136

The Life and Public Assassination of President John F. Kennedy by the CIA

Edward Curtin

What is the truth, and where did it go?
Ask Oswald and Ruby, they oughta know
“Shut your mouth,” said the wise old owl
Business is business, and it’s a murder most foul

Don’t worry, Mr. President
Help’s on the way
Your brothers are coming, there’ll be hell to pay
Brothers? What brothers? What’s this about hell?
Tell them, “We’re waiting, keep coming”
We’ll get them as well

Bob Dylan, Murder Most Foul

Why President Kennedy was publicly murdered by the CIA sixty years ago has never been more important.  All pseudo-debates to the contrary – including the numerous and growing claims that it was not the U.S. national security state but the Israelis that assassinated the president, which exonerates the CIA – the truth about the assassination has long been evident.  There is nothing to debate unless one is some sort of intelligence operative, has an obsession, or is out to make a name or a buck.  I suggest that all those annual JFK conferences in Dallas should finally end, but my guess is that they will be rolling along for many more decades.  To make an industry out of a tragedy is wrong.  And these conferences are so often devoted to examining and debating minutiae that are a distraction from the essential truth. 

As for the corporate mainstream media, they will never admit the truth but will continue as long as necessary to titillate the public with lies, limited hangouts, and sensational non-sequiturs.  To do otherwise would require admitting that they have long been complicit in falsely reporting the crime and the endless coverup.  That they are arms of the CIA and NSA.

The Cold War, endless other wars, and the nuclear threat John Kennedy worked so hard to end have today been inflamed to a fever pitch by U.S. leaders in thrall to the forces that killed the president. President Joseph Biden, like all the presidents that followed Kennedy, is JFK’s opposite, an unrepentant war-monger, not only in Ukraine with the U.S. war against Russia and the U.S. nuclear first-strike policy, but throughout the world – the Middle-East, Africa, Syria, Iran, and on and on, including the push for war with China. 

Nowhere is this truer than with the U.S. support for the current Israeli genocide of the Palestinians in Gaza, a slaughter also supported by Robert Kennedy, Jr., who, ironically, is campaigning for the presidency on the coattails of JFK and his father Senator Robert F. Kennedy, who would be appalled by his unequivocal support for the Israeli government.  By such support and his silence as the slaughter in Gaza continues, RFK, Jr. is, contrary his other expressed opinions, supporting a wide range of war-related matters that involve the U.S.- Israel alliance, which is central to the military-industrial forces running U.S. foreign policy.  To say this is dispiriting is a great understatement, for RFK, Jr., a very intelligent man, knows that the CIA killed his uncle and father, and he is campaigning as a spiritually awakened man intent on ending the U.S. warfare state, something impossible to accomplish when one gives full-fledged support to Israel.  And I believe he will be elected the next U.S. president.

The Biden administration is doing all in its power to undo the legacy of JFK’s last year in office when on every front he fought for peace, not war.  It is not hard to realize that all presidents since John Kennedy have been fully aware that a bullet to the head in broad daylight could be their fate if they bucked their bosses.  They knew this when they sought the office because they were run by the same bosses before election.  Small-souled men, cowards on the make, willing to sacrifice millions to their ambition.

I believe that the following article – my final one on this matter – which I published two years ago, is worth reading again if you have once done so, and even more important if you have never read it. It is not based on speculation but on well-sourced facts, and it will make clear the importance of President Kennedy and why his assassination lay the foundation for today’s dire events.  In this dark time, when the world is spinning out of control, the story of his great courage in the face of an assassination he expected, can inspire us to oppose the systemic forces of evil that control the United States and are leading the world into the abyss.

Despite a treasure-trove of new research and information having emerged over the last sixty years, there are many people who still think who killed President John Fitzgerald Kennedy and why are unanswerable questions. They have drunk what Dr. Martin Schotz has called “the waters of uncertainty” that results “in a state of confusion in which anything can be believed but nothing can be known, nothing of significance that is.”[1]

Then there are others who cling to the Lee Harvey Oswald “lone-nut” explanation proffered by the Warren Commission.

Both these groups tend to agree, however, that whatever the truth, unknowable or allegedly known, it has no contemporary relevance but is old-hat, ancient history, stuff for conspiracy-obsessed people with nothing better to do. The general thinking is that the assassination occurred more than a half-century ago, so let’s move on.

Nothing could be further from the truth, for the assassination of JFK is the foundational event of modern American history, the Pandora’s box from which many decades of tragedy have sprung.

Pressured to Wage War

From the day he was sworn in as President on January 20, 1961, John F. Kennedy was relentlessly pressured by the Pentagon, the Central Intelligence Agency, and by many of his own advisers to wage war – clandestine, conventional, and nuclear.

To understand why and by whom he was assassinated on November 22, 1963, one needs to apprehend this pressure and the reasons why President Kennedy consistently resisted it, as well as the consequences of that resistance.

It is a key to understanding the current state of our world today and why the United States has been waging endless foreign wars and creating a national security surveillance state at home since JFK’s death.

A War Hero Who Was Appalled By War

It is very important to remember that Lieutenant John Kennedy was a genuine Naval war hero in WW II, having risked his life and been badly injured while saving his men in the treacherous waters of the South Pacific after their PT boat was sunk by a Japanese destroyer. His older brother Joe and his brother-in-law Billy Hartington had died in the war, as had some of his boat’s crew members.

As a result, Kennedy was extremely sensitive to the horrors of war, and, when he first ran for Congress in Massachusetts in 1946, he made it explicitly clear that avoiding another war was his number one priority. This commitment remained with him and was intensely strengthened throughout his brief presidency until the day he died, fighting for peace.

Despite much rhetoric to the contrary, this anti-war stance was unusual for a politician, especially during the 1950s and 1960s. Kennedy was a remarkable man, for even though he assumed the presidency as somewhat of a cold warrior vis-à-vis the Soviet Union in particular, his experiences in office rapidly chastened that stance. He very quickly came to see that there were many people surrounding him who relished the thought of war, even nuclear war, and he came to consider them as very dangerous.

A Prescient Perspective

Yet even before he became president, in 1957, then Senator Kennedy gave a speech in the U.S. Senate that sent shock waves throughout Washington, D.C. and around the world.[2] He came out in support of Algerian independence from France and African liberation generally and against colonial imperialism.

As chair of the Senate’s African Subcommittee in 1959, he urged sympathy for African independence movements as part of American foreign policy. He believed that continued support of colonial policies would only end in more bloodshed because the voices of independence would not be denied, nor should they be.

That speech caused an international uproar, and in the U.S.A. Kennedy was harshly criticized by Eisenhower, Nixon, John Foster Dulles, and even members of the Democratic party, such as Adlai Stevenson and Dean Acheson. But it was applauded in Africa and the Third World.

Yet JFK continued throughout his 1960 presidential campaign raising his voice against colonialism throughout the world and for free and independent African nations. Such views were anathema to the foreign policy establishment, including the CIA and the burgeoning military industrial complex that President Eisenhower belatedly warned against in his Farewell Address, delivered nine months after approving the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in March 1960; this juxtaposition revealed the hold the Pentagon and CIA had and has on sitting presidents, as the pressure for war became structurally systemized.

Patrice Lumumba

One of Africa’s anti-colonial and nationalist leaders was the charismatic Congolese Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba. In June, 1960, he had become the first democratically elected leader of the Congo, a country savagely raped and plundered for more than half a century by Belgium’s King Leopold II for himself and multinational mining companies. Kennedy’s support for African independence was well-known and especially feared by the CIA, who, together with Brussels, considered Lumumba, and Kennedy for supporting him, as threats to their interests in the region.

So, three days before JFK’s inauguration, together with the Belgian government, the CIA had Lumumba brutally assassinated after torturing and beating him. According to Robert Johnson, a note taker at a National Security Council meeting in August 1960, Lumumba’s assassination had been approved by President Eisenhower when he gave Allen Dulles, the Director of the CIA, the approval to “eliminate” Lumumba. Johnson disclosed that in a 1975 interview that was discovered in 2000.[3]

On January 26, 1961, when Dulles briefed the new president on the Congo, he did not tell JFK that they already had Lumumba assassinated nine days before. This was meant to keep Kennedy on tenterhooks to teach him a lesson. On February 13, 1961, Kennedy received a phone call from his UN ambassador Adlai Stevenson informing him of Lumumba’s death. There is a photograph by White House photographer Jacques Lowe of the horror-stricken president sitting in the oval office answering that call that is harrowing to view. It was an unmistakable portent of things to come, a warning for the president.

Dag Hammarskjöld, Indonesia, and Sukarno

One of Kennedy’s crucial allies in his efforts to support third-world independence was United Nations’ Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld. Hammarskjöld had been deeply involved in peacekeeping in the Congo as well as efforts to resolve disputes in Indonesia, both important countries central to JFK’s concerns. Hammarskjöld was killed on September 18, 1961 while on a peacekeeping mission to the Congo. Substantial evidence exists that he was assassinated and that the CIA and Allen Dulles were involved. Kennedy was devastated to lose such an important ally.[4]

Kennedy’s strategy involved befriending Indonesia as a Cold War ally as a crucial aspect of his Southeast Asian policy of dealing with Laos and Vietnam and finding peaceful resolutions to other smoldering Cold War conflicts. Hammarskjöld was also central to these efforts. The CIA, led by Dulles, strongly opposed Kennedy’s strategy in Indonesia. In fact, Dulles and the CIA had been involved in treacherous maneuverings in resource rich Indonesia for decades. President Kennedy supported the Indonesian President Sukarno, while Dulles opposed him since he stood for Indonesian independence.

Just two days before Kennedy was killed on November 22, 1963, he had accepted an invitation from Indonesian President Sukarno to visit that country the following spring. The aim of the visit was to end the conflict (Konfrontasi) between Indonesia and Malaysia and to continue Kennedy’s efforts to support post-colonial Indonesia with non-military economic and development aid. His goal was to end conflict throughout Southeast Asia and assist the growth of democracy in newly liberated post-colonial countries worldwide.

Of course, JFK never made it to Indonesia in 1964, and his peaceful strategy to bring Indonesia to America’s side and to ease tensions in the Cold War was never realized, thanks to Allen Dulles and the CIA.  And, Kennedy’s proposed withdrawal of American military advisers from Vietnam, which, in part, was premised on success in Indonesia, was quickly reversed by Lyndon Johnson after JFK’s murder and within a short time hundreds of thousand American combat troops were sent to Vietnam. In Indonesia, Sukarno would be forced out and replaced by General Suharto, who would rule with an iron fist for the next 30 years. Soon, both countries would experience mass slaughter engineered by Kennedy’s opponents in the CIA and Pentagon.[5]

The Bay of Pigs

In mid-April 1961, less than three months into his presidency, a trap was set for President Kennedy by the CIA and its director, Allen Dulles, who knew of Kennedy’s reluctance to invade Cuba. They assumed the new president would be forced by circumstances at the last minute to send in U.S. Navy and Marine forces to back the invasion that they had planned. The CIA and generals wanted to oust Fidel Castro, and in pursuit of that goal, trained a force of Cuban exiles to invade Cuba. This had started under President Eisenhower and Vice President Nixon. Kennedy refused to go along with sending in American troops and the invasion was roundly defeated. The CIA, military, and Cuban exiles bitterly blamed Kennedy.

But it was all a sham. Classified documents uncovered in 2000 revealed that the CIA had discovered that the Soviets had learned the date of the invasion more than a week in advance and had informed Cuban Prime Minister Fidel Castro, but—and here is a startling fact that should make people’s hair stand on end—the CIA never told the President. The CIA knew the invasion was probably doomed before the fact but went ahead with it anyway.

Why? So, they could blame JFK for the failure afterwards.

Kennedy later said to his friends Dave Powell and Ken O’Donnell, “They were sure I’d give in to them and send the go-ahead order to the [Navy’s aircraft carrier] Essex. They couldn’t believe that a new president like me wouldn’t panic and save his own face. Well, they had me figured all wrong.”[6]

This treachery set the stage for events to come. Sensing but not knowing the full extent of the set-up, Kennedy fired CIA Director Allen Dulles (who, as in a bad joke, was later named to the Warren Commission investigating JFK’s assassination) and his assistant, General Charles Cabell (whose brother, Earle Cabell, to make a bad joke absurd, was the mayor of Dallas on the day Kennedy was killed.) It was later discovered that Earle Cabell was a CIA asset.[7]

JFK said he wanted “to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.” Not sentiments to endear him to a secretive government within a government whose power was growing exponentially.[8]

Kennedy Responds After the Bay of Pigs Treachery

The stage was now set for events to follow as JFK, now even more suspicious of the military-intelligence people around him, and in opposition to nearly all his advisers, consistently opposed the use of force in U.S. foreign policy.

In 1961, despite the Joint Chiefs’ demand to put combat troops into Laos – advising 140,000 by the end of April – Kennedy bluntly insisted otherwise as he ordered Averell Harriman, his representative at the Geneva Conference, “Did you understand? I want a negotiated settlement in Laos. I don’t want to put troops in.”[9]  The president knew that Laos and Vietnam were linked issues, and since Laos came first on his agenda, he was determined to push for a neutral Laos.

Also in 1961, he refused to accede to the insistence of his top generals to give them permission to use nuclear weapons in a dispute with the Soviet Union over Berlin and Southeast Asia. Walking out of a meeting with his top military advisors, Kennedy threw his hands in the air and said, “These people are crazy.”[10]

In March 1962, the CIA, in the person of legendary operative, Edward Lansdale, and with the approval of every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, presented the president with a pretext for a U.S. invasion of Cuba. Code-named Operation Northwoodsthe false-flag plan called for innocent people to be shot in the U.S., boats carrying Cuban refugees to be sunk and a terrorism campaign to be launched in Miami, Washington D.C., and other places, all to be blamed on the Castro government so that the public would be outraged and call for an invasion of Cuba.[11]

Kennedy was appalled and rejected this pressure to manipulate him into agreeing to terrorist attacks on Americans that could later be used against him. He already knew that his life was in danger and that the CIA and military were tightening a noose around his neck. But he refused to yield.

As early as June 26, 1961, in a White House meeting with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev’s spokesperson, Mikhail Kharlamov, and Khrushchev’s son-in-law, Alexei Adzhubei, when asked by Kharlamov why he wasn’t moving faster to advance relations between the two countries, JFK said “You don’t understand this country. If I move too fast on U.S.-Soviet relations, I’ll either be thrown into an insane asylum, or be killed.”[12]

JFK refused to bomb and invade Cuba as the military wished during the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962. The Soviets had placed offensive nuclear missiles and more than 30,000 support troops in Cuba to prevent another U.S.-led invasion. American aerial photography had detected the missiles. This was understandably unacceptable to the U.S. government. While being urged by the Joint Chiefs and his trusted advisors to order a preemptive nuclear strike on Cuba, JFK knew that a diplomatic solution was the only way out as he wouldn’t accept the death of hundreds of millions of people that would likely follow a series of nuclear exchanges with the Soviet Union. Only his brother, Robert, and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara stood with him in opposing the use of nuclear weapons. Daniel Ellsberg, a former Pentagon and Rand Corporation analyst, reported a coup atmosphere in the Pentagon as Kennedy chose to settle rather than attack.[13] In the end, after thirteen incredibly tense days of brinksmanship, Kennedy and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev miraculously found a way to resolve the crisis and prevent the use of those weapons.

Afterwards, JFK told his friend John Kenneth Galbraith that “I never had the slightest intention of doing so.”[14]

The Fateful Year 1963

In June, 1963, JFK gave an historic speech at American University in which he called for the total abolishment of nuclear weapons, the end of the Cold War and the “Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war,” and movement toward “general and complete disarmament.”[15]

A few months later he signed a Limited Test Ban Treaty with Nikita Khrushchev.[16]

In October 1963 he signed National Security Action Memorandum 263 calling for the withdrawal of 1,000 U. S. military troops from Vietnam by the end of the year and complete withdrawal by the end of 1965.[17]

All this he did while secretly engaging in negotiations with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev via Saturday Evening Post editor and anti-nuclear weapon advocate, Norman Cousins, Soviet agent Georgi Bolshakov,[18] and Pope John XXIII,[19] as well as  with Cuba’s Prime Minister Fidel Castro through various intermediaries, one of whom was French Journalist Jean Daniel. Of course, secret was not secret when the CIA was involved.

Kennedy, deeply disturbed by the near nuclear catastrophe of the Cuban missile crisis, was determined to open back channel communications to make sure such a near miss never happened again. He knew fault lay on both sides, and that one slipup or miscommunication could initiate a nuclear holocaust.  He was determined, therefore, to try to open lines of communications with his enemies.

Jean Daniel was going to Cuba to interview Fidel Castro, but before he did he interviewed Kennedy on October 24, 1963.  Kennedy, knowing Daniel would tell Castro what he said, asked Daniel if Castro realizes that “through his fault the world was on the verge of nuclear war in October 1962….or even if he cares about it.”  But he also added, to soften the message:

“I approved the proclamation Fidel Castro made in the Sierra Maestra, when he justifiably called for justice and especially yearned to rid Cuba of corruption. I will go even further: to some extent it is as though Batista was the incarnation of a number of sins on the part of the United States. Now we will have to pay for those sins. In the matter of the Batista regime, I am in agreement with the first Cuban revolutionaries. That is perfectly clear.”[20]

Such sentiments were anathema, shall we say treasonous, to the CIA and top Pentagon generals. These clear refusals to go to war with Cuba, to emphasize peace and negotiated solutions to conflicts rather than war, to order the withdrawal of all military personnel from Vietnam, to call for an end to the Cold War, and his willingness to engage in private, back-channel communications with Cold War enemies marked Kennedy as an enemy of the national security state. They were on a collision course.

The Assassination on November 22, 1963

After going through the Bay of Pigs, Cuban Missile Crisis and many other military cliffhangers, Kennedy underwent a deep metanoia, a spiritual transformation, from Cold Warrior to peacemaker. He came to regard the generals who advised him as devaluing human life and hell-bent on launching nuclear wars. And he was well aware that his growing resistance to war had put him on a dangerous collision course with those generals and the CIA. On numerous occasions, he spoke of the possibility of a military coup d’état against him.

The night before his trip to Dallas, he told his wife, “But, Jackie, if somebody wants to shoot me from a window with a rifle, nobody can stop it, so why worry about it.”[21]

And we know that nobody did try to stop it because they had planned his execution from multiple locations to assure its success.

Who Killed Him?

If the only things you read, watched, or listened to since 1963 were the mainstream corporate media (MSM), you would be convinced that the official explanation for JFK’s assassination, the Warren Commission, was correct in essentials. You would be wrong, because those corporate media have for all these years served as mouthpieces for the government, most notably the CIA that infiltrated and controlled them long ago under a secret program called Operation Mockingbird.[22]

In 1977, celebrated Watergate journalist, Carl Bernstein, published a 25,000-word cover story for Rolling Stone, “The CIA and the Media,” in which he published the names of many journalists and media, such as The New York TimesCBS, Time, Newsweek, etc., who worked hand in glove with the CIA for decades. Ironically, or as part of “a limited hangout” (spy talk for admitting some truths while concealing deeper ones), this article can be found at the CIA’s own website.

Total control of information requires media complicity, and with the JFK assassination, and in all matters they consider important, the CIA and the MSM are unified.[23] Such control extends to literature, arts, and popular culture as well as news. Frances Stonor Saunders comprehensively documents this in her 1999 book, The Cultural Cold War: The CIA And The World Of Arts And Letters,[24] and Joel Whitney followed this up in 2016 with Finks: How the CIA Tricked the World’s Best Writerswith particular emphasis on the complicity of the CIA and the famous literary journal The Paris Review.  Such revelations are retrospective, of course, but only the most naïve would conclude such operations are a thing of the past.

The Warren Commission claimed that the president was shot by an ex-Marine named Lee Harvey Oswald, firing three bullets from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository as Kennedy’s car was already two hundred and fifty feet past and driving away from him. But this is patently false for many reasons, including the bizarre claim that one of these bullets, later termed “the magic bullet,” passed through Kennedy’s body and zigzagged up and down, left and right, striking Texas Governor John Connolly who was sitting in the front seat and causing seven wounds in all, only to be found later in pristine condition on a stretcher in Parkland Hospital.[25] And, any lone assassin looking out the 6th floor window would have taken the perfect shot as the limousine approached within forty feet of the TSBD on Houston St.

The absurdity of the government’s claim, a ballistic fairy tale, was the key to its assertion that Oswald killed Kennedy. It was visually shattered and rendered ridiculous by the famous Zapruder film that clearly shows the president being shot from the front right, and, as the right front of his head explodes, he is violently thrown back and to his left as Jacqueline Kennedy climbs on to the car’s trunk to retrieve a piece of her husband’s skull and brain.

This video evidence is clear and simple proof of a conspiracy.[26]

Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?

But there is another way to examine it.

If Lee Harvey Oswald, the man The Warren Commission said killed JFK, was connected to the intelligence community, the FBI and the CIA, then we can logically conclude that he was not “a lone-nut” assassin or not an assassin at all. There is a wealth of evidence to show how, from the very start, Oswald was moved around the globe by the CIA like a pawn in a game, and when the game was done, the pawn was eliminated in the Dallas police headquarters by Jack Ruby two days later.

James W. Douglass, in JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters, the most important book on the matter, asks this question:

Why was Lee Harvey Oswald so tolerated and supported by the government he betrayed?

This is a key question.

After serving as a U.S. Marine at the CIA’s U-2 spy plane Atsugi Air Force Base in Japan with a Crypto clearance (higher than top secret, a fact suppressed by the Warren Commission) and being trained in the Russian language, Oswald left the Marines and defected to the Soviet Union.[27] After denouncing the U.S., rejecting his American citizenship, working at a Soviet factory in Minsk, and taking a Russian wife—during which time Gary Powers’ U-2 spy plane was shot down over the Soviet Union—he returned to the U.S. with a loan from the American Embassy in Moscow, only to be met at the dock in Hoboken, New Jersey, by Spas T. Raikin, a prominent anti-Communist with extensive intelligence connections recommended by the State Department.[28]

Oswald passed through immigration with no trouble, was not prosecuted, moved to Fort Worth, Texas where, at the suggestion of the Dallas CIA Domestic Contacts Service chief, he was met and befriended by George de Mohrenschildt, an anti-communist Russian, who was a CIA asset. De Mohrenschildt got him a job four days later at a photography and graphic arts company that worked on top secret maps for the U.S. Army Map Service related to U-2 spy missions over Cuba.

Oswald was then shepherded around the Dallas area by de Mohrenschildt. In 1977, on the day he revealed he had contacted Oswald for the CIA and was to meet with the House Select Committee on Assassinations’ investigator, Gaeton Fonzi, de Mohrenschildt allegedly committed suicide.

Oswald then moved to New Orleans in April, 1963 where he got a job at the Reily Coffee Company owned by CIA-affiliated William Reily. The Reily Coffee Company was located in close vicinity to the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, and Naval Intelligence offices and a stone’s throw from the office of Guy Banister, a former Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Chicago Bureau, who worked as a covert action coordinator for the intelligence services, supplying weapons, money, and training to anti-Castro paramilitaries. Oswald then went to work with Banister and the CIA paramilitaries.

From this time up until the assassination, Oswald engaged in all sorts of contradictory activities, one day portraying himself as pro-Castro, the next day as anti-Castro, many of these theatrical performances being directed from Banister’s office. It was as though Oswald, on the orders of his puppet masters, was     enacting multiple and antithetical roles in order to confound anyone intent on deciphering the purposes behind his actions and to set him up as a future “assassin” or “patsy.”

James Douglass persuasively argues that Oswald “seems to have been working with both the CIA and FBI,” as a provocateur for the former and an informant for the latter. Jim and Elsie Wilcott, who worked at the CIA Tokyo Station from 1960-64, in a 1978 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, said, “It was common knowledge in the Tokyo CIA station that Oswald worked for the agency.”[29]

When Oswald moved to New Orleans in April, 1963, de Mohrenschildt exited the picture, having asked the CIA for and been indirectly given a $285,000 contract to do a geological survey for Haitian dictator “Papa Doc” Duvalier, which he never did, but for which he was paid.[30]

Ruth and Michael Paine then entered the scene on cue. Ruth had been introduced to Oswald by de Mohrenschildt. In September, 1963, Ruth Paine drove from her sister’s house in Virginia to New Orleans to pick up Marina Oswald and bring her to Dallas to live with her, where Lee also stayed on weekends. Back in Dallas, Ruth Paine conveniently arranged a job for Lee Harvey Oswald in the Texas Book Depository, where he began work on October 16, 1963.

Ruth, along with Marina Oswald, was the Warren Commission’s critically important witness against Oswald. Allen Dulles, despite his earlier firing by JFK, got appointed to a key position on the Warren Commission.  He questioned the Paines in front of it, studiously avoiding any revealing questions, especially ones that could disclose his personal connections to the Paines. For Michel Paine’s mother, therefore Ruth’s mother-in-law, Ruth Paine Forbes Young, was a close friend of his old mistress, Mary Bancroft, who worked as a spy with Dulles during WW II. Bancroft and he had been invited guests at Ruth Paine Forbes Young’s private island off Cape Cod.

Ruth and Michael Paine had extensive intelligence connections. Thirty years after the assassination, a document was declassified showing Ruth Paine’s sister Sylvia worked for the CIA. Her father traveled throughout Latin America on an Agency for International Development (notorious for CIA front activities) contract and filed reports that went to the CIA. Her husband Michael’s step-father, Arthur Young, was the inventor of the Bell Helicopter, a major military supplier for the Vietnam War, and Michael’s job there gave him a security clearance.

From late September through November 22nd, various “Oswalds” were later reported to have simultaneously been seen from Mexico City to Dallas. Two Oswalds were arrested in the Texas Theater, the real one taken out the front door and an impostor out the back.

As Douglass says:

There were more Oswalds providing evidence against Lee Harvey Oswald than the Warren Report could use or even explain.[31]

Even J. Edgar Hoover knew that Oswald impostors were used, as he told LBJ concerning Oswald’s alleged visit to the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City. He later called this CIA ploy, “the false story re Oswald’s trip to Mexico…their (CIA’s) double-dealing,” something that he couldn’t forget.[32]

It was apparent to anyone paying close attention that a very intricate and deadly game was being played at high levels in the shadows.

We know Oswald was blamed for the President’s murder. But if one fairly follows the trail of the crime, it becomes blatantly obvious that government forces were at work. Douglass and others have amassed layer upon layer of evidence to show how this had to be so.

Who Had the Power to Withdraw the President’s Security?

To answer this essential question is to finger the conspirators and to expose, in Vincent Salandria’s words, “the false mystery concealing state crimes.”[33]

Neither Oswald, the mafia nor anti-Castro Cubans could have withdrawn most of the security that day. Sheriff Bill Decker ordered all his deputies “to take no part whatsoever in the security of that [presidential] motorcade.”[34]

Police Chief Jesse Curry did the same for Dallas police protection for the president in Dealey Plaza. Both “Chief Curry and Sheriff Decker gave their orders withdrawing security from the president in obedience to orders they had themselves received from the Secret Service.” The Secret Service withdrew the police motorcycle escorts from beside the president’s car where they had been on previous presidential motorcades as well as the day before in Houston and removed agents from the back of the car where they were normally stationed to obstruct gunfire.

The Secret Service admitted there were no Secret Service agents on the ground in Dealey Plaza to protect Kennedy. But we know from extensive witness testimony that, during and after the assassination, there were people in Dealey Plaza impersonating Secret Service agents who stopped policeman and the public from moving through the area on the Grassy Knoll where some of the shots appeared to come from. The Secret Service approved the fateful, dogleg turn (on a dry run on November 18) where the car, driven by Secret Service agent William Greer, moved at a snail’s pace and came almost to a halt before the final head shot, clear and blatant security violations.  The House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded this, not some conspiracy theorist.[35]

Who could have squelched the testimony of the many doctors and medical personnel who claimed the president had been shot from the front in his neck and head, testimony contradicting the official story?

Who could have prosecuted and imprisoned Abraham Bolden, the first African-American Secret Service agent personally brought on to the White House detail by JFK, who warned that he feared the president was going to be assassinated? (Douglass interviewed Bolden seven times and his evidence on the aborted plot to kill JFK in Chicago on November 2 is a story little known but extraordinary in its implications.)

The list of all the people who turned up dead, the evidence and events manipulated, the inquiry squelched, distorted, and twisted in an ex post facto cover-up clearly point to forces within the government, not rogue actors without institutional support.

The evidence for a conspiracy organized at the deepest levels of the intelligence apparatus is overwhelming. James Douglass presents it in such depth and so logically that only one hardened to the truth would not be deeply moved and affected by his book, JFK and the Unspeakable.

But there is more from him and other researchers who have cut the Gordian knot of this false mystery with a few brief strokes.

Oswald, The Preordained Patsy

Three examples will suffice to show that Lee Harvey Oswald, working as part of a U.S. Intelligence operation, was set up to take the blame for the assassination of President Kennedy, and that when he said in police custody that he was “a patsy,” he was speaking truthfully. These examples make it clear that Oswald was deceived by his intelligence handlers and had been chosen without his knowledge, long before the murder, to take the blame as a lone, crazed killer.

First, Kennedy was shot at 12:30 P.M. CT. According to the Warren Report, at 12:45 P.M. a police report was issued for a suspect that perfectly fit Oswald’s description. This was based on the testimony of Howard Brennan, who said he was standing across from the Book Depository and saw a standing white man, about 5’10” and slender, fire a rifle at the president’s car from the sixth-floor window. This was blatantly false because photographs taken moments after the shooting show the window open only partially at the bottom about fourteen inches, and it would have been impossible for a standing assassin to be seen “resting against the left windowsill,” (the windowsill was a foot from the floor), as Brennan is alleged to have said. He would have therefore had to have been shooting through the glass. The description of the suspect was clearly fabricated in advance to match Oswald’s.

Then between 1:06 and 1:15 P.M. in the quiet residential Oak Cliff neighborhood of Dallas, Police Officer J.D. Tippit was shot and killed. Supposedly based on Brennan’s description broadcast over police radio, Tippit had stopped a man fitting the description and this man pulled a gun and shot the officer. Meanwhile, Oswald had returned to his rooming house where his landlady said he left at 1:03 P.M., went outside, and was standing at a northbound bus stop. The Tippet murder took place nine-tenths of a mile away to the south where a witness, Mrs. Higgins, said she heard a gunshot at 1:06 P.M., ran outside, saw Tippit lying in the street and a man running away with a handgun whom she said was not Oswald.

Oswald is reported to have entered the Texas Theater minutes before the Tippit murder. The concession stand operator, Warren Burroughs has said he sold him popcorn at 1:15 P.M., which is the time the Warren Report claims Tippit was killed. At 1:50 P.M., Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested in the Texas Theater and taken out the front door where a crowd and many police cars awaited him, while a few minutes later a second Oswald is secretly taken out the back door of the movie theater. (To read this story of the second Oswald and his movement by the CIA out of Dallas on a military aircraft on the afternoon of November 22, 1963, documented in great detail by James W. Douglass, is an eye-opener.)

The official narrative of Oswald and the Tippit murder begs credulity, but it serves to “show” that Oswald was a killer.[36]

Despite his denials, Oswald, set up for Kennedy’s murder based on a prepackaged description, is arraigned for Tippit’s murder at 7:10 PM. It was not until the next day that he was charged for Kennedy’s.

The Message to Air Force One

Secondly, while Oswald is being questioned about Tippit’s murder in the afternoon hours after his arrest, Air Force One has left Dallas for Washington with the newly sworn-in president Lyndon Johnson and the presidential party. Back in D.C., the White House Situation Room is under the personal and direct control of Kennedy’s National Security Advisor, McGeorge Bundy, a man with close CIA ties who had opposed JFK on many matters, including the Bay of Pigs and Kennedy’s order to withdraw from Vietnam.[37]

As reported by Theodore White, in The Making of the President 1964, Johnson and the others were informed by the Bundy controlled Situation Room that “there was no conspiracy, learned of the identity of Oswald and his arrest …”[38]

Vincent Salandria, one of the earliest and most astute critics of the Warren Commission, put it this way in his book, False Mystery[39]:

This [announcement from the Situation Room to Air Force One in flight back to Washington, D.C] was the very first announcement of Oswald as the lone assassin. In Dallas, Oswald was not even charged with assassinating the President until 1:30 A.M. the next morning. The plane landed at 5:59 P.M. on the 22nd. At that time the District Attorney of Dallas, Henry Wade, was stating that “preliminary reports indicated more than one person was involved in the shooting … the electric chair is too good for the killers.” Can there be any doubt that for any government taken by surprise by the assassination — and legitimately seeking the truth concerning it — less than six hours after the time of the assassination was too soon to know there was no conspiracy? This announcement was the first which designated Oswald as the lone assassin….

I propose the thesis that McGeorge Bundy, when that announcement was issued from his Situation Room, had reason to know that the true meaning of such a message when conveyed to the Presidential party on Air Force One [and to a separate plane with the entire cabinet that had turned around and was headed back over the Pacific Ocean] was not the ostensible message which was being communicated. Rather, I submit that Bundy … was really conveying to the Presidential party the thought that Oswald was being designated the lone assassin before any evidence against him was ascertainable. As a central coordinator of intelligence services, Bundy in transmitting such a message through the Situation Room was really telling the Presidential party that an unholy marriage had taken place between the U.S. Governmental intelligence services and the lone-assassin doctrine. Was he not telling the Presidential party peremptorily, ‘Now, hear this! Oswald is the assassin, the sole assassin. Evidence is not available yet. Evidence will be obtained, or in lieu thereof evidence will be created. This is a crucial matter of state that cannot await evidence. The new rulers have spoken. You, there, Mr. New President, and therefore dispatchable stuff, and you the underlings of a deposed President, heed the message well.’ Was not Bundy’s Situation Room serving an Orwellian double-think function?[40]

Oswald’s Prepackaged Life Story

Finally, Air Force Colonel Fletcher Prouty adds a third example of the CIA conspiracy for those who need more evidence that the government has lied from the start about the assassination.

Prouty was Chief of Special Operations in the Pentagon before and during the Kennedy years. He was the liaison between the Joint Chiefs and the CIA, working closely with Director Allen Dulles and others in supporting the clandestine operations of the CIA under military cover. He had been sent out of the country to the South Pole by the aforementioned CIA operative Edward Lansdale (Operation Northwoods) before the Kennedy assassination and was returning on November 22, 1963.

On a stopover in Christchurch, New Zealand, he heard a radio report that the president had been killed but knew no details. He was having breakfast with a U.S Congressman at 7:30 AM on November 23, New Zealand time. A short time later, at approximately 4:30 PM Dallas time, November 22, he bought the Christchurch Star 23 November 1963 newspaper and read it together with the Congressman.

The newspaper reports from the scene said that Kennedy had been killed by bursts of automatic weapons fire, not a single shot rifle, firing three separate shots in 6.8 seconds, as was later claimed for Oswald. But the thing that really startled him was that at a time when Oswald had just been arrested and had not even been charged for the murder of Officer Tippit, there was elaborate background information on Oswald, his time in Russia, his association with Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans, etc. “It’s almost like a book written five years later,” said Prouty. “Furthermore, there’s a picture of Oswald, well-dressed in a business suit, whereas, when he was picked up on the streets of Dallas after the President’s death, he had on some t-shirt or something…

Who had written that scenario?  Who wrote that script…So much news was already written ahead of time of the murder to say that Oswald killed the President and that he did it with three shots…Somebody had decided Oswald was going to be the patsy…Where did they get it, before the police had charged him with the crime?  Not so much ‘where,’ as ‘why’ Oswald?[41]

Prouty, an experienced military man working for the CIA in the Pentagon, accused the military-intelligence “High Cabal” of killing President Kennedy in an elaborate and sophisticated plot and blaming it on Oswald, whom they had begun setting up years in advance.

The evidence for a government plot to plan, assassinate, cover-up, and choose a patsy in the murder of President John Kennedy is overwhelming.[42]

Five years after JFK’s assassination, we would learn, to our chagrin and his glory, that the president’s younger brother, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, equally brave and unintimidated, would take a bullet to the back of his head in 1968 as he was on his way to the presidency and the pursuit of his brother’s killers. The same cowards struck again.

Their successors still run the country and must be stopped.

Epilogue by James W. Douglass

John F. Kennedy was raised from the death of wealth, power, and privilege. The son of a millionaire ambassador, he was born, raised, and educated to rule the system. When he was elected President, Kennedy’s heritage of power corresponded to his position as head of the greatest national security state in history. But Kennedy, like Lazarus, was raised from the death of that system. In spite of all odds, he became a peacemaker and, thus, a traitor to the system….

Why? What raised Kennedy from the dead? Why did John Kennedy choose life in the midst of death and by continuing to choose life thus condemn himself to death? I have puzzled over that question while studying the various biographies of Kennedy. May I suggest one source of grace for his resurrection as a peacemaker? In reading his story, one is struck by his devotion to his children. There is no mistaking the depth of love he had for Caroline and John, and the overwhelming pain he and Jacqueline experienced at the death of their son Patrick. Robert Kennedy in his book Thirteen Days has described how his brother saw the Cuban Missile Crisis in terms of the future of his children and all children. I believe John Kennedy was at least partially raised from the dead of the national security state by the life of his children. The heroic peacemaking of his final months, with his acceptance of its likely cost in his own death, was, I suspect, partly a result of the universal life he saw in and through them. I think he believed profoundly the words that he gave in his American University address as his foundation for rejecting the Cold War:

‘Our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future. And we are all mortal.[43]

Edward Curtin is an independent writer whose work has appeared widely over many years. His website is edwardcurtin.com and his new book is Seeking Truth in a Country of Lies.
References:-

[1] History Will Not Absolve Us: Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of President Kennedy, E. Martin Schotz, Kurtz, Ulmer, & DeLucia Book Publishers, 1996.

[2] JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died & Why It MattersJames W. Douglass, Orbis Books, 2008[1][2], p. 8 & p.212. Destiny BetrayedJames DiEugenio2nd Edition, Skyhorse Publishing, 2012, pp. 17-33.

[3] The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA and the Rise of America’s Secret GovernmentDavid Talbot, Harper Collins, 2015, pp. 375389MORI DocID: 1451843 p. 464, p. 473 of “The CIA’s Family Jewels,” 16 May 1973, The National Security Archives.

[4] Investigation into the condition and circumstances resulting in the tragic death of Dag Hammarskjold and of members of the party accompanying him (United Nations General Assembly document,) Judge Mohamed Chande Othman, September 5, 2017, p. 49 and 50, Dag Hammarskjöld Plane Crash Recent Developments, UN Association, Westminster Branch UK.

[5] Edward Curtin interviews Greg Poulgrain on The Incubus of Intervention: Conflicting Indonesian Strategies of John F. Kennedy and Allen DullesGlobal Research, July 22, 2016. Chapter 2 – JFK, Dulles and Hammarskjöld of The Incubus of Intervention. Greg Poulgrain, JFK vs Allen Dulles: Battleground Indonesia, Simon & Schuster, 2020.

[6] Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., American ValuesHarper Collins, 2018, p. 117.

[7] Dallas Mayor During JFK Assassination Was CIA AssetWho.What.Why, August 2, 2017.

[8] Peter Kornbluh confirmed this in a phone conversation with the author in May 2000. See The ULTRASENSITIVE Bay of PigsNewly Released Portions of Taylor Commission Report Provide Critical New Details on Operation Zapata, National Security Archive Briefing Book No. 29, May 3, 2000.

[9] Averell Harriman interviewed in Charles Stevenson, The End Of Nowhere; American Policy Toward Laos Since 1954 , 1972, p. 154.

[10] Richard Reeves, President Kennedy: Profile of Power, Simon & Schuster, 1994, p. 222.

[11] Pentagon Proposed Pretexts for Cuba Invasion in 1962, FOIA documents at National Security Archive.

[12] Pierre Salinger, P.S.: A Memoir, St. Martin’s Press, 1995, p. 253.

[13] Talbot, op. cit., p. 453.

[14] John Kenneth Galbraith, A Life in Our Times, Houghton Mifflin, 1981, p. 388.

[15] American University Commencement Address, President Kennedy, June 10, 1963.

[16] President Kennedy Radio and TV Address to the American People on the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, July 26, 1963. Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space, and Under Water, signed at Moscow August 5, 1963, entered into force October 10, 1963.

[17] See James K. Galbraith, “Exit Strategy,” Boston Review, Sept 1, 2003

[18] Pierre Salinger, With Kennedy, Doubleday & Co., 1966, p.198.

[19] See Norman Cousins, The Improbable Triumvirate: John F. Kennedy, Pope John, Nikita Khrushchev – An Asterisk to the History of a Hopeful Year, 1962-1963, W.W. Norton & Co., 1972.

[20] Jean Daniel, “Unofficial Envoy – An Historic Report from Two Capitals,” The New Republic, December 14, 1963.

[21] Kenneth P. O’Donnell and David F. Powers, “Johnny, We Hardly Knew Ye;” Memories of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Little Brown, 1972, p.25.

[22] See Operation Mockingbird, the only FOIA-released-by-CIA documents at The Black Vault. Carl Bernstein, “THE CIA AND THE MEDIA – How Americas Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church Committee Covered It Up.” Rolling Stone, October 20, 1977.

[23] James F. Tracy, “The CIA and the Media: 50 Facts the World Needs to Know,” Global Research/ratical.org, 2018.

[24] Frances Stonor Saunders, The Cultural Cold War: The CIA And The World Of Arts And Letters, New Press. 1999. See Also: James Petras, “The CIA and the Cultural Cold War Revisited,” Monthly Review, November 1999.

[25] See Vincent J. Salandria, “The Warren Report?“ Liberation, March 1965.

[26] Zapruder Film in slow motion.

[27] Gerald D. McKnight, Breach of Trust: How the Warren Commission Failed the Nation and Why, Univ. Of Kansas Press, 2005, review by Jim DiEugenio.

[28] Douglass, op. cit., p. 46.

[29] See James and Elsie Wilcott: CIA Profile in Courage, excerpt from JFK and the Unspeakable, pp. 144-148, 421-422.

[30] Douglass, op. cit., p. 47-48.

[31] See Oswald’s Doubles: How Multiple Lookalikes Were Used to Craft One Lone Scapegoat, excerpt from JFK and the Unspeakable, pp. 286-303, 350-355, 464-470, 481-483.

[32] Douglass, op. cit., p. 81.

[33] Vincent Salandria, The JFK Assassination: A False Mystery Concealing State Crimes, presentation at the Coalition on Political Assassinations, November 20, 1998.

[34] Dallas Deputy Sheriff Roger Dean Craig, When They Kill A President, 1971.

[35] Douglass, op. cit., pp. 270-277 and endnote 75 of James Douglass’ 2009 COPA Keynote Address. Secret Service Final Survey Report for the November 21, 1963, visit by President Kennedy to Houston, cited in Appendix to Hearings before the HSCA, vol. 11p.529.

[36] Douglass, op. cit., pp. 287-304. DiEugenio, op. cit., pp. 391-2.

[37] Talbot, op.cit., pp. 407-8.  &  NSAM 263 (document 194), Foreign Relations of the United States, Vietnam v. IV, Aug-Dec’63.

[38] Theodore White, The Making of the President, 1964, Atheneum, 1965, p. 33. See also, , Let Us Begin Anew: An Oral History of the Kennedy Presidency, Gerald S. Strober, Debra Strober, Perennial, 1993, pp. 450-451.

[39] False MysteryEssays on the JFK Assassination by Vincent Salandriarat haus reality press, 2017

[40] Bundy Continued to Shape Hawkish Policies, in Vincent J. Salandria, “The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy: A Model of Explanation,” Computers and Automation, December 1971, pp. 32-40.

[41] David T. Ratcliffe, Understanding Special Operations: 1989 Interview with L. Fletcher Proutyrat haus reality press, 1999, pp. 214-215.

[42] See The President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection at The National Archives.

[43] James Douglass, “The Assassinations of Martin Luther King and John F. Kennedy in the Light of the Fourth Gospel,” Sewanee Theological Review, 1998

SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN

If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.

For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.

4 33 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

136 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
NickM
NickM
Nov 30, 2023 7:33 PM

The Kennedy Legacy: Fiscal profligacy. Go anywhere: to Cuba to Vietnam even to the moon; pay any price.

“It’s a long time since we won a war but we sure are good at spending money; 65% of the Pentagon budget is unnacounted” — Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter.

Paul
Paul
Nov 30, 2023 8:48 AM

It has never interested me talking about the killing of JFK. I never understood what was so special about this assassination that warranted so much talk.
And then I realised: the result is most people think it’s the “CIA” that’s behind everything.
Which is great for the powers that be, who control the CIA.

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Nov 30, 2023 11:02 AM
Reply to  Paul

Fatuous remark. About 50% of people still think it was Oswald’s magic bullet what done it. If you are right in your belief that Israel controls the CIA, and the US is essentially proxy state, people are a lot closer to realising this if they believe the CIA did it than a lone gunman. Yes?

I am aware that you’re also a Christian fundamentalist and occultist who believes that Israel is a front for Satan’s minions, so maybe from your pov the ‘cia’ is still a ways off the mark lol 🤷‍♂️, but it’s one step closer. Isn’t it?

Where is the intelligence behind your comment? I don’t get it. Was it more important to make some innuendo about Jews than to actually think through what you’re saying? A2

Paul
Paul
Nov 30, 2023 10:06 PM
Reply to  Sam - Admin2

I notice my other comment, posted seconds before, didn’t make it on. Hmm.

No, you are wrong. People interested in the JFK assassination have already considered that governments murder people, they are just looking for proof.
But even when they confirm it in their minds, their only conclusion is “the CIA did it”. And their knowledge goes no further.
But the awake among us know there are authors behind all worldly agencies.
So it just seems very fishy to me that such attention should be put on one assassination out of what… 100s of 1000s?

Also, conduct yourself appropriately for an ‘admin’ – don’t hurl ad hominems at me or anyone else. Are you trying to drive away contributors of money and comments? It seems so.

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Dec 1, 2023 12:42 AM
Reply to  Paul

You want table service, do you, as you come here preaching your evil demon cabal spiel? Miffed that your ‘spiritual war’ may in any way impinge on your God-given consumer rights? Quite revealing of your true outlook on all this, if so. 😅

In any case, no ad hom was intended, I assure you. If you still feel offended, to misquote Bill Hicks, try forgiving me.

A2

Paul
Paul
Dec 1, 2023 11:01 AM
Reply to  Sam - Admin2

I’ll forgive anyone. Don’t have to like or trust them though. You seem to have form in attacking people who don’t follow the particular party line that’s developed here.
And others have noticed, these attacks mostly follow any criticism of Israel or Jooz.
With that, you give yourself away pal.
A shame, considering the reason for Off G’s creation.

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Dec 1, 2023 4:52 PM
Reply to  Paul

Well you haven’t been ‘attacked’. I think those are your projections. I’m sure we can disagree without this toxic shaming culture you seem to revel in, you know. Sorry to burst your bubble, but you seem to mention Israel etc pretty regularly, or perhaps you haven’t noticed? Perhaps you’re sore because you prefer an echo chamber? However I think robust challenge is healthy. A2

Dallas Beaufort
Dallas Beaufort
Nov 30, 2023 3:20 AM

I shared this on Facebook yesterday and received a 30 day ban as the piece went against their community standards deemed Fraudulent and deceptive. 24 hours after the review which reinstated the article Facebook changed their bot minds and reinstated the ban.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 30, 2023 3:52 AM

It just proves how 60 years on, this item is still the very livest of live wires.

[It would be quite erring to think this is largely about JFK. It’s most about all that followed in his wake. And what a wake! A 60 year Irish wake all the same. But that’s just for starters.]

“You can shut up the truth and bury it under ground, but it will only gather to itself such explosive force that the day it bursts through it will blow away everything in its path.”

~ Émile Zola (commenting on the Dreyfus Affair, still a very, very live wire 128 years on. So, there’s that, for your ol’ precedent.)

Dramatized in Polanski’s 2020 film, “An Officer and a Spy” ~ not banned but rendered nearly impossible to see, and then only if you speak really good French. The book by Robert Harris is seriously great.

J’ACCUSE!

Anarchos
Anarchos
Nov 29, 2023 2:03 PM

I believe that the following article – my final one on this matter –

Let’s hope so. This is quite literally beating a dead horse. Thew only relevance today is the fact that the assassins were not caught, which precludes the possibility that any of the more serious crimes, such as 9/11, will ever be “solved”, not so much for lack of evidence but for lack of brains.

JFK was an American politician, and hence by definition an enemy of humanity (reminder: humanity has priority over Americans).

Anyone who aspires to be the US president should be locked away fro life.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 29, 2023 11:52 PM
Reply to  Anarchos

Another facile canard. Posted late, when the thread had gone to bed. What a surprise.

David Otness
David Otness
Nov 30, 2023 6:23 AM
Reply to  Anarchos

Feckin’ twat

Levi Tate
Levi Tate
Nov 29, 2023 1:59 AM

Last try, for the benefit of your readers.
The Lone Gunman theory was invented as an alternative to the CIA’s conspiracy theory – that Cuba did it.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 29, 2023 2:08 PM
Reply to  Levi Tate

The Lone Gunman canard was already in the works, prefabricated long before by
Oswald’s CIA handlers to fit him for the rap. It was a feature of the Cuba theory.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 30, 2023 5:11 AM
Reply to  John Ervin

Even without brave Jim Garrison (and his deputized Mort Sahl, “A glorious quest”) or the Oliver Stone film, or thousands of other essays (Parenti, Schotz, Fonzi, Salandria, Wecht, Douglass etc etc) there are enough firm, and confirmed, facts-in-evidence (that were never allowed in any courtroom) to know that all the faked, counterfeited Cuba connections to Oswald were a package deal in his patsy murder, in this grotesquely conceived conspiracy, driven by greed and money interests.

Wally Jasper
Wally Jasper
Nov 28, 2023 10:05 PM

Thanks for this almost thorough summary. One point I may add regarding your dismissal of Israeli complicity in JFK’s assassination: to recognize Israeli complicity does not in the least exonerate CIA for its ultimate culpability. In fact, the Mossad was and is an arm of the CIA deep state; they work together in coordination. Sam Husseini details another part of this story that you have not included, which is that in the weeks before the assassination JFK was working fervently to prevent Israel from developing nuclear weapons, He had been demanding that Israeli PM Ben Gurion allow investigators to inspect Israeli nuclear facilities. This position was in opposition to the agenda of the CIA which wanted their ally to gain nuclear capability to help in their hegemonic designs in the Middle East. Sam details the involvement of Mossad in JFK’s assassination. See:
https://husseini.substack.com/p/israel-and-the-kennedy-assassinations?

Tom Larsen
Tom Larsen
Nov 29, 2023 3:43 AM
Reply to  Wally Jasper

Wow! From Husseini’s article:

Another strand of my interest in this has been my tracking the remarkable RFK Jr. campaign. As I wrote last August about RFK Jr.’s off-the-charts catering to Israel:

As to the mechanisms for this, some have speculated that Kennedy may be compromised in an Epstein-like manner; that pro-Israeli money is the factor; that his wife’s career in Hollywood may be dependent on pro-Israeli individuals; or that it is tied to the possibility that his uncle and father may have been assassinated at least in part over their attempts to stop Israel from getting nuclear weapons and attempts to designate Zionist organizations as foreign agents respectively.

Hugh O'Neill
Hugh O'Neill
Nov 28, 2023 8:22 PM
  • There’s no question that there was another gunman, because one of the people who was hit, just grazed, was standing next to me, and that happened when Sirhan Sirhan had been wrestled to the ground. So that’s the interesting thing. There was another assassin or another several assassins. And then it was bedlam. And as you know, Kennedy died about twenty-four hours later. 
  • AMY GOODMAN: John Pilger, what about Robert Kennedy’s views of Vietnam? Also, of course, your view is not the standard one, that there were other assassins. 
  • JOHN PILGER: I’m sorry. I didn’t quite hear the second part. His views of Vietnam and…?
  • AMY GOODMAN: Your view is not the standard one, that there were other assassins there. But -—
  • JOHN PILGER: Well, I told — the FBI interviewed quite a few of us, and I told the FBIat length just what had happened, the numbers of shots that were fired that I heard — I thought I heard. And I’m pretty sure I did hear them, which Sirhan Sirhan —- 
  • AMY GOODMAN: How many? 
  • JOHN PILGER: —- couldn’t have fired. 

The above extract is from “Democracy Now” from the 40th anniversary of RFK’s assassination (Note how AG tried to steer Pilger away from the ‘multiple assassins’ truth-bomb). In the same programme, there is an admission by RFK that he and JFK had got Vietnam wrong and he was admitting that. IN essence, no politician is squeaky clean, but the fact that both men were changed by their experience and witness for the better is indisputable – once their assassinations. Of course, JFK was no saint, and he’s be the first to admit it. But I doubt whether saints themselves considered themselves saintly. To err is Human. What is too often forgotten is these opinion wars is the undeniable fact that both JFK and RFK defied their own closest advisers in October 1962 and (with Khrushchev) brought the world back from the edge of the abyss. That is why we ought to remember these two and the reasons why they were assassinated. End of lesson.

Hugh O'Neill
Hugh O'Neill
Nov 28, 2023 8:27 PM
Reply to  Hugh O'Neill

Sorry: too many typos. should read “Hence their assassinations” and “He’d be the first” etc.

Nick Baam
Nick Baam
Dec 2, 2023 9:33 PM
Reply to  Hugh O'Neill

We’ll let you off easy on “programme.”

gordan
gordan
Nov 28, 2023 7:51 PM

jack rubenstein was oirish enough of the hate now live and let live
sorry die

William Gutowski
William Gutowski
Nov 28, 2023 5:55 PM

Correction to previous post:

It is Department of State 7477, not UN.

Apologies, sleep deprivation at 0Dark30 Romeo is not your friend.

Crush Limbraw
Crush Limbraw
Nov 28, 2023 4:46 PM

CIA? Israel? Tail wag DaDog? Is there anything else not considered? Try this……..

DaSynagogue of Satan is not only the prime culprit in this and other related conflicts – it is the fundamental and prime agitator in all such affairs. It is not a figment of our imaginations – it is REALITY itself – and thus fills the gap of knowledge and understanding which most folks, both secular and churchian, still can hardly grasp….much less understand. So here goes…….

Take it from a former churchian zionist- until I discovered that today’s jews are NOT Old Testament Israel, I was just as confused as most of today’s pundits – trying to complete a puzzle with major missing pieces…..and those missing pieces are spiritual…….but with material consequences.
The big picture ongoing war which started as described in Genesis and runs as a thread all the way through Revelation, and is literally still being waged as we speak – https://crushlimbraw.blogspot.com/2021/03/in-essenceit-always-wasand-still-isa.html?m=0 – history confirms this, if one is paying attention to history. Unfortunately, most folks are as ignorant of history as everything else.
Today’s Israel, for all intents and purposes, is yesterday’s Pharisees, Sadducees etc – their bible is the Talmud and NOT the Old Testament.
Another interesting ‘coincidence’ – those Pharasaic religious leaders 2000 years ago used the services of DaRomanEmpire to have Jesus crucified……..sorta like today’s Israel is using Uncle Sam’s services to fight its enemies.
There are no coincidences!

Martin Odoni
Martin Odoni
Nov 28, 2023 4:26 PM

‘one of these bullets, later termed “the magic bullet,” passed through Kennedy’s body and zigzagged up and down, left and right, striking Texas Governor John Connolly who was sitting in the front seat and causing seven wounds in all, only to be found later in pristine condition on a stretcher in Parkland Hospital’

Oh dear. All that build-up only for the regurgitation of that old horlicks.

Were you watching the Oliver Stone movie and LITERALLY NOTHING ELSE?

The Magic Bullet was never claimed, nor had any need, to follow such a wildly all-over-the-place path to inflict wounds on both Kennedy and Governor Connelly. What happened was that it sliced through Kennedy’s throat, then started looping and tilting downwards so that it hit Connelly’s wrist side-on, gouging a deep wound.

The claim that the bullet was in pristine condition when found on the stretcher is just science-fiction. It had almost been squashed flat along one side and had shallow but very visible diagonal gouges, consistent with the motion created by firing from a rifle barrel, along its length on the other.

Look, I don’t even accept the Warren Commission’s version of events, and I’m fairly confident that there was a second gunman. But please, don’t use long-discredited information like this to uphold your position. There’s no point when so many photos exist proving you wrong about the condition of the bullet. It just makes you look silly and stubborn.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 11:08 PM
Reply to  Martin Odoni

Nothing brings the spooks out of the closet, or unloads its rattling skeletons, like JFK and the assassination. To one’s amazement we may see many chronic commenters on threads who seem, all in all, like stable enough substances, start to “délire” and unravel, even into incoherence, whenever this most singular of crimes is dug up? There are a number on this very thread who either had a few too many or are having episodes.

What I find most revealing was the outcome of eminent M.E. Cyril Wecht’s letter to Connolly’s widow, Nell, asking her permission to do another autopsy, which was simply refused by her. He had indicated that a study of the bullet fragments still in the Texas governor’s wrist would confirm or refute the participation of at least one other shooter. But she declined. Her right, but given the weight of such history?

John Connolly later worked on the Reagan campaign 1980. A “D.I.N.O.” really.

Of course, acoustic recordings were pointless. (As sometimes seems the near totality of our “Press” as well.) Silencers could have been used on dozens of rifles, and then nobody hears a whisper. Either from those rifles or our compliant Press, which never even raised such an obvious question, or quickly hushed/muted. [Kilgallen Syndrome??]

But we crawl along with all this endless hubbub for 6 decades+, precisely as immovable as healthcare reform, when Castro* had most of the key answers about Oswald and the CIA (and their Nazi “imports”) the next day! 11.23.63

At least we’ve kept that candle lit, though blowin’ in the wind…

…of “Intelligence.”

£4£&$4$~~

[*A full translated transcript of his 2 hr. speech on Cuban radio, Saturday 11.23, is an appendix to E. Martin Schotz’ landmark ’99 defining book, “History Will Not Absolve Us.” Available at raticle.org, and I also posted a link somewhere on this thread. An astonishing speech for the depth and breadth of its (global) understanding of “what was really happening.” (He no doubt had some foreign input? Not just from behind the Iron Curtain, either. De Gaulle spent that year dodging many CIA/OAS bullets, which is yet another way to connect these dots.) Our public(s) still hasn’t caught up with all, or even most, of Castro’s radio speech, 60 years later? “On the Facts and Consequences of the Tragic Death of President John F. Kennedy.”

Young Fidel had all the goods on it, while LHOswald was still above ground, albeit a “dead man walking” ~ and for only another day.

Who knew? Very few, here, since it was long blacked out. But we muddle on, in dubious battle.]

Anarchos
Anarchos
Nov 29, 2023 2:14 PM
Reply to  John Ervin

The spooks couldn’t care less about people scrambling to figure out an operation from 50 years ago.

Such folks seem pretty cranky, poring over that incident when there have been major global events that make JFK pale into insignificance.

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Nov 29, 2023 4:13 PM
Reply to  Anarchos

If men could learn from history, what lessons it might teach us!

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 30, 2023 1:21 PM
Reply to  Anarchos

I wouldn’t know. It seems to me that Intel hacks seem pretty spooky about all this, not the other way around.

I’,m approached all the time by them on the street about this, in my work with the public, for decades. They break out in a sweat or jagged jitters if the talk gets too relevant. Very strange phenomenon that.

Live very much in USA? Doesn’t sound like it.

If you had, really, it would be the spooks that seem pretty cranky. Cranky spooks!

But we have to take what the “Defense” [DARPA] gives us. Just like football.

William Gutowski
William Gutowski
Nov 28, 2023 12:49 PM

No mentions of JFK approving / signing UN7477 or EO11110?

My favorite line is

One of the Lee Harvey Oswalds was acting alone

Also enjoy “Scott Free” segment in Kentucky Fried Movie. Best book I found so far was “Kill Zone” by Paul Craig Roberts.

Cui bono? If the Central Banks / City of London, CIA, Mafia and Mossad were the true beneficiaries, does it really matter who actually fired the rifle(s)?

Paul Prichard
Paul Prichard
Nov 28, 2023 10:42 AM

Your alternative update on #COVID19 for 2023-11-27. British politicians who “questioned government decision making” monitored 77th brigade to “counter disinfo” (blog, gab, tweet, pic1, pic2, pic3, pic4).

Victor G.
Victor G.
Nov 28, 2023 9:58 AM

” … the Israelis that assassinated the president, which exonerates the CIA … “

What is the arcane logic behind this affirmation? I can’t see how one excludes the other.
These two “entities” were practically created together and have a long, detailed history of intimate collaboration on innumerable “projects”.
The precision and craftiness of the Israeli intelligence services has been widely acknowledged. Their involvement was fundamental to the success of the plot. Do you honestly believe the USAmericans could have pulled the assassination off on their own? Maybe they could have called upon the experience they had recently acquired in Cuba but why bother when you can get experts involved.
Why no mention of Dimona? Was this omission simply an oversight or was it on purpose?
Why no detailed mention of the life, times, and sayings of Jacob Leon Rubenstein?
Laying all the blame on the CIA is either proceeding with eyes wide shut or trying to cover for something all together more nefarious.
Come, Mr. Curtin, you don’t have the excuses RFJ Jr has for covering things up. You can do much better

Jonathan K X
Jonathan K X
Nov 28, 2023 3:24 PM
Reply to  Victor G.

Yes, this.

As if the CIA and Mossad have never collaborated.

Rhys Jaggar
Rhys Jaggar
Nov 28, 2023 9:23 AM

This story really does show why it is imperative that the names of the top 100 CIA operatives have to be known to the General Public, ditto the top 100 Pentagon officials, ditto the top 100 NSA officials and ditto the top 100 Armed Forces Executives.

There is no possibility that anyone can say that the USA is not a military state, out of control, with genocidal murderers actively conspiring to destroy the will of the people and actively promoting murder and genocide, all over the globe, for decades on end.

Here are a few imperatives for the cleansing of America:

If Allen Dulles has a marked grave, it must be desecrated and, if it is in any religious burial ground, the religious building associated with it must be razed to the ground. There can be zero tolerance of any non-religious ‘organisation’ that allows the burial of the worst genocidal psychopath in post-war US history.

Oaths of allegiance for the CIA, NSA, Pentagon, DOD and the Armed Forces must expressly include the death penalty for any attempt to promote global warfare as a means of neutralising a legitimately elected US President. Every single person appointed to one of the top 100 posts in all those organisations must be filmed making that oath.

No dual nationals can ever work in any of those organisations, nor can they be in any role overseeing their operations. Any Jew living in the USA who wishes to do either of those things must swear a lifelong renunciation of any allegiance to the State of Israel, understanding fully that they will be lined up and shot if they betray that renunciation on even a single day for the rest of their life on earth.

No more than 1% of the entire roster of those organisations can be Jews and not a single one of them can be dual nationals.

All meetings of the CIA must be wiretapped in future and all the senior officials must be chipped so that nothing they can do is private. There can be zero freedom any longer for violent military officials to conspire against a peace-promoting USA.

Any officials of those organisations that have children must understand that their bloodline will be wiped out if they conspire to promote global genocides at the expense of elected peace-seeking US Presidents. There cannot be any negotiation about that and no loyal American would ever disagree with that. It is only the criminals, the grifters, the dual nationals and the traitors who would.

There is a lot more required to regulate the CIA properly, just as there is no point in ‘rebranding it’. The name CIA must live on for 150 years in infamy, with all its terrible history, because there cannot be any chance of the USA being forgiven for its disgusting acts of genocide lasting centuries.

underground poet
underground poet
Nov 28, 2023 2:11 PM
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar

You are preaching to an empty quire, these are the same people who fired rubber bullets at citizens Jan 6th causing the proud boys to react with their military unit and breach the capital building.

Only to find themselves in violation of some law and unable to raise the defensive case leading to the obvious guilty judgement.

Corruption is as corruption does.

Jeffrey Strahl
Jeffrey Strahl
Nov 28, 2023 5:06 AM

Sukarno? Should we talk about Sukarno? The CIA was busy figuring out how to get rid rid of Sukarno the entire time JFK was president, under the leadership of John McCone, whom JFK appointed the head the CIA this month 62 years ago, upon the advice of brother Bobby, and he proceeded to overthrow several governments, prepare the overthrow of the governments of Indonesia and Brazil (Indonesia coup took place in October ’65, Brazil in April ’64), and subvert the government of John Diefenbaker in Canada, pushing it aside in March ’63, because Diefenbaker refused to arm Canada’s air defense missiles with US nukes and integrate Canada’s military with the US’s.

Brother Bobby said this, “ “My brother really hated only two men in all his presidency,” said Robert Kennedy. “One was Sukarno [Indonesia’s left-wing president] and the other was Diefenbaker.” This piece focuses on the latter.
https://covertactionmagazine.com/2021/04/01/canadian-ties-to-u-s-empire-part-2-lester-pearson-and-the-myth-of-canada-as-peaceable-kingdom/

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 5:11 AM
Reply to  Jeffrey Strahl

CAM [Covert Action Mag] is an absolute joke. It’s just an Intel false flag psyop. As so many of its articles will clearly, easily show. It publishes more preposterous filth about the Kennedys than most any of the tabloids. What a sCAM.

NickM
NickM
Nov 28, 2023 6:58 AM
Reply to  John Ervin

Any facts to back your rhetorical “preposterous filth”?

Jeffrey Strahl
Jeffrey Strahl
Nov 28, 2023 7:17 AM
Reply to  John Ervin

The Diefenbaker material is well-sourced and collaborated. Lots of good sourcing on JFK, John McCone, and the overthrow of 4 governments in Latin America, the preparation for such an overthrow in Brazil which didn’t get implemented till April ’64 and of the Iraqi government in March ’63/

Christine Thompson
Christine Thompson
Nov 28, 2023 12:05 PM
Reply to  John Ervin

O/T, but the link below is just in case you didn’t see my reply to your post on an Off-G article of 22 November. The link takes you direct to my post; your question, and my earlier post[s] on it, of course are above mine, at the link

N.B., when disseminating the facts re. the subject being referred to in my post at the link below, I always use more or less the same phraseology; you made some remark re. my post being a verbatim copy of my earlier comments on the topic.

https://off-guardian.org/2023/11/22/the-hate-machine/#comment-641576

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 2:44 PM
Reply to  John Ervin

Meet Jeremy Kuzmarov, “Managing Editor” of sCAM, impressive credentials: assistant professor of history at University of Tulsa:

https://biography.omicsonline.org/united-states-of-america/the-university-of-tulsa/jeremy-kuzmarov-193169

Big Al
Big Al
Nov 28, 2023 3:56 AM

So that is who killed Kennedy and why, and everyone else should shut up especially those blaming Israel because it’s more important now than ever. OK, got it.

Maxwell
Maxwell
Nov 28, 2023 2:07 AM

Good grief will these hagiographies that surround the Kennedy’s and Camelot be with us through eternity?

Worship of leaders is a technique of indoctrination that goes back to the crazed George Washington cult of the 18th century and on to the truly lunatic Reagan cult of today, the Obama hopium groupies, the MAGA maniacs and on and on. The JFK cult is similar.

JFK’s foreign policy record was militantly imperial and militarist, contrary to subsequent liberal hagiographers’ efforts to re-invent him as a peacenik. That record includes the decision to dramatically escalate the international arms race after Kennedy campaigned on the deceptive claim that the U.S. was on the wrong side of a mythical Soviet-American “missile gap.”

Referring to the U.S. as “watchtower on the walls of global freedom,” JFK imposed, equipped, and supported numerous Latin-American dictatorships and oligarchies in the name of “democracy.”

Kennedy’s Alliance for Progress “development program” benefited Latin American elites while drastically increasing Latin American unemployment. Sound familiar?

One of Sen. Joe McCarthy’s biggest financial backers and friends was Joe Kennedy, the dad, despite the fact that McCarthy was a Republican. McCarthy dated JFK’s sister. In 1953, RFK was a senior staffer for McCarthy at the height of McCarthyism. JFK was an ardent supporter. Take a look at how he voted in the vote to censure McCarthy in 1954. In fact, take a look at JFK’s entire voting record as a Congressman and as a Senator (short as both those tenures were).

The largest and most radical of the CIO unions at the time was UE, the United Electrical Workers, primarily concentrated at GE and Westinghouse among other major employers. The union was particularly powerful in Massachusetts with perhaps its most important local being at Lynn/GE (the aircraft engine plant). After the war, the government decided that UE had to be destroyed. The entire spectrum of what was thrown at UE is a history unto itself, starting with HUAC and reaching past McCarthy.

The campaign included jailings, shootings, arbitrary decertifications of locals, a “counter-union” funded by the government, FBI and Congressional committee intimidation, open collusion between the cops, the government, the employers, and the counter-union, you name it. 

In Massachusetts, the Kennedys led the effort. They toured the state, lending their considerable power and “charisma” to destroying the union. The union was devastated.

Kennedy’s approach to U.S.-Latin American relations reintroduced “gunboat” diplomacy into the Dominican Republic and Haiti, and further extended U.S. meddling into Brazil, Argentina, and Chile. In 1962, the CIA spent $5 million on political campaigns in Brazil, funneled Alliance for Progress aid to friendly state governors, and undercut social reform programs in the drought-ridden Northeast by “assisting anti-Goulart oligarchs.”

Sorry to burst the bubble of those who believe JFK was a man of peace and a man of the people. That fable is true only in fictional narratives spun by those who are compelled to keep the Camelot Industry alive.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 3:08 AM
Reply to  Maxwell

YOU OPINE, BY WAY OF RHETORICAL QUIZ: “Good grief will these hagiographies that surround the Kennedy’s and Camelot be with us through eternity?”

Apparently “yes” is your answer.

JFK (and RFK as eternally linked brother martyr) sure have got a lot of “bang” for their buck, or bullet.

It’s one of history’s strangest facts that no murders since Jesus Christ Himself have got more “free” publicity (not even the Donald in free network campaign face time on air, billions; but surely I jest, at least in all that).

That 60 years of relentless coverage, alone, is one of the most remarkable facts in all of history, whether good or bad.

NickM
NickM
Nov 28, 2023 7:02 AM
Reply to  John Ervin

Again, a rhetorical flourish about “eternally linked brother martyrs” as the only rebuttals to Maxwell’s factual charges.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 7:56 AM
Reply to  NickM

Better than rhetorical flourishes of BS.

Some easily findable sources littered with pitiful stock rotting canards.

Jeremy Kuzmarov?! Really?

Johnny
Johnny
Nov 28, 2023 3:21 AM
Reply to  Maxwell

As usual, you make valid points Maxwell.

We can be sure that all presidential candidates are vetted, and any signs of compassion are quickly ‘castrated’.

Perhaps JFK’s ambitions and patriotism had ‘lapsed’ after some time in office.

Expedience is the first law of business, so he was expedited:
(‘To speed up the progress of or execute quickly’).

Jeffrey Strahl
Jeffrey Strahl
Nov 28, 2023 4:45 AM
Reply to  Maxwell

It’s been a Kennedy hagiography parade all week at this page.

George Mc
George Mc
Nov 28, 2023 8:18 AM
Reply to  Maxwell

I think it’s possible to maintain two proposals which don’t necessarily contradict each other:

First, the JFK was not the peacenik he is made out to be.

Second, that his assassination was the outcome of a conspiracy and led to a cover up.

The first is easy to understand. Had JFK truly been the “man of peace” he is made out to be then he would never have had a chance of becoming president. Like all presidents – and indeed all political figurers – he has to comply with the forces around him.

The second – the assassination as conspiracy and cover-up – merely shows that whatever JFK was, he wasn’t behaving “as well” as the deep state wanted. Perhaps he was threatening in some ways. Perhaps he wasn’t moving fast enough in the desired direction.

It may even be the case that those working hard to build up a vision of JFK as some kind of saint are working to “radicalise” two sides of a conflict to stir up futile fighting.  

George Mc
George Mc
Nov 28, 2023 8:22 AM
Reply to  George Mc

Also, the “radicalisation” of the dispute would encourage everyone to adopt an either/or position i.e.

either JFK is a total saint and was executed by conspiracy.

or there was no conspiracy at all and we are back to the “lone nut” assassination thesis.

Tom Larsen
Tom Larsen
Nov 28, 2023 2:57 PM
Reply to  George Mc

Yeah, this is where the “radical” Chomsky comes in, he rightly points to contradictions in the JFK “peacenick” narrative and concludes that there was no conspiracy…

George Mc
George Mc
Nov 28, 2023 4:15 PM
Reply to  Tom Larsen

I’m sure there’s a word for it but the whole “Camelot was shite” narrative is based on this false logic whereby the dismissal of Camelot is supposed to prove there was no conspiracy.

I recall someone using the same false logic when confronted by those claiming that the moon landings were faked and assuming that they were implying the world was flat. Thus conveniently conflating two completely different claims.

Victor G.
Victor G.
Nov 28, 2023 4:20 PM
Reply to  Tom Larsen

Hmmmm … Hasn’t Chomsky routinely concluded there are no conspiracies? Hmmm ….

Tom Larsen
Tom Larsen
Nov 29, 2023 2:41 AM
Reply to  Victor G.

Indeed and if you’d like NC’s to elaborate on his relationship with convicted pedophile and sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein – “it’s none of your business”!

The Coming Revolution
The Coming Revolution
Nov 28, 2023 10:52 AM
Reply to  George Mc

Therefore, frictions, – genuine, not manufactured frictions – do exist within power. And if they exist within power in one nation, a fortiori they must exist between powers of different nations.

Jeffrey Strahl
Jeffrey Strahl
Nov 28, 2023 6:52 PM
Reply to  George Mc

He got in the way of creating an expanded war in Indochina, a war in a part of the world he did not view as vital to the US Empire.

A faction of the ruling elite shared his view, preferred to keep it a covert operation and not spend US military strength on something deemed not a critical interest. The other faction wanted a war, for personal profit, for the drug trade, and to demonstrate that the US will act to protect interests large or small. And it was willing to use violence within the ruling class to get its way.

Plus, JFK had pissed off Cuban exiles and the Chicago mob (which got him elected, only to have Brother Bobby go after it once in office). Those two provided the foot soldiers for the op.

Tom Larsen
Tom Larsen
Nov 28, 2023 3:06 PM
Reply to  Maxwell

That’s interesting about the CIO and UEW. Can you point to sources for that story, books?
Thanks.

I have long thought that ignorance of American labor history is ignorance of American history.

Maxwell
Maxwell
Nov 28, 2023 11:46 PM
Reply to  Tom Larsen

Here are some resources:

Labor’s Untold Story, by Herbert J. Morais and Richard O. Boyer, (1955)

Them and Us: Struggles of a Rank-and-File Union, by James Matles and James Higgins (1974)

The Electrical Workers: A History of Labor at General Electric and Westinghouse, 1923-60, by Ronald Schatz (1983)

Cold War in the Working Class: The Rise and Decline of the United Electrical Workers, by Ronald Filippelli and Mark McColloch (1995)

Tom Larsen
Tom Larsen
Nov 29, 2023 2:33 AM
Reply to  Maxwell

Thank you!

turesankara
turesankara
Nov 28, 2023 8:32 PM
Reply to  Maxwell

President Kennedy never foresaw that the chickens would come home to roost so soon…Being an old farm boy myself, chickens coming home to roost never did make me sad; they always made me glad. — Malcolm X

If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged. — Noam Chomsky

Don’t forgot The Bay of Pigs too o_O

underground poet
underground poet
Nov 28, 2023 1:52 AM

Its not pubically what he said that killed him, its privately what he wanted that killed him.

NickM
NickM
Nov 28, 2023 7:08 AM

“Its not pubically what he said that killed him,”
Pubically JFK was in pretty good shape. He had a private door to the Oval Office with a line of beauties queuing behind it for a quick Pubic Affair between Public Affairs.

Victor G.
Victor G.
Nov 28, 2023 4:21 PM
Reply to  NickM

Well that does it! What a worthless politician … The disgust …

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 5:32 PM
Reply to  NickM

What a handful

Edwige
Edwige
Nov 28, 2023 11:34 AM

What he said to someone somewhere clearly had something to do with it because the symbolism of that throat wound is too strong to be mere coincidence.

underground poet
underground poet
Nov 28, 2023 12:10 PM
Reply to  Edwige

Or something simply like the gun didn’t recoil as it should have so a second attempt was needed. Gun fighters never think of symbolism when it comes to a fight, b/c its their reputation on the line.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 11:25 PM
Reply to  Edwige

That’s a mob calling card, like the “Mafia Necktie” for those who violate the code of Omertà.

However, it’s not fully clear that that shot wasn’t a miss.

rangeofillusions
rangeofillusions
Nov 28, 2023 1:40 AM

Anyone who lived during Iraq war 911 propaganda and the covid must stay fully awake. and see how the lies of so called opposition to the establishment is just fake lies.
fucking fake lies.!!!!!!!

Orban, Nigel, Trump, Bojo, Bolsonaro  from Brazil and Giuseppe Conte Italy they all shared the same concept using the ‘first motif ‘ which Is exactly what they did, first to lockdown and first to mandate the use of masks and first to use the vaccine passport and first to get the jab out first.
They was sticking it to the unelected bureaucrats from the e>U and deep state they sure showd how anti they was . (against the people small business;s and un vaccinated) 

if JFK was about 3 years ago, he would of done the exact same.
The exact same propaganda back then as the same propaganda now..(without the anti war party)

Ed and Off G has got cyber psychosis and now trying to flog his RFK jr to the viewers as man that is not compromised.  💤 

what JFK does is sells the hopium off, if we get the right man in office fantasy. 💤  Just like…..
5 minutes ago you was selling hopium fantasys off Orban, Nigel, Trump, Bojo, Bolsonaro, Giuseppe Conte, tuker carson and Gb news. Brexit. Nukes etc etc etc

JoeC
JoeC
Nov 28, 2023 1:37 AM

We shouldn’t be discussing who murdered JFK. That is impossible to determine and highly speculative. We should be discussing that Lee Harvey Oswald was a patsy and didn’t shoot the president on his lunch break like it’s claimed as the truth. So much evidence buried by 26 volumes of the Warren Commission findings. The investigation should still be open.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 1:12 AM

HERE IS AN ONLINE FREE EDITION OF THE FIRST REFERENCE, ABOVE, “HISTORY WILL NOT ABSOLVE US” AND ALWAYS BEARS REPEATING, AND RE-POSTING. A TREASURE ON THESE SUBJECTS, NOT LEAST OF THAT THE APPENDICES:

https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/HWNAU/

les online
les online
Nov 28, 2023 4:31 AM
Reply to  John Ervin

Re: ratville’s Orwell quote:
Orwell’s ‘protective stupidity’ (Crimestop): a built-in psychic
mechanism that prevents us thinking thoughts before we think
them ie your wife dies immediately after receiving a ‘covid’
jab, but it doesnt occur to you that the jab killed her…
(‘Psychoanalysis is the study of how we maintain not knowing
what we know.’ (Matthew Steinfeld)…

The Coming Revolution
The Coming Revolution
Nov 28, 2023 7:35 PM
Reply to  John Ervin

To expand a little on the two first assassinations listed:

Matteotti, socialist anti-Fascist politician was killed by Fascism’s connections to the underworld of crime (Amerigo Dumini’s gang) for his open and vehement challenge to the results of the General Elections of 1924 that gave the majority of seats of deputies to Mussolini’s party.

According to Isaac Deutscher, Kirov was killed by communist anti-Stalinist Nicolaiev of which, according to Deutscher, the GPU (State Political Directorate) was perfectly aware of his mouvements in preparation for the assassination. They were shadowing him in the hope they would find some clue that he was a Trotskyist agent; but Kirov did his deed under the watch of the GPU and without any clue as for whom he was working.

The assassination of Kirov was the prelude that sought to justify the purges of 1936-1938.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 11:40 PM

Thanks, don’t know enough that many of those deeper details, but sounds like more global Intel filaments of the “O what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.”

“And on that Day He will destroy the web that has veiled all nations.”

~ The Bible

Massive solar flare, timely & precise?

Unplug in time!

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Nov 28, 2023 12:40 AM

It was nothing personal, just business. They were threatening the entire system from within. The Kennedy brothers wanted to blow up America.

Thomas Paine
Thomas Paine
Nov 28, 2023 12:21 AM

This guy loves Kennedy because he is an Irish Catholic. For no other reason. Where, he asked bootlessly, are idols for the Pennsylvania Dutchmen? Where for the Geordies? Where for the Sorbs? Isn’t that kind of bigoted, loving only your own kind?

Human values
Human values
Nov 28, 2023 3:30 PM
Reply to  Thomas Paine

Idolatry is always bigoted, narrow-minded and selfish.

It is also a sin.

Johnny
Johnny
Nov 27, 2023 11:58 PM

The assassinators, whether they be CIA operatives, Israelis or hired guns, is not as significant as the reason JFK, and others like him, have been ‘removed’.

He/they were bad for business

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 1:49 AM
Reply to  Johnny

If only in the business minds. “Crackpot Realists.”

underground poet
underground poet
Nov 28, 2023 1:54 AM
Reply to  Johnny

But were they doing Gods business?

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 3:16 AM

God’s will can surely be clearly enough divided into two kinds, for any understanding under God:

God’s “ordaining will.”

Or, His “suffering will.”

Your call? I’m guessing that in His suffering will, as with the brutal unfathomably bad Crucifixion of His Son, He never allows an evil like the JFK murder unless it is His will for a greater good to be born, of those seeds sown.

What else? How else can it be seen??

If there is another way to see it, it can’t be of a unitive kind….

Johnny
Johnny
Nov 28, 2023 5:09 AM

God, whatever God is, does not do business.
God just ‘Is’
Like Life and Love.
Simple hey?
Don’t let religions cloud your view.

underground poet
underground poet
Nov 28, 2023 12:16 PM
Reply to  Johnny

She does business alright, but its out of sight and the minds of just about all humans.

The truth is stranger than fiction in this case.

Jeffrey Strahl
Jeffrey Strahl
Nov 28, 2023 5:09 AM
Reply to  Johnny

Kennedy pushed through the 1962 tax cut, a huge boon for billionaires and millionaires. And he pushed through the 1962 vaccination act, a huge boon to Big Pharma. Not at all bad for business.

Hannah
Hannah
Nov 28, 2023 8:57 AM
Reply to  Jeffrey Strahl

Why do you think they killed him? Is that not quite an important question? Or are you claiming he didn’t die?

Edwige
Edwige
Nov 28, 2023 11:38 AM
Reply to  Hannah

They are valid and forgotten parts of the history though.

Kennedy’s tax cut was the first in the level of tax for the super-rich from WW levels. Truman and Eisenhower hadn’t touched it – although the latter was supposedly an arch-conservative? And Kennedy is some radical progressive?…

Something doesn’t add up here!

TRT
TRT
Nov 28, 2023 9:09 PM
Reply to  Edwige

Eisenhower wasn’t an arch-conservative. He was closely identified with the Eastern ‘liberal’ establishment and Rockefeller Republicans that supported New Deal programs. He disliked arch-conservative Republicans like McCarthy and they thought he was a communist sympathizer.

Cloverleaf
Cloverleaf
Nov 27, 2023 11:39 PM

USS Liberty… JFK… Gaza… Is there any reason Israel shouldn’t be wiped off the map?

NickM
NickM
Nov 28, 2023 7:18 AM
Reply to  Cloverleaf

Sentimental reasons. Ancient Israel carried the wisdom of Babylon and Egypt to the West; same as the ancient Greeks did. The West built Christendom on those twin foundations; same as West Asia built Islam on the foundation of Christianity. Israel deserves to be a province in Palestine — the Holy Land of the People of the Book.

It is no coincidence that a Christian church and a Muslim mosque sit on top of a Jewish temple in Jerusalem..

Cloverleaf
Cloverleaf
Nov 28, 2023 4:08 PM
Reply to  NickM

He’ll awaits them ~ for all eternity.

Victor G.
Victor G.
Nov 28, 2023 4:47 PM
Reply to  NickM

Wow! Would you believe I’m starting to feel “sentimental” about thousands of civilians who have died in the past few weeks in Stalag Gaza?

NickM
NickM
Nov 30, 2023 7:29 AM
Reply to  Victor G.

So does most of the world. That outrush of human feeling has cancelled the money power of Zionazi Israel and will lead to a Palestinian State. Same as the outrush of sympathy for Jews after millions of innocents were killed by Nazi Germany led to a Jewish State.

“The heart has its reasons which reason does not comprehend” — Pascal

Placental_Mammal
Placental_Mammal
Dec 2, 2023 11:46 AM
Reply to  NickM

Millions ?

ariel
ariel
Nov 28, 2023 9:26 PM
Reply to  NickM

I didn’t see a Christian church on top of the Haram al Sharif/Temple Mount, just the Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa mosque. I walked around the Dome and Mosque enough times to notice one.

NickM
NickM
Nov 30, 2023 9:44 AM
Reply to  ariel

Correct. Muslims, Christians and Jews alike have tried to diminish the contribution of the 2 other faiths. Nevertheless, the Holiness of the Holy Land is undoubtedly built on Christian as well as Jewish foundations. And the sooner they acknowledge each others’ contributions the better it will be for all three Peoples of the Book.

From Wikipedia re pre-Islamic Byzantine churches;

“Princess Helena (Greek: Ἑλένη, Helénē; c. AD 246/248– c. 330), also known in Christianity as Saint Helena, was an Augusta of the Roman Empire and mother of Emperor Constantine the Great. Helena ranks as an important figure in the history of Christianity. In her final years, she made a religious tour of Syria Palaestina and Jerusalem, during which she founded several churches The Eastern Orthodox Church, the Roman Catholic Church, Oriental Orthodox Churches, and Anglican Communion revere her as a saint, and the Lutheran Church commemorates her. She was a Greek, probably from Asia Minor in modern Turkey.

in AD 326–28 Constantine appointed his mother Helena and gave her unlimited access to the imperial treasury, in order to locate the Christian tradition. According to Eusebius of Caesarea, who records the details of her pilgrimage to Palestine, she was responsible for the construction or beautification of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, and the Church of Eleona on the Mount of Olives; sites of Christ’s birth and ascension, respectively. Her magnificent fourth century ‘Byzantine’ (late Roman) churches built at these sites became known as the ‘Helena churches’.
The Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem – the earliest part of which dates from 326AD – is the world’s oldest Christian church still in regular use.”

Wikipedia also mentions that the Rock of the Dome contains the remains of a Christian church; and I read somewhere that Helena founded a church there.

“Strange claims that Abd al-Malik used materials from the destroyed Church of Our Lady to build the mosque and points to possible evidence that substructures on the southeast corners of the mosque are remains of the church.[49]

These internecine quarrels in the modern Holy Land always reminds me of the Nobel Prize awarded to doctors Fleming, Florey and Chain:

Interviewer: “How does it feel to receive a Nobel Prize for the discovery of Penicillin?”
Dr.Fleming: “All right. Except I have to share it with those other two buggers”.

Jane in France
Jane in France
Nov 27, 2023 9:19 PM

I have been reading some of the work of a French guy called Laurent Guyénot: He argues that Israel dunnit, mainly in order to avoid the inspection of the Dimona site where research on nuclear weapons was being carried out: Here’s a link to an article in English:
https://www.voltairenet.org/article178401.html

Marfanoid
Marfanoid
Nov 27, 2023 8:55 PM

Jackie did it.

QuincyMD
QuincyMD
Nov 27, 2023 10:05 PM
Reply to  Marfanoid

Agreed, the evidence is overwhelming. Why else would she have climbed “on to the car’s trunk to retrieve a piece of her husband’s skull and brain”? Only CIA and serial killers covet such ghastly souvenirs.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 1:51 AM
Reply to  QuincyMD

So compelling an argument, I forgot to blink.

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Nov 28, 2023 1:05 AM
Reply to  Marfanoid

I buy that one. She had the motive, the position, the right place and moment, and the connections to do it.

What do a wife and a woman do when she see her husband are flirting with Marilyn Monroe and approximately all girls in America?

She cannot do it in secret, the Police would find out about it immediately. As the smart girl she is, she chooses a moment where the whole world gets involved so nobody can blame her.

Onassis her secret lover, a tycoon and a mafioso boss who always walk around with dark Godfather glasses are paying and pulling in the strings, and all police, fbi disappear that day.

They know they will end with a bloody horsehead in the end of their bed when they wake up next morning, if they are not doing what they are fokking told.

Jackie is in deep sorrow, black dress in 3 month. The masquerade is over.
She move to Greece, She is now under the protection of the tycoon Onassis. The perfect kill.
A woman’s revenge over a man who refused to love his own wife. 💄 . Life is that simple!

NickM
NickM
Nov 28, 2023 7:23 AM
Reply to  Erik Nielsen

I gave you a 1 for ingenuity and a -1 for libel.
1+1=0.
An appreciative 0.

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Nov 28, 2023 5:23 PM
Reply to  NickM

Libel is a tort (wrongful action or infringement) leading to civil liability.

I always feel honoured when someone gives me a one, and I am prepared for the civil liability all the way up to the Supreme Court for the other one ;-).

Edwige
Edwige
Nov 28, 2023 12:07 PM
Reply to  Erik Nielsen

You can try and make it sound ridiculous – but there are reasons to think she was not the total innocent of popular perception (although of course nobody is going to claim she was sole or prime mover).

Her father was a member of the Order of Cincinnati, the US equivalent of the Order of the Garter. He was on Wall Street and Goerge de Mohrenschildt was a family friend. She went to the usual elite schools and had an early job as a CIA secretary. Her stepfather was in Naval Intelligence and his second wife was Senator Thomas Gore’s daughter. She went on to marry Aristotle Onassis. Onassis went to Argentina supposedly penniless at 21 and was a millionaire by 23. Does that happen unless you’re one of the elect, from a bloodline family?

She reputedly had an affair with William Holden as revenge for JFK’s womanising. Holden died in extremely odd circumstances just when Reagan became President. Holden was big pals with Reagan, had been his best man. This death looks like it might have been a warning shot to Reagan (which presumably he didn’t take – hence the real shot that soon followed).

The next most senior US government officer to die in office in the two decades after 1945 was James Forrestal. The official version of his death is also highly dubious and Bethesda features prominently in both his death and JFK’s. Is there a motive connecting to the two events?

Kennedy’s war record is another thing that strikes me as strange. Kennedy was supposedly in extremely poor health – he’d been close to death as a child, had a condition that meant he was bound to die early and his back condition meant he wore a brace ane needed regular medication. And yet he could pass the naval medical and see active service?…. This doesn’t add up.

Finally, if the goal was simply to stop some policy or other then JFK could simply have been impeached. There were any number of possible grounds – his affair with an East German agent most obviously plus serial drug consumption including LSD. The Democrats may have had the majority in Congress but many Southern Democrats had no love for Kennedy and the potential crimes he faced could hardly been denied on party political grounds.

I’m not writing any of this to muddy the waters or sow confusion. The main point is always that the official story is garbage and that there’s been a 60 year cover-up.

Monti
Monti
Nov 29, 2023 1:11 AM
Reply to  Edwige

Kennedy never had a back problem until he met Marilyn.

Monti
Monti
Nov 28, 2023 3:11 PM
Reply to  Erik Nielsen

No, Monroe did it. She was on the floor of the limousine and blew his head off.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 1:50 AM
Reply to  Marfanoid

What, no space aliens?

gordan
gordan
Nov 27, 2023 8:47 PM

2 views palmer

myles mathesons everything is anglo zio fiction trauma based plato cave.
or

the final judgement michael collins piper is ra hell ask a nazi conpirings
my gut rumblings tell me the 13th tribers the turkic mongol scum known as the khazarian identity stealers land pirates.

now get out of my office and close the bloody door maurice

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 1:53 AM
Reply to  gordan

you and e. e. cummings (a longtime penpal of James J. Angleton, and also letters to JJA’s wife: “What a miracle of complexity is the poet!” he once wrote to her; hmmm).

gordan
gordan
Nov 28, 2023 3:20 PM
Reply to  John Ervin

e e A
interesting report j e
now get out and make me an eggless
SOUFFLÉ

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 5:35 PM
Reply to  gordan

ẞumma cum E.I.E.I.O.

Turning Moment
Turning Moment
Nov 27, 2023 8:11 PM

Just embarrassingly stupid in my opinion:

Why President Kennedy was publicly murdered by the CIA sixty years ago has never been more important. All pseudo-debates to the contrary – including the numerous and growing claims that it was not the U.S. national security state but the Israelis that assassinated the president, which exonerates the CIA – the truth about the assassination has long been evident. There is nothing to debate unless one is some sort of intelligence operative, has an obsession, or is out to make a name or a buck.

Where does this notion that the Israel theory of JFK’s assassination ‘exonerates the CIA’ come from ? (Kit Knightly said essentially the same thing the other day.)
Anyone who has actually read Piper or Guyenot (the two main exponents of the Israel theory) will immediately see that Kit and Edward are misrepresenting their case. We are left with the question, “Why would they want to do that” ?
Piper references Peter Dale Scott and his proposal that there is/was a ‘CIA within the CIA’ and that the most likely and obvious character at the centre of that inner conspiratorial group was James Jesus Angleton. This is the same counterintelligence mastermind who stole and hid files with impunity, who was honoured at his death with a monument in Israel for his great service to that country, and who sat on the Israel desk at the CIA for many many years forming close personal and professional relationships with some of the most notorious Zionists of his day.
To say “the CIA killed John F Kennedy” is all but meaningless. Do you mean all 20,000 of them were engaged in a conspiracy to kill the president ? Of course that is ridiculous and nothing but a soundbite empty of any insight into the plot or the power structure that is revealed by uncovering the plot. Once a researcher starts to name names and looks at connections between individuals and their motives then things start to make more sense. Piper and Guyenot have done this in my opinion, and possibly they may not have uncovered the whole can of worms, the suppression and a priori dismissal of their work speaks volumes. It is a coherent theory about a bunch of known terrorists, deeply embedded with organised crime and the intelligence world, all with names and self proclaimed allegiances.
By labeling a theory that Curtin clearly knows next to nothing about ‘a psuedo -debate’ and declaring ‘case closed’, he is revealing a prejudice, and one that clouds his thinking.
https://www.unz.com/article/kennedy-assassination-cia-did-it-theorists-are-covering-for-israel/

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Nov 27, 2023 11:04 PM
Reply to  Turning Moment

So we go straight from…

Anyone who has actually read Piper or Guyenot (the two main exponents of the Israel theory) will immediately see that Kit and Edward are misrepresenting their case.

To…

We are left with the question, “Why would they want to do that” ?

Do you think you really did enough there to establish your case, before leaping to casting broadband aspersions? I don’t think you have lol

Why must any mention of Israel be accompanied by a toxic culture of shaming and coercion, whereby anyone who disagrees gets labelled complicit?

The circularity of it. This exact toxic culture alone may account for people’s resistance to it, and yet that never gets factored in by those casting the aspersions – people who appear to pride themselves on being so very rational and honest. Curious.

Can’t you resist the urge to cast such coercive aspersions? I wonder.

I notice even Laurent Guyénot can’t resist casting such aspersions. Even while Guyénot declares he doesn’t share his Holocaust skepticism in French society for fear of reprisal, and at first appears to understand why Douglas would wish to do likewise and ‘minimise the risk of being banned by publishers’, he then proceeds to heavily imply Douglas has other, more sinister motives. He says…

Douglass made sure he didn’t give his readers the slightest chance to start imagining that Israel had any part in Kennedy’s problem with “the Unspeakable”.

I mean, in his correspondence with Guyénot, perhaps Douglas merely doesn’t want to be associated with an author who openly declares he has ‘heretical’ views about the holocaust? There may be many reasons why Douglas would choose to do that. But that doesn’t seem to occur to Guyénot.

Herein lies the juvenile, toxic coercion and conformism I mentioned, which people instinctively tend to resist, since no one (especially not published authors with their own opinions) likes to feel coerced. When one alleges a sinister and ugly Israeli (or Zionist or Jewish) conspiracy, and shame anyone who may disagree using a circular argument (like above) by heavily implying they’re in on it too, intelligent conversation must end there!

If this culture becomes established around any view, how can the arena of debate ever be fair? Where’s the trust?

Isn’t it a bit like chatting up a woman and calling her ‘bitch’ if she doesn’t agree to go to bed with you, and then wondering why no women want to go to bed with you?

The fact that people instinctively resist this coercive tactic is also used as further evidence of its truth, and of their complicity, and so the circular reasoning continues on… Almost as if labelling people is the desired result, rather than having real dialogue. Curious.

Also, surely it’s just as ‘meaningless’, actually more ‘meaningless’, by your logic, to state it’s ‘Israel’, since Israel is rather larger than the CIA? Please be consistent there.

Thanks for at least providing a link. A2

Placental Mammal
Placental Mammal
Nov 27, 2023 11:26 PM
Reply to  Sam - Admin2

Publishers

Publishers would not consider publishing a book that hypothesized the involvement of a certain apartheid state in the Middle East. Or the involvement of the wider central banking community that created that state. The publishing industry like the global media and Hollyweird is tightly controlled.

Placental Mammal
Placental Mammal
Nov 28, 2023 1:59 AM
Reply to  Sam - Admin2

Sam Bloom

The involvement of Sam Bloom is seldom if ever mentioned outside Final Judgement. A snippet here:

Israel is behind serial assassinations of Kennedy brothers: Laurent Guyenot – Tehran Times

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Nov 28, 2023 5:26 AM

Ah, you’re on to me. Knew I should have changed both names.

Turning Moment
Turning Moment
Nov 28, 2023 9:46 AM
Reply to  Sam - Admin2

Sam, I think it is you who cast aspersions. I merely asked “Why did Knightly and Curtin misrepresent the theories of Piper and Guyenot?”.
I think it right to say that they certainly have misrepresented that theory : it does not protect the ‘lone shooter theory’ nor does it exonerate the CIA. Moreso, they have tried to denigrate the theory of Israeli influence. I think it fair to ask the question “Why? Seeing as Knightly and Curtin are not known propagandists.
You don’t seem to have an answer for that, but instead try to attack my character for asking.
One, or other or both of them might be sayanim, secretly working for the Israel secret state to ‘cognitively infiltrate’ the conspiracy research media and smear such theorists as Piper and Guyenot (or smear their theories). They might simply be aware (consciously or unconsciously) of the third rail of theories that implicate zionist actors in these conspiracies and so reject them reflexively without actually reading them, perhaps for some rationale about getting widely read. They might be somewhat stuck in an outmoded geopolitical model from the Cold War era Left that places Israel as a vassal state to the powerful USA, a beach head, an unsinkable fortress in the Middle East, and be hampered by a degree of cognitive dissonance when evidence seems to contradict that worldview.
There are three possible answers (perhaps listed in increasingly probability). Either way, it seems worth asking that genuine question, yet you accuse me of making the discussion “toxic”. I think that is projection.

I don’t read your quote from Guyenot about Douglass in the same way. He merely states a fact by saying that Douglass does not introduce his readers at any point to any of the evidence that might implicate Israel or zionist actors in the plot. Guyenot’s suggestion in the article is that Douglass is motivated by Christian holocaust guilt in his decision to not consider/ include the Dimona dispute in his book (which is largely about nuclear disarmament). I don’t think Guyenot is implying ‘sinister motives’ on the part of Douglass. If Douglass cannot do his own research on Dimona and mentally separate that out from any association fallacy concerning holocaust beliefs of other writers who have explored that thread, then so much the worse for him.

I have seen the same thing in the 911 research sphere : anyone pointing out evidential threads that lead to Israel and zionist fanatics is downplayed or denigrated. For years I kept reading about the allegation that ‘the Neocons’ were the most likely culprits of the 911 crime, yet such a tiny few actually went on to explore Who were/ are the Neocons? What are they motivated by ?

It boils down to this : if the truth is considered ‘antisemitic’ by the liberal mainstream, the radical Left, the Conservative Right and even much of those who debate conspiracy theories, then what is one to do ? Walk away ? Keep quiet ? Talk around certain subjects, avoiding certain facts?

As a final example, Is it not expanding our knowledge of the whole JFK saga to learn of Arnon Milchen’s life as a Mossad agent and film producer, someone involved in the procurement of nuclear technology for Israel’s illegal bomb, yet someone who produced the most watched film about JFK ? (That is a rhetorical question, yet where do we read of this ? in Piper of course)

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Nov 28, 2023 12:38 PM
Reply to  Turning Moment

All of that is your right to question, but I think your approach is very bad form and has the effect of shutting down conversation, whether intended or not. We’re not here to oversee some McCarthy-esque witch-hunt for Mossad infiltrators. Let me be very clear about that. I don’t like the tone of your comment, and I ask you to dial that right back.

I personally believe you were implying the above and you are concern trolling, despite what you say, but whether intended or not, the implication can certainly be inferred. By all means invite questions, share evidence, perhaps an author will even respond. Let’s discuss, but I will not accept any more libellous implications like above. A cheap shot. Thanks. A2

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 2:02 AM
Reply to  Turning Moment

Well, it exonerates them in the sense only that it re-directs some or all blame. But I don’t see that exoneration is even an issue, since it could have been a joint venture, or false flag, or whatever. “Murder on the Orient Express” too, where it turns out all the suspects were complicit and shared guilt.

Perhaps “exonerates” is simply a way of saying that it takes the glare off the CIA and sends it elsewhere, but the CIA already did that sixty years ago with the far-fetched and fabulously false (flag) “story” that LHO was a Russian mole and the hit was commie-based.

All that noise is actually a much stronger argument that it was Nazi-based, as both Castro in his speech the day after the assassination, and Mae Brussel in her landmark essay, “The Nazi Connection to the Assassination” demonstrate more than amply, with evidence. And the Stone film JFK.

Wasn’t Hitler and his SS using exactly the same ploy only twenty or thirty years before, pinning all the crimes that could be pinned on commies and Jews. And associates. That’s SOP for them, so it seems all too suspect that we hear that analysis so seldom.

Over the years.

SIXTY

A long paper route.

Portonchok
Portonchok
Nov 27, 2023 7:47 PM

All very good points, except that the potential Israel connection sould not be ignored.
After all, one of the excuses for not opening up the files to the public included risk of damage to US “foreign relations”. There’s only one country important enough to the US which is backed to the hilt, come hell or high water, and we know which one it is.

Loverat 8
Loverat 8
Nov 27, 2023 8:43 PM
Reply to  Portonchok

I have asked on multiple occasions to Off G. Cancel my subscription. Until you do I will keep asking.

Portonchok
Portonchok
Nov 28, 2023 10:06 AM
Reply to  Loverat 8

No idea what you’re on about.

NickM
NickM
Nov 28, 2023 7:30 AM
Reply to  Portonchok

“I refuse to embarrass America’s greatest ally for the sake of a few dead American sailors” — Kennedy’s successor as POTU$A (LB.Johnson) when asked how he was going to punish Israel’s murderous False Flag attack on USS Liberty.

Brianborou
Brianborou
Nov 27, 2023 7:46 PM

The CIA + others in the US murdered J.F.K but who was controlling them. Well, the Rockefeller’s for one since they directly and indirectly provided Dulles with funds to buy a mansion but there others much further in the shadows who resided, and still reside, in the City of London plus other financial centres in Europe.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 2:33 AM
Reply to  Brianborou

That’s perhaps the key question. CIA is only the private guard dogs of certain interests. Dulles & Co. didn’t proceed by their own say-so, the orders came from higher up. There is much evidence to suggest it was the higher levels of Freemasonry. Poppy Bush was a 33rd degree Freemason.

One of the takeaways from my recent view of “Killers of the Flower Moon” was the impactful way, as in his Gangs of New York, 2002, that Scorsese shows how callous was William King Hale, the serial killer who rubbed out so many of an Osage native clan in Oklahoma, to steal their oil-rich land. Scorsese offers some deft touches to show that total disregard for the natives’ lives, indelibly shocking. “You can’t get a conviction for kicking a dog or killing an Indian?”

When they dynamite a house of two members of the family gruesomely, Hale, “King of the Osage” rolls back into town and past the house that is surrounded by gawkers, in its obliteration, and says to his driver matter-of-factly and with a smirk, “Ha, they used too much dynamite.” Or words to that effect. (Same tone as saying that the gardener left the water on too long and badly soaked some of the grass.) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_King_Hale]

But a favorite scene is when he paddles his nephew Ernest, the protagonist of the film, in a Masonic back room, stating that he’s doing this ritual as an honorable “32 degree Freemason” bent on teaching the lesson fully.

That was a revelation for me, and I looked up some Freemasonry sites that have some commentary about this. One states to its fellow “brothers” that most Masons distinguish themselves as true Masons, while others show themselves to have never been any more than merest “members” and so dishonored. Two kinds, then.

That really intrigued. There was no explanation of how he rose to the 32 degree, just that he was never, sadly, really, a true Mason. Seemed like a pretty convenient safety valve for any scandal caused.

Same kind of basic mechanism used for the P2 Lodge (Italian: “Propaganda Due” or “Two”). When Licio Gelli and Roberto Calvi nearly bankrupted the Vatican through their malfeasance at Banco Vaticano and Banco Ambrosiano, it was later declared that P2 (of which Berlusconi was a member in good standing at the time) was really not a Masonic Lodge after all, but a “pseudo” Masonic Lodge.

See what we mean?

Licio Gelli was interviewed some years later by an Italian journalist (on the air, I believe) and asked what his true interest and ambition was. He answered, “Puppet master.”

“Killers of the Flower Moon” graphically displays the mindsets behind much of this. That is Scorsese’s real gift, to use film to show atmospherically those social realities in memorable ways. Those scenes will haunt me as not just memorable but unforgettable. Who cares if any of it is all true to the events! Even when it so often is.

His historical surrealism makes them true! He makes them alive as the truth of the deeper sickness that they caused in society.

It’s just all mobbed up now. He shows that.

NickM
NickM
Nov 28, 2023 7:43 AM
Reply to  John Ervin

“He makes them alive as the truth of the deeper sickness that they caused in society.”

The “deeper sickness” with which JFK infected U$ society was not his anti-Communism (Cuba, Vietnam, Khruschev nuclear crisis) because that disease was already chronic in the U$ body politic (Truman, Macarthy and the start of the Cold War). The Kennedy sickness was exceptionalism coupled with fiscal irresponsibility (First Men on the Moon) — typical behaviour of a cocky rich brat.

“Go anywhere! Do anything!” — JFK.

judith
judith
Nov 28, 2023 1:34 PM
Reply to  John Ervin

Interesting. I just finished reading a story on Global Research about the atrocities against First Nation people of what was to become the United States of America, beginning in the 1600’s.
I believe you cannot begin to talk about “reparations” in this United States of America until you address what happened to the people that were here first.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/why-first-nations-people-regard-americas-thanksgiving-day-as-a-national-day-of-mourning/5660426

NickM
NickM
Nov 28, 2023 3:44 PM
Reply to  judith

The first Naqba?

I read an interesting article about a religious change in Anglo-American colonial policy between the era of The Pilgrim Fathers (1600-1700) and the Victorian era. America and Australia were colonized in the first period, and the natives were hunted to extinction. India and South Africa were colonized later, and the natives survived to regain their country — and even partialy take over the “Motherland”).

“Sweetness and Light” — Victorian Christian slogan.

Jenner
Jenner
Nov 29, 2023 2:21 AM
Reply to  NickM

@Judith and NickM: more of the Wokeist ignorance that sometimes strays onto Off-G. Memo: if UK, you both are likely descendants of the victors from various genocides and land dispossessions (Western Hunter Gatherers 10,000BC done in by, Neolithic Farmers 5,000 BC done in by Bronze Age Corded Ware/Bell Beaker 2,000BC, etc.)

So work out what genes in you owe what and how much to the others, good luck with that, let me know the net balance of Self-Hating Guilt. And the absolution for the guilt is (drum roll): Open Borders, No Human Being is Illegal Anywhere.

For the Regressive Left, time does not heal all wounds, it exists to tear them open again, or still, so as to achieve Power with that nice Mr Sunak or Mr Varadkhar

Hunted to extinction? I In the 60s there were around 150k Aust, aborigines, now there are ca. 600k. Even allowing for the nonsensical self-definition under Aust, law, that was already an impressive number in the 60s.

ariel
ariel
Nov 28, 2023 9:46 PM
Reply to  judith

You could take it directly from the Lakota. Leonard Crow Dog and Wallace Black Elk in 1972, before they were the Medicine Men. Wichasa Wakan for the stand at Wounded Knee in February 1973. In 2015 I was challenged to go and do the Sundance/ Wakan Hoye Wachipi in South Dakota, by Elva who sent me this vid yesterday. She is married to a Medicine Man in SD.

ariel
ariel
Nov 28, 2023 10:06 PM
Reply to  judith

I was challenged to go do the Sundance/Wakan Hoye Wachipi in South Dakota in 2015.
I never met the ‘Chief’ as he was called, but I did the ordeal and learned a lot. 32 back-to-back sweatlodgesIInipi/Initi for a start.
He (Leonard Crow Dog, or more correctly Crow Coyote) and ‘Uncle’ Wallace Black Elk are seen explaining Lakota tradition in 1972 the year before they were both the Medicine men/Wichasa wakan for the February 1973 stand at Wounded Knee, a protest against continuing genocide. Elva is married to a Medicine man, and sent me this video yehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asnsTkLCNV4sterday.

ariel
ariel
Nov 28, 2023 10:08 PM
Reply to  ariel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asnsTkLCNV4
I think I’m up too late.

Lost in a dark wood
Lost in a dark wood
Nov 27, 2023 7:40 PM

There is nothing to debate . . .

– Edward Curtin

These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with.

– Barack Obama

BTW:

1) I’ve never been to a “conspiracy conference” of any sort and don’t intend to start. Unfortunately, I bought Douglass’s book along with a number of others by various frauds (e.g. DRG) and controlled operatives, but I doubt I’ll buy any more!

2) For reasons I present under a different article, I don’t subscribe to the “Israel did it” narrative. However, there are still a number of reasons (e.g. technology transfer) as to why it should be debated.

Lost in a dark wood
Lost in a dark wood
Nov 28, 2023 6:58 PM

Do people really think the CIA (or equivalent) would have failed to set up the “truth” and “peace” movements?

AlanG
AlanG
Nov 27, 2023 7:39 PM

Nah. It was probably Mossad.

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 28, 2023 2:09 AM
Reply to  AlanG

There is a real joke to be dug out here: For the first 30 years the CIA was pinning the blame for the hideous hit on the commies. Then, after the Oliver Stone film JFK changed enough public perception, and many landmark essays about LHO shifted focus to others, for the next 30 years, to the present day, they flipped the script at Langley and pinned the blame on the eternal J*w, history’s other big scapegoat in this, as well as the one size fits all for many things well before it.

Commies & J*ws. Isn’t that the old Nazi playbook going back to the 5th century in Kiev Rus? (aka Ukraine)

Okay, those were Goths and Huns and hordes of the day, technically not Nazis, but all of them lusting for Russian land, and true, they had slightly different logos. But just a few fashions different all in all.

Same deal of the old deck. Off the bottom.

Placental Mammal
Placental Mammal
Nov 28, 2023 5:20 AM
Reply to  John Ervin

Verbal Diarrhoea

Your output of propaganda is prodigious. I can’t believe you do this because of the goodness of your heart.

les online
les online
Nov 28, 2023 4:44 AM
Reply to  AlanG

You sure Moriarty wasnt behind it ?
Sherlock would likely see Moriarty’s hand in it…

John Ervin
John Ervin
Nov 29, 2023 12:58 AM
Reply to  les online

One of my favorite films was “Young Sherlock Holmes” by Spielberg. The very title implies that Sherlock was secretly J*wish, which certainly adds another wrinkle to the geopolitics of such dastardly deeds. (Moriarty was an international scoundrel, too, summoning ancient curses & rites & hallucinogens from Pharaoh’s Egypt.)

Can you say “Elementary!”