply can’t emphasize that enough. It’s simply how it is done.
Oswald apparently didn’t. That tells me a couple of things.

Then, any normal investigation would have involved recreating the event.
My point is that nobody, so far, has been able to pull that, exactly that, within 7 seconds.
That tells me also a couple of things.

All this is irrelevant.

My understanding is that there is something in American psyche which is drawn to this event.
Watching discussions isn’t about the event; it’s about people discussing.

My take is simple:
If we clear the number of shooters (and for me the timeframe is crucial) then two options:
More than one shooter: obviously conspiracy.
One shooter, Oswald, a couple of (sub)options:
- Not a conspiracy, just a peculiar combination of events.
- Hare-brained, amateurish conspiracy.

Now, having said that, I am positive there was a conspiracy, by a couple of interested parties, after the event, to exploit it, including messing up the investigation.
More of a power play and “cover my/our arse” type than anything else.

Still…..it all hinges, as I said in my first post here, the timeframe of those 3 shots.
Bang/start the stopwatch….bang…..bang/stop the stopwatch. 7 seconds not a single shooter. 8…….borderline. 9….possible.
If/when we clear that we move on the next element of the event: ballistics. Then wounding. Etc.

As, again, I said before, I do have an issue with buying that modern technology can’t, apparently, figure out that timeframe. To a milisecond.
----------------------------------------

j2 says:
June 20, 2018 at 7:20 am GMT • 200 Words
@Dillon Sweeny

“The bullets were extracted and identified per recognized forensic analysis. If you contend those were not the actual bullets, either produce same, or produce evidence of bullet-like phenomena that evaporated after doing the dirty deed.”
So, you want evidence of a bullet-like thing, like a casing? James Files confessed having shot the final Grassy Knoll shot and said that he bit the casing and put in on the fence. A casing was found, there were marks from biting, it was from Remington Firebird. Though later it was claimed that the stamp on the casing showed that it was produced after 1963, this is not necessarily true. The drawings of the casing with this kind of stamp were approved after 1963, but it is perfectly possible that the machine produced casings that did not fully agree with drawings and so drawings were changed to correspond to the machine, not inversely. I once worked in a factory where they did the same: change the drawing when an internal review showed inconsistency, instead of changing the million dollar machine.

So, I cannot say if Files told the truth, but here you have a very concrete bullet-like piece of evidence and a confession. This is more than from the casings and bullets from Oswald, as Oswald did not confess and there are doubts of his rifle’s capabilities. A Firebird shot just after a rifle shot from the back surely could blow up JFK’s head as in the Zapruder film.
------------------------------------

Wizard of Oz says:
June 20, 2018 at 9:13 am GMT • 300 Words
@CanSpeccy

What’s your plausible scenario for Johnson’s guilty knowledge? Presumably too risky for him to do any serious organising. After all he wouldn’t want to have to even laugh off someone’s recollection that he went to see “Murder in the Cathedral” and came back laughing about his version of “Who will rid me of this troublesome priest?” being “Who will rid me of this goddam drugged up whoring President?”. Much less could he afford to sound people out.

So it has to start elsewhere. Very high level representatives of the Israeli government could have plenty of justified contact with Johnson and so could American de facto representatives of Israel that the ambassador, say, might vouch for as knowing the mind of the Israeli government. If it was a big actual or potential donor no problem explaining the contact.

The next step is that Johnson is sounded out on e.g. nuclear weapons and registration of foreign lobbyists to ascertain effectually what his policy positions would be if he were President. (I have previously noted that the policy on nuclear weapons didn’t actually change on LBJ becoming President but let us press on). The LBJ involvement would have to be very slight or he could have been blackmailed into immediate easing off on Dimona, and maybe much more. And here a thought occurs to me. There is no way that LBJ would have been such an innocent as to allow any possibility of blackmail – which means a very peripheral involvement by him, if any.

But what about Israel not being willing to be patient and rely on diplomacy and cunning? Search this thread for Abba Eban and you will find my reasoning which leads me to the conclusion that Israel wouldn’t have risked it.

Mind you if that last conclusion is wrong I daresay Israel would have had a couple of plants in the FBI, CIA and elsewhere who could enlist precisely the kind of low life which Oswald and Ruby both were in their ways.
------------------------------------

j2 says:
June 20, 2018 at 10:33 am GMT • 100 Words
@Laurent Guyénot

One problem with the magic bullet theory is that Connally did not believe in it

Connally is Johnson’s accomplice. Period.

Connally was Johnson’s accomplice, OK, but he probably did not make a deal of being shot. So he was not told that JFK would be shot with him and his wife sitting in the same car. I would not trust a sniper to be so good as to agree to sit as a target. So when it did happen, Connally must have been pretty chocked being shot and all, and he told what he thought was the truth: JFK was shot before him. He could not think Johnson was behind the attack at that time, they were pals. But agreed, Connally did not make much trouble with his disbelieve in the magic bullet theory.
------------------------------------



Conspiracy theory

ians says:
June 20, 2018 at 3:50 pm GMT • 300 Words

An extract from projectunspaekable site.
Simple question- why should the CIA be concerned at a growing suspicion among the public that the assassination was a result of a conspiracy?

‘Conspiracy theory’s acutely negative connotations may be traced to liberal historian Richard Hofstadter’s well-known fusillades against the “New Right.” Yet it was the Central Intelligence Agency that likely played the greatest role in effectively “weaponizing” the term. 


In the groundswell of public skepticism toward the Warren Commission’s findings on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the CIA sent a detailed directive to all of its bureaus. Titled “Countering Criticism of the Warren Commission Report,” the dispatch played a definitive role in making the “conspiracy theory” term a weapon to be wielded against almost any individual or group calling the government’s increasingly clandestine programs and activities into question.

This important memorandum and its broad implications for American politics and public discourse are detailed in a book by Florida State University political scientist Lance deHaven-Smith, Conspiracy Theory in America. Dr. deHaven-Smith devised the state crimes against democracy concept to interpret and explain potential government complicity in events such as the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the major political assassinations of the 1960s, and 9/11.
CIA Document 1035-960 was released in response to a 1976 FOIA request by the New York Times. The directive is especially significant because it outlines the CIA’s concern regarding “the whole reputation of the American government” vis-à-vis the Warren Commission Report. The agency was especially interested in maintaining its own image and role as it “contributed information to the [Warren] investigation".
---------------------------------------

In Ike Altgen’s famous photograph, JFK can be seen clutching at his throat. The throat wound was described at Parkland as a wound of entry.

    When JFK was brought to trauma room one in Parkland Hospital, the attending surgeon identified the wound as a wound of entry [...] The president was still alive and efforts were being made to save him so a tracheotomy was made. The doctors used the wound of entry and enlarged it so a tube could be inserted.

    Dr. Robert N. McClelland, a Parkland surgeon on duty that day, was in trauma room one and was asked to assist with the tracheotomy. As he assisted, he came behind the president, behind his head, and he announced to the other doctors present that there was a wound of exit at the back of his head. McClelland was 18 inches away from the president’s head for a good seven to eight minutes.

    For further evidence, we need go no further than two motorcycle officers that were riding in the left rear behind the presidential vehicle. Both motorcycle officers were splattered with brain tissue. One officer, Bobby Hargis, was struck so hard that he thought that he had been hit with a bullet on that day. Pieces of the president’s skull were found in the left rear. This nullifies the concept that Kennedy’s head was moving towards a shooter.
------------------------------------

Peripatetic commenter says:
June 20, 2018 at 5:30 pm GMT • 100 Words
@ians

I have this view that the issue is not whether or not the CIA did it but who ordered it.

I think that the majority of Americans now have the view that it was a conspiracy and it’s a dark part of our history, but the current view is that, “oh well, it was Americans who organized it.”

However, what if it found that a foreign power ordered and managed the assassination of JFK (and probably RFK because he was going to dig it all up again.) In that case I think there would be many calls for retaliation and reprisals, even after 55 years.

We have already seen after 9/11 that sufficient people acquiesced in the notion of destroying Saddam Hussein for his alleged involvement in those events …

---------------------------------

lysias says:
June 20, 2018 at 5:32 pm GMT • 200 Words

Yes, the absence of any mention of Billie Sol Estes in Caro’ s multi-volume biography of LBJ struck me when I read Caro’ s latest volume. Well, if he had mentioned Estes, he would have had to cite the book that Estes coauthored with French journalist William Reymond in 2003: JFK: The Last Witness. (I have had to type the English translation of the title because Autocorrect won’t let me post the French. With spaces inserted, it is JFK: L e d e r n I e r t e m o I n.) And the book makes clear how the assassination happened when it did because LBJ had insisted that it be speeded up and conveyed this insistence to the Texas Mafia through one of his chief aides, Cliff Carter. Carter and another associate, Mac Wallace, played key roles in organizing the assassination. Estes knew about this because he had been told about it in detail by Carter and Wallace in December 1963. Caro supports the Warren Commission fiction.

Not surprisingly, the Reymond/Estes book has never been published in English translation.
----------------------------------

CanSpeccy says: • Website
June 20, 2018 at 5:50 pm GMT • 200 Words
@Wizard of Oz

    What’s your plausible scenario for Johnson’s guilty knowledge?

I have none. Maybe the claim, by Johnson’s mistress, Madelaine Duncan Brown, that Johnson anticipated the assassination is false. However, the Warren Commission Report appears to have been a cover up (I actually read the damn thing, all 25 volumes, and while every detail now escape me,the account it provides of the assassination appears to have been false in almost every significant detail).

Allen Dulles, the CIA Director that Kennedy fired, is said to have played a key role in shaping the Warren Commission Report. Given the reasons that Dulles, in particular, and others at the CIA* had for antagonism toward Kennedy, it seems entirely possible that Dulles would have known of, and may have played a central role in organizing, Kennedy’s assassination. If so, Dulles, or whoever the organizers were, would likely have sought assurance that Johnson would provide them with cover in the aftermath. If so, Dulles, who Johnson appointed to the Warren Commission, could have been the intermediary seeking that assurance.

———
* According to this BBC report, it was the CIA group responsible for the Bay of Pigs Cuba invasion debacle, who killed RFK. That makes sense, since if elected President, Robert Kennedy, who seems to have been very naive, could have been expected to go after his brother’s killers.
-------------------------------------

The Triple Underpass

Bombercommand says:
June 20, 2018 at 6:21 pm GMT • 500 Words
@James N. Kennett

James N. Kennett, thank you for your courteous reply. You voice three objections: 1) The head shot did not necessarily come from above Kennedy,
2) & 3), there were spectators on The Triple Underpass who would have seen and heard a rifle shootist there. Before I deal with your objections, I must emphasize that there is one unassailable fact from that day, the wound to the right rear head was an EXIT wound, and everything devolves from this, it is “The Clincher”, and no amount of tortured argumentation can make it go away. Now to your first objection.This wound tells us three things:
1) the gun was in front of Kennedy,
2) the gun was slightly to the left of Kennedy from his perspective (less than 30 degrees left),
3) the gun was high enough so the trajectory could clear the windshield and “rollbar” of the limo. Remarkably, the terrain of Dealy Plaza corresponds to these three stipulations perfectly giving two possible locations for the rifle shootist:
1) on the so-called South Knoll bordering the south side of Commerce St. or
2) on top of The Triple Underpass directly above the pedestrian tunnel on the south side of Commerce, where the trees on the South Knoll meet the concrete guardrail of The Triple Underpass.
Personnaly I do not favor the South Knoll site. It is a bit too far left to make the exit wound, it is not certain there was an unobstructed line of sight through the trees, there was risk of a pedestrian on the sidewalk bordering the South Knoll spotting the shootist, and finally no obstruction to a cop charging up the Knoll.
The Triple Underpass site has none of these problems, which leads us to your objections
2) & 3) which MUST be considered. As to hearing the shot, the range of the target was short, making use of a subsonic load suitable. A subsonic rifle load with silencer is very quiet. I believe the rifle was a semi auto takedown, with a low power scope with adjustable parallax.
Regarding “the spectators” on The Triple Underpass, no pedestrians were permitted on ANY overpass on the parade route, the Secret Service was specific about this to the Dallas Police Department, and police were posted to prevent this.
Two DPD officers, J W Foster and J C White were posted on top of The Triple Underpass, why did they not order “the spectators” seen in your linked photo to clear out? That was their job.
J C White perjured himself to the Warren Commission, claiming he neither saw nor heard the assassination due to a loud freight train going over The Triple Underpass when no train appears in any photo, in fact trains, like pedestrians, were prohibited from any overpass on the parade route.
The two cops had a very simple job: see nothing and say nothing. I believe these “spectators” were part of The Team, there to block lines of sight from the Elm St. side of The Triple Underpass to the Commerce St. side (where the Kill Team was set up) in the event someone climbed the embankment near Elm to The Triple Underpass. The Kill Team bugged out to the south.

-------------------------------

MacNucc11 says:
June 20, 2018 at 6:34 pm GMT • 100 Words
@Anon

Makes absolutely no sense to me that someone could pick Oswald out of the whole population of Dallas walking the streets and seek to question him based on what? A description of him? It is not like his picture is on America’s most wanted. Even allowing they are looking for him for some reason how in the heck do they know what he looks like and locate him that quick? Because the guy who was meant to kill him actually knew exactly what he looked like and where he was going to be.
---------------------------------

Iris says:
June 21, 2018 at 12:19 am GMT • 200 Words
@Bombercommand

“it would be necessary for part of the Dallas Police Department to be part of a conspiracy”

The conspiracy succeeded in the first place because of a major “malfunction” within the Secret Service who was supposed to protect President Kennedy.

The Secret Service were mostly absent, did not respect any security protocol when organising the motorcade, and even notoriously partied and drank until the early hours before the fatal shooting.
When the Secret Service came under scrutiny of the HSCA in 1979, evidence of the motorcade was destroyed and the matter was closed. The agent in charge was Emory Roberts. He met an early death in the late 60′s.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/palamara/roberts.html

“The Secret Service made the killing of a president, which could have been prevented, possible. The awful truth, kept from the public for years, is that but for the Secret Service’s blunders President Kennedy would not have been slain”.

http://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1174&context=fac_pm
------------------------------------

Paul C. says:
June 21, 2018 at 2:23 am GMT • 400 Words
@renfro

    As for this….”I view the CIA as an arm of the Central Bankers”…….who are you viewing as the Central Bankers?

The Central Bankers are a private cartel, so it’s difficult to get information, but the list of names in this link seems pretty consistent among several researchers:

https://www.facts-are-facts.com/news/the-federal-reserve-is-privately-owned#.WysDlC2ZP1w

Think about it. Private bankers dictate to our government how much money will be created and in circulation and at what interest rates. And the government pays them interest and through the Treasury, Bureau of Engraving, creates the currency. The money is being created out of thin air, why wouldn’t the gov’t do this and keep the proceeds versus paying guaranteed interest (backed by our labor) to the Fed. A private Central Bank is unconstitutional as only the gov’t has the right to coin money.

This set up is the same all over the world and those countries that resist get invaded. The Central Bank of all central banks is the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) in Switzerland. These select families (including of course the Rothschilds) own the system, which includes the IMF, World Bank and United Nations and they have all their surrogates CFR, Trilateral Commission and the like to help formulate policy. At its heart, it’s Communism. Communism, Zionism, Freemasonry, Bolshevism, Socialism, Marxism are largely Jewish constructs.

With an unlimited money supply, the bankers own the politicians and thus gov’t and also own and control the pillars of our society: Justice system, education, media, medicine and finance. We are completely controlled, lied to and are not free. The US gov’t made its citizens turn in their gold and silver in 1933 in lieu for Federal Reserve Notes. So much for freedom. People vote for one of the two measly parties this constitutional republic offers, but the end result is the same, since both parties are controlled.

Research the Rockefeller’s control on US Medicine. Cures are a thing of the past and prevention is swept under the carpet. Medicine is business and it’s not that they need he money it’s control.

If you have the time check out this Ron Bernard video (and there are several others). He was one of the (Illuminati) bankers in the system and flipped.

From my point of view, private Central Banking is the main influence of evil affecting all societies.

-------------------------------------------

Ron Unz says:
June 21, 2018 at 3:49 am GMT • 200 Words

Well, I certainly haven’t read the nearly 80,000 words of comments in this enormous thread. But I’d guess that something like 25-35% of the remarks are in the “no conspiracy” camp, and for those, I just came across another interesting item while working on my Part II.

On p. 542 of Talbot’s 2015 book, he discusses that during Oswald’s late September trip to Mexico, someone impersonating him made calls to the Cuban and Soviet embassies, calls that intercepted and recorded by the CIA. After the assassination, Hoover listened to the calls and immediately informed Johnson that the voice was not Oswald’s. All of this was presented in a 1995 book by John Newman, a history professor and former U.S. military intelligence officer, which also discussed the extremely suspicious behavior of the CIA regarding Oswald in the weeks just prior to the assassination.

The nice thing about making a very strong case for a “conspiracy” is that it requires such minimal evidence, e.g. merely a second shooter would be sufficient. And if someone were impersonating Oswald in calls to the Cubans and the Russians weeks before the assassination, that seems extremely difficult to explain without admitting a “conspiracy.”

Although I’m hardly a JFK assassination expert, my own feeling is that there are something like 100 separate factual items, each individually ranging from plausible to very likely, and any one of which if true would be enough to establish the overwhelming likelihood of a conspiracy.

---------------------------------
Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
June 21, 2018 at 5:39 am GMT • 100 Words
@Paw

Aha, now you have figured out from the faces of the detectives with Oswald when he was shot that Dallas PD killed both Kennedy and Oswald.

I suppose you wouldn’t even question them, just arrest and charge them with 2 homicides, conspiracy to commit 2 homicides, some other charges

And you’d use just that picture as your evidence. The charges would be dismissed at the bail hearing, no more than 48 hours after you arrested them.

Crazy crazier and craziest. This is worse than the Betty Ong thread.
-------------------------------

j2 says:
June 21, 2018 at 6:02 am GMT • 400 Words
@Sparkon

I think the shot that caused the would in the neck of JFK likely came from the back (bouncing to the neck after hititng the car) and was the fourth shot. This I justify by the following argument.

1. Dictabelt can be timed by the bell and other markers to the time of the assassination. The timing by a crosstalk to a later time can be shown incorrect as this crosstalk shows tampering: the signal is too regular to be human voice.

2. After timing the Dictabelt correctly, there are 5 visible impulses with wide spectrum in the time span of the assassination. They are in my Dictabelt copy placed as follows: three louder at 52.5s, 55.6s and 58.8s, two less loud at 53.2s and 53.8s. Echo analysis, though a weak proof, agrees with locating all three first shots to the Texas School Book Repository.

3. Assigning the last impulse to the head shot in the Zapruder frame 313, we get the timing. The average speed of the Zapruder film was 18.3 fps. That means that the first shot 52.5s is around the frame 198. There is a blurred frame 197, but some after it are also blurred. If we think that 197 is blurred because Zapruder shoke the camera when hearing the shot, the first shot was around frame 194 giving Zapruder a reaction time 160 ms. Then the speed of the film can be established as (312-194)/(58.8-52.5)=18.7 fps. The nominal speed of the camera was 16 fps. The speed fluctuated a bit with the average 18.3 fps. Thus, 18.7 fps is fine. Then the shot at 55.6s is at frame 253. JFK’s hand goes to the neck in the frame 254. It is a very short movement and can be by impact. There are still the impulses at 53,2s and 53.8 s, that is frames 210 and 221. They happened when the car was behind the traffic sign. They can correspond to the back shot to JFK (frame 210) and shot to Connally (221). There must be a shot from the front at 58.9s to explain his fall (and the exit would in the back of the head if that information is correct).

4. From this I deduce that the shot to the neck seen in frame 254, time 55.6s, likely came from the back. Either the bullet from the back hit the car and bounced to JFK’s neck, or it was a fragment of something, like a mirror, from a shot that came from the back. Of course, it might be from the front, but then the scenario must be slightly modified.
---------------------------------
690

Bertrand Russell : 16 Questions on the Assassination



16 Questions on the Assassination


By Bertrand Russell

[Originally published in: The Minority of One, 6 September 1964, pp.6–8.]
The official version of the assassination of President Kennedy has been so riddled with contradictions that it is been abandoned and rewritten no less than three times. Blatant fabrications have received very widespread coverage by the mass media, but denials of these same lies have gone unpublished. Photographs, evidence and affidavits have been doctored out of recognition. Some of the most important aspects of the case against Lee Harvey Oswald have been completely blacked out. Meanwhile, the F.B.I., the police and the Secret Service have tried to silence key witnesses or instruct them what evidence to give. Others involved have disappeared or died in extraordinary circumstances.
It is facts such as these that demand attention, and which the Warren Commission should have regarded as vital. Although I am writing before the publication of the Warren Commission’s report, leaks to the press have made much of its contents predictable. Because of the high office of its members and the fact of its establishment by President Johnson, the Commission has been widely regarded as a body of holy men appointed to pronounce the truth. An impartial examination of the composition and conduct of the Commission suggests quite otherwise.

1: Membership of the Warren Commission

The Warren Commission has been utterly unrepresentative of the American people. It consisted of:

  • two Democrats, Senator Russell of Georgia and Congressman Boggs of Louisiana, both of whose racist views have brought shame on the United States;
  • two Republicans, Senator Cooper of Kentucky and Congressman Gerald R. Ford of Michigan, the latter of whom is a leader of his local Goldwater movement and an associate of the F.B.I.;
  • Allen Dulles, former director of the Central Intelligence Agency,
  • and Mr. McCloy, who has been referred to as the spokesman for the business community.
Leadership of the filibuster in the Senate against the Civil Rights Bill prevented Senator Russell from attending hearings during the period. The Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, Earl Warren, who rightly commands respect, was finally persuaded, much against his will, to preside over the Commission, and it was his involvement above all else that helped lend the Commission an aura of legality and authority. Yet many of its members were also members of those very groups which have done so much to distort and suppress the facts about the assassination. Because of their connection with the Government, not one member would have been permitted under U.S. law to serve on a jury had Oswald faced trial. It is small wonder that the Chief Justice himself remarked that the release of some of the Commission’s information “might not be in your lifetime.” Here, then, is my first question: Why were all the members of the Warren Commission closely connected with the U.S. Government?

2 and 3: Conduct and Official Secrecy

If the composition of the Commission was suspect, its conduct confirmed one’s worst fears. No counsel was permitted to act for Oswald, so that cross–examination was barred. Later, under pressure, the Commission appointed the President of the American Bar Association, Walter Craig, one of the supporters of the Goldwater movement in Arizona, to represent Oswald. To my knowledge, he did not attend hearings, but satisfied himself with representation by observers.
In the name of national security, the Commission’s hearings were held in secret, thereby continuing the policy which has marked the entire course of the case. This prompts my second question: If, as we are told, Oswald was the lone assassin, where is the issue of national security? Indeed, precisely the same question must be put here as was posed in France during the Dreyfus case: If the Government is so certain of its case, why has it conducted all its inquiries in the strictest secrecy?

4: The Crucial Question Was Not Asked

At the outset the Commission appointed six panels through which it would conduct its enquiry. They considered:

  1. What did Oswald do on November 22, 1963?
  2. What was Oswald’s background?
  3. What did Oswald do in the U.S. Marine Corps, and in the Soviet Union?
  4. How did Ruby kill Oswald?
  5. What is Ruby’s background?
  6. What efforts were taken to protect the President on November 22?
This raises my fourth question: Why did the Warren Commission not establish a panel to deal with the question of who killed President Kennedy?

5: Challenging the Commission

All the evidence given to the Commission has been classified “Top Secret,” including even a request that hearings be held in public. Despite this the Commission itself leaked much of the evidence to the press, though only if the evidence tended to prove Oswald the lone assassin. Thus, Chief Justice Warren held a press conference after Oswald’s wife, Marina, had testified. He said that she believed her husband was the assassin. Before Oswald’s brother Robert testified, he gained the Commission’s agreement not to comment on what he said. After he had testified for two days, the newspapers were full of stories that “a member of the Commission” had told the press that Robert Oswald had just testified that he believed that his brother was an agent of the Soviet Union. Robert Oswald was outraged by this, and he said that he could not remain silent while lies were told about his testimony. He had never said this and he had never believed it. All that he had told the Commission was that he believed his brother was innocent and was in no way involved in the assassination.
The methods adopted by the Commission have indeed been deplorable, but it is important to challenge the entire role of the Warren Commission. It stated that it would not conduct its own investigation, but rely instead on the existing governmental agencies — the F.B.I., the Secret Service and the Dallas police. Confidence in the Warren Commission thus presupposes confidence in these three institutions. Why have so many liberals abandoned their own responsibility to a Commission whose circumstances they refuse to examine?

6: Oswald the Subversive

It is known that the strictest and most elaborate security precautions ever taken for a President of the United States were ordered for November 22 in Dallas. The city had a reputation for violence and was the home of some of the most extreme right–wing fanatics in America. Mr. and Mrs. Lyndon Johnson had been assailed there in 1960 when he was a candidate for the Vice–Presidency. Adlai Stevenson had been physically attacked when he spoke in the city only a month before Kennedy’s visit. On the morning of November 22, the Dallas Morning News carried a full–page advertisement associating the President with Communism. The city was covered with posters showing the President’s picture and headed “Wanted for Treason.” The Dallas list of subversives comprised 23 names, of which Oswald’s was the first. All of them were followed that day, except Oswald. Why did the authorities follow many persons as potential assassins and fail to observe Oswald’s entry into the book depository building while allegedly carrying a rifle over three feet long?

7: The Route of the Motorcade

The President’s route for his drive through Dallas was widely known and was printed in the Dallas Morning News on November 22. At the last minute the Secret Service changed a small part of their plans so that the President left Main Street and turned into Houston and Elm Streets. This alteration took the President past the book depository building from which it is alleged that Oswald shot him. How Oswald is supposed to have known of this change has never been explained. Why was the President’s route changed at the last minute to take him past Oswald’s place of work?

8: Changing the Evidence

After the assassination and Oswald’s arrest, judgment was pronounced swiftly: Oswald was the assassin, and he had acted alone. No attempt was made to arrest others, no road blocks were set up round the area, and every piece of evidence which tended to incriminate Oswald was announced to the press by the Dallas District Attorney, Mr. Wade. In such a way millions of people were prejudiced against Oswald before there was any opportunity for him to be brought to trial. The first theory announced by the authorities was that the President’s car was in Houston Street, approaching the book depository building, when Oswald opened fire. When available photographs and eyewitnesses had shown this to be quite untrue, the theory was abandoned and a new one formulated which placed the vehicle in its correct position. Meanwhile, however, D.A. Wade had announced that three days after Oswald’s room in Dallas had been searched, a map had been found there on which the book depository building had been circled and dotted lines drawn from the building to a vehicle on Houston Street, showing the alleged bullet trajectory had been planned in advance. After the first theory was proved false, the Associated Press put out the following story on November 27: “Dallas authorities announced today that there never was a map.”

The second theory correctly placed the President’s car on Elm Street, 50 to 75 yards past the book depository, but had to contend with the difficulty that the President was shot from the front, in the throat. How did Oswald manage to shoot the President in the front from behind? The F.B.I. held a series of background briefing sessions for Life magazine, which in its issue of December 6 explained that the President had turned completely round just at the time he was shot. This too, was soon shown to be entirely false. It was denied by several witnesses and films, and the previous issue of Life itself had shown the President looking forward as he was hit. Theory number two was abandoned.
In order to retain the basis of all official thinking, that Oswald was the lone assassin, it now became necessary to construct a third theory with the medical evidence altered to fit it. For the first month no Secret Service agent had ever spoken to the three doctors who had tried to save Kennedy’s life in the Parkland Memorial Hospital. Now two agents spent three hours with the doctors and persuaded them that they were all misinformed: the entrance wound in the President’s throat had been an exit wound, and the bullet had not ranged down towards the lungs. Asked by the press how they could have been so mistaken, Dr. McClelland advanced two reasons:

  • they had not seen the autopsy report
  • and they had not known that Oswald was behind the President!
The autopsy report, they had been told by the Secret Service, showed that Kennedy had been shot from behind. The agents, however, had refused to show the report to the doctors, who were entirely dependent on the word of the Secret Service for this suggestion. The doctors made it clear that they were not permitted to discuss the case. The third theory, with the medical evidence rewritten, remains the basis of the case against Oswald at this moment. Why has the medical evidence concerning the President’s death been altered out of recognition?

9: Shots From the Front and Behind

Although Oswald is alleged to have shot the President from behind, there are many witnesses who are confident that the shots came from the front. Among them are two reporters from the Forth Worth Star Telegram, four from the Dallas Morning News, and two people who were standing in front of the book depository building itself, the director of the book depository and the vice–president of the firm. It appears that only two people immediately entered the building: the director, Mr. Roy S. Truly, and a Dallas police officer, Seymour Weitzman. Both thought that the shots had come from in front of the President’s vehicle. On first running in that direction, Weitzman was informed by “someone” that he thought the shots had come from the building, so he rushed back there. Truly entered with him in order to assist with his knowledge of the building. Mr. Jesse Curry, the Chief of Police in Dallas, has stated that he was immediately convinced that the shots came from the building. If anyone else believes this, he has been reluctant to say so to date. It is also known that the first bulletin to go out on Dallas police radios stated that “the shots came from a triple overpass in front of the presidential automobile.” In addition, there is the consideration that after the first shot the vehicle was brought almost to a halt by the trained Secret Service driver, an unlikely response if the shots had indeed come from behind. Certainly Mr. Roy Kellerman, who was in charge of the Secret Service operation in Dallas that day, and travelled in the presidential car, looked to the front as the shots were fired. The Secret Service has had all the evidence removed from the car, so it is no longer possible to examine it. What is the evidence to substantiate the allegation that the President was shot from behind?

10: Withholding Photographs

Photographs taken at the scene of the crime could be most helpful. One young lady standing just to the left of the presidential car as the shots were fired took photographs of the vehicle just before and during the shooting, and was thus able to get into her picture the entire front of the book depository building. Two F.B.I. agents immediately took the film which she took. Why has the F.B.I. refused to publish what could be the most reliable piece of evidence in the whole case?

11: Fraudulent Evidence

In this connection it is noteworthy also that it is impossible to obtain the originals of photographs bearing upon the case. When Time magazine published a photograph of Oswald’s arrest —the only one ever seen — the entire background was blacked out for reasons which have never been explained. It is difficult to recall an occasion for so much falsification of photographs as has happened in the Oswald case.
The affidavit by Police Office Weitzman, who entered the book depository building, stated that he found the alleged murder rifle on the sixth floor. (It was first announced that the rifle had been found on the fifth floor, but this was soon altered.) It was a German 7.65 mm. Mauser. Late the following day, the F.B.I. issued its first proclamation. Oswald had purchased in March 1963 an Italian 6.5 mm. Mannlicher–Carcano. D.A. Wade immediately altered the nationality and size of the weapon to conform to the F.B.I. statement.
Several photographs have been published of the alleged murder weapon. On February 21, Life magazine carried on its cover a picture of “Lee Oswald with the weapons he used to kill President Kennedy and Officer Tippitt [sic].” On page 80, Life explained that the photograph was taken during March or April of 1963. According to the F.B.I., Oswald purchased his pistol in September 1963. The New York Times carried a picture of the alleged murder weapon being taken by police into the Dallas police station. The rifle is quite different. Experts have stated that no rifle resembling the one in the Life picture has even been manufactured. The New York Times also carried the same photograph as Life, but left out the telescopic sights. On March 2, Newsweek used the same photograph but painted in an entirely new rifle. Then on April 13 the Latin American edition of Life carried the same picture on its cover as the U.S. edition had on February 21, but in the same issue on page 18 it had the same picture with the rifle altered. How is it that millions of people have been misled by complete forgeries in the press?

The authorities interrogated Oswald for nearly 48 hours without allowing him to contact a lawyer, despite his repeated requests to do so. The director of the F.B.I. in Dallas was a man with considerable experience. American Civil Liberties Union lawyers were in Dallas requesting to see Oswald and were not allowed to do so. By interrogating Oswald for 48 hours without access to lawyers, the F.B.I. created conditions which made a trial of Oswald more difficult. A confession or evidence obtained from a man held 48 hours in custody is likely to be inadmissible in a U.S. court of law. The F.B.I. director conducted his interrogation in a manner which made the use of material secured in such a fashion worthless to him. This raises the question of whether he expected the trial to take place.
Another falsehood concerning the shooting was a story circulated by the Associated Press on November 23 from Los Angeles. This reported Oswald’s former superior officer in the Marine Corps as saying that Oswald was a crack shot and a hot–head. The story was published widely. Three hours later AP sent out a correction deleting the entire story from Los Angeles. The officer had checked his records and it had turned out that he was talking about another man. He had never known Oswald. To my knowledge the correction has yet to be published by a single major publication.

12: Distorting the Scientific Evidence

The Dallas police took a paraffin test on Oswald’s face and hands to try to establish that he had fired a weapon on November 22. The Chief of the Dallas Police, Jesse Curry, announced on November 23 that the result of the test “proves Oswald is the assassin.” The Director of the F.B.I. in the Dallas–Fort Worth area in charge of the investigation stated: “I have seen the paraffin test. The paraffin test proves that Oswald had nitrates and gunpowder on his hands and face. It proves he fired a rifle on November 22.” Not only does this unreliable test not prove any such thing, it was later discovered that the test on Oswald’s face was in fact negative, suggesting that it was unlikely he fired a rifle that day. Why was the result of the paraffin test altered before being announced by the authorities?

13: Description of Tippit’s Killer

Oswald, it will be recalled, was originally arrested and charged with the murder of Patrolman Tippitt. Tippitt was killed at 1:06 p.m. on November 22 by a man who first engaged him in conversation, then caused him to get out of the stationary police car in which he was sitting and shot him with a pistol. Miss Helen L. Markham, who states that she is the sole eye–witness to this crime, gave the Dallas police a description of the assailant. After signing her affidavit, she was instructed by the F.B.I., the Secret Service and many police officers that she was not permitted to discuss the case with anyone. The affidavit’s only description of the killer was that he was a “young white man.” Miss Markham later revealed that the killer had run right up to her and past her, brandishing the pistol, and she repeated the description of the murderer which she had given to the police. He was, she said, “short, a little heavy, and had somewhat bushy hair.” (The police description of Oswald was that he was of average height, or a little taller, was slim and had receding fair hair.) Miss Markham’s affidavit is the entire case against Oswald for the murder of Patrolman Tippitt, yet District Attorney Wade asserted: “We have more evidence to prove Oswald killed Tippit than we have to show he killed the President.” The case against Oswald for the murder of Tippitt, he continued, was an absolutely strong case. Why was the only description of Tippitt’s killer deliberately omitted by the police from the affidavit of the sole eye–witness?

14: Timing of the Police Broadcast

Oswald’s description was broadcast by the Dallas police only 12 minutes after the President was shot. This raises one of the most extraordinary questions ever posed in a murder case: Why was Oswald’s description in connection with the murder of Patrolman Tippitt broadcast over Dallas police radio at 12:43 p.m. on November 22, when Tippitt was not shot until 1:06 p.m.?

15: Treatment of Witnesses

According to Mr. Bob Considine, writing in the New York Journal American, there had been another person who had heard the shots that were fired at Tippitt. Warren Reynolds had heard shooting in the street from a nearby room and had rushed to the window to see the murderer run off. Reynolds himself was later shot through the head by a rifleman. A man was arrested for this crime but produced an alibi. His girl–friend, Betty Mooney McDonald, told the police she had been with him at the time Reynolds was shot, according to Mr. Considine. The Dallas police immediately dropped the charges, even before Reynolds had time to recover consciousness, and attempt to identify his assailant. The man at once disappeared, and two days later the police arrested Betty Mooney McDonald on a minor charge and it was announced that she had hanged herself in the police cell. She had been a striptease artist in Jack Ruby’s nightclub, according to Mr. Considine.
Another witness to receive extraordinary treatment in the Oswald case was his wife, Marina. She was taken to the jail while her husband was still alive and shown a rifle by Chief of Police Jesse Curry. Asked if it were Oswald’s, she replied that she believed Oswald had a rifle but that it didn’t look like that. She and her mother–in–law were in great danger following the assassination because of the threat of public revenge on them. At this time they were unable to obtain a single police officer to protect them. Immediately after Oswald was killed, however, the Secret service illegally held both women against their will. After three days they were separated and Marina has never again been accessible to the public. Held in custody for nine weeks and questioned almost daily by the F.B.I. and Secret Service, she finally testified to the Warren Commission and, according to Earl Warren, said that she believed her husband was the assassin. The Chief Justice added that the next day they intended to show Mrs. Oswald the murder weapon and the Commission was fairly confident that she would identify it as her husband’s. The following day it was announced that this had indeed happened. Mrs. Oswald, we are informed, is still in the custody of the Secret Service. To isolate a witness for nine weeks and to subject her to repeated questioning by the Secret Service in this manner is reminiscent of police behavior in other countries, where it is called brainwashing. The only witness produced to show that Oswald carried a rifle before the assassination stated that he saw a brown paper parcel about two feet long in the back seat of Oswald’s car. The rifle which the police “produced” was almost 3½ feet long. How was it possible for Earl Warren to forecast that Marina Oswald’s evidence would be exactly the reverse of what she had previously testified?

16: Altering the Evidence

After Ruby had killed Oswald, D.A. Wade made a statement about Oswald’s movements following the assassination. He explained that Oswald had taken a bus, but he described the point at which Oswald had entered the vehicle as seven blocks away from the point located by the bus driver in his affidavit. Oswald, Wade continued, then took a taxi driven by a Daryll Click, who had signed an affidavit. An inquiry at the City Transportation Company revealed that no such taxi driver had ever existed in Dallas. Presented with this evidence, Wade altered the driver’s name to William Whaley. The driver’s log book showed that a man answering Oswald’s description had been picked up at 12:30. The President was shot at 12:31. D.A. Wade made no mention of this. Wade has been D.A. in Dallas for 14 years and before that was an F.B.I. agent. How does a District Attorney of Wade’s great experience account for all the extraordinary changes in evidence and testimony which he has announced during the Oswald case?

These are only a few of the questions raised by the official versions of the assassination and by the way in which the entire case against Oswald has been conducted. Sixteen questions are no substitute for a full examination of all the factors in this case, but I hope that they indicate the importance of such an investigation. I am indebted to Mr. Mark Lane, the New York criminal lawyer who was appointed counsel for Oswald by his mother, for much of the information in this article. Mr. Lane’s enquiries, which are continuing, deserve widespread support. A Citizen’s Committee of Inquiry has been established in New York, at Room 422, 156 Fifth Avenue, New York. N.Y. (telephone YU9-6850) for such a purpose, and comparable committees are being set up in Europe.
In Britain, I invited people eminent in the intellectual life of the country to join a “Who Killed Kennedy Committee,” which at the moment of writing consists of the following people:

  • Mr. John Arden, playwright;
  • Mrs. Carolyn Wedgwood Benn, from Cincinnati, wife of Anthony Wedgwood Benn, M.P.;
  • Lord Boyd–Orr, former director–general of the U.N. Food and Agricultural Organization and a Nobel Peace Prize winner;
  • Mr. John Calder, publisher;
  • Professor William Empsom, Professor of English Literature at Sheffield University;
  • Mr. Victor Golancz, publisher;
  • Mr. Michael Foot, Member of Parliament;
  • Mr. Kingsley Martin, former editor of the New Statesman;
  • Sir Compton Mackenzie, writer;
  • Mr. J.B. Priestley, playwright and author;
  • Sir Herbert Read, art critic;
  • Mr. Tony Richardson, film director;
  • Dr. Mervyn Stockwood, Bishop of Southwark;
  • Professor Hugh Trevor-Roper, Regius Professor of Modern History at Oxford University;
  • Mr. Kenneth Tynan, Literary Manager of the National Theatre;
  • and myself.
We view the problem with the utmost seriousness. U.S. Embassies have long ago reported to Washington world–wide disbelief in the official charges against Oswald, but this has scarcely been reflected by the American press. No U.S. television program or mass circulation newspaper has challenged the permanent basis of all the allegations — that Oswald was the assassin, and that he acted alone. It is a task which is left to the American people.

Ron Unz: the JFK Assassination, Comments 1


   
Ron Unz: the JFK Assassination, Comments 1

COMMENTS
===============

Joe Wazzzz says:
June 18, 2018 at 11:29 pm GMT • 500 Words
@Achilles

With respect to ballistics, almost anything is possible. The degree to which a bullet remains intact or the trajectory it takes is not predictable. The number of shots fired and heard in the echo canyon of a downtown area is not reliable.

With respect to Kennedy’s physical reactions, we can predict fluid dynamics. The first bullet to have struck Kennedy was in the back of the neck to which he slightly stiffens and grabs his throat in response. He immediately realizes that he has been shot. He can’t breathe and with the impact so close to his spine, he feels full body pain. His body immediately recognizes the impending danger. The second bullet that hits him strikes him in the back of the head killing him instantly. The cerebellum, unaffected by the bullet’s trajectory responds instantly and his body reacts reflexively by violently stiffening again. The bullet enters his cranium and sucks air in behind it while simultaneously creating tremendous intracranial pressure by pushing non-compressible water in his brain out ahead of it. The water and brain matter escapes through a break through in the forward side of his skull and his head and body are propelled backward in the opposite direction by the same escaping jet of water and brain matter. No frontal shooter, no big mystery there.

One of the earliest books to reveal the probable chain of events leading up to the assassination is Russo’s “Live by the Sword”. His findings appear to be buttressed by recent released documents. Oswald wasn’t an innocent but he could have easily been the patsy he claims to have been. It is well within the realm of possibility that Oswald was the lone shooter and that he could have shot the pattern of inaccuracy and accuracy he is accused of only to be abandoned or appear to be abandoned by his co-conspirators leading to the events at the theater.

With respect to Jack Ruby, everything stinks.

It is well within the realm of possibility, even probable, that Dulles, Hoover and Johnson, just to mention a few, had intelligence of something afoot and deliberately chose to ignore or suppress it. Their disgust for the Kennedys had to be a common topic of mutual disdain. They may have had a running bet. The Kennedy’s had created a huge number of very powerful enemies, people not averse to killing, who could have been complicit in the assassination either by direct or indirect conspiracy or by acquiescence. The copious flow of intelligence between the pro-Castro and anti-Castro factions, the Mafia, the CIA and FBI is well established as is the underhandedness of the Kennedy brothers.

It is even possible that one of the Secret Service officers in the trailing car accidentally fired the fatal shot in the excitement as has been reasonably posited. We can never know but such possibilities go a long way in answering much of the confusing testimony of those close to the event that simply don’t jibe with the official explanation.
------------------------

renfro says:
June 18, 2018 at 11:38 pm GMT • 300 Words
@Skeptikal

Pay attention yourself.

You are contending that a former CIA director told the then CIA director what to do.
I doubt that.

Also pay attention and learn how to search for records that uphold your ‘opinions’.

For instance how Dulles got on the Warren Commission to begin with.

Nicholas Katzenbach has been credited with providing advice after the assassination of John F. Kennedy that led to the creation of the Warren Commission.
On November 28 he sent a memo to Johnson’s White House aide Bill Moyers recommending the formation of a Presidential Commission to investigate the assassination. To combat speculation of a conspiracy, Katzenbach said that the results of the FBI’s investigation should be made public.
He wrote, in part: “The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large”.
Johnson initially resisted calls for investigations beyond the FBI report, which was being written that first week – see his phone call with Washington Post columnist Joe Alsop. The long-told story that Assistant Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach and Justice Department lawyers were pushing for the “blue ribbon commission” is now shown to be only part of the truth.
The Johnson phone calls reveal that some powerful men outside the government played an important role in the push for a Presidential commission. Besides Alsop, these men include Eugene Rostow, Dean of Yale Law School, and Dean Acheson.

You can find all this in the:

transcripts of Johnson November 1963 phone calls from Nov 22 thru 30th
-------------------------------------

bj says:
June 18, 2018 at 11:45 pm GMT • 200 Words

“Evidence of Revision (The assassination of America)” is a ten hour documentary of archived footage of the spectacle that fateful day in Dallas, Texas when our nation constitutional heritage was decapitated by public sacrifice of John F. Kennedy the President of the United States of America.

I watched the documentary a few years ago, as I revisited the event which altered the course of my life and the lives of all Americans. The assassination made clear to anyone with intelligence and an open mind that our country and our lives are controlled, manipulated, and discarded by forces of evil in the background of the official narrative and history.

The in your face cover-up makes plain the contempt of the unseen cabal for the well being of humanity. The coup d’état, began a massive social engineering operation to destroy the highest aspirations of mankind and induce apathy and insanity leading to the destruction of human decency and the collapse of Western Civilization.

https://youtu.be/BHb5X3fFhPw
--------------------------

Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
June 18, 2018 at 11:56 pm GMT • 100 Words
@Anonymouse

The job in the warehouse wasn’t advertised. The friend with whom Marina stayed asked friends and neighbors if they knew if they knew of any job openings.

A warehouse employee lived right next door and told her about the job. Oswald commuted with him on Friday night and Monday mornings because Oswald lived in the city and spent the weekends with Marina in her friend’s house.

At least the man next door was able to testify that on the morning of the asassination Oswald brought from the house, into the car and into the warehouse a long narrow package wrapped in paper grocery bags just the size to hold a rifle.
-------------------------------------

Bombercommand says:
June 19, 2018 at 12:00 am GMT • 200 Words
@Jim Christian

Anyone who has ever hunted will recognize the kill shot wound in the back of President Kennedy’s head as an EXIT wound. This wound is at the lower right of the skull. Therefore the rifle could only be in front, and above the target. There is only one place the rifle shootist could have made that shot from: on top of The Triple Underpass. The entrance wound(a small hole as any hunter knows) is on top of President Kennedy’s skull hidden by his hair. The rifle shootist was one very cool operator, the first shot was to the throat to cause Kennedy to look down so the top of his head became the target, otherwise there would be a messy face shot, blowing the whole game. No shots were fired from The Grassy Knoll, only noise makers that sounded like rifle shots. This had two purposes. One, to cause everyone to look at The Grassy Knoll, the wrong direction, and two, as a signal to the driver of the limo to stop briefly, as is known he did, to give the real assassin on The Triple Underpass a still target.

--------------------------

Milton says:
June 19, 2018 at 12:07 am GMT • 200 Words

If we are to believe the Warren Commission, then the high powered Mannlicher Carcano was fired three times above the heads of the bystanders lining Elm Street. Dealey Plaza is a actually a small space, as anyone who as traveled there can attest. After watching the Zapruder film, I see no one reacting to a high powered rifle being fired three times a few stories above their heads. A little girl running suddenly stops and appears startled for a second, but this is the only strange reaction and it certainly does not appear to be the startled reaction of one exposed to high powered gunfire in such close proximity, especially since the adults lining Elm just continue to stand there like nothing is happening. My contention is that if a high powered rifle was being fired on the sixth floor of the TSBD, then we would have seen people hitting the deck just below on Elm Street. We see no such reaction on the Zfilm however. Kennedy and Connally were clearly hit by some sort of projectile behind the Stemmons sign and Kennedy clearly had his head blown off by some sort of projectile, but I highly doubt it was a Mannlicher Carcano firing unsuppressed from the TSBD.
-----------------------------------

PANCHO PERICO says:
June 19, 2018 at 12:12 am GMT • 100 Words

For a new theory about the JFK assassination, please take a look at this book: Partners in Crime: The Rockefeller, CFR, CIA and Castro Connection to the Kennedy Assassination. Lots of new information and a substantiated hypothesis. The author makes a thorough analysis of both the coverup, launched by the Warren Commission, and what he calls the post-coverup, launched as soon as Oliver Stone’s JFK hit the theaters. He studies the reasons why, even though Castro was the only one among the potential suspects who publicly threatened the Kennedy brothers with assassination, most books about the JFK assassination simply ignore Castro of up front or discards the possibility of him having played a role in the event. The author also analyzes the reasons why David Rockefeller and his Wall Street partners hated JFK so much.
------------------------------------

Iris says:
June 19, 2018 at 12:44 am GMT • 100 Words
@bj

“The coup d’état, began a massive social engineering operation to destroy the highest aspirations of mankind and induce apathy and insanity leading to the destruction of human decency and the collapse of Western Civilization”.

The assassination of President Kennedy is considered a catastrophe of unprecedented scale by all decent and intelligent people, in Europe, in Africa, in the Middle-East, in Russia. His ethics were universal; his memory is alive and cherished far beyond “Western civilization”.


-----------------------------------

DESERT FOX says:
June 18, 2018 at 1:01 pm GMT

To see who killed JFK get the book "JFK the CIA and Vietnam" by Col. L. Fletcher Prouty can be had on amazon.com and watch his videos on y0utube.

seeing-thru says:
June 19, 2018 at 12:44 am GMT • 100 Words
@DESERT FOX

Indeed. Col Prouty’s book goes way beyond just the JFK assassination, it makes you think about a lot of reported history. Prouty explains the entire political landscape in which JFK’s removal had sort of become almost inevitable. His book does not offer any “whodunit” answers which, he says, is almost impossible and in any case not as important as WHY it happened. Conspiracy theories are not always the result of vivid imaginations of malcontents; conspiracies are nothing but instances of planning. All matters of importance are planned, especially matters of state. His book sheds light on some of the unsavoury types and instances of planning, and shows JFK’s killing as yet another instance of such “planning”.

Completely endorse your recommendation about Col Fletcher Prouty’s book. It is a MUST READ, not only for the light it sheds on the JFK affair but for its overall political educational value.


-----------------------------------

gp says:
June 19, 2018 at 1:13 am GMT • 300 Words
@CF

Carcano 6.5mm runs around 2300fps. That’s high velocity. It’s a powerful round that had exactly the expected terminal effects on JFK’s head. I shoot old milsurp rifles, I know what I’m talking about. What you see at Zapruder frame 313 is precisely what happens when you get hit from behind/left with a 2300fps 162gr projectile. To say “JFK was killed by a High Velocity weapon and Oswald didn’t have one” is complete bilge.

Whether Oswald’s specific scoped rifle was accurate enough depends on the luck of the draw. Some milsurp rifles have good bores, some are terrible. I agree that Z313 was a difficult, extraordinarily good/lucky 1 out of 4 shot at a moving target in a short interval. I’ve seen no evidence that Oswald practiced such a shot ever, not even in Marine training. As other people have pointed out here, there were easier/more certain ways to kill JFK than this risky plan.

The JFK assassination certainly presents an enormous quantity of strange facts and an even stranger cast of characters. How many returned defector veterans lived in the USA in 1963? There can’t have been many to choose from. Did the conspirators say “We need a patsy, but where are we going to find a wacko returned defector commie? Oh wow look at this Oswald guy, what a strange bird!” Did they pick the time and location before the patsy, or was the Dallas parade selected solely because the patsy lived there? It would have taken a long time to recruit/groom the patsy before Nov 1963, without any guarantee JFK would ever tour Dallas.
-------------------------

redmudhooch says:
June 19, 2018 at 1:55 am GMT • 1,500 Words

Israel’s Mossad was a primary (and critical) behind the scenes player in the conspiracy that ended the life of JFK. 

Through its own vast resources and through its international contacts in the intelligence community and in organised crime, Israel had the means, it had the opportunity, and it had the motive to play a major frontline role in the crime of the century – and it did.

Israel’s motive for the assassination was Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion’s outrage at JFK’s opposition to Israel becoming a nuclear power, and that in his final days as Prime Minister Ben-Gurion commanded the Mossad to become involved in a plot to kill America’s president. JFK’s assassination served the dual purpose of eliminating not only the threat to Israel’s nuclear ambitions, but also the need for the AZC to register as a foreign agent. So when Vice President Lyndon Johnson (LBJ) was sworn in as JFK’s successor, he wasted no time in increasing Israel’s arms budget and also turned a blind eye to its nuclear arms development program. A further blow to the integrity and independence of the U.S. Senate occurred in November 1963, when Nicholas Katzenbach replaced RFK as Attorney General with the result that the AZC evaded registration and calculatingly morphed into the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman JW Fulbright became convinced that unregistered Israeli foreign agents were a serious matter in 1961. A classified staff report worried that:

“In recent years there has been an increasing number of incidents involving attempts by foreign governments, or their agents, to influence the conduct of American foreign policy by techniques outside normal diplomatic channels….there have been occasions when representatives of other governments have been privately accused of engaging in covert activities within the United States and elsewhere, for the purpose of influencing United States Policy (the Lavon Affair).”

The Lavon Affair referred to Israeli false-flag terror attacks on US facilities in Egypt, in the interest of preventing the handover of the Suez Canal to Egyptian control. The Israeli spies were caught and prosecuted by Egypt, while the disclosure of the attacks created a diplomatic crisis.

During the course of the 1960s Senate and Justice Department investigations, it was revealed that Israel was funneling millions of dollars to unregistered foreign agents in America to lobby for foreign aid to Israel, set up think tanks, engage in Madison Avenue public relations, fund lobbying newsletters, and establish an umbrella organization called the American Zionist Council (AZC).

Within the AZC was an unincorporated unit that lobbied congress called the “American Israel Public Affairs Committee.”

On November 21, 1962, the Department of Justice ordered the AZC to begin registering as an Israeli foreign agent. This touched off an intense battle between the Justice Department and the AZC which outlasted both JFK and RFK. The bloodied and bruised Justice Department hid away its files on the affair until they were finally declassified and released in 2008.

The effort to register Israel’s foreign agents clearly failed. Just 42 days after the Justice Department order, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee incorporated itself in Washington and took over the AZC’s functions. Since the year it was ordered to register—as part of the AZC—AIPAC has extracted an inflation-adjusted $250 billion from US taxpayers for its foreign principals. Influencing the conduct of US policy “by techniques outside normal diplomatic channels” has never stopped.

If AIPAC had complied with the 1962 FARA order, by now it would have filed 109 required biennial reports (1963-2017) of its activities. It would have had to detail joint efforts with Israeli operatives. These include a 1975 incident in which AIPAC Director Morris Amitay circulated classified information about a proposed US Hawk missile sale to Jordan. AIPAC’s FARA file would have had to detail AIPAC staffers Steven Rosen, Douglas Bloomfield and Ester Kurz 1984 receipt of stolen classified information taken from US industry groups opposed to allowing duty free imports from Israel into the United States. Of course, the FARA disclosure would include details on two AIPAC executives, Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman, who from 2002-2004 solicited and received stolen classified national defense information from Colonel Lawrence Franklin about Iran and other matters which they passed to the Israeli embassy. The pair attempted to contextualize and place the stolen classified national defense information in the Washington Post to precipitate a US attack on Iran.

The lobby that Israel and its supporters have built in the United States to make all this aid happen, and to ban discussion of it from the national dialogue, goes far beyond AIPAC, with its $15 million budget, its 150 employees, and its five or six registered lobbyists who manage to visit every member of Congress individually once or twice a year.

AIPAC, in turn, can draw upon the resources of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, a roof group set up solely to coordinate the efforts of some 52 national Jewish organizations on behalf of Israel.

Among them are Hadassah, the Zionist women’s organization, which organizes a steady stream of American Jewish visitors to Israel; the American Jewish Congress, which mobilizes support for Israel among members of the traditionally left-of-center Jewish mainstream; and the American Jewish Committee, which plays the same role within the growing middle-of-the-road and right-of-center Jewish community. The American Jewish Committee also publishes Commentary, one of the Israel lobby’s principal national publications.

Perhaps the most controversial of these groups is B’nai B’rith’s Anti-Defamation League. Its original highly commendable purpose was to protect the civil rights of American Jews. Over the past generation, however, the ADL has regressed into a conspiratorial and, with a $45 million budget, extremely well funded hate group.

In the 1980s, during the tenure of chairman Seymour Reich, who went on to become chairman of the Conference of Presidents, ADL was found to have circulated two annual fund-raising letters warning Jewish parents against allegedly negative influences on their children arising from the increasing Arab presence on American university campuses.

More recently, FBI raids on ADL’s Los Angeles and San Francisco offices revealed that an ADL operative had purchased files stolen from the San Francisco police department that a court had ordered destroyed because they violated the civil rights of the individuals on whom they had been compiled. ADL, it was shown, had added the illegally prepared and illegally obtained material to its own secret files, compiled by planting informants among Arab-American, African-American, anti-Apartheid and peace and justice groups.

The ADL infiltrators took notes of the names and remarks of speakers and members of audiences at programs organized by such groups. ADL agents even recorded the license plates of persons attending such programs and then suborned corrupt motor vehicles department employees or renegade police officers to identify the owners.

Most special interests have PACs, as do many major corporations, labor unions, trade associations and public-interest groups. But the pro-Israel groups went wild. To date some 126 pro-Israel PACs have been registered, and no fewer than 50 have been active in every national election over the past generation.

An individual voter can give up to $2,000 to a candidate in an election cycle, and a PAC can give a candidate up to $10,000. However, a single special interest with 50 PACs can give a candidate who is facing a tough opponent, and who has voted according to its recommendations, up to half a million dollars. That’s enough to buy all the television time needed to get elected in most parts of the country.

Even candidates who don’t need this kind of money certainly don’t want it to become available to a rival from their own party in a primary election, or to an opponent from the opposing party in a general election. As a result, all but a handful of the 535 members of the Senate and House vote as AIPAC instructs when it comes to aid to Israel, or other aspects of U.S. Middle East policy.

There is something else very special about AIPAC’s network of political action committees. Nearly all have deceptive names. Who could possibly know that the Delaware Valley Good Government Association in Philadelphia, San Franciscans for Good Government in California, Cactus PAC in Arizona, Beaver PAC in Wisconsin, and even Icepac in New York are really pro-Israel PACs under deep cover?

In fact, the congress members know it when they list the contributions they receive on the campaign statements they have to prepare for the Federal Election Commission. But their constituents don’t know this when they read these statements. So just as no other special interest can put so much “hard money” into any candidate’s election campaign as can the Israel lobby, no other special interest has gone to such elaborate lengths to hide its tracks.

Michael Collins Piper – Final Judgement -The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy
-------------------------------

CanSpeccy says: • Website
June 19, 2018 at 2:51 am GMT • 400 Words

Lots of people had reason to want Kennedy dead. But few were in a position to (a) kill Kennedy, and (b) get away with it.

Among those who hated Kennedy was Lyndon Baines Johnson. If Johnson had not been on the ticket with Kennedy, Kennedy would almost certainly have lost, what was a very close election, to Nixon. Yet in office, Kennedy treated Johnson with contempt, or so Johnson complained, and Johnson was not a man to cross.

Others who hated Kennedy were the CIA, which Kennedy is alleged to have promised to “splinter into a thousand pieces and scatter to the wind.” In addition, the CIA operatives responsible for the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba hated Kennedy for his failure to back the operation when the heat was on. And then there was Allen Dulles, the CIA chief Kennedy had just fired.

So there you have LBJ, the greatest beneficiary of the assassination, and the CIA, with both means and motive. In particlular, the CIA almost certainly had control of the patsy Lee Harvey Oswald by way of George H.W. Bush’s friend George De Morhenschildt, and likely Oswald’s killer, Jack Ruby, too.

Once the operation was complete, Johnson, the greatest beneficiary of the killing, was immediately in a position to assist in the cover up. In that connection, Johnson appointed Gerald Ford to the Warren Commission that investigated the assassination, and Gerald Ford, who Johnson once remarked could not find his arse with both hands, was responsible for a rewording of the autopsy report, raising the location of the supposed entry wound in Kennedy’s neck by three inches to more closely conform to the magic bullet theory. In addition, LBJ arranged for Allen Dulles to serve on the Warren Commission, in which capacity Dulles played the principal role in shaping the Report’s dubious conclusions.

As for the Mafia, who had reason to fear the Kennedy’s, they likely did the shooting under contract to the CIA, with Howard Hunt (one time boss of William F. Buckley, Jr.) and friends serving as bench warmers, according to Hunt’s deathbed confession.

So pretty much everything falls into place, which is more than you can say of any other scenario.
----------------------------------------
    Since the mid-1960s law enforcement and regulatory agencies suspected a small nuclear processing facility in Pennsylvania had illegally diverted U.S. government-owned weapons-grade nuclear material into Israel’s clandestine nuclear weapons program. The Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation received start-up capital organized by a mysterious former smuggler with deep and ongoing ties to Israeli intelligence. FBI investigations revealed NUMEC President Zalman Mordecai Shapiro also had repeated unexplained interactions with Israeli intelligence and organized a joint venture with the primary front organization of the Israeli nuclear weapons program. According to a 2001 US Department of Energy report, NUMEC still holds the record for the highest losses of bomb-grade material of any plant in the United States.

    http://www.israellobby.org/numec/

    The office of Sen Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania attempted to obtain a statement from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission according to documents newly released under the Freedom of Information Act. On Aug 27 2009, Arlen Specter wrote to Rebecca Schmidt asking that the NRC “issue a formal public statement confirming that he [constituent Zalman Shapiro] was not involved in any activities related to the diversion of uranium to Israel.” Zalman Shapiro was formerly president of the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation at Apollo, PA.
    http://www.irmep.org/08272009specter_numec.pdf
------------------------------

 Here’s proof on the day it happened. The secret service agents were called off of Kennedys car. Look at the beginning at the handles on the back of the Presidents car. The agents were supposed to hang on to those. Places to stand were on the bumper. They were called off, see for yourself. Then…he was killed.
-------------------------------

Anon[271] • Disclaimer says:
June 19, 2018 at 9:22 am GMT • 300 Words
@Dillon Sweeny

The scope mounted on the rifle was found by the FBI to be massively misaligned. Given that the US is a gun-crazed country you would expect the details of all this to be common knowledge, but in fact the details are rare and hard to find.

The FBI tested the rifle and found that it shot 2.5″ to 4″ high at 15 yards. You can easily calculate from basics how far it was misaligned at 90 yards. Given a scope height of 2″ above the barrel, if the rifle is shooting 4″ high at 15 yards the barrel is actually shooting 6″ high. Assuming a straight bullet path to 90 yards, the amount the barrel is shooting high at 90 yards is 90/15 x 6 = 36″ high.

In order to cover this up, the FBI testers then adjusted the scope as much as possible and got it shooting about 2″-5″ high at 100 yards. They then pretended this was the amount it was actually misaligned when Oswald was allegedly shooting it at Kennedy. The Warren Commission happily went along with this pretense.

The rifle scope was eventually fitted with a shim under the front screw to enable correct adjustment. Now you might say that probably the rifle was dropped or something like this which put the scope out.

However, JFK researcher John Lattimer (a believer in the official theory) purchased 4 Carcano rifles and scope sets identical to the alleged murder weapon during the 1960′s and found they all required shims under the scope to obtain correct alignment. (Shim fitting and scope alignment was not done by Kleins the gun dealer).

Using a ballistics program JFK researcher Robert Prudhomme also found that given the figures provided by the FBI, the scope was misaligned by 36″ at 90 yards. There’s some discussion at Deep Politics forum “The FBI’s Fib About the Mannlicher Carcano”
---------------------------------
343

www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-jfk-assassination-part-i-what-happened/#comment-2379170


=====================