Wednesday, November 20, 2013

John F. Kennedy Assassination Happened Fifty Years Ago! (Part 2)


*******
*******
Buzzsaw : JFK Assassination Truth After 50 Years of Conspiracy
*******
The JFK Assassination: What really happened
*******
JFK Deathbed confession - Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura
*******
“No matter how big the lie; repeat it often enough and the masses will regard it as the truth.”
― John F. Kennedy
*******
Rothschild Ties to JFK Assassination
By Michael Collins Piper (Author of "Final Judgment")
American Free Press
(Edited and abridged by henrymakow.com)
November 22, 2013
Clay Shaw was the only man prosecuted for the assassination of JFK. His associate on the Board of MOSSAD front "Permindex" was Louis Bloomfield, a longtime Rothschild errand boy.
The government's handling of the investigation of John Kennedy's murder was a fraud. It was the greatest fraud in the history of our country. It probably was the greatest fraud ever perpetrated in the history of humankind. That doesn't mean that we have to accept the continued existence of the kind of government which allows this to happen. We can do something about it. We're forced either to leave this country or to accept the authoritarianism that has developed - the authoritarianism which tells us that in the year 2029 we can see the evidence about what happened to John Kennedy. - Jim Garrison (Closing speech at trial of Clay Shaw Feb 28, 1969)
Dozens of new books and reports from diverse sources purporting to bring out "the truth at last" about the John F. Kennedy assassination on its 50th anniversary are suspiciously ignoring the very real Rothschild connection to the JFK conspiracy.
Right now the big push is to pin the blame on former Vice President Lyndon Johnson. The "LBJ Killed JFK" theme is rampant, even in the self-styled "alternative" media.
However, AMERICAN FREE PRESS is pleased to be the first publication ever to report on the findings of Maurice Phillipps--an otherwise unheralded researcher --who uncovered the Rothschild banking dynasty connection to a key player linked to the JFK conspiracy.
Here's the story, one which should force JFK researchers--at least the honest ones--to take a whole new look at the death of the president.
(left, Jim Garrison)
Today, although the JFK assassination is the focus of a media frenzy, many writers avoid delving into (or even mentioning) New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison's unsuccessful 1969 prosecution of trade executive Clay Shaw for involvement in the JFK conspiracy, knowing Garrison had turned up leads pointing in some uncomfortable and controversial directions.
In fact, when Garrison launched his investigation of Shaw he had unwittingly unearthed the "Rothschild connection" to the JFK conspiracy, although Garrison himself apparently didn't realize it at first. This explains why there was such a concerted effort--coming from the highest levels--to derail and destroy the hard-driving prosecutor.
While many first heard of Garrison's prosecution of Shaw through Oliver Stone's film "JFK"--which presented the JFK conspiracy as the work of LBJ and the military brass, aided by rogue Central Intelligence Agency operatives--there was much more that Stone left out.
Below, AFP provides an annotated overview of the astounding revelations by Canadian writer Phillipps whose work has heretofore been suppressed. Although Phillipps's book, De Dallas a Montreal, is available only in French, Phillipps has written in English of his research on his well-documented website.
Once you learn of what Phillipps has uncovered, you'll understand why so many truth seekers are so determined to suppress his findings.
Rothschild-Israeli Ties to JFK
• Researcher has found the mother of all connections between Israel and the JFK assassination
Oliver Stone's 1991 drama "JFK" focused on New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison's 1969 prosecution of trade executive (and longtime CIA asset) Clay Shaw for involvement in the JFK assassination conspiracy. But Stone diverted attention away from Shaw's link to a key figure in the global operations of the Rothschild banking dynasty.
While Stone referenced--in passing--Shaw's membership on the board of a Rome-based corporate shell known as Permindex, subsidiary of another entity, the Centro Mondiale Commerciale, which Stone portrayed as a CIA front, he provided only a sliver of the much bigger picture.
Documents unearthed by Canadian author Maurice Phillipps demonstrate beyond question that Shaw's associate on the board of Permindex (its chief executive officer and primary shareholder), Louis Bloomfield of Montreal, was a longtime attorney for the Rothschild dynasty, particularly for Baron Edmund de Rothschild of London, going back as far as World War II.
(left, Bloomfield - Rothschild errand boy)
Having studied Bloomfield's private files, which Bloomfield donated to the Canada National Archives, Phillipps found what he describes as "many documents" revealing the Rothschild connection.
The Israeli connection is no surprise. The Rothschilds have been Israel's foremost patrons. In addition, Bloomfield and Montreal liquor baron Sam Bronfman--the head of the World Jewish Congress, another Bloomfield associate--were among a clique of money kings who, in the 1950s, bankrolled Israel's secret nuclear arms program.
While Phillipps has never suggested Bloomfield was involved in any way in the JFK assassination, he has pointed out that Bloomfield's Rothschild connection has been otherwise ignored.
Phillipps's findings on the Rothschild-Bloomfield link also put to rest the rumor that Permindex was
proof of "Nazi" involvement in the JFK conspiracy, a patently ridiculous theme propounded by one Mae Brussell whose father, Rabbi Edgar Magnin, was spiritual leader of the Jewish movie moguls in Hollywood.
PERMINDEX
How and why Clay Shaw of New Orleans ended up in the Permindex operation is no longer a mystery.
Shaw's closest friends, who provided the funds for his defense against Garrison--the powerful Stern family, leaders of the New Orleans Jewish community--were primary shareholders in the Apollo, Pennsylvania-based NUMEC nuclear facility from which American nuclear materiel was illicitly channeled to Israel with the collaboration of CIA chief of counterintelligence, James Angleton, a devoted ally of Israel as head of the CIA's Mossad desk.
Though avoiding the Mossad connection, many researchers now say Angleton was the key CIA figure in the JFK conspiracy.
The Sterns also owned WDSU radio and television, which hyped Lee Harvey Oswald as a "pro- Castro agitator" at precisely the time Shaw was acting as a handler for Oswald in the summer of 1963 while Oswald was in New Orleans being set up as the "patsy" in the JFK conspiracy.
(Clay Shaw, left)
So Shaw's Rothschild--and Mossad--connection via Permindex was solidified by the Stern link to Israel's nuclear weapons program we now know JFK was so determined to stop, another point ignored by most JFK writers.
MOSSAD FRONT
All told, a variety of evidence indicates Permindex fronted for a Mossad operation funding Israel's drive to assemble the atomic bomb.
A primary Permindex shareholder and the chief depository for its funds--the Banque De Credit Internationale [BCI] of Geneva--was the fiefdom of Tibor Rosenbaum, a Mossad arms procurement official referred to as one of Israel's "founding fathers."
BCI was also chief money launderer for the crime syndicate of Israeli loyalist Meyer Lansky, business partner of the aforementioned Sam Bronfman, associate of Louis Bloomfield and the Rothschilds.
In fact, Lansky's Israeli biographers note that "after Israel became a state, almost 90% of its purchases of arms abroad was channeled through Rosenbaum's bank. The financing of many of Israel's most daring secret operations was carried out through the funds in [BCI]."
ISRAELI AGENT MADE "JFK"
We now understand why Oliver Stone chose not to pursue these avenues when he made "JFK."
(Milchan, center)
The man who bankrolled Stone's film,
Israeli arms dealer Arnon Milchan--listed as "executive producer"--was a primary player in Israel's nuclear program. Head of a global empire in weapons, chemicals, electronics, aerospace and plastics--operating in the Rothschild sphere--Milchan (now perhaps the biggest mover in Hollywood) has been described as "Mr. Israel," as "secretive yet famous, but only among famous people," and is a close friend and business partner of Rothschild-sponsored media baron Rupert Murdoch.
Although Milchan--partnered with the interconnecting Rothschild-controlled media conglomerates Havas and StudioCanal in financing Stone's extravaganza--paid author Jim Marrs a reported $200K for rights to his book Crossfire (a partial foundation for Stone's film), Jim Garrison's family had to go to court to claim promised proceeds from "JFK" after Milchan claimed the blockbuster turned a loss. On a procedural technicality, a federal court ruled for Milchan against the Garrisons.
(Oliver Stone, Director of "JFK" steers attention away from Mossad)
Well-known JFK writer, A.J. Weberman--a U.S.-Israeli dual citizen--says Garrison once showed him an unpublished novel which Weberman says was "a fictional work that placed the blame for John Kennedy's death on the Mossad."
Although Garrison did publish a JFK novel, The Star-Spangled Contract, it did not allude to Mossad involvement. But if Weberman is to be believed, Garrison had ultimately figured out the Rothschild-Israeli connection to the JFK conspiracy.
And that says much about what many of today's JFK researchers are choosing to ignore.
-----------------------
Thanks to Victoria for the Tip!
Related- Must read! The Illuminati Jewish Royalists in Clay Shaw's Address Book & Background on Permindex
and -
The CIA-Permindex Connection
and
"JFK Murder Solved"
- Piper - Mossad Role in JFK Assassination
*******
PBS Whitewashes Oswald’s KGB Connections
By Cliff Kincaid
November 22, 2013
NewsWithViews.com
In its nearly two-hour documentary on the Kennedy assassination, “Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?,” public television actually interviewed three former Soviet KGB officers who acknowledged contact with the assassin Oswald. But these communist intelligence operatives insisted they did not encourage Oswald’s plot to kill the American president.
Russian President Vladmir Putin, a former KGB officer, must have been pleased with their performance.
In this case, the taxpayer-supported Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and its Frontline series failed to provide the “definitive investigation of the mysterious life and character of Lee Harvey Oswald.”
It may have been a mystery at one time, but not 50 years later.
The fingerprints of the Soviet intelligence service and its Cuban affiliate are all over Oswald.
One of the main controversies covered superficially in the program was Oswald’s trip to Mexico City—a favorite place for foreign communist governments to contact communist agents living in the U.S.
PBS claimed that Oswald visited the Soviet and Cuban embassies looking for a visa, but was rebuffed by communist officials. It said, “…in the end both the Russians and the Cubans rejected him. All his plans to fight for Castro and return to Russia had come to nothing. He had nowhere to go but back to America.”
Needless to say, taking the KGB’s word on such a grave matter is not responsible journalism. In fact, it is downright laughable.
One of the KGB officers interviewed by PBS was Valery Kostikov, an espionage agent connected to political assassinations. He was used to make the point that the CIA had misled American investigators about Oswald’s alleged meeting at the Soviet embassy.
Fifty years after the fact, our media are still covering up the conspiracy to kill Kennedy based in Moscow and Havana. Kennedy was an enemy because he was a dedicated anti-communist who wanted to overthrow Cuban dictator Fidel Castro and stop communism’s advance in the Western hemisphere.
For some strange reason, PBS decided to take the word of former officers of the KGB.


A better source would have been Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa’s book, Programmed to Kill: Moscow’s Responsibility for Lee Harvey Oswald’s Assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. It examines in detail the KGB’s disinformation Operation Dragon to “throw the blame on various elements in the United States for killing their own president.”
Over the years the Soviets have successfully confused many people about their role, blaming the CIA, the Mafia, the right-wing, Texas oil men, or Lyndon Johnson.
One of the lies was that Oswald went to the Soviet embassy in Mexico City to get a Russian visa so that he could then travel to Cuba. In fact, Pacepa says, Oswald met with Kostikov outside the embassy, in order to discuss Kennedy’s murder.
The PBS program documented many of Oswald's communist connections, including his membership in the pro-Castro Fair Play for Cuba Committee, and his defection to Soviet Russia and return to the U.S. However, it whitewashed the nature of his ongoing relationship with the Soviet KGB.
In an interview with Accuracy in Media, Pacepa, the highest ranking defector ever from the Soviet-bloc, discussed media coverage of the anniversary of the Kennedy assassination, including a controversial CNN column by University of Virginia political scientist Larry J. Sabato casting aspersions on the conduct of the CIA and FBI.
Pacepa told Accuracy in Media, “Larry Sabato does not know anything about this crime of the century, which sent the whole country into profound shock, but he accuses various American authorities of lying about it without having any evidence they really lied. Thousands of other people without any sort of expertise joined this party of lying, each viewing events from his own narrow perspective, and each accusing the U.S. government of deceiving its people.”
Sabato wondered what Oswald was doing in Mexico City just before the assassination. He wrote, “It would also be useful to know what really happened when Oswald visited the Cuban and Soviet embassies in Mexico City just two months before the assassination.”
PBS tried to explain these meetings through interviews with former Cuban and Soviet officials. They insisted Oswald merely wanted to discuss a trip to Cuba.
PBS claimed Oswald was told by Cuban officials that “he could only enter Cuba on a temporary visa and only if he was in transit to Russia” and so he “walked the short distance to the Soviet diplomatic compound.”
The program added, “At the Soviet embassy, he [Oswald] met with three consular officials. In fact, all three were KGB officers working under diplomatic cover. In this, their first interview, they recall that Oswald’s hands were shaking and his behavior was erratic.”
“Oswald was told it would take several months to get a Soviet visa, but without one, he would be unable to go to Cuba. Oswald took the news badly,” PBS reported.

Oleg M. Nechiporenko was also featured in the PBS program as another KGB official who wanted nothing to do with Oswald. He wrote the book, Passport to Assassination: the Never-Before-Told Story of Lee Harvey Oswald by the KGB Colonel Who Knew Him, another element of Operation Dragon.
PBS said, “As he left the embassy, Oswald should have been observed by CIA operatives. From houses across the street, the CIA was maintaining non-stop photo surveillance on the Russians and Cubans. Yet the CIA claimed it failed to take one single photograph of Oswald.”
This may be because Oswald did not meet the KGB at the embassy. Pacepa says the Soviets promoted the report that Oswald went to the Soviet embassy in Mexico City to cover his “iron meeting” outside the embassy with Kostikov.
Pacepa explains, “Documents obtained by the Warren Commission prove that during that trip to Mexico City Oswald met a Soviet diplomat, but the meeting was secret, outside of the Embassy. The problem is that, in order to understand those documents, one should be familiar with the KGB super-secret technique of the ‘iron meeting,’ a standard intelligence procedure for emergency situations, with ‘iron’ meaning ironclad or invariable.”
That “diplomat” was in fact Kostikov, an officer of the KGB’s department for assassinations abroad, who was assigned under diplomatic cover to the Soviet embassy in Mexico City.
Pacepa says the facts about the meeting were found in various effects left behind in the garage of Ruth Paine, an American at whose house Oswald spent a critical weekend. A photocopy of a letter Oswald sent to the Soviet embassy was recovered by the Warren Commission and referred to “Comrade Kostin.”
Pacepa comments, “The fact that Oswald used an operational codename for Kostikov confirms that both his meeting with Kostikov in Mexico City and his correspondence with the Soviet Embassy in Washington were conducted in a KGB operational context. The fact that Oswald did not use his real name to obtain his Mexican travel permit confirms this conclusion.”
Pacepa notes that a Mexico City guide book and a Spanish-English dictionary were found among Oswald’s effects after the assassination. The guide book included the Soviet embassy’s telephone number underlined in pencil, the names “Kosten” and “Osvald” noted in Cyrillic on the page listing “Diplomats in Mexico,” and check marks next to five movie theaters on the previous page. Oswald wrote on the back of his Spanish-English dictionary, “buy tickets for bull fight,” and the Plaza México bullring is encircled on his Mexico City map. Also marked on Oswald’s map is the Palace of Fine Arts, a favorite place for tourists to assemble on Sunday mornings to watch the Ballet Folklórico.
Pacepa told AIM these facts strongly suggest that Oswald resorted to an unscheduled or “iron meeting” for an urgent talk with Kostikov in Mexico City. Summarizing the evidence of the meeting, he says a brief encounter was held at a movie house to arrange a meeting for the following day at the bullfights, a brief encounter took place in front of the Palace of Fine Arts to pass Kostikov one of the bullfight tickets Oswald had bought, and a long meeting was held at the Sunday bullfight.
“We cannot be sure that everything happened exactly that way—every case officer has his own quirks,” Pacepa says. “But it is clear that Kostikov and Oswald did secretly meet over that weekend of September 28-29, 1963. The letter to the Soviet embassy that Oswald worked so hard on irrefutably proves that.”
This is not to say that the U.S. Government did not engage in a cover-up. Pacepa says the purpose of the Warren Commission, named after its chairman, Chief Justice Earl Warren, was not to investigate the assassination, but rather to invoke the integrity and long experience of its distinguished members in issuing a report designed to calm the populace and dispel all rumors of “foreign complications” stemming from Oswald’s known connections with the Soviet Union and Cuba.
This was confirmed by former FBI agent Herman Bly, who reviewed CIA files on the assassination, including evidence of Oswald’s meeting with Kostikov, and wrote, “…I believe the heads of the FBI, CIA, and President Johnson wanted the Oswald case brought to a conclusion as fast as possible as they did not want another crisis with the Soviet Union so soon after the Cuban missile crisis.”
“Sadly,” Pacepa says, “we are now commemorating 50 years since the killing of a widely admired American president. Let’s hope that all those who are still trying to make a name for themselves by building fantasies around this national drama will stop. It is time for the truth, not for more fantasy books.”

Former ABC newsman Sam Donaldson, appearing on ABC’s “This Week” in 2009, said about the murder of JFK: “In his dying breath I’d like to be at [Castro’s] bedside and say, did you do it? Meaning November 22, 1963.” After some co-panelists expressed surprise at this statement, Donaldson responded, “Wait a moment. I think it is still open.”
Actually, the case is closed. The communists killed Kennedy. But because of the media’s love affair with Castro, as I point out in this column, liberal reporters can’t bring themselves to admit the truth. It is a triumph of bias over facts and evidence that leaves many people still in the dark about the murder of an American president.
© 2013 Cliff Kincaid - All Rights Reserved
Cliff Kincaid, a veteran journalist and media critic, Cliff concentrated in journalism and communications at the University of Toledo, where he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree.

Cliff has written or co-authored nine books on media and cultural affairs and foreign policy issues. One of Cliff's books, "Global Bondage: The UN Plan to Rule the World" is still awailable.
Cliff has appeared on Hannity & Colmes, The O’Reilly Factor, Crossfire and has been published in the Washington Post, Washington Times, Chronicles, Human Events and Insight.
Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc.
E-Mail:
cliff.kincaid@aim.org
*******
JFK conspiracy theorist points finger at LBJ
Michael Clancy, The Arizona Republic
November 21, 2013
Scottsdale, Ariz., attorney Craig Zirbel maintains there was a "Texas connection" in the Kennedy assassination.
PHOENIX -- LBJ did it.
He didn't pull the trigger, but he was in the thick of the conspiracy, according to a Scottsdale attorney who has written two books on the subject.
President John F. Kennedy was shot dead in Dallas 50 years ago Friday, and the attorney is certain that Lee Harvey Oswald's only involvement was as the fall guy.
On a recent morning, Craig Zirbel is sitting at a nondescript office in the Scottsdale Airpark, behind a desk that he says once belonged to Joseph McCarthy, the Wisconsin senator famous for his claims that Communists had infiltrated the government.
Zirbel has written two books on the Kennedy assassination, and, McCarthyesque government conspiracies aside, he says the public has but two choices on deciding what to believe about that November day: Either Lee Harvey Oswald, a man with no motive did it, or another theory must be devised.
A majority of people, according to polls, believe the conspiracy idea and have for a long time.
Zirbel delivers his conclusions with enthusiasm, waving his arms and raising his voice.
"I don't believe Oswald pulled the trigger," Zirbel says.
The attorney has been interested in the assassination for a long time.
Zirbel was in third grade when Kennedy was killed. He got a copy of the Warren Commission report on the assassination a year later, shortly after it was published. He says he did not understand much of it at the time, but he maintained his interest over the years.
The report, based on an investigation by a select government committee, concluded that Oswald acted alone in killing Kennedy. That has been the official finding ever since.
But that has not stopped conspiracy theories from persisting.
Zirbel has self-published two books on the subject, "The Texas Connection" in 1991 and "The Final Chapter on the Assassination of John F. Kennedy" in 2010. The titles have been well-received by some people, criticized by others — typical of the contentious and eccentric world of Kennedy conspiracy theorists.
One of them, political strategist Roger Stone, is the author of "The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case against LBJ," which came out this year.
"Craig Zirbel did some of the earliest and most important seminal work on LBJ's involvement in the murder of JFK," Stone said in an email. "I have used his book, 'The Texas Connection,' with attribution. I have tried to build on the solid foundation built by Zirbel."
Not all assassination buffs agree. It is easy to find numerous commentators who believe Zirbel misinterpreted some of the data.
The title of the book gives away Zirbel's position: that Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson and his associates in Texas were behind the assassination.
If Oswald did not pull the trigger — and Zirbel provides a list of reasons he believes he did not — then the explanation becomes more elusive.
*******
Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson, left, and President John F. Kennedy attend a dinner for Sen. Carl Hayden in Arizona. (Photo: Robert Markow, The Arizona Republic)
*******
Those who have interest in the case know the scenarios:
-- The Central Intelligence Agency, perhaps upset by changes in the agency that followed the failed Bay of Pigs invasion aimed at ousting Fidel Castro from leadership in Cuba.
-- The Mafia, arguably because of law-enforcement moves against organized crime by the Kennedy administration.
-- Anti-Castro Cuban exile groups, upset by the Bay of Pigs failure, perhaps working closely with the previous two groups.
-- Others, including the military industrial complex, a government agency such as the FBI, Southern segregationists, the Soviet Union or American conservatives.
Zirbel makes the case that Johnson, and only Johnson, had the motive, the means and the opportunity to mount a conspiracy against the president.
The motive: political gain. There were political differences, personal issues, Johnson's involvement in several scandals and his desire to become president before he got too old.
The opportunity: Kennedy's visit to LBJ's home turf in Texas. Johnson and his associates controlled many of the trip's details.
The means: shots by multiple gunmen firing from the direction of the now infamous grassy knoll. Hired perhaps by Johnson associates in the oil business, who had ties to the Mafia, Zirbel insists, there were at least two shooters.
He also emphasizes that as president, Johnson had the means to block any serious investigation.
And Oswald? His movements, his statements and his background make no sense if he was the lone gunman, Zirbel says. Even the site of the fatal shots was out of whack: Oswald would have had a much easier target several seconds earlier, as the motorcade slowed to turn twice, Zirbel notes.
It's the awkward turns, rather than the otherwise direct route the motorcade took, that strikes Zirbel.
"It's the thing that blows my mind away," he says. "It's the first time a route ever was changed from what the Secret Service had established."
The revised route took the motorcade directly past the Texas School Book Depository building and Dealey Plaza, site of the grassy knoll, from which many theorists believe the shots were fired.
Zirbel says John Connally, then Texas governor, had insisted upon the arrangement. Connally was an ally of Johnson. He, in fact, lost a fight over motorcade seating arrangements, was forced to ride with Kennedy and was wounded in the shooting.
Zirbel also points to statements by two known participants in his conspiracy: Oswald, who shouted, "I'm a patsy!" to nearby reporters at the Dallas jail, and Oswald's killer, Jack Ruby, who was quoted as saying, "If you knew the truth, you'd be amazed."
But it has been 50 years, and no conclusive evidence has emerged. Zirbel says the public is beginning to lose interest in the assassination. He says he never had interest in the "minutae," and is losing interest generally.
He has begun to sell off his assassination memorabilia, including his replica of the car the president was riding in that fateful day. Media calls have slowed down, too, bumping back up only because of the significance of the anniversary.
He still wants the public to see the case for what it is.
"All I want to get out," he says, "is that there was no lone assassin, and there was a conspiracy."
He and his like-minded investigators in the field have to be gratified with their efforts, although the numbers have slipped over the last decade.
According to a recent survey from the Associated Press, conducted in mid-April, 59 percent of Americans think multiple people were involved in a conspiracy to kill the president, while 24 percent think Oswald acted alone, and 16 percent are unsure. A 2003 Gallup poll found that 75 percent of Americans felt there was a conspiracy.
The Oswald-acted-alone results, meanwhile, are the highest since the period three years after the assassination, when 36 percent said one man was responsible for Kennedy's death.
*******

Hoover, The Mob, LBJ and The Texas Connection  
 *******
The JFK Assassination. Disputing the Official Theory that Lee Harvey Oswald was the “Lone Assassin”
By Dr. Gary G. Kohls
Global Research, November 20, 2013
 
Below is more documentation putting the lie to the media coverage (and the perpetual cover-up) of the 50th anniversary of the assassination of JFK. The powers-that-be desperately want as many of us viewers as possible to believe the easily disprovable Big Lie Theory that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone crazed assassin of the president on November 22, 1963.
Last week I watched three of PBS’s JFK retrospectives, including Frontline’s “Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?” and the fraudulent pseudoscientific “ballistics special” on NOVA [proudly underwritten by David Koch!]. I also caught some specials on NBC, CBS and ABC, and I was uniformly frustrated (predictably) at the consistency of the propaganda that is being orchestrated to lead us comfortably numb sheeple to nod our heads and agree that the official theories about the assassination were correct. None of the compelling evidence that I list below was allowed to be shown.
During some of the retrospectives that I watched there usually was some denegration of the true patriots who have resisted the brain-washing and independently examined the evidence disproving the official story. These dissenters (who haven’t yet lost the ability to think critically) were just dismissed as “conspiracy theorists”.
The following are some of the important items that disprove the official story line and that were never mentioned on any of the JFK retrospectives that I watched.
1) JFK’s brain or parts of his skull were thrown backwards (out of a large exit wound in the back of the skull) onto the trunk of the limo – which is the reason why Jackie was famously seen on the film footage turning around and reaching backwards. The Secret Service guy testified frequently that Jackie was not reaching for him, but for fragments of JFK’s brain. Again this is more evidence that one of the two head shots that killed JFK came from the front.
Below is the link to the statement of secret service agent Clint Hill (from 1975) saying that Jackie wasn’t reaching out to him, but rather she was reaching to retrieve a chunk of JFK’s brain. (Apparently, according to other interviews that Hill has given, he has also been spouting the easily refutable official story about Oswald being the lone shooter and that there were only 3 audible shots – which contradicts many witnesses who heard up to 6 shots. Hill knows what happens to whistleblowers who tell unwelcome truths that expose government conspiracies.)
2) Also proving that there was at least one shooter in front of the motorcade, the surgical resident at Parkland Hospital, (Dr Ronald Jones) who was one of the several Parkland Hospital surgeons who attended JFK (all of whom, incidentally, also testified about the existence of the small entrance bullet wound in JFK’s throat), gave testimony on last Sunday’s Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer about the tiny “1/4 inch” entry wound in JFK’s throat (trauma surgeons know that entry wounds are small, and exit wounds are large – like the large blow-out wound at JFK’s right occipital area of the skull, also proving a shot coming from in front of the motorcade).
That small entry wound proves the conspiracy theory (now a “conspiracy fact”) that there was more than one shooter and therefore discredits the Warren Commission’s conclusions about a “lone crazed gunman” and therefore “no conspiracy”.
By the way, any good journalist would have asked Dr Jones about the significance of the tiny entrance wound in the front of the neck, but of course Scheiffer is no longer a good journalist. Rather, he is just an average millionaire talking head/anchor man, a mouthpiece of officialdom and a mouthpiece for the powerful multinational mega-corporate owners of the mainstream media who want us to not ask questions, not to rock their boat, to not panic and to not start thinking critically about what we are told to believe. Whomever pays the piper, calls the tune.
3) Thirdly, it is important for citizens who should be exposed to the non-corporate side of the story to consult some of Jim Fetzer’s powerful documented evidence that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK and a conspiracy to cover up the evidence which would have led honest investigators to find and name the conspirators. Indeed much of the available evidence presented in Fetzer’s writings about the assassination may not even have involved Oswald (except as a patsy).
It is useful to read what Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren said about the sealed documents that his commission examined. Apparently 50 years of secrecy protecting the identity of the many co-conspirators isn’t long enough. Arlen Specter, George H. W. Bush, the families of Lyndon Johnson, Gerald Ford and other commission members don’t want to risk being humiliated with the evidence of being involved in the murder or the cover-up.
Now -deceased FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, who considered himself above the law, perjured himself in front of the Commission (Warren Commission member congressman Hale Boggs said that Hoover “lied his eyes out”); and Hoover’s loyal FBI “family“, even now, will probably do anything to prevent the release of information exposing Hoover’s involvement in the assassination. (Interestingly, Hoover, a homosexual and a cross-dresser, has no known offspring that would care about the besmirching of his legacy.) Others who want to have the past forgotten forever are the guilty or complicit members of Kennedy’s Secret Service, his Joint Chiefs of Staff and the CIA who are still alive and prosecutable if their involvement were to be revealed.
Current information says that more than a thousand sealed documents with secret information that only commission members and/or its investigators have seen are due to be released in 2017. Previously the sealed documents were not to be opened until 2039. For more check out: http://www.history.com/news/history-lists/9-things-you-may-not-know-about-the-warren-commission
Earl Warren said:
 
“There will come a time when testimony taken by the Commission will be made public. But it might not be in your lifetime. There may be some things that would involve security. This would be preserved but not made public.” — Earl Warren

And listen to some 1968 quotes and warnings from comedian and JFK assassination expert Mort Sahl, who was black-listed after JFK’s death when he came out publically disputing the Warren Commission’s “lone assassin” theory:
“Once the neo-fascists became bold enough to slay the President on the street, they showed their hand. They showed how arrogant they had become.”—Mort Sahl
“(America) has to hang on through a period of the military and the CIA who have a blank check trying to sell fascism. If she can hang on long enough, Americans may yet live in the country in which they were born. And that is the country structured by Tom Paine and Tom Jefferson.” – Mort Sahl
“(Fascism in America) started with the death of Roosevelt. They moved in and they negated every treaty we made with every world leader who didn’t fit the fascist/militarist mold.”—Mort Sahl
For more of the transcript of a 1968 interview with Sahl, go to: http://www.assassinationscience.com/AnHistoricalPerspective-MortSahl.html
Copyright © 2013 Global Research

*******
JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters
Review of James Douglass' Book
Global Research, November 16, 2013
Global Research 25 November 2009
Article first published in November 2009
Despite a treasure-trove of new information having emerged over the last forty-six years, there are many people who still think who killed President John Fitzgerald Kennedy and why are unanswerable questions. There are others who cling to the Lee Harvey Oswald “lone-nut” explanation proffered by the Warren Commission. Both groups agree, however, that whatever the truth, it has no contemporary relevance but is old-hat, history, stuff for conspiracy-obsessed people with nothing better to do. The general thinking is that the assassination occurred almost a half-century ago, so let’s move on.
Nothing could be further from the truth, as James Douglass shows in his extraordinary book, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters (Orbis Books, 2008). It is clearly one of the best books ever written on the Kennedy assassination and deserves a vast readership. It is bound to roil the waters of complacency that have submerged the truth of this key event in modern American history.
It’s not often that the intersection of history and contemporary events pose such a startling and chilling lesson as does the contemplation of the murder of JFK on November 22, 1963 juxtaposed with the situations faced by President Obama today. So far, at least, Obama’s behavior has mirrored Johnson’s, not Kennedy’s, as he has escalated the war in Afghanistan by 34,000. One can’t but help think that the thought of JFK’s fate might not be far from his mind as he contemplates his next move in Afghanistan.
Douglass presents a very compelling argument that Kennedy was killed by “unspeakable” (the Trappist monk Thomas Merton’s term) forces within the U.S. national security state because of his conversion from a cold warrior into a man of peace. He argues, using a wealth of newly uncovered information, that JFK had become a major threat to the burgeoning military-industrial complex and had to be eliminated through a conspiracy planned by the CIA – “the CIA’s fingerprints are all over the crime and the events leading up to it” – not by a crazed individual, the Mafia, or disgruntled anti-Castro Cubans, though some of these may have been used in the execution of the plot.
Why and by whom? These are the key questions. If it can be shown that Kennedy did, in fact, turn emphatically away from war as a solution to political conflict; did, in fact, as he was being urged by his military and intelligence advisers to up the ante and use violence, rejected such advice and turned toward peaceful solutions, then, a motive for his elimination is established. If, furthermore, it can be clearly shown that Oswald was a dupe in a deadly game and that forces within the military/intelligence apparatus were involved with him from start to finish, then the crime is solved, not by fingering an individual who may have given the order for the murder or pulled the trigger, but by showing that the coordination of the assassination had to involve U.S. intelligence agencies, most notably the CIA . Douglass does both, providing highly detailed and intricately linked evidence based on his own research and a vast array of the best scholarship.
We are then faced with the contemporary relevance, and since we know that every president since JFK has refused to confront the growth of the national security state and its call for violence, one can logically assume a message was sent and heeded. In this regard, it is not incidental that former twenty-seven year CIA analyst Raymond McGovern, in a recent interview, warned of the “two CIAs,” one the analytic arm providing straight scoop to presidents, the other the covert action arm which operates according to its own rules. “Let me leave you with this thought,” he told his interviewer, “and that is that I think Panetta (current CIA Director), and to a degree Obama, are afraid – I never thought I’d hear myself saying this – I think they are afraid of the CIA.” He then recommended Douglass’ book, “It’s very well-researched and his conclusion is very alarming.” [i]
Let’s look at the history marshaled by Douglass to support his thesis.
First, Kennedy, who took office in January 1961 as somewhat of a Cold Warrior, was quickly set up by the CIA to take the blame for the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in April 1961. The CIA and generals wanted to oust Castro, and in pursuit of that goal, trained a force of Cuban exiles to invade Cuba. Kennedy refused to go along and the invasion was roundly defeated. The CIA, military, and Cuban exiles bitterly blamed Kennedy. But it was all a sham.
Though Douglass doesn’t mention it, and few Americans know it, classified documents uncovered in 2000 revealed that the CIA had discovered that the Soviets had learned of the date of the invasion more than a week in advance, had informed Castro, but – and here is a startling fact that should make people’s hair stand on end – never told the President. [ii] The CIA knew the invasion was doomed before the fact but went ahead with it anyway. Why? So they could and did afterwards blame JFK for the failure.
This treachery set the stage for events to come. For his part, sensing but not knowing the full extent of the set-up, Kennedy fired CIA Director Allen Dulles (as in a bad joke, later to be named to the Warren Commission) 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) and said he wanted “to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.” Not the sentiments to endear him to a secretive government within a government whose power was growing exponentially.
The stage was now set for events to follow as JFK, in opposition to nearly all his advisers, consistently opposed the use of force in U.S. foreign policy.
In 1961, despite the Joint Chief’s demand to put troops into Laos, 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.”
Also in 1961, he refused to concede to the insistence of his top generals to give them permission to use nuclear weapons in Berlin and Southeast Asia. Walking out of a meeting with top military advisors, Kennedy threw his hands in the air and said, “These people are crazy.”
He refused to bomb and invade Cuba as the military wished during the Cuban missile crisis in 1962. Afterwards he told his friend John Kenneth Galbraith that “I never had the slightest intention of doing so.”
Then in June 1963 he gave an incredible 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.”
A few months later he signed a Limited Test Ban Treaty with Nikita Khrushchev.
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 a total withdrawal by the end of 1965.[iii]
All this he did while secretly engaging in negotiations with Khrushchev via the KGB , Norman Cousins, and Pope John XXIII , and with Castro through various intermediaries, one of whom was French Journalist Jean Daniel. In an interview with Daniel on October 24, 1963 Kennedy said, “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.” Such sentiments were anathema, shall we say treasonous, to the CIA and top generals.
These clear refusals to go to war and his decision 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. As Douglass and others have pointed out, every move Kennedy made was anti-war. This, Douglass argues, was because JFK, a war hero, had been deeply affected by the horror of war and was severely shaken by how close the world had come to destruction during the Cuban missile crisis. Throughout his life he had been touched by death and had come to appreciate the fragility of life. Once in the Presidency, Kennedy underwent a deep metanoia, a spiritual transformation, from Cold Warrior to peace maker. He came to see the generals who advised him as devoid of the tragic sense of life and as hell-bent on war. 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’etat against him. On 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.” And we know that nobody did try to stop it because they had planned it.
But who killed him?
Douglass presents a formidable amount of evidence, some old and some new, against the CIA and covert action agencies within the national security state, and does so in such a logical and persuasive way that any fair-minded reader cannot help but be taken aback; stunned, really. And he links this evidence directly to JFK’s actions on behalf of peace.
He knows, however, that to truly convince he must break a “conspiracy of silence that would envelop our government, our media, our academic institutions, and virtually our entire society from November 22, 1963, to the present.” This “unspeakable,” this hypnotic “collective denial of the obvious,” is sustained by a mass-media whose repeated message is that the truth about such significant events is beyond our grasp, that we will have to drink the waters of uncertainty forever. As for those who don’t, they are relegated to the status of conspiracy nuts.
Fear and uncertainty block a true appraisal of the assassination – that plus the thought that it no longer matters.
It matters. For we know that no president since JFK has dared to buck the military-intelligence-industrial complex. We know a Pax Americana has spread its tentacles across the globe with U.S. military in over 130 countries on 750 plus bases. We know that the amount of blood and money spent on wars and war preparations has risen astronomically.
There is a great deal we know and even more that we don’t want to know, or at the very least, investigate.
If Lee Harvey Oswald was connected to the intelligence community, the FBI and the CIA, then we can logically conclude that he was not “a lone-nut” assassin. Douglass marshals a wealth of evidence to show how from the very start Oswald was moved around the globe like a pawn in a game, and when the game was done, the pawn was eliminated in the Dallas police headquarters. As he begins to trace Oswald’s path, Douglass asks this question: “Why was Lee Harvey Oswald so tolerated and supported by the government he betrayed?” After serving as a U.S. Marine at the CIA’s U-2 spy plane operating base in Japan with a Crypto clearance (higher than top secret but a fact suppressed by the Warren Commission), Oswald left the Marines and defected to the Soviet Union. After denouncing the U.S., working at a Soviet factory in Minsk , and taking a Russian wife – during which time Gary Powers’ U-2 spy plane is 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 a man, Spas T. Raikin, a prominent anti-communist with extensive intelligence connections, recommended by the State Department. He 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 graphic arts company that worked on 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 who, in 1977, on the day he revealed he had contacted Oswald for the CIA and was to meet with the House Select Committee on Assasinations’ Gaeton Fonzi, allegedly committed suicide. Oswald then moved to New Orleans in April 1963 where got a job at the Reilly Coffee Company owned by CIA-affiliated William Reilly. The Reilly Coffee Company was located in close vicinity to the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, and Office of Naval Intelligence offices and a stone’s throw from the office of Guy Bannister, a former Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Chicago Bureau, who worked as a covert action coordinator for the intelligence services, supplying and training anti-Castro paramilitaries meant to ensnare Kennedy. Oswald then went to work with Bannister and the CIA paramilitaries.
During 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 Bannister’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.” 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.”
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. Ruth and Michael Paine then entered the picture on cue. Douglass illuminatingly traces in their intelligence connections. Ruth later was the Warren Commission’s chief witness. She 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 her house in Dallas to live with her. Thirty years after the assassination a document was declassified showing 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 and Michael’s job there gave him a security clearance. Her mother was related to the Forbes family of Boston and her lifelong friend, Mary Bancroft, worked as a WW II spy with Allen Dulles and was his mistress. Afterwards, Dulles questioned the Paines in front of the Warren Commission, studiously avoiding any revealing questions. Back in Dallas, Ruth Paine conveniently got Oswald a job in the Texas Book Depository where he began work on October 16, 1963.
From late September until November 22, various Oswalds are later reported to have simultaneously been seen from Dallas to Mexico City. Two Oswalds were arrested in the Texas Theatre, the real one taken out the front door and an impostor out the back. As Douglas says, “There were more Oswalds providing evidence against Lee Harvey Oswald than the Warren Report could use or even explain.” 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. It was apparent that a very intricate and deadly game was being played out 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 adds layer upon layer of evidence to show how this had to be so. Oswald, the mafia, anti-Castro Cubans could not have withdrawn most of the security that day. The Sheriff Bill Decker withdrew all police protection. The Secret Service withdrew the police motorcycle escorts from beside the president’s car where they had been the day before in Houston; took agents off the back of the car where they were normally stationed to obstruct gunfire. They approved the fateful, dogleg turn (on a dry run on November 18) where the car came, almost to a halt, a clear security violation. The House Select Committee on Assasinations concluded this, not some conspiracy nut.
Who could have squelched the testimony of all the 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 – a story little known but extraordinary in its implications – is riveting.) 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.
He says it best: “The extent to which our national security state was systematically marshaled for the assassination of President John F. Kennedy remains incomprehensible to us. When we live in a system, we absorb and think in a system. We lack the independence needed to judge the system around us. Yet the evidence we have seen points toward our national security state, the systemic bubble in which we all live, as the source of Kennedy’s murder and immediate cover-up.”
Speaking to his friends Dave Powers and Ken O’Donnell about those who planned the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, JFK said, “They couldn’t believe that a new president like me wouldn’t panic and try to save his own face. Well, they had me figured all wrong.”
Let’s hope for another president like that, but one that meets a different end.
[ii] Vernon Loeb, “Soviets Knew Date of Cuba Attack,” Washington Post, April 29, 2000
[iii] See James K. Galbraith, “Exit Strategy,” Boston Review, October/November 2003
Edward Curtin teaches sociology at Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts
*******
Obama, Clintons honor President Kennedy 50 years after assassination
By Steve Holland and Jeff Mason
Reuters News | Nov 20, 2013
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama joined with Bill and Hillary Clinton on Wednesday to recognize the legacy of John F. Kennedy, the president who inspired a generation until he was felled by an assassin's bullets 50 years ago this week.
Obama, former President Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton laid a wreath and bowed their heads before Kennedy's grave at Arlington National Cemetery. As a bugler played "Taps," an eternal flame at the gravesite fluttered in a chilly autumn breeze and Kennedy family members stood nearby.
It was a remarkable meeting of Democratic heavyweights to mark the anniversary of Kennedy's death on November 22, 1963, an event that has spawned countless books and conspiracy theories on whether assassin Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.
The day was steeped in powerful political imagery as Obama awarded the highest U.S. civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, to Bill Clinton and 15 other Americans who have made significant contributions to U.S. culture, politics, sports and science.
The White House event was intended as a testament to the memory of Kennedy, who signed an executive order shortly before his death creating the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Kennedy also established the Peace Corps and set the country on a path to landing humans on the moon.
Kennedy was shot to death as he and his wife, Jacqueline, rode in a motorcade in Dallas. America has been awash in televised remembrances of the death of the handsome, vigorous 46-year-old president and subsequent killing of Oswald by nightclub owner Jack Ruby.
White House officials decided to mark the occasion with the Medal of Freedom ceremony to remember Kennedy's life rather than the macabre circumstances of his death.
Those who had the Medal of Freedom medal draped around their necks by Obama included a wide range of American success stories, from TV talk show host Oprah Winfrey to former Chicago Cubs baseball star Ernie Banks, country singer Loretta Lynn and former Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee.
The event allowed Obama and Clinton to warm a relationship that has seen its share of strains and came as speculation mounts that Hillary Clinton might seek to succeed Obama as president in 2016.
Just last week Bill Clinton jumped into the political fight over Obama's healthcare law by telling a TV interviewer that Obama should "honor the commitment" he made that if people like their insurance plan, they can keep it.
Millions are seeing their insurance plans canceled despite Obama's pledge, and the resulting loss of trust in his leadership has contributed to a downward spiral in his job approval ratings, down to 37 percent in a new CBS News poll.
A new book, "Double Down," by journalists Mark Halperin and John Heilemann, said Obama in the past has found Clinton to be exhausting, and quoted him as telling an aide, "I like him ... in doses."
Praise for Clinton
Perhaps mindful of that anecdote, Obama went out of his way to honor Clinton, who was president from 1993-2001 and heads the Clinton Global Initiative, a global charity organization.
Clinton's lifelong interest in public service dates back in part to a 1963 visit to the White House where he shook Kennedy's hand four months before the assassination.
Obama said he was grateful for the patience Clinton had shown during the endless travels of Hillary Clinton as the top U.S. diplomat.
"I'm grateful, Bill, as well for the advice and counsel you have offered me on and off the golf course, and most importantly for your life-saving work around the world, which represents what's very best in America," Obama said.
(Editing by Vicki Allen and Cynthia Osterman)

*******
Why the Communists Killed Kennedy
By Cliff Kincaid
November 20, 2013
NewsWithViews.com

http://www.newswithviews.com/Kincaid/cliff777.htm
The media’s love affair with Fidel Castro apparently outweighs their love for President John F. Kennedy and his Camelot era. Otherwise, the communist role in the Kennedy assassination would be prominently noted during the 50th anniversary coverage of the JFK assassination.Assassin Lee Harvey Oswald was a communist member of the pro-Castro Fair Play for Cuba Committee and, after his arrest, tried to reach Communist Party USA attorney John Abt to act as his counsel. “Before Mr. Abt could accept or reject the bid, Mr. Oswald was shot and killed by Jack Ruby,” The New York Times noted.
William J. Murray writes in his book, My Life Without God, that his mother, atheist Madalyn Murray O’Hair, was a communist who was ordered to report to an office of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee and destroy any references in the files to Oswald’s involvement with the group.
Oswald’s Russian connections are sometimes noted in the anniversary coverage, but treated as inconclusive, or even as evidence that the Soviets could not possibly have killed Kennedy because their connection to Oswald was too well-known and too many fingers would point to Moscow as the culprit!“Oswald was a supporter of Soviet-backed Cuba,” CNN reports. But it then quotes an amateur researcher named Dave Perry as saying, “We know Oswald was in the Russian embassy in Mexico City. We even know who he talked to. But we don’t know what was said. Then a few weeks later, he shoots Kennedy.”
In fact, as noted by former FBI agent Herman Bly in his book, Communism, the Cold War, and the FBI Connection, Oswald met with a Soviet KGB espionage agent connected with KGB Department Thirteen, which was in charge of assassinations. Bly had gone to the U.S. Embassy in 1965, on assignment for the CIA, and reviewed its files on Soviet personnel in Mexico City.
Yet, Perry assures CNN that the Soviets were not involved. “The Russians would never have ordered Oswald to kill Kennedy because of his well-known links to Russia and his pro-Cuban sympathies,” Perry says. “Russia’s leaders knew they would have been the first suspects if they’d engineered an assassination by Oswald. It would have been an act of war, which could have triggered a nuclear attack.”
On the contrary, the possibility of a nuclear war, coming so soon after the Cuban missile crisis, is why the communist connection to Russia and Cuba would be played down. Bly writes, “…I believe the heads of the FBI, CIA, and President Johnson wanted the Oswald case brought to a conclusion as fast as possible as they did not want another crisis with the Soviet Union so soon after the Cuban missile crisis.”
Oswald’s well-known communist connections help explain the plot and the communist cover-up.
The Soviets tried to mask their connection to Oswald by publishing through a KGB front company, Marzani and Munsell, the book, Oswald, Assassin or Fall Guy. The book was dedicated to Mark Lane, whose book, Rush to Judgment, blamed right-wingers for the Kennedy assassination.
This KGB disinformation campaign was called “Dragon Operation,” an effort to shift blame for Kennedy’s murder away from the communists.
The KGB’s Mitrokhin archive shows indirect Soviet support for Lane, considered “the most talented of the first wave of conspiracy theorists researching the Kennedy assassination.” Soviet funds were funneled to him through an associate, the book says.
I.F. Stone, the so-called maverick left-wing journalist later exposed as a Soviet agent, also joined the effort to blame the Right. “For 15 years of my life at the top of the Soviet bloc intelligence community, I was involved in a world-wide disinformation effort aimed at diverting attention away from the KGB’s involvement with Lee Harvey Oswald. The Kennedy assassination conspiracy was born—and it never died,” says Ion Mihai Pacepa, the highest ranking intelligence official ever to defect from the Soviet bloc. Pacepa wrote the book, Programmed to Kill: Lee Harvey Oswald, the Soviet KGB, and the Kennedy Assassination.
As we have pointed out, the former Romanian intelligence chief documents that Oswald was recruited by the KGB when he was a U.S. Marine stationed in Japan and that, after defecting to the Soviet Union, he came back to America three years later for the express purpose of killing Kennedy. Even though the Soviets, for their own reasons, subsequently tried “to turn Oswald off,” Oswald went ahead with the plan and was already “programmed” by the communists to kill Kennedy.Kenneth J. Dillon, a former Foreign Service officer and intelligence analyst, writes that “Given Oswald’s aggressive mentality [he had tried to kill right-wing General Edwin A. Walker]and track record (well known to the KGB), it would have required very little for the KGB to insert into his mind the suggestion that he should assassinate Kennedy. Indeed, virulent communist hate propaganda during Oswald’s years in the Soviet Union might have instilled in his impressionable brain the need to take action, as the occasion presented itself, against those like the American president who thwarted the progress of communism.”
Like his brother Robert, John F. Kennedy was an anti-communist liberal. (RFK would be assassinated five years later by a Marxist Palestinian, Sirhan Sirhan).Humberto Fontova, the author of two excellent books on Castro’s support in Hollywood and the American media, has written extensively on the Castro connection to Oswald. He notes that Castro declared on September 7, 1963, that “U.S leaders who plan on eliminating Cuban leaders should not think that they are themselves safe! We are prepared to answer in kind!”
Castro hated JFK for authorizing an invasion of Cuba and the overthrow of the Castro regime. Castro himself was the target of CIA assassination plots authorized and supervised by JFK’s brother Robert Kennedy, JFK’s Attorney General. Former Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev wrote in his memoir, Khrushchev Remembers, that Castro hated the U.S. so much that he urged a Russian nuclear strike on the U.S.
Former CIA officer Brian Latell’s book, Castro’s Secrets, includes the revelation from a high-ranking Cuban defector that Fidel Castro knew Oswald was going to kill President Kennedy. The book adds to the evidence that Castro had foreknowledge of the plot to kill JFK.
Pacepa believes the evidence suggests that Jack Ruby, who killed Oswald, was also a Cuban agent whose assignment was to keep Oswald from talking. He is suspicious of the circumstances surrounding Ruby’s death as well.
As we commemorate the 50th anniversary of the assassination, it is worth remembering that the cover-up of Oswald’s communist connections began soon after the assassination and continues to this day. In his 1964 book, None Dare Call it Treason, John Stormer wrote, “Volumes could be written on the press coverage of President Kennedy’s assassination by a communist killer. Even after Oswald was captured and his Marxist affiliations disclosed, TV and radio commentators have conducted a continual crusade of distortion and smear to direct the blame against right wing or conservative groups.”
In fact, the FBI file on one of the most influential journalism educators in U.S. history, Curtis MacDougall, reveals that he was telling people in 1964 that Oswald was a “fall guy” in the assassination and that the real culprits were “rightists.” MacDougall is quoted as saying that he had been in New York City at a publisher’s party for the announcement of a book with the “true facts” about the murder. That book was Oswald, Assassin or Fall Guy.
The same publisher, the KGB front company Marzani and Munsell, also published MacDougall’s book on the Progressive Party, Gideon’s Army.
Fifty years after the fact, our media have not acknowledged and explained to the American people the substantial evidence that an American president was killed as a result of a communist conspiracy based in Moscow and Havana.
A good summary of the evidence is in Pacepa’s latest book, Disinformation: Former Spy Chief Reveals Secret Strategies for Undermining Freedom, Attacking Religion, and Promoting Terrorism.
Humberto Fontova’s latest book, The Longest Romance: The Mainstream Media and Fidel Castro, will help explain why our media go out of their way to dismiss the evidence.
It seems that our media love Castro and his “progressive” fellow travelers more than they want the facts about the Kennedy assassination to come out.
But the media will certainly exploit JFK’s death. We are all witnesses to that.
© 2013 Cliff Kincaid - All Rights Reserved
Cliff Kincaid, a veteran journalist and media critic, Cliff concentrated in journalism and communications at the University of Toledo, where he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree.
Cliff has written or co-authored nine books on media and cultural affairs and foreign policy issues. One of Cliff's books, "Global Bondage: The UN Plan to Rule the World" is still awailable.
Cliff has appeared on Hannity & Colmes, The O’Reilly Factor, Crossfire and has been published in the Washington Post, Washington Times, Chronicles, Human Events and Insight.
Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc.
E-Mail:
cliff.kincaid@aim.org
*******
The JFK Assassination: New York Times Acknowledges CIA Deceptions
By Peter Dale Scott
Global Research, October 21, 2009
The New York Times, on October 17, published a page-one story by Scott Shane about the CIA’s defiance of a court order to release documents pertaining to the John F. Kennedy assassination, in its so-called Joannides file. George Joannides was the CIA case officer for a Cuban exile group that made headlines in 1963 by its public engagements with Lee Harvey Oswald, just a few weeks before Oswald allegedly killed Kennedy. For over six years a former Washington Post reporter, Jefferson Morley, has been suing the CIA for the release of these documents. [1]
Sometimes the way that a news item is reported can be more newsworthy than the item itself. A notorious example was the 1971 publication of the Pentagon Papers (documents far too detailed for most people to read) on the front page of the New York Times.
The October 17 Times story was another such example. It revealed, perhaps for the first time in any major U.S. newspaper, that the CIA has been deceiving the public about its own relationship to the JFK assassination.
On the Kennedy assassination, the deceptions began in 1964 with the Warren Commission. The C.I.A. hid its schemes to kill Fidel Castro and its ties to the anti-Castro Directorio Revolucionario Estudantil, or Cuban Student Directorate, which received $50,000 a month in C.I.A. support during 1963.
In August 1963, Oswald visited a New Orleans shop owned by a directorate official, feigning sympathy with the group’s goal of ousting Mr. Castro. A few days later, directorate members found Oswald handing out pro-Castro pamphlets and got into a brawl with him. Later that month, he debated the anti-Castro Cubans on a local radio station.  
That the October 17 story was published at all is astonishing. According to Lexis Nexis, there have only been two earlier references to the CIA Joannides documents controversy in any major U.S. newspaper: a brief squib in the New York Daily News in 2003 announcing the launching of the case, and a letter to the New York Times in 2007 (of which the lead author was Jeff Morley) complaining about the Times’ rave review of a book claiming that Oswald was a lone assassin.
(The review had said inter alia that “''Conspiracy theorists'' should be ''ridiculed, even shunned... marginalized the way we've marginalized smokers.'' The letter pointed out in response that those suspecting conspiracy included Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Robert Kennedy, and J. Edgar Hoover.)
The New York Times has systematically regulated the release of any facts about the Kennedy assassination, ever since November 25, 1963, when it first declared Oswald, the day after his death, to have been the “assassin” of JFK. A notorious example was the deletion, between the early and the final edition of a Times issue, of a paragraph in a review of a book about the JFK assassination, making the obvious point that “MYSTERIES PERSIST.” [2]
Apparently there was similar jockeying over the positioning of the Scott Shane story. In some east coast editions it ran on page eleven, with a trivializing introductory squib, "Food for Conspiracy Theorists." In the California edition, headlined “C.I.A. Is Still Cagey About Oswald Mystery,” it was on page one above the fold.
One can assume that the Times decision to run the story was a momentous one not made casually.
The same can probably be said of another recent remarkable editorial decision, to publish Tom Friedman’s op-ed on September 29 about the “very dangerous” climate now in America, “the same kind of climate here that existed in Israel on the eve of the Rabin assassination.”
Friedman did not mention JFK at all, and his most specific reference was to a recent poll on Facebook asking respondents, “Should Obama be killed?” [3] Four days later the Wall Street Journal expressed similar concern, adding to the “poll on Facebook asking whether the president should be assassinated, a column on a conservative Web site suggesting a military coup is in the works.” [4]
Friedman’s column broke a code of silence about the threats to Obama that had been in place ever since two redneck white supremacists (Shawn Adolf and Tharin Gartrell) were arrested in August 2008 for a plot to assassinate Obama with scoped bolt-action rifles. Andrew Gumbel’s story about them ran in the London Independent on November 16, 2008; of the fifteen related news stories in Lexis Nexis, only one, a brief one, is from a U.S. paper.
It is possible to take at face value the concern expressed by Friedman in his column. The Boston Globe, a New York Times affiliate, reported on October 18 that “The unprecedented number of death threats against President Obama, a rise in racist hate groups, and a new wave of antigovernment fervor threaten to overwhelm the US Secret Service.” [5]
But there may have been a higher level of concern in the normally pro-war Wall Street Journal’s reference to a military coup. Such talk on a conservative web site is hardly newsworthy. More alarming is the report by Robert Dreyfuss in the October 29 Rolling Stone that Obama is currently facing an ultimatum from the Pentagon and Joint Chiefs: either provide General McChrystal with the 40,000 additional troops he has publicly demanded, or “face a full-scale mutiny by his generals...The president, it seems, is battling two insurgencies: one in Afghanistan and one cooked up by his own generals.” [6]
One can only guess at what led the New York Times to publish a story about CIA obstinacy over documents about the JFK assassination. One explanation would be the similarities between the painful choices that Obama now faces in Afghanistan – to escalate, maintain a losing status quo, or begin to withdraw – and the same equally painful choices that Kennedy in 1963 faced in Vietnam. [7] More and more books in recent years have asked if some disgruntled hawks in the CIA and Pentagon did not participate in the assassination which led to a wider Vietnam War. [8]
Six weeks before Kennedy’s murder, the Washington News published an extraordinary attack on the CIA’s “bureaucratic arrogance” and
obstinate disregard of orders... “If the United States ever experiences a `Seven Days in May’ it will come from the CIA...” one U.S. official commented caustically. (“Seven Days in May” is a fictional account of an attempted military coup to take over the U.S. Government.) [9]
The story was actually a misleading one, but it was a symptom of the high-level rifts and infighting that were becoming explosive over Vietnam inside the Kennedy administration. The New York Times story about the CIA on October 17 can also be seen as a symptom of rifts and infighting. One must hope that the country has matured enough since 1963 to avoid a similarly bloody denouement.
Notes
1. “C.I.A. Is Cagey About '63 Files Tied to Oswald,” New York Times, October 17, 2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/17/us/17inquire.html.
2. Jerry Policoff, The Media and the Murder of John Kennedy,” in Peter Dale Scott, Paul L. Hoch, and Russell Stetler, The Assassinations: Dallas and Beyond (New York: Random House/Vintage, 1976), 268.
3. Friedman, in decrying attacks on presidential legitimacy, recalled that “The right impeached Bill Clinton and hounded him from Day 1 with the bogus Whitewater “scandal.” It is worth recalling also that the public outcry about Whitewater was encouraged initially by a series of stories by Jeff Gerth, since largely discredited, in the New York Times. See Gene Lyons, “Fool for Scandal: How the New York Times Got Whitewater Wrong,” Harper’s, October 1994.
5. Bryan Bender, “Secret Service strained as leaders face more threats Report questions its role in financial investigations,” Boston Globe, October 18, 2009,
6. Robert Dreyfuss, “The Generals’ Revolt: As Obama rethinks America’s failed strategy in Afghanistan, he faces two insurgencies: the Taliban and the Pentagon.” Rolling Stone, October 29, 41. Several other articles entitled “The Generals’ Revolt” have been published since 2003, including at least two earlier this year and a number in 2006, when retired generals’ pushed successfully for the removal of Rumsfeld over his handling of the Vietnam War.
7. Gareth Porter, Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2005), 266.
8. See for example James Douglass, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died & Why It Matters (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2008).
9. Washington Daily News, October 2, 1963; discussed in Peter Dale Scott, The War Conspiracy: JFK, 9/11, and the Deep Politics of War (Ipswich, MA: Mary Ferrell Foundation Press, 2008), 286.
*******

Also See:

Who Killed JFK?
13 April 2007
and
John F. Kennedy Assassination Happened Fifty Years Ago!
(Part 1)
15 January 2013
*******