some of the best writers, old and new, not a complete list:
note: about half of these writers have interviews in the Black Op Radio archives
Who Killed Whom and Why?
Dark Thoughts about Dark Events
By M. S. Arnoni
The Minority of One, December 1963
The possibility can by no means be dismissed that important men in Washington do know the identity of the conspirators, or at least some of them, and that these conspirators are so powerful that prudence dictates that they not be identified in public.
Let us make the "fantastic" assumption that President Lyndon Johnson and Attorney-General Robert F. Kennedy know or believe that the murder was planned by a group of high-ranking officers who would stop at nothing to end American-Soviet negotiations. However strong their desire to avenge John F. Kennedy, what course would be open to them? To move against such formidable conspirators might start a disastrous chain of events. It could lead to American troops shooting at other American troops. It could lead to a direct take-over by a military clique. To avert such catastrophes, it might well be considered prudent to pretend utter ignorance, in the hope that the conspirators might be removed from power discreetly, at a later date, one by one.
Of course, this theory sounds absolutely fantastic. But if we are to think about the issues without "patriotic" prejudice, it is necessary to test its plausibility by imagining it to be an explanation of the assassination of the head of another country. Few people in America would have difficulty accepting such a theory about the assassination of a Soviet, Latin American or Southeast Asian leader; and chances are that its incredulity in our own case is merely a measure of our ill-conceived national exceptionalism. ....
As for the broader picture, the next few months will show what the political consequences of John Kennedy's assassination are to be.
If the Johnson Administration pursues negotiations with the Soviets with even less vigor, sincerity and good faith than the Kennedy Administration, the change may well be tacit proof that the conspirators have achieved their political aim; and that their true target was the late President's policies.
December 1, 1963
[note: President Johnson reversed Kennedy's withdrawal order for Vietnam almost immediately after the assassination, which confirms this prediction.]
Sidebar from NameBase NewsLine, No. 4, January-March 1994:
The Man Who Wasn't There
by Daniel Brandt
Clinton, Quigley, and Conspiracy: What's going on here?
by Daniel Brandt
from NameBase NewsLine, No. 1, April-June 1993
"the reason why the JFK assassination is so important is this: It's one thing to believe that there are rich people who become richer because their environment tells them to behave that way, and quite another to believe that there is a powerful, secret government that doesn't have to play by the rules. If you can prove that the assassination was a conspiracy, then the first notion becomes silly and insignificant. Essentially, conspiracy theories restore notions of freedom and responsibility that have been stripped from the "value free" social science establishment."
The Searchers film
"Randolph Benson is an award-winning, Durham-based filmmaker. His films have garnered the Gold Medal in the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences' Student Academy Awards and a Kodak Excellence in Filmmaking Award at the Cannes Film Festival, among others. His work has been featured on the Bravo Network, the Independent Film Channel and UNC-TV as well as several international channels.
"His current project, The Searchers, is a portrait of researchers of the Kennedy assassination. The film is slated for a spring release.
"A graduate of Wake Forest University and the North Carolina School of the Arts, Benson has taught at the Center for Documentary Studies at Duke University for more than 10 years."
JFK, Oswald and the Raleigh connection
by Randolph Benson
13 documents you should read about the JFK assassination
by Randolph Benson
A Dream Interrupted
John F. Kennedy was on a path to peace before that fateful Friday in Dallas 50 years ago
BY STEVE BHAERMAN
November 20, 2013
In the 50 years since the assassination, there have been some 2,000 books written on the subject. The books tend to fall into several categories: one, that there was no conspiracy and the official story stands (not many, but some books proclaim this); two, that there was a plot, which points to the Soviet Union or Castro's Cuba; three, that the Mafia did it; and four, that the CIA and the Mafia did it.
I certainly haven't read all of those books, but I did at least come to the conversation early. As a freshman teacher in Washington, D.C., in 1967 as part of the Urban Teaching Corps, I was given the material to teach a unit on alternative views of the Kennedy assassination. As I delved into a mystery I'd never examined before, two red flags jumped out at me. One was the Zapruder film showing the back of Kennedy's head as he was shot and how it indicated that a bullet came from the front and not from the Texas School Book Depository building, where Oswald supposedly carried out his deed. The other red flag was the surprising number of witnesses to the assassination who met unfortunate and untimely ends.
Seeds of doubt were planted in me, and the one thing that I knew to be true about the Kennedy assassination is that the official story was not true. ....
The body politic is most certainly in need of healing, and of all those 2,000 books that have been written about the Kennedy assassination, there is one book that stands out as a potential pathway to metabolizing our huge political toxin.
JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died & Why It Matters is authored by James W. Douglass, a progressive Catholic deeply influenced by the American Trappist monk Thomas Merton (1915–1968). Though Merton lived a monastic life and rarely traveled, he was influential as a religious philosopher whose correspondents included well-known Catholics of all political persuasions, from Clare Boothe Luce to Ethel Kennedy.
Because of his fierce inner convictions and willingness to stand for these convictions, Merton was able to gaze unflinchingly into the heart of darkness. He used the word "unspeakable" to describe "a suicidal moral evil and total lack of ethics and rationality with which international politics tend to be conducted."
It's hard to imagine a book about the death of a beloved president at the hands of "the unspeakable" as inspiring, but Douglass' book courageously acknowledges the likeliest scenario, and by facing the dark implications, shows us a way toward redemption. In many ways, JFK and the Unspeakable is a spiritual book. It seems so old-fashioned to speak about "evil," and yet it may be that our unwillingness to use this term and face the darkness head-on is why evil seems to have snuggled up with us and moved in next door.
A Tribute to Mae Brussell
Mae Brussell was one of the best and most prolific anti-fascist political researchers of the latter half of the 20th Century. She was born on May 29, 1922 in Beverly Hills, California, the great-granddaughter of Isaac Magnin, founder of the I. Magnin west coast department store chain, and daughter of Edgar Magnin, rabbi of the Wilshire Boulevard Temple. A philosophy major at Stanford, she left several credits short of graduation to be married.
On November 22, 1963, Mae began her investigation of the assassination of John F. Kennedy. The following year, she purchased the 26 volumes of the Warren Commission as a “Christmas present,” which lead to her cross-indexing the 26 volumes and making over 27,000 pages of textual analysis. In 1967, she went to New Orleans to assist DA Jim Garrison in his investigation of the death of JFK.
One of the viewpoints and avenues of research that Mae pioneered was the importation of Nazis into the United States post-World War 2 and their connection to various crimes and political murders since that time.
In 1971, Mae began her radio show “Dialogue: Assassination” on the independently owned radio station, KLRB. The show was later called “Dialogue: Conspiracy” and then “World Watchers International.” She mailed tapes of her broadcasts all over the world and provided bibliographies for each tape to show her sources. ....
Her work amounted to 851 broadcasts and 39 four-drawer filing cabinets. She also influenced a generation of anti-fascist political researchers, who called themselves Brussell Sprouts, through her broadcasts and articles.
Let Justice Be Done: New Light on the Jim Garrison Investigation
Citizens for the Truth about the Kennedy Assassinations
Probe Magazine on JFK, MLK, RFK and Malcolm X
Edited by James DiEugenio and Lisa Pease
Destiny Betrayed, by Jim DiEugenio
JFK’s Embrace of Third World Nationalists
November 25, 2013
Exclusive: The intensive media coverage of the half-century anniversary of John F. Kennedy’s murder was long on hype and emotion but short on explaining how revolutionary JFK’s foreign policy was in his extraordinary support for Third World nationalists, as Jim DiEugenio explains.
The Left and the Death of Kennedy
By Jim DiEugenio
Ultimate Sacrifice by Lamar Waldron and Thom Hartmann
Reviewed by James DiEugenio
(a book that falsely claims the Mafia did it, DiEugenio's review deconstructs its falsehoods)
author of JFK and the Unspeakable: Why he died and why it matters
The best book I have read on the Kennedy assassination, Presidential policy making and modern US history.
www.jfkmoon.org/unspeakable.html has several reviews and excerpts
"After the American University address, John Kennedy and Nikita Krushchev began to act like competitors in peace. They were both turning. However, Kennedy's rejection of Cold War politics was considered treasonous by forces in his own government. In that context, which Kennedy knew well, the American University address was a profile in courage with lethal consequences. President Kennedy's June 10, 1963 call for an end to the Cold War, five and one-half months before his assassination, anticipates Dr. King's courage in his April 4, 1967, Riverside Church address calling for an end to the Vietnam War, exactly one year before his assassination. Each of those transforming speeches was a prophetic statement provoking the reward a prophet traditionally receives. John Kennedy's American University address was to his death in Dallas as Martin Luther King's Riverside Church address was to his death in Memphis."
-- James Douglass, "JFK and the Unspeakable," p. 46
Jim Douglass on The Hope in Confronting the Unspeakable
in the Assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy
Coalition on Political Assassinations Conference
20 November 2009
full transcript with footnotes and transcription of question and answer discussion
"The Mary Ferrell Foundation (MFF) is a non-profit 501(c)(3) group engaged in an ongoing effort to bring accessible and interactive history to a new generation of critical thinkers.
"With a wide topic base including the assassinations of the 1960s, the Watergate scandal, and post-Watergate intelligence abuse investigations, the MFF's vast digital archive at www.maryferrell.org contains over 1.2 million pages of documents, government reports, books, essays, and hours of multimedia."
"On November 22, 1963 Mary was at work in downtown Dallas. Upon hearing the news of the assassination of President Kennedy, Mary thought the crime would be difficult to solve, and was astounded when the police arrested a man, Lee Harvey Oswald, hardly more than an hour later. Mary had three teenaged sons at home, and she told her husband Buck to place one boy at the loading dock of both papers in Dallas to get a copy of each edition that weekend.
"Mary and her boys obtained a complete set of all the editions of the Dallas papers from that weekend, and thus began what turned into a legendary collection of books, newspapers, magazines, reports, and declassified documents, now held by the Mary Ferrell Foundation. Mary Ferrell died in 2004 at the age of 81."
update: In memorium, Gaeton Fonzi (Oct 10th1935 - August 30th, 2012)
Black Op Radio conducted an interview with Mr. Fonzi in 2001 (before 9/11) which was rebroadcast September 6, 2012.
Investigators of these sorts of crimes have to contend with numerous false leads being offered to distract those with the interest and stamina to stay focused on the details. Gaeton Fonzi was an investigator for the House Select Committee on Assassinations, the only Congressional effort to get toward the truth of what was done to President Kennedy. Here is his description of how this strategy was used to reduce his effectiveness:
The Last Investigation, by Gaeton Fonzi
"The first question I tried to get approved was the one by experience in investigating the case had dictated as a priority: Was there an intelligence agency connection through anti-Castro Cubans and Oswald to the Kennedy assassination? That, I knew, would never pass muster because of the investigative approach and effort it would require. By the nature of its operations, an intelligence agency doesn't leave authentic tracks. One had to look for patterns. The issue I wanted to pursue involved the patterns of verified misinformation -- almost all linking Oswald to Castro -- which were born in Miami immediately after the assassination."
The Last Investigation
I discovered there are a lot of Cubans in Miami named Julio Fernandez. There are more than a dozen lawyers named Fernandez. Many Cubans, like Americans, are commonly known by their middle name, not their first, and some Cubans are commonly known not by their by father's family name by their matrinomy. Nevertheless, selecting them by their age and word of their anti-Castro activism, I spent weeks talking with scores of Cubans named Julio Fernandez. Schweiker particularly interested in the Julio Fernandez whose name did turn up in an FBI report buried in the Warren Commissions' volume of evidence. I finally tracked him down in upstate New York. He wasn't the Julio Fernandez who had called Clair Boothe Luce. It wasn't until more than a year later, with the broadened access to information I had with the House Assassinations Committee, I discovered that there was no Julio Fernandez who called Luce. She had simply concocted the name for Schweiker.
What was interesting about the Luce story was that it had a couple of the characteristics common to so many of the other leads which were fed to Schweiker and, later, the House Assassinations Committee and, when checked out, went no where. One such characteristic was that the leads usually could not be dismissed outright because they always contained hard kernels of truth mixed in the fluff.
The Last Investigation
By Gaeton Fonzi
Reviewed by James DiEugenio
book review by NameBase
Fonzi, Gaeton. The Last Investigation. New York: Thunder's Mouth Press, 1993. 448 pages.
This is the first comprehensive insider account of the House Select Committee on Assassinations. Fonzi was a staff investigator for the HSCA, and before that an investigator for Senator Richard Schweiker, who was interested in the JFK assassination as a member of the Church Committee. Strapped for resources and under deadline pressures, HSCA chief counsel Robert Blakey steered the investigation along avenues that would look good in their report. Blakey gave the CIA plenty of room to maneuver around his investigation, either to enhance his own insider status or because of his realpolitik pragmatism. He blames organized crime for the assassination, while Fonzi is much more interested in anti-Castro Cubans and the CIA. Committee staffers were unable to pursue many promising leads in this area.
Fonzi spends much energy trying to establish that CIA heavyweight David Atlee Phillips was the "Maurice Bishop" that Alpha 66 founder Antonio Veciana saw with Oswald before the assassination. He convinces his readers on this point, but since there's no corroboration for Veciana's story that Bishop met Oswald, it's unclear where this leaves us. The most interesting portions of the book, therefore, revolve around Fonzi's occasional evidence of disinformation and false leads planted in the paths of Committee investigators, apparently by U.S. intelligence assets.
We Know the Truth
By Gaeton Fonzi
We have been defensive in our posture and perspective. We have done hard, grinding research and then presented it as if it were another significant piece of the puzzle, hoping that someday the picture will become clear and the mysterious image will emerge whole and explicit. We have offered the evidence we uncovered as openly and innocently as we can, hoping it was going to be judged on its substance and its validity – and seen it too often ambushed by those still intent on subverting the truth.
We have written letters to the editor believing that rational and logical retort will somehow result in the editor's publication recognizing the obvious and accept the evidence we put forth on its merits, evidence that appears to point towards solving the so-called mystery of Kennedy's assassination.
And we have played into the hands of such covert illusionists as Posner by climbing into his trick-filled ring and, in critical rebuttal, actually provide credibility to his assertion that the issue of conspiracy remains a valid question.
It's time we climbed into our own ring. That's what our future demands. Our future as researchers demands that we abandon our posture as explorers of a mystery and assume the role as re-enforcers of the foundation of truth. That, after all, is what most of us have been about. Now from this distance, these thirty-five years from that awful day, we can now clearly know what we believed from the beginning. Now we know the truth.
Let us shift the focus of the American people, let us lead the American people away from believing the truth to knowing the truth. And we can do this if we are persistent and steadfast in proclaiming the truth.
details at www.jfkmoon.org/jim-garrison.html
Copyright Michael B. Green August 3, 2005
An analysis by Michael B. Green
I have great respect for the courage of all the legitimate 911 researchers who try to find the truth and tell it to others, but they often forget a simple essential point. Because 911 (JFK, etc.) are not ordinary crimes, but crimes of state, they cannot be proven by simple forensic means. The proof of any such crimes requires rethinking our picture of the means of government from the ground up. People naturally do not wish to do this, and are propagandized to believe the contrary, so any effort to get their attention should be with evidence that is simple, clear, and convincing, not abstract, obscure, dubious or debatable. I do not pretend that this is enough. Orwellian "stop think" provides that "protective stupidity" that allows us to function in comfort and it is both difficult and painful to abandon. ...
If a film-maker or live lecturer has the good fortune of having the attention of someone like this, or good solid middle-Americans, for an hour-long DVD, or for a 2-3 hour live presentation, he had better use clear hard facts for persuasion, and not iffy, vaguely or ambiguously supported possibilities. The intelligence agencies that do the crimes try to control the counter-community's response by infiltrating moles that infect it with large falsehoods and impossible-to-prove technical questions (micro-analysis). The large falsehoods are designed to prove the community wrong and nuts if the need arises. The microanalysis into pointless or unanswerable questions, or into just plain dumb ones, is to divert its energies from using the clear hard facts to tell the story simply and clearly.
"Robert Groden is one of the leading experts on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. He is the world's leading expert on the photographic evidence in the JFK case. And has written five best selling books about the assassination, the conspiracy, evidence, the cover-up, and suspects involved. His book, High Treason was on the New York Times bestseller list for eleven weeks, peaking at number two.
"Mr. Groden was the chief consultant to Oliver Stone throughout the filming of the epic movie JFK. He is a leading critic of the Warren Commission, and was the first person to bring the Zapruder film to national TV in 1975, on Good Night America with Geraldo Rivera. His efforts that year proved instrumental in forcing Congress to reopen the investigation creating the House Select Committee on Assassinations, where Mr. Groden served as staff photographic consultant for three years. Mr. Groden was also senior program consultant to the 1988 landmark British documentary mini-series The Men Who Killed Kennedy."
Limousine, Midnight Blue: Fifty Frames From the Zapruder Film
Kennedy, I love talking about the Kennedy assassination because to me it's a great example of, er, a totalitarian government's ability to, you know, manage information and thus keep us in the dark any way they... Oh sorry wrong meeting... Ah shit. That's the meeting we're having tomorrow at the docks. [winks] I love talking about Kennedy. I was just down in Dallas, Texas. You know you can go down there and, er, to Dealey Plaza where Kennedy was assassinated. And you can actually go to the sixth floor of the Schoolbook Depository. It's a museum called... 'The Assassination Museum'. I think they named that after the assassination. I can't be too sure of the chronology here but... Anyway they have the window set up to look exactly like it did on that day. And it's really accurate, you know, cos Oswald's not in it. "Yeah, yeh so wow that's cool." Painstaking accuracy, you know. It's true, it's called the 'Sniper's Nest'. It's glassed in, it's got he boxes sitting there. You can't actually get to the window as such but the reason they did that of course, they didn't want thousands of American tourists getting there each year going [Mimes looking out of window] "No fucking way! I can't even see the road. Shit they're lying to us. Fuck! Where are they? There's no fucking way. Not unless Oswald was hanging by his toes, upside down from the ledge. Either that or some pigeons grabbed onto him, flew him over the motorcade... Surely someone would have seen that. You know there was rumours of anti-Castro pigeons seen drinking in bars... Someone overhead them saying 'coup, coup' Coo. Unbelievable. And you know what's wild, people's, er, attitudes in the States about it. Talking about Kennedy, people come up to me: "Bill, quit talking about Kennedy, man. Let it go. It's a long time ago - just forget about it." And I'm like alright, then don't bring up Jesus to me. As long as we're talking shelf life here. "Bill, you know Jesus died for you." Yeah, well it was a long time ago. Forget about it! How about this. Get Pilate to release the fucking files. Quit washing your hands Pilate - release the goddam files. Who else was on that grassy Golgotha that day? "Bill, it was just, you know, hur, taking over of democracy by a totalitarian government, let it go."
Coalition on Political Assassinations
"Not all conspiracies are created equal" by John Judge
The blindness of Chomsky and the other left structuralists is that they make the class out to be monolithic and without mechanisms to carry out its will. They fear that if you think there was any reason to kill a president then you don't understand how capitalism works, and that you will be filled with false hope about the Kennedy clan, who were only more of the same old ruling class. They can't let themselves think JFK could really have intended to pull out of the Vietnam war, since he went along with legacy left him by Nixon and the 40 committee, which included the Bay of Pigs operation already on the books.
But when JFK saw the CIA and the Cubans in action he refused to be pushed into sending American troops into Cuba. When the Joint Chiefs were ready and raring to go into full scale nuclear war with the USSR during the missile crisis, JFK was almost the only level head in the room who refused. And he WAS pulling out of Vietnam. He had given the orders and forced the Joint Chiefs to project that withdrawal by the end of 1964 during the month of April, 1963.
The Joint Chiefs reversed him 180 degrees plus on the Monday following his assassination, projecting instead a 10-year war with 57,000 dead that freaked out my mother enough to take it back up to the Chiefs and question it, the first civilian protest to the war in Vietnam by their highest paid woman manpower analyst.
And even today you can go into the homes of poor Black people in the South and find pictures on the wall of Jesus, Dr. King and the Kennedy brothers because of the hope for change they represented in their response to popular movements like civil rights and nuclear disarmament. Kennedy called for an end to the Cold War in June of 1963. He was going after the Mafia and threatening the tax writeoffs of the oil rich. He said in October he would "scatter the CIA to the four winds", and behind the scenes he was reaching out to normalize relations with Cuba that last year.
But it's not enough for Howard Zinn and Alexander Cockburn, much less Max Holland and David Corn. They want more dirt, and they want us never to notice a tree for fear we will miss the forest. The hard truth of the matter is that the left critique of Kennedy, and there is one to be made, is not the issue. It is the right's critique of him that mattered, what Generals Curtis Lemay and Lyman Lemnitzer thought of him and what they did about it.
Chomsky says that such "conspiracies" only exist outside the mechanisms of state power, are rare and are stopped when discovered (like Contragate he claims). And yet, when you raise the assassination of Martin Luther King with him then he becomes a "conspiracy theorist" too, saying that it was planned at the highest level of government, maybe using the Mafia, and covered up. He says they had a REASON to kill Dr. King. So, with them, it's just a function of how much you liked the guy whether he was done in by coincidence or not. Gee, maybe they'll start to wonder about the Wellstone plane crash?
Assassination as a Tool of Fascism
Nazis in America and the JFK Assassination
What I'm suggesting is that there's this history of the Fascism moving; that assassination has been its long-term technique for certain political purposes; and that it's time you took a look around you. Because they are killing us. They're not killing all of us. But they're killing people not just at the top government levels, but all the way down to the activists and the people who are going to try to make a difference.
Which is not to me, again, an argument not to try to make a difference. Because they can't kill us all. Or if we don't do anything, they will kill us all. So you see, it's one or the other. But to me, there's really no choice. ....
.... We're 6 percent of the population, consuming 60 percent of its energy, 30 percent of its raw materials coming right here, into this society. All this wealth doesn't come from out of some magic well in Kansas marked `Capitalism.' It comes from tentacles of exploitation of labor and resources all over the world. And because we exploit those societies, they're in worse shape and we're in better shape.
There's enough to go around. There's no shortage. There's surplus, in fact, if it weren't being used for war; and weren't being diverted into cash crops instead of growing food, everyone could eat, everyone could live comfortably. In fact, probably on a third of the budget they spend on warfare in the world. There is a surplus; the surplus has to be manipulated in order to disappear.
But there are populations, Rand Corporation studied them. In `68 they did a study saying that half of the world population, over two billion people, had to go, in order to make it economically comfortable for the elites. They studied setting up martial law in many countries where it came to pass: the Philippines, Yemen and South Korea, Vietnam, Canada even, and eventually the United States.
How do you set up martial law here? You do it with a terrorist scenario. I'd suggest a nuclear terrorist scenario. You have Abu Nidal, who's really Oliver North in drag. They say I'm paranoid. I don't have an eight foot security fence around my house. And he's working internationally with the people that financed Nidal. It's not mano a mano, it's have him over for dinner. That fence is up for us, in case we figure out who Ollie North really is and what he did to us.
You have this so-called `terrorist,' you know, the guy with the pop gun that terrorizes you. The nuclear weapons don't terrorize you, the state control doesn't terrorize you, the massive death and genocide that goes on in your name doesn't terrorize you. You don't know who the enemy is, and so you're afraid of a guy on an airplane with a pistol. But that's a terrorist, and you're shaking in your boots, and now they are going to be said to have a nuclear weapon. So, `Oh well, what can we do? We have to suspend civil liberties. We have to put people in camps. We have to do whatever is necessary in order to stop this "threat".'
So you come up with a scenario that's good enough, and then you move. And they have the plans, they know how to move, they have it down to the neighborhood level. If you buy the lie; if you don't identify who's oppressing whom and who the enemy really is. Believe me, you are not in danger of Abu Nidal, or the PLO, or whoever the Terrorist of the Month is supposed to be. Your life is not hanging on a hinge. Yeah, maybe if you travel internationally all the time you'll be on the wrong plane at the wrong moment. But I doubt most of you are jet setters.
The threat comes from someplace else. And even the people who take over the plane, in my experience, have ties to these same military intelligence networks. But they kill people. And at the same time it is possible to expose how they do it; and to break the cycle of the lies; and to catch up with it; and to understand who's assassinating whom, and how. Because the techniques work and they use them over. They're not that hard to figure out, once you understand the personnel and the pattern.
Who Really Runs America? The Hidden History Of The United States (1994)
"Praise from a Future Generation: The Assassination of John F. Kennedy and the First Generation Critics of the Warren Report"
Why No One Believes the Warren Report
By John Kelin
For most Americans, the assassination of John F. Kennedy is just a history lesson: a national calamity, to be sure, but something that happened a long time ago. Yet for an ever-dwindling number it is much more than that. What happened fifty years ago on November 22 is a remembered event, as vivid as September 11, 2001: a day the world turned upside down.
Whether or not you can remember that awful day, chances are good you don't believe that Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, shot President Kennedy. Few people do. That may have something to do with Oliver Stone, whose incendiary film JFK pointed the finger of blame squarely at government insiders. But it probably has more to do with some people most have never even heard of: ordinary Americans who, back in the 1960s, were the first to demonstrate that the assassination could not have happened the way the government said it did. Their work may one day become an American legend, as familiar as the ride of Paul Revere.
These early critics were mostly private citizens, but they shared an intense interest in an extraordinary event and a determination to do something about it. There were barely a dozen of them, at first, and they were scattered about the United States. Most did not know each other in 1963. Independently, they launched amateur investigations into one of the major events of the twentieth century. Amateur, but effective: over the years, their work has had an enormous impact on public opinion.
Today, on the eve of its fiftieth anniversary, research into the Kennedy assassination is very much alive. Yet the issue has a serious public relations problem; when modern-day critics are acknowledged it is usually derisive. "These people should be ridiculed, even shunned," The New York Times Book Review sneered in 2007. "It's time we marginalized Kennedy conspiracy theorists the way we've marginalized smokers."
But the earliest critics were not conspiracy theorists, and this is an important point. They analyzed the government's case on its merit, testing the official evidence to see whether it could stand on its own. And their analyses led to an inescapable conclusion: there had indeed been a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy. Who conceived and carried out that conspiracy was an entirely different question. ...
John F. Kennedy's Vision of Peace
On the 50th anniversary of JFK's death, his nephew recalls the fallen president's attempts to halt the war machine
By ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR.
November 20, 2013 12:30 PM ET
JFK's great concerns seem more relevant than ever: the dangers of nuclear proliferation, the notion that empire is inconsistent with a republic and that corporate domination of our democracy at home is the partner of imperial policies abroad. He understood the perils to our Constitution from a national-security state and mistrusted zealots and ideologues. He thought other nations ought to fight their own civil wars and choose their own governments and not ask the U.S. to do it for them. Yet the world he imagined and fought for has receded so far below the horizon that it's no longer even part of the permissible narrative inside the Beltway or in the mainstream press. Critics who endeavor to debate the survival of American democracy within the national-security state risk marginalization as crackpots and kooks. His greatest, most heroic aspirations for a peaceful, demilitarized foreign policy are the forbidden debates of the modern political era.
Murder in Dealey Plaza (2000)
The Silence of the Historians*
David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D.
A Black Hole in Twentieth Century History
Any future historian who risks discussing the assassination, or any of the issues that surround it, without mastering the core evidence of the assassination—including these issues of authenticity—will hazard gross error and distortion. Yet these events are essential to our understanding of 20th Century; lists of the century's major events typically include the JFK assassination. If this is indeed a major event, but our history textbooks will not offer even a reasoned hypothesis on who killed an American President, then what purpose do they serve? And if assassination related issues are simply avoided, even including those related to the proximate causes of the war in Vietnam, then a black hole has invaded our own history.
For example, both John M. Newman (Newman, JFK and Vietnam: Deception, Intrigue, and the Struggle for Power 1992) and Robert McNamara (McNamara, In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam 1995, pp. 95–96) argue strongly that JFK would not have involved the US in such a war. Even John Connally, one of LBJ's oldest and closest friends, supports this interpretation (Connally, In History's Shadow: An American Odyssey 1993 p. 358). Comments by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. (in Robert Brent Toplin, ed., "Nixon," Oliver Stones' USA: Film, History, and Controversy) and documents released by the ARRB also support this conclusion (Probe, March/April 1998). Finally, a new book by David Kaiser (American Tragedy: Kennedy, Johnson, and the Origins of the Vietnam War, 2000) describes the war as a pivotal event in American history and as the greatest policy miscalculation in the history of American foreign relations. Kaiser also emphasizes that JFK, often alone, resisted the policies he had inherited from Eisenhower and that he especially resisted involvement in Southeast Asia. This evasion of the JFK assassination, and its aftermath, by historians cannot last forever. Like the physical universe, history also abhors a vacuum.
James Loewen (Lies My Teacher Told Me 1995, pp. 233–247) has pointed out the distinction made by many African societies between the remote past (the zamani) and the recent past (the sasha). The former lies beyond the memory of anyone still alive, whereas the latter lies within the memory of the living. One of Loewen's charges is that history textbooks, in general, leave a huge gap in the recent past. Loewen suggests that the authors simply lack the courage to discuss controversial subjects—subjects on which their adult readers, who lived through the events, might well have strong views of their own. For the JFK assassination, this concern is more powerful than for any other subject; in fact, not even Loewen discusses it! In another history book that is somewhat outside the mainstream (Davis 1995, pp. 364–367), supporters of the lone gunman theory are given serious credibility, while critics are given, at most, a demeaning pat on the rear. Yet another history tome that is somewhat off the beaten path (Howard Zinn, A People's History of the United States 1999) solves this entire problem with ease. Although Zinn provides a refreshing review of too often neglected, albeit important, events in American history, when it comes to the JFK assassination—one of the twentieth century's major events and one of history's greatest mysteries—the admirable Zinn opts for total silence.
Are Presidents Afraid of the CIA - Consortiumnews.com
Dec 29, 2009 – Are Presidents Afraid of the CIA? By Ray McGovern.
The well-connected Dulles got himself appointed to the Warren Commission and took the lead in shaping the investigation of JFK’s assassination.
Documents in the Truman Library show that he then mounted a small domestic covert action of his own to neutralize any future airing of Truman’s and Souers’s warnings about covert action.
So important was this to Dulles that he invented a pretext to get himself invited to visit Truman in Independence, Missouri. On the afternoon of April 17, 1964, Dulles spent a half-hour trying to get the former President to retract what he had said in his op-ed. No dice, said Truman.
No problem, thought Dulles. Four days later, in a formal memo for his old buddy Lawrence Houston, CIA General Counsel from 1947 to 1973, Dulles fabricated a private retraction, claiming that Truman told him the Washington Post article was “all wrong,” and that Truman “seemed quite astounded at it.”
No doubt Dulles thought it might be handy to have such a memo in CIA files, just in case.
A fabricated retraction? It certainly seems so, because Truman did not change his tune. Far from it.
In a June 10, 1964, letter to the managing editor of Look magazine, for example, Truman restated his critique of covert action, emphasizing that he never intended the CIA to get involved in “strange activities.”
Dulles and Dallas
Dulles could hardly have expected to get Truman to recant publicly. So why was it so important for Dulles to place in CIA files a fabricated retraction? My guess is that in early 1964 he was feeling a good bit of heat from those suggesting the CIA might have been involved somehow in the Kennedy assassination.
Indeed, columnists were asking how the truth could ever come out with Allen Dulles on the Warren Commission. Prescient.
Dulles feared, rightly, that Truman’s limited-edition op-ed might yet hit pay dirt and raise serious questions about covert action. Dulles would have wanted to be in position to flash the Truman “retraction,” with the hope that this would nip any serious questioning in the bud.
The media had already shown how co-opted — er, I mean “cooperative” — it could be.
As the de facto head of the Warren Commission, Dulles was perfectly positioned to exculpate himself and any of his associates, were any commissioners or investigators — or journalists — tempted to question whether the killing in Dallas might have been a CIA covert action.
Did Allen Dulles and other "cloak-and-dagger CIA operatives have a hand in killing President Kennedy and then covering it up? The most up-to-date — and, in my view, the best — dissection of the assassination appeared last year in James Douglass’s book, JFK and the Unspeakable.
After updating and arraying the abundant evidence, and conducting still more interviews, Douglass concludes the answer is Yes.
Ray McGovern now works with Tell the Word, the publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. During a 27-year career at CIA, he served under nine CIA directors and in all four of CIA’s main directorates, including operations. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).
Sylvia Meagher was a research analyst at the UN’s World Health Organization. She took a strong interest in the assassination of John F. Kennedy and read the twenty-six volumes of the hearings and exhibits of the Warren Commission: "It was appalling to find how many of the Commission's statements were unsupportable or even completely contradicted by the testimony and/or exhibits... I began to list what is now a long list of deliberate misrepresentations, omissions, distortions, and other defects demonstrating not only extreme bias, incompetence, and carelessness but irrefutable instances of dishonesty."
In 1965 Meagher published Subject Index to the Warren Report and Hearings and Exhibits. As Meagher pointed out, studying the entire twenty-six volumes without a subject index would be "tantamount to a search for information in the Encylopedia Britannica if the contents were untitled, unalphabetized, and in random sequence."
A deep study of the Warren Commission Report convinced her that the its detailed evidence contradicted its general conclusions. Meagher therefore published Accessories After the Fact: The Warren Commission, the Authorities, and the Report (1967). Meagher was unconvinced that Lee Harvey Oswald had been a lone gunman and concluded that the Warren Commission had attempted to cover-up details of the real people behind the assassination. Meagher believed that John F. Kennedy had been killed by a group Anti-Castro exiles.
Meagher helped Mark Lane (Rush to Judgment), Léo Sauvage (The Oswald Affair - an Examination of the Contradictions and Omissions of the Warren Report) and Edward Jay Epstein (Inquest: The Warren Commission and the Establishment of Truth) in their research. In his book Sauvage commented: “I wish to express my gratitude to Mrs. Sylvia Meagher, author of an indispensable Subject Index and the only person in the world who really knows every item hidden in the twenty-six volumes of Hearings and Exhibits… With total unselfishness, Mrs. Meagher has always been available to me as to others, for any needed information, verification, or reference.”
In 1975 Richard Schweiker, who later became a member of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, pointed out that the Accessories After the Fact: The Warren Commission, the Authorities, and the Report "clearly establish Sylvia Meagher’s major contribution to understanding this tragic incident in our nation’s history... and was instrumental in finally causing a committee of Congress - with full subpoena power, access to classified documents, and a working knowledge of the nuances of the FBI and CIA - to take a second official look at what happened in Dallas November 22, 1963.”
In 1980 Meagher co-authored with Gary Owen, the Master Index to the John F. Kennedy Assassination Investigations. This book incorporated the House Select Committee on Assassinations volumes with the original Warren Commission Report. The lawyer, Russell Stetler, commented: "To the FBI agents in Dallas - who at least were doing their research on company time-the thought of plowing through thousands of pages of unindexed reference material was indeed daunting. Should we not pause to imagine how intimidating such work looked to spare-time researchers, that first generation of Warren Commission critics? Sylvia Meagher’s index to the volumes not only enabled many researchers to get to work, pushed them over the first hurdle, so to speak; her efforts also provided a model of scholarly rigor and selfless personal dedication which has only grown more stunning with the passage of time."
A Farewell to Justice
Jim Garrison, JFK's Assassination, and the Case That Should Have Changed History
"Students should ponder that the biographers of President Kennedy (Robert Dallek, Michael Beschloss, a historian of the sixties) and of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (Taylor Branch) have committed an act no serious biographer would ever commit: they have written the story of the lives of their subject while avoiding how their subjects died. This represents a major default of course because their subjects were murdered. It is astonishing that these writers do not explore who was behind the deaths of their subjects. The reviewing media have given these writers a pass, has allowed them to get away with avoiding the truth, and they have been showered with prizes. Writers should beware of awards and prizes, of course."
Patrick Kerkstra, Philadelphia Inquirer (2005)
There are some subjects - and the web of conspiracy theories surrounding the assassination of John F. Kennedy is certainly among them - that most members of the academic establishment avoid as much as possible.
And then there is Temple University's Joan Mellen, whose new book, A Farewell to Justice, pins the murder on the U.S. government itself.
"Long live tenure," said Mellen, an English professor who has written an eclectic collection of 17 books.
Her latest, which was published last week, started out as a biography of Jim Garrison, the New Orleans district attorney whose investigation of the assassination was dramatized in Oliver Stone's 1991 film JFK. ....
"The serious historians have run away from this case," she said. "They don't want the taint; they want to be in the mainstream."
But poll after poll has demonstrated that a large majority of Americans do not believe the Warren Commission's findings that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.
Despite that, the subject is "taboo" in most academic circles, Mellen said. It would also seem, if the reaction of publishers is any gauge, that the popularity of JFK assassination books is on the wane.
Mellen found no takers for her full 1,500-page manuscript, and only one - a specialist Virginia press called Potomac Books - for the whittled down version.
A Farewell to Justice will have to sell well if Mellen is to recoup the $150,000 of her own money she estimates she spent researching the book.
"It consumed my life, but I'd do it again," Mellen said. "It's my contribution to history."
"Jefferson Morley, author and former Washington Post reporter, is the moderator of JFK Facts and plaintiff in the lawsuit, Morley v. CIA. seeking release of long-secret JFK records."
The Academic JFK Assassination Web Site
Understanding the assassination with principles of evidence, critical thinking, and physical science
The Secret State
[Speech to the Massachusetts Libertarian Party on the 200th Birthday of the Bill of Rights, December 19, 1991.]
A secret state has set itself up within the darkest corners of the American government. It is what Nixon adviser John Dean called a cancer on the presidency, but it has metastasized well beyond the White House. It is not paranoia to call attention to this, but a simple act of realism.
Black Op Radio: weekly podcast with JFK researchers, from Vancouver, Canada
The Enduring JFK Mystery
By Lisa Pease
November 22, 2005
Forty-two years ago, on Nov. 22, 1963, President John F. Kennedy was gunned down in Dallas, Texas. In Bethesda, Maryland, this past weekend, a group of distinguished journalists, historians, scientists and others gathered to discuss and debate the evidence of conspiracy in the JFK case.
This site exists because we are not being told the truth about our history. Are you under the impression that Oswald killed Kennedy? That the Media is independent? That the CIA never operates without presidential authority? If so, you need to peruse these archives and find out what you've been missing.
This site is designed to provide researchers links and leads to finding solid information about our real history, as opposed to the convenient - if somewhat fake - history the "mainstream" corporate press feeds us.
Basic Evidence of Conspiracy
People often ask,
"Why does the Kennedy assassination still matter?"
It's a good question, and one worthy of a longer and more detailed response than you'll find here. Ultimately each person needs to answer that for themselves, but here's one response:
When the government can flat out lie to its citizens about the death of its own President, when the truth is knowable, when the conspirators still living are not prosecuted, when the accessories after the fact still grind out the disinformation, when a concerted campaign to publish books promoting the big lie can go unchallenged, and when the media is not held accountable for its participation in the 30+ year cover-up, then our constitution is meaningless, our laws without substance, our people without hope of ever participating in the pseudo-democracy that passes for America.
If we allow ourselves to be lied to in so blatant a fashion about something as important as the assassination of a president, can we really expect the government or the media to tell us the truth about anything at all after that? Is that why Watergate happened? Iran-Contra? If no one is held accountable, than anything goes. We are only just now finding out about an operation during the Vietnam war to spray nerve gas on deserters. What is going on now that we cannot know for another thirty years?
George Orwell wrote in his famous book 1984, "Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past." He wasn't being facetious. He was giving us a strong warning, and one that should be well heeded.
Don't give up your history. It's too important.
Col. Fletcher Prouty was the liaison from the Pentagon to the CIA when the assassination happened. He resigned from the military afterwards, and wrote two books and numerous articles -- which are archived at this website. Prouty is probably most famous for being part of the inspiration for the character of "X" in Oliver Stone's film JFK (where he was played by actor Donald Sutherland).
www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ also has archived writings and interviews with Col. Prouty, including his first book "The Secret Team."
Prouty, L. Fletcher. JFK: The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy. New York: Birch Lane Press, 1992. 366 pages. With an introduction by Oliver Stone.
L. Fletcher Prouty is a retired Air Force colonel who served in the Pentagon from 1955-1963 as the Focal Point liaison officer for Department of Defense support of CIA covert activities. During the Kennedy years his title was Chief, Special Operations Division, Joint Chiefs of Staff. He was a briefing officer on various special assignments dating back to the Cairo and Teheran conferences of 1943, and has also been a jet pilot and professor of air science and tactics at Yale University. Since first writing on the topic in May, 1970 for the Washington Monthly, he has made a persistent case based on his own experiences that the CIA and other secret elites are out of control. Prouty was portrayed as "Mr. X" in Oliver Stone's movie "JFK."
When Eisenhower warned about the military-industrial complex, Prouty was in a position to know what the outgoing president was talking about. With the publication of this book, the opening scene in "JFK" and the later interview with "Mr. X" are transformed from fleeting visual images into a coherent impression that is based on Prouty's richly-detailed experiences in the Pentagon. Prouty presents evidence that JFK was removed because he wanted to curtail the CIA and get out of Vietnam, but those responsible remain nameless and faceless, visible only in rough outline.
TOPICS ON THE NATIONAL SECURITY STATES OF AMERICA
Understanding Special Operations
The Kennedy Assassination
The Clandestine Operations Business
several books, numerous articles (long out of print) about the JFK Assassination and how the secret government (military - intelligence complex) actually functions
ratical.org is one of the most comprehensive websites on the internet. In addition to the tremendous archive on "deep politics," there is also one of the best archives about the hazards of nuclear power and radiation health effects plus perspectives from the "Native Americans" / First Nations. Ratical hosts an online copy of the book "Basic Call to Consciousness," the Six Nations Iriquois Confederacy's view of the rise of industrial civilization.
16 Questions on the Assassination
By Bertrand Russell
The Minority of One, 6 September 1964
"False Mystery: Essays on the Assassination of JFK"
We can no longer afford to shield ourselves by asserting that the murder of President Kennedy is a mystery. There is no mystery regarding how, by whom, and why President Kennedy was killed. Only when we strip away our privileged cloak of denial about the truth of the killing will we be able to free ourselves for the hard global work of changing our unfair and brutal society to one that is more equitable and less violent.
The JFK Assassination: A False Mystery Concealing State Crimes
by Vincent J. Salandria
Coalition on Political Assassinations Conference
20 November 1998
"The tyranny of power is here. Current events tell us that those who killed Kennedy can only perpetuate their power by promoting social upheaval both at home and abroad. And that will lead not to revolution but to repression. I suggest to you, my friend, that the interests of those who killed Kennedy now transcend national boundaries and national priorities. No doubt we are dealing now with an international conspiracy. We must face that fact - and not waste any more time microanalyzing the evidence. That's exactly what they want us to do. They have kept us busy for so long. And I will bet, buddy, that is what will happen to you. They'll keep you very, very busy and, eventually, they'll wear you down. The truth was easily ascertainable. I feel that my work on the assassination is an accomplishment which required little intelligence, minimal analytic ability, and no special talents. Rather, it reflected a willingness to bear witness to the truth irrespective of the consequences. In my responsibility to adhering to the truth as I saw it, I have been and will continue to be, oblivious to all the consequences of its expression."
-- Vincent Salandria
The JFK Assassination: A False Mystery Concealing State Crimes
by Vincent J. Salandria
In my judgment the assassins of JFK killed the presidency. Before JFK there was Eisenhower and his farewell address. Here was a president who saved us from horrible wars when he dragged John Foster Dulles back from the brink on several occasions. Here was a president who would inform us that "until the latest of our world conflicts the United States had no armaments industry... Now the conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence--economic, political, even spiritual--is felt in every city, every state, home, every office of the Federal Government...In the councils of Government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."
In his forward to Fred J. Cook's The Warfare State, in 1962, Bertrand Russell, a pretty fair philosopher in his own right, said: "There is only one way of reversing the trend towards preemptive war. It is to make the truth known to the American public. This is a difficult task, since the military-industrial fanatics have a large measure of control over the major means of publicity."
Then we had JFK, who in his American University speech of June 10, 1963 spoke of the struggle for peace as a kind of dialectical process. See speech attached.
Eisenhower and Kennedy were presidents. Since the killing of JFK I feel that we have had no presidency. Clinton today must join the 11 to 15% of the American public who believe the Warren Report. He knows his limitations, as Johnson knew his limitations, as Nixon knew his limitations, etc. The CIA even placed its own former head into the President's slot and with no howls from a public thoroughly conditioned to accepting the clandestine aspects of the government as essentially the government.
Not only did the killing of JFK destroy the American public's confidence in the presidency but in essentially all aspects of the legitimacy of the government. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and respected members of the Congress and of the American establishment placed their names on the Warren Report, which the American public considered to be a fraud. The public lost ist confidence in the media, which refused to investigate the killing. These changes were significant and important, and they can be traced and are traced by so many of us to the assassination.
After the killing of Kennedy it was easy to splinter the broad democratic and Democratic coalitions in the large cities consisting of ethnics, the poor, the working class and the more liberal and leftish elements. Racism was fanned. Martin Luther was dispatched. Top demonstrate that the Kennedy clan was finished, Johnbie was shot away. In 1975 Kirkpatrick Sale in his Power Shift said "After November 22, 1963, everything changed."
The national security state at its highest levels killed Kennedy. Kennedy was killed because he was viewed by it as seeking to thwart the national security state from exercising its enormous power to consolidate U.S. hegemony over the globe through military means. Kennedy thought that the national security state in its efforts to consolidate its power over the world through military means was risking the destruction of the planet. The leaders of the national security state knowingly combined in a conspiracy to kill Kennedy and following the killing through its control of the U.S. media sought to control the minds of the U.S. citizenry by manipulating the debate on the assassination. This debate was intended to, and did accomplish, through Orwellian mind-control methods, the paralysis of the U.S. citizenry's thinking.
To participate in this debate, and not to cut to the simple and irrefutable evidence which points directly to a high level national security state killing is to enlist in the service of the killers.
The successful assassination permitted the national security state to slaughter millions in Vietnam, and tens of thousands in South and Central America through training the military forces there. The killing of Kennedy and the manipulation of the post-assassination debate facilitated the assassination by the intelligence forces of the national security state of decent, freedom-loving popular leaders here and elsewhere. As a consequence of the assassination the military-intelligence budget has been maintained in the absence of credible enemies at a rate so high that the society has seen fit in order to sustain these military budgetary outlays to cut away many of the welfare benefits.
Anyone who seeks to pervert the meaning of the assassination by urging that the evidence points to a low-level renegade conspiracy has contempt for the obvious truth, and by endeavoring to strip away the significance of the assassination is committing great injustice to the millions whose deaths have been made easy by that killing.
My dictionary defines evil as morally wrong or bad, harmful, injurious. Therefore, the national security state is by definition evil.
Every national security state operative, like every Nazi concentration camp operative, is not completely evil. But every national security state operative, like every Nazi concentration camp operative, while in the work of assisting the national security state and concentration camps is unquestionably involved in evil.
www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/HWNAU/index.html [complete book on-line]
History Will Not Absolve Us
Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of President Kennedy
Part psycho-social analysis and part documentary compilation, this unusual book reveals the Orwellian techniques by which the public has allowed itself to be led into confusion about the assassination and assembles the documentary evidence necessary to know without a doubt who killed President Kennedy and why. As such it stands as a critical resource awaiting citizens who need to inform themselves in the process of building a social, economic, and political democracy capable of living in peace with itself and the rest of the world.
The first and simplest stage of discipline, which can be taught even to young children, is called in Newspeak, Crimestop. Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity.
George Orwell, 1984
On Belief Versus Knowledge
It is so important to understand that one of the primary means of immobilizing the American people politically today is to hold them in a state of confusion in which anything can be believed but nothing can be known, nothing of significance that is.
And the American people are more than willing to be held in this state because to know the truth — as opposed to only believe the truth — is to face an awful terror and to be no longer able to evade responsibility. It is precisely in moving from belief to knowledge that the citizen moves from irresponsibility to responsibility, from helplessness and hopelessness to action, with the ultimate aim of being empowered and confident in one's rational powers.
Unpublished letter, E. Martin Schotz to Vincent J. Salandria, May 14, 1992
Today most Americans believe there was a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy, but they don't know it. They don't want to know it — and our government doesn't want to know it and our elected representatives don't want to know it, because knowing it would mean having to do something about it. That is an awesome thought.
Gaeton Fonzi, The Last Investigation
"Who can murder the President, frame a CIA agent, and command this kind of cover?" I am not going to reiterate what Vince Salandria has presented to you. As we knew at the time, Kennedy had begun a process of rapprochement with the USSR and had been making clear moves away from the Cold War. The very simple and obvious question is, Who had the means and motive to organize a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy, frame in advance a CIA agent for the murder, use immediately all media channels to spill the frame-up of Oswald to the world, have the White House radioing Air Force One on the way back from Dallas that Oswald was it before the Dallas police had anything on him? Who can do all this and command a complete cover-up by all our society's institutions? Only one institution had the means and motive to accomplish all this, an element of the United States government that is so necessary to the "defense" of the nation that to expose it would be unthinkable – the answer is obvious – high US military intelligence.
But I want to take us a step further, because today the truth is not just that our military intelligence assassinated our President. Today, thirty-five years later, such an assertion is a half-truth. The full truth today must include an acknowledgment that the source of the assassination conspiracy was knowable and known at the time, and continues to be. The full truth requires that we acknowledge that every leading institution of this society has cooperated in covering up the President's murder.
WHY THE COVER-UP WAS NECESSARY
At the time of the assassination what would have happened if it had been acknowledged that the assassination had been a high level conspiracy of the US military intelligence apparatus? I suggest to you that if this truth had been acknowledged early on, our own CIA and military would have emerged as leading threats to freedom, democracy and peace here at home as well as throughout the world. Such an awareness on the part of a significant portion of our public would have led to the fragmentation of our society, and to a level of domestic turmoil which would have disrupted America's international empire. Think of the potential function of such truth in the context of the political movements of the 60's. In no way could the United States have prosecuted the Vietnam War under those circumstances. An enormous anti-militarist opposition would have thwarted much of what our military intelligence has perpetrated over the years in Latin America, and around the world.
What does all this tell us about ourselves? Well, one of the implications is that we have a very strange sort of democracy. It is a democracy in which the press is so free that the President can't have sex with a White House intern without being hauled before the court of public opinion, but the military intelligence establishment can openly assassinate the President and escape without any serious effort by that press to call it to account. The President Iying in a civil deposition, and supposedly obstructing justice over something that is totally meaningless, gets infinite attention from our media. This, while clear obstruction of justice in the murder of a President passes in silence. To see such a thing is to realize when we call ourselves "free" and "democratic", we are wrapping ourselves in the window dressing of a modern militarist empire – an empire of which we are but subjects. Granted, ladies and gentlemen, some of us in this country may be privileged subjects, maybe even the majority of us are privileged subjects, but when the day is done, that is what we are – subjects. We are not citizens of a free democratic society, but subjects of a modern version of the Roman Empire. I suggest to you that this is a truth about ourselves which most Americans would rather not hear, because we Americans love to bask in the illusion that we are a beacon to the world, that we are freer and more democratic than the poor of the world whom our tax dollars have so effectively help to murder and suppress. ....
The lie that was destined to cover the truth of the assassination was the lie that the assassination is a mystery, that we are not sure what happened, but being free citizens of a great democracy we can discuss and debate what has occurred. We can petition our government and join with it in seeking the solution to this mystery. This is the essence of the cover-up.
The lie is that there is a mystery to debate, and so we have pseudo debates, debates about meaningless disputes, based on assumptions which are obviously false. This is the form that Orwell's crimestop has taken in the matter of the President's murder. I am talking about the pseudo debate over whether the Warren Report is true when it is obviously and undebatably false, the pseudo debate over whether the Russians, or the Cubans, or the Mafia, or Lyndon Johnson, or some spinoff from the CIA killed the President. These are all part of the process of crimestop which is designed to cover up the obvious nature of this assassination. And let us not forget the pseudo debate over whether JFK would or would not have escalated in Vietnam, as if a President who was obviously turning against the cold war and was secretly negotiating normalization of relations with Cuba, would have allowed the military to trap him into pursuing our War in Vietnam.
Since the publication of History Will Not Absolve Us, what I have found most striking is the profound resistance people have to the concept of pseudo debate, a resistance in people which is manifest as an inability or unwillingness to grasp the concept and to use it to analyze their own actions and the information that comes before them. Even amongst "critics" who are very favorably disposed to my book, I note a consistent avoidance of this concept. And I see this as part of the illness, a very dangerous manifestation of the illness, which I want to discuss further.
THE MALIGNANT NATURE OF PSEUDO DEBATE
Perhaps many people think that engaging in pseudo debate is a benign activity, that it simply means that people are debating something that is irrelevant. This is not the case. I say this because every debate rests on a premise to which the debaters must agree, or there is no debate. In the case of pseudo debate the premise is a lie. So in the pseudo debate we have the parties to the debate agreeing to purvey a lie to the public. And it is all the more malignant because it is subtle. The unsuspecting person who is witness to the pseudo debate does not understand that he is being passed a lie. He is not even aware that he is being passed a premise; it is so subtle that the premise just passes into the person as if it were reality. This prernise – that there is uncertainly to be resolved – seems so benign. It is as easy as drinking a glass of treated water.
But the fact remains that there is no mystery except in the minds of those who are willing to drink this premise. The premise is a lie, and a society which agrees to drink such a lie ceases to perceive reality. This is what we mean by mass denial.
That the entire establishment has been willing to join in this process of cover-up by confusion creates an extreme form of problem for anyone who would seek to utter the truth. For these civilian institutions – the media, the universities and the government – once they begin engaging in denial of knowledge of the identity of the assassins, once they are drawn into the cover-up, a secondary motivation develops for them. Now they are not only protecting the state, they are now protecting themselves, because to expose the obviousness of the assassination and the false debate would be to reveal the corrupt role of all these institutions. And there is no question that these institutions are masters in self protection. Thus anyone who would attempt to confront the true cover-up must be prepared to confront virtually the entire society. And in doing this, one is inevitably going to be marginalized.
"I believe that a true understanding of the Kennedy assassination will lead not to a few bad people but to the institutional and parapolitical arrangements which constitute the way we are systematically governed."
-- Peter Dale Scott, "Deep Politics and the Death of JFK"
comprehensive history site, including JFK assassination
The Role of the Left in the Cover-Up of the JFK Assassination
Started by John Simkin, Nov 26 2012 01:19 PM
Bill Simpich's new book State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City, Double Agents, and the Framing of Lee Oswald has chapters on line at the Mary Ferrell Foundation. Simpich also discusses the book in several interviews at Black Op Radio.
Chapter 1: The Double Dangle
Chapter 2: Three Counterintelligence Teams Watched Oswald
Chapter 3: The Cuban Compound in Mexico City Was Ground Zero
Chapter 4: Mexico City Intrigue – The World of Surveillance
WEDNESDAY, NOV 6, 2013 7:30 PM UTC
JFK assassination: CIA and New York Times are still lying to us
Fifty years later, a complicit media still covers up for the security state. We need to reclaim our history
The assassination of President Kennedy and its subsequent coverup was a triumph for the rapidly growing U.S. national security state. Fifty years later, that surveillance colossus increasingly treats the American people as if we're enemies of the state. We can begin to take control of our future by finally demanding ownership of our past.
There is a wealth of useful information about the Kennedy assassination available online. But before a beginner wades into these thickets, it's best to start with some of the best books on the subject.
1. "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters," by James W. Douglass. Written by a deeply thoughtful Catholic peace activist, this book portrays Kennedy as a Cold War martyr – a leader who sacrificed his life to save the world from the nuclear holocaust that was being threatened by his national security team. Douglass draws together much of the best research about the Kennedy administration, and the tensions that finally tore it apart.
2. "The Last Investigation: What Insiders Know About the Assassination of JFK," by Gaeton Fonzi. An aggressive Philadelphia investigative journalist, Fonzi was recruited by the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1976 to be one of its lead investigators. (The HSCA's final report in 1979 overturned the Warren Report, concluding that JFK had been killed as the result of a conspiracy, but failed to name the plotters.) Fonzi's inside account of the committee, which came tantalizingly close to cracking the case before it was sabotaged by CIA obstructionism and congressional cowardice, makes for a gripping and eye-opening tale.
3. "Breach of Trust: How the Warren Commission Failed the Nation and Why," by Gerald McKnight. Written by a professor emeritus of history at Hood College, this is one of the few invaluable books on the Kennedy case produced by American academia – which has been as timid as the press when it comes to exploring this taboo topic. McKnight documents how U.S. security agencies immediately hijacked the Warren investigation — and makes a compelling case for their own involvement in JFK's death.
4. "Our Man in Mexico: Winston Scott and the Hidden History of the CIA," by Jefferson Morley. By focusing on Scott, chief of the CIA station in Mexico City at the time of the JFK assassination, Morley sheds a revealing light on a fascinating sideshow in the Oswald story. Morley demonstrates how Oswald was the object of an intensive CIA shadow play, which can be traced back to the agency's wizard of deception, James Jesus Angleton.
5. "Oswald and the CIA," by John Newman. A former military intelligence officer, Newman brought his unique expertise to deciphering the flood of JFK documents that were declassified in 1992 as a result of the public outcry following Oliver Stone's film "JFK." Newman shows that – despite CIA denials – the agency had a strong operational interest in Oswald that dated back years before Dallas.
6. "Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years," by David Talbot. Yes, I plead guilty to shameless self-promotion. But in my defense, my book broke new ground by documenting how Robert Kennedy himself was one of the first JFK conspiracy theorists. Based on over 150 interviews with Kennedy relatives and administration insiders, the book traces Bobby's secret search for the truth about his brother's murder.
7. "Deep Politics and the Death of JFK," by Peter Dale Scott. A retired University of California, Berkeley, literature scholar, former Canadian diplomat and distinguished poet, Scott is the Wise Man of the Kennedy research movement. Though not trained as a historian or investigative journalist, Scott took up the challenge of the JFK mystery in his spare time over four decades ago, delving assiduously where few reporters or academics dared go. "Deep Politics" is his Kennedy masterpiece, a meticulously detailed examination of the deep network of power that underlies the events in Dallas. The book is filled with provocative insights about how the upper circles of U.S. power actually operate (often in concert with the criminal underworld). I list "Deep Politics" last, only because it's not for beginners – readers should approach this dense and challenging book after getting a basic grounding in the Kennedy case.
David Talbot, the founder of Salon, is the author of the New York Times bestseller "Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years." He is now working on a book about the legendary CIA director Allen W. Dulles and the rise of the national security state.
video of Dr. Wecht's keynote address to the Coalition on Political Assassinations conference, Dallas, November 22, 2013 - http://worldwatchers.info/admin/wecht.mp4
An International Symposium on the
50th Anniversary of the Assassination
of President John F. Kennedy
October 17-19 — Following up on its world-renowned 40th anniversary conference, the Wecht Institute is pleased to host many of the leading scientific, legal and investigative experts on the murder case that has fascinated and perplexed us for decades. As the JFK assassination and many of its witnesses, investigators and researchers begin to recede into history, this symposium is intended to educate students, professionals and the general public alike about one of the seminal events of 20th century American history, and why it still matters today.
"Passing the Torch" on Video
Many of you who could not attend our recent conference, along with many conference attendees, have inquired about the availability of the program on video. Please note that the Institute is currently editing and sequencing the video footage, as well as exploring various delivery mechanisms. As soon as we have more to report, we will do so here, as well as via email to the Institute's email list. If you are not yet on that list, please let us know.
C-Span has excerpts from this conference at www.c-spanvideo.org/event/225884
reflections on the Garrison investigation
The Order of Skull and Bones
James Shelby Downard's article, "Sorcery, Sex, Assassination and the Science of Symbolism ," an underground classic, links American historical events with a wild, numerological, grand occult plan "to turn us into cybernetic mystery zombies". The assassination of JFK, this article contends, was the performance of a public occult ritual called The Killing of the King, designed as a mass-trauma, mind-control assault against our U.S. national body-politic.
During Operation Sunrise, Operation Blowback, Operation Paperclip and others, thousands of Nazi scientists, researchers and administrators were brought to the United States after World War II. Many were "smuggled" into the country against direct, written, orders from President Harry S. Truman.
Project Monarch was the resumption of a mind-control project called Marionette Programming, which started in Nazi Germany. The basic component of the Monarch Program is the sophisticated manipulation of the mind, using extreme trauma to induce Multiple Personality Disorder.
Mr. Downward feels that the perpetrators purposefully murdered JFK in such a way as to affect our National identity and cohesiveness -- to fracture America's soul. Even the blatancy of their conspiracy was designed to show "their superiority" and "our futility".
There have been studies that show a correlation between the JFK assassination and the rise in violence in society, distrust of government and other extensions of social ills.
last updated: 2013-12-13
JFKMOON.org by Mark Robinowitz, who was born the day after JFK's last speech to the UN