New Book Convinces Daniel Ellsberg CIA behind Dallas JFK.

EPIC1934

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2008
Messages
136
I want to let folks know about a new book that is out that basically does a TKO of left gatekeepers like Chomsky and Alexander Cockburn on the Kennedy Assassination.

As we know from the example of Encounter magazine (heyday 1950-64) the CIA can sometimes fund left-liberal magazines for purposes of limiting what they say about US foreign policy. (The best books about this funding of the left by the CIA to create divisions in the left is The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters by Frances Saunders. Another GREAT BOOK ON THE CIA AND the origins of communications research is Christopher Simpsons book The Science of Coercion. Simpson is a professor of Communications at American University)

With that in mind that-- that most gatekeeping on the CIA and JFK has come from the "left"-- it is significant that two left liberals have endorsed this new book by James W. Douglass JFK AND THE UNSPEAKABLE: WHY HE DIED AND WHY IT MATTERS

“Douglass presents, brilliantly, an unfamiliar yet thoroughly convincing account of a series of creditable decisions of John F. Kennedy—at odds with his initial Cold War stance—that earned him the secret distrust and hatred of hard-liners among the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the CIA. Did this suspicion and rage lead directly to his murder by agents of these institutions, as Douglass concludes? Many readers who are not yet convinced of this ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ by Douglass’s prosecutorial indictment will find themselves, perhaps—like myself—for the first time, compelled to call for an authoritative criminal investigation. Recent events give all the more urgency to learning what such an inquiry can teach us about how, by whom, and in whose interests this country is run.” --Daniel Ellsberg, author, Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers

As someone who has read 15 books on the Assassination and 50 on the post 1947
National Security State, I can assure you that there is an unbelivable amount of new stuff here.

This includes more material than anywhere else on the Chicago Plot of 11-2-63. The author has made an amazing breakthrough here: it was the same Chicago CIA connected cop in charge of the Chicago Soldiers Field plot of 11-2-63 that was in charge of the 1969 Chicago raid that killed Black Panther leader Fred Hampton (on Hampton I would urge all patriots to see the Youtube movied The Murder of Fred Hampton, WHICH CLEARLY PROVES THAT THE BLACK PANTHERS WERE NOT A RACIST ORG, BUT RATHER EMPHASIZED CLASS INSTEAD OF RACE. Seriously check out what the guy says about white people and how race is used to divide the working and middle class to help the rich!)

Also check out this quote from Harry Truman which I found in this book for the first time:

The first I heard of it was as quoted here in James W. Douglass' incredible book JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters. -------------- On December 22, 1963, one month to the day after JFK's assassintion, Former President Truman published a very carefully worded article in the Washington Post warning the American people about the danger of the CIA taking over the government. He wrote: "I think it has become necessary to take another look at the purpose and operations of our Central Intelligence Agency--CIA...for some time I have been disturbed by the way the CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at time a policy-making arm of the Government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas. We have grown up as a nation, respected for our free institutions and for our ability to maintain a free and open society. THere is something about the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historica position and I feel that we need to correct it" (note 678, Chapter 6) Trumans's warning, with its ominous post-assassination timing, was greeted by total silence (note 679) Had it been noticed and heeded the , the contraversial ex-president might have been accused more justly this time of trying to abolish the CIA, since he did indeed want to abolish its covert activities. Ptesident Harry Truman had himself established the CIA in 1947, but not he thought, to do what he saw it doing in the fall of 1963. He restated his radical critique of the CIA in a letter writeen six months later (note 680, Chapter 6). The managing editor of Look magazine had sent Truman the latest Look featuring a piece on the CIA. Truman wrote back: "Thank you for the copy of Look with the article on the Central Intelligence Agency. It is, I regret to say, not true to the facts in many respects. The CIA was set up by me for the sole purposse of getting all the available information to the president. It was not inteneded to operate as an international agency engaged in strange activities" (note 681, Chapter 6) (pp.332-333, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters) ------------ "It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government. " Well Douglass book is full of examples of this generalization by Truman.

This is not only an "assassination" book. Rather it is a history book that clearly shows the STRUCTURAL THREAT that JFK posed for the faction of our rulers who favored War, Oil and and defense contractors instead of investments in the Civilian economy. The author shows how JFK represented a tripple threat of peace with Vietnam, Cuba and the USSR. He was killed so that the Cold War-- with all of its cover for US oil and defense contracting and the financial sector taking over our entire economy-- could live and spread greater disparity between the super rich and the middle class and working class.
 
Today professional journals are often cited in contraversial issues such as 9/11. Yet this book shows an example of the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association being used for purposses of disinformation, when one of the key doctors wrote a book called Trauma Room One. JAMA CLAIMED THAT HE WAS NOT EVEN IN THE OPPERATING ROOM, WHEN FIVE DIFFERENT DOCTORS AND NURSES REFFERENCED HIM DIRECTLY EVEN IN THE OFFICIAL WARREN COMMISSION PUBLISHED TESTIMONY!
----
RE: USE OF JAMA FOR DISINFORMATION ABOUT Dr. CRENSHAW AND HIS
OBSERVATIONS ABOUT HOW THE SECRET SERVICE PRESSURED THE PARKLAND HOSPITAL DOCTORS TO CHANGE THEIR TESTIMONY.

Along similar lines see this interesting comment about another such professional journal, and its use in disinformation, and the scattering of dissenting opinions about the JFK autopsy. Until reading this I hadawlays thought Phi Slamma JAMA was an allusion to an old center for the Hous.
Rockets. Apparently its origins date to another Mute Yale Collective, this group of fervent youthfull ideologues being designed for premeds who dreamed of one day trading in reconstructive autopsies:

In April 1992, Crenshaw same out with his book JFK: Conspiracy of Silence which revealed what he had seen of President Kennedy's
wounds, contradicting the Warren Report. The book rose to number one on the NYT best-seller list. Crenshaw was then attacked in
print by the director of the FBI's Dallas office, who claimed "the documentation does not show that the doctor was involved in any way,"
and by a former Warren Commsssion attorney, who said the press should demand "fulll financial disclusure [of Crenshaw] because
hundreds of thousands and millions have been made of the assassination." Then, to his surprise, Crenshaw was denounced by the
prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)

In in its may 27, 1992, issue, JAMA published two article suggsting Dr. Crenshaw was not even in Trauma Room One with President
Kennedy. JAMA's editor promoted the articles by a New York press conference that revieved massive press coverage. Dr. Cren-
shaw submitted to JAMA a series of articles and letters responding to the charge that he was a liar. He pointed out that in testimony
before the Warren Commission five different doctors and nurses had specifically mentioned seeing him working with them to revive
the president. They made it clear Crenshaw had been in Trauma Room One, doing exactly what he said he did in Conspiracy of Silence.

All of Dr. Crenshaw's written efforts to set the record straight on JAMA's pages were rejected by the editor. Crenshaw then sued the
journal. In 1994, therough court -ordered mediation, JAMA agreed to pay Dr. Crenshaw and his co-author Gary Shaw, a sum of money.
JAMA also agreed to publish their rebuttal article, which eventually appeared in an abbreviated version. Then JAMA published still another
piece attacking Crenshaw, Shaw and their book (p. 311, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He DIed and Why It Matters)
 
45 years later and most of the government documents are STILL classified: TOP SECRET/SCI.

They'll never reveal the truth
 
Oswald Talked worked for me. And while that's true, HOLLYWOOD, the city of Dallas did release a lot of information.
 
45 years later and most of the government documents are STILL classified: TOP SECRET/SCI.

They'll never reveal the truth

The truth has already been revealed.

I have read a lot about this case as a kid, but I found there was no reliable story. I think it's quite obvious that the shots didn't come from the Daltex building which makes Oswald innocent. I gave up on the real 'truth' because I found all existing theories very implausible.

HOWEVER, years later; in 2005 I came across a new theory. I read a lot about it and I'm 100% convinced this is how the story went. The shooter was a gangster: James Files.

http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/index1.htm

Also the lead Dutch crime-reporter (the guy who also made Joran confess over Natalie Holloway and who has solved lots of crimes for the Dutch police) also finds this story the most plausible one around and made a 3 hour documentary about it in 2006. Parts are still on youtube.

http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/vries.htm (It's in Dutch though; De vries debunks the criticics of the existing theory)
 
Play Action With Fort Worth White Russians

PLAY ACTION WITH FORT WORTH WHITE RUSSIANS: Not by Monet!


In JFK and the Unspeakable, JD writes, "As Kennedy was trying to save Diem's life while going along with a coup that would take it, Lee Harvey Oswald was gaining employment at the Texas School Book Depository in Dallas. He got the job that would place him strategically right over the president's parade route through the intercession of Marina Oswald's friend Ruth Paine, a housewife with connections.

It was through CIA asset George de Mohrenschildt that Ruth Paine met Lee and Marina Oswald. When Warren Commission lawyer Wesley Liebeler asked Ruth Paine if Marina Oswald had ever mentioned George de Mohrenschildt to her, Paine answered, "Well, that's how I met her."

She said her meeting with Marina occurred at a February 1963 party in Dallas. 192 DeMohrenschild had helped arrange the party, which took place at the home of a friend. 193

Ruth Paine attended it especially to meet Marina. As a student of the Russian language, Ruth wanted to meet somebody with whom she could practice. 194 DeMohrenschildt told the Warren Commission, "I noticed immediately that there was another nice relationship developed there between Mrs. Paine and Marina." 197 Ruth followed up her introductions to the Oswalds by letters, phone calls, and visits to Marina in particular.

In late April, Ruth convinced Marina to move into Ruth's house in Irving, a suburb of Dallas, for two weeks, while Lee went ahead "to look for work" in New Orleans the context where he would be sheep-dipped by U.S. intelligence that summer as a follower of Fidel Castro. Marina's living with Ruth Paine would become a more permanent arrangement in the fall. It was supported from the beginning by Ruth's husband, Michael Paine, then separated from Ruth and their two young children living in his own apartment. When Lee Oswald said he was settled in New Orleans, Ruth with her children drove Marina and her fourteen-month-old daughter June down to New Orleans, again with the encouragement and financial support of Michael Paine.

By the time George de Mohrenschildt dropped out of Oswalds' lives in April 1963, Ruth and her husband, Michael Paine, had taken de Mohrenschildt's place as Marina's and Lee's Dallas sponsors. De Mohrenschildt's sponsorship was sanctioned by the CIA. Three hours before his death in 1977 in Florida by an apparently self-inflicted shotgun blast, George de Mohrenschildt revealed in an interview that he befriended Lee Harvey Owald at the encouragement of Dallas CIA agent J. Walton Moore, with whom he had been meeting regularly for yeras. 198 In return for his sheepherding of Oswald, de Mohrenschildt asked for and receieved a discreetly facilited $285,000 contract with dictator "Papa Doc" Duvalier to do a geological survey of Haiti. De Mohrenschildt did no geoogical survey in Haiti, but still deposited over $200,000 in his bank account. 200 When de Mohrenschildt left Dallas in April for Haiti (stopping off in Washington, D.C. for a meeting with CIA and Army Intelligence officials), 201 Ruth and Michael Paine stepped into his place as the Oswalds' Dallas benefactors.

It was de Mohrenschildt who had handed off the Oswalds to the Paines like a football in a reverse end run. When the Dallas play-action began, the Oswalds were being carried by a prominent White Russian anti-communist. As de Mohrenschildt with CIA assistance left the Dallas action for Haiti, the Oswalds were suddenly in the hands of a Quaker-Unitarian couple who belonged to the ACLU. If it was in fact a handoff, one trick play in a larger game plan, its sleight of hand was so successful that when the game was over, hardly anyone even rememberedf this one critical play.

(p.168-169, JD, JFK&TU) THis is how a longtime CIA asset was set up as an alledged pro-Castro communist BY THE CIA.
 
Last edited:
WHAT IS THIS BOOK ACTUALLY ARGUING ABOUT JFK?

1) Chomsky and Cockburn are essentially CORRECT in arguing that JFK got to power as a Cold Warrior, with some signs of change-- for example in the context of 1960 he met with MLK and NIxon refused to. You can be as cynical as you want, until you study the context of that action in 1960 with the Dems still controlling the Solid SOuth.

2.) Even before becoming president, Kennedy did show some NOT RADICAL BUT STILL SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT POSITIONS REGUARDING ANTI-COLONIAL STRUGGLES IN AFRICA AND SOUTHEAST ASIA AS COMPARED WITH OTHERS IN SENATE AND ELITE US OPINION.

3) KENNEDY DISAGREED STRONGLY OVER LAOS AND PREVENTED A US LAND WAR THERE IN 1961 OVER VERY STRONG OPPOSITION FORM THE JCS AND CIA AND MUCH OF THE CORPORATE MEDIA, MOST SIGNIFICANTLY LUCES'S TIME-LIFE.

4) KENNEDY BEGAN TO HAVE A NUMBER OF VERY SERIOUS DIFFERENCES WITH THE CIA OVER AUTONOMY FROM THE VERY BEGINNING OF HIS ADMINISRATION WHICH BECAME OVERT AND DANGEROUS DURING THE BAY OF PIGS INVASION-- WHICH WAS PLANNED BEFORE HE CAME INTO OFFICE.

5) KENNEDY IT IS TRUE-- WAS VERY STRONGLY ANTI-CASTRO AND WAS SEEKING CASTRO'S REMOVAL FROM POWER IN THE BEGINNING OF HIS TERM. CAN YOU THINK OF ANYONE WHO COULD HAVE BEEN ELECTED PRESIDENT AT THAT TIME AND WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN? (keep in mind here Monroe doc, history of US fo.po. etc.)

6) KENEDY WAS GOING TO PULL OUT OF VIETNAM. THIS IS NO LONGER EVEN DEBATEABLE SAVE AMONG NEWSWEEK, THE NEW YORK TIMES AND NOAM CHOMSKY!

7) KENNEDY MANAGED TO STAVE OFF A FULL US GROUND WAR IN VIETNAM IN 1961-62. YES THIS INVOLVED SOME SERIOUS COMPROMISES, BUT WE ONLY HEAR ABOUT THE COMPROMISES FROM GURU CHOMSKY AND NOT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY.

8) JFK BEGAN VERY SERIOUS AND CONCRETE MOVES TOWARDS DETANTE WITH THE USSR IN 1963, AS IS MOST PROFOUNDLY EVIDENT IN HIS JUNE 10TH 1963 SPEECH AT AMERICAN UNIVERSITY WHICH IS NEVER MENTIONED BY CHOMSKY AND HIS FELLOW KENNEDY BASHERS AT HIS BELOVED NYT.

9) KENNEDY RESISTED THE MOST INTENSE PRESSURE IMAGINABLE -- FROM THE PERMANENT MILITARY AND INTELLIGENCE BUREAUCRACY THAT BEGAN TO OSSIFY AND BECOME THE REAL INSTRUMENT OF POWER IN THE US AFTER ITS BIRTH ONLY

13 YEARS BEFORE-- DURING THE CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS. THERE WAS
OVERWHELMING AND VIRTUALLY UNANIMOUS PRESSURE FROM CIA AND JCS TO CARRY OUT AN INVASION THAT WOULD HAVE HAD AN EXTREMELY HIGH PROBABILITY OF TRIGGERING WORLD WAR III.

10) KENNEDY HAD SHOWN THAT HE WAS NOT AFRAID TO CHALLENGE US CORPORATE ELITES BY GOING DIRECTLY TO THE AIRWAVES AND CRITICIZING CORPORATE GREED IN A WAY THAT I CHALLENGE YOU TO FIND A SIMILAR EXAMPLE SINCE. I AM HERE REFERrING TO THE STEEL CRISIS OF 1962.

11) KENNEDY WAS THE ONLY PRESIDENT SINCE WORLD WAR TWO THAT HAS EVER REFUSED TO RECOGNIZE A RIGHT WING COUP D'ETAT IN LATIN AMERICA. UNPRECEDENTED. WAS HE CHE? NO, BUT TO ROCKEFELLER AND WALL STREET HE WAS A VERY VERY REAL AND SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN COMPARISON TO THE CORPORATE MAINSTREAM ON LATIN AMERICAN AND ALSO IN COMPARISON WITH
PREVIOUS US FOREIGN POLICY TOWARD THE REGION.

12) KENNEDY WAS ALLY OF SUKARNO IN INDONESIA EVEN AT A TIME WHEN THE CIA WAS HAD ALREADY BEGUN ITS SUBVERSION OF THAT COUNTRY WHICH CULMINATED IN THE GENOCIDE OF 1965 UNDER PRESIDENT JOHNSON. KENNEDY WAS ACTUALLY PLANNING A STATE VISIT TO SUKARNO IN 1963-- GURU CHOMSKY SOMEHOW MANAGES TO FORGET THIS AS HE DOES RFK S COMMENTS -- VIRTUALLY ALONE AMONG ALL US POLS--DURING THAT GENOCIDE.

13) KENNEDY TOOK ACTIVE STEPS TO SUPPORT THE POPULARLY ELECTED PRESIDENT OF BRAZIL GOULART IN 1963. EVEN AS HE DID THIS THE CIA WAS COORDINATING THE COUP THAT WOUL HAPPEN SHORTLY AFTER HIS DEATH.
Please see the book endorsed by Daniel Ellsberg, JFK AND THE UNSPEAKABLE: WHY HE DIED AND WHY IT MATTERED. BY JAMES W. DOUGLASS
The Political Assassinations of the 1960s were about real policy issues; they were not "Conspiracy Theory" until thirty years of disinformation. Until we overcome the dichotomy between structuralism and a true understanding of these assassinations we will not understand the structure of power we currently live under.
 
PROGRAMMED TO KILL
Lee Harvey Oswald, the Soviet KGB, and the Kennedy Assassination

Ion Mihai Pacepa

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?ISBN=1566637619

"The assassination of President John F. Kennedy by Lee Harvey Oswald, the American Marine who had defected to the Soviet Union and four years later committed the crime of the century, was an extremely rare cold war episode in which both sides were vitally interested in hiding the truth.

Soviet premier Khrushchev feared that Oswald’s involvement in the assassination would ignite nuclear war. The new president Lyndon Johnson faced elections in less than a year, and any conclusion implicating Moscow would have forced him to take unwanted political or even military action.

Thus, forty years later America lives with the uncertain truth about this political drama. In Programmed to Kill, former Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa, the highest-ranking intelligence official ever to defect from the Soviet bloc, reveals facts covered up by the Kremlin and addresses the myriad questions left unanswered by the Warren Commission, the House Select Committee on Assassinations, and the numerous books written on this subject.

Pacepa is the only investigator of the assassination who had direct knowledge of the KGB’s ties to Oswald. He spent fifteen years of his previous life at the top of a frenzied Communist intelligence effort designed to cast the blame for Kennedy’s death on forces within the United States.

Programmed to Kill places Pacepa’s knowledge of the KGB’s secret involvement with Oswald in the context of factual reporting that has appeared on the case. The book juxtaposes the KGB modus operandi—mostly unknown to outsiders—against the irrefutable evidence assembled by the FBI and other U.S. investigators.

According to Wayne A. Barnes, retired Special Agent in the FBI who worked foreign counterintelligence for over 25 years as a cold warrior, and was a principal debriefing agent for General Pacepa for nearly two years after his defection in 1978:

"General Ion Mihai Pacepa has given us a new and very different point of view of the JFK assassination, clarifying what has been the conspiracy theorists’ haven in the 20th century. In the FBI we taught that ‘the truth is in the details,’ and the General exquisitely reveals the truth—with verifiable, consistent, meshing-together, and incontrovertible facts about the involvement of the Soviet leadership and the KGB in this tragedy from start to finish, and even afterward in covering up their malfeasance."

"The General’s credibility—from the time of his initial debriefings and to the present—continues to ring true. He speaks the ‘language of intelligence’ and admirably translates it for those who lived through that time but were unaware of how to interpret what the plethora of facts really meant. A younger generation can now also profit from the General’s insight to see this historic event clearly."

Programmed to Kill is mind-boggling in its detail. The book illuminates the inherent evil of the KGB, whose former officers are now running Russia and apparently continuing to dispose of dissidents at home and around the world.

* * *

ION MIHAI PACEPA was national security adviser to Romania’s president and acting chief of his foreign intelligence service. In 1978, he was granted political asylum by President Carter. Mr. Pacepa has also written Red Horizons, which has been published in twenty-seven countries. He is an American citizen and lives with his wife in the United States."



.
 
The KGB did not do it. IT was CIA. There is little doubt anymore if you have read the latest credible books.
----

On this weekend of the Coup D'etat of 11-22-63, we should contemplate the implications for our current situation.

Of course it raises the question of the President's flexibility in foreign policy, if he is countered by an ossified permanent military intelligence bureaucracy, as JFK was re, Laos, Vietnam, Cuba, Africa and the USSR.

Increaslingly I have also seen the vast differences between JFK's economic policy and today's OIL-BANK-and Weapons R' US economy. As JFK and the Unspeakable makes clear, JFK was interested in some sort of Industrial Policy. He saw through, and SPOKE THROUGH the false dichotomy of today's "free market" rhetoric that wanted to forget US industry, and offere all the government help in the world to the oil, banking and military industry.
 
i always thought it was weird how in the video of kennedy being shot his head explodes upward with alot of crap comming out of it, but yet in the pictures of his head at the hospital, the is just one very small hole where they say the bullet went. his head wasnt even deformed looking.
 
The KGB did not do it. IT was CIA. There is little doubt anymore if you have read the latest credible books.

Ion Mihai Pacepa, the highest ranking intelligence official to ever defect from the Soviet Bloc of nations, disagrees with you.

As acting head of the Rumanian intelligence apparatus, Pacepa was intimately familiar with the Soviet KGB, as he worked with them on a virtual daily basis. He was well aware of the massive effort the KGB was making in an attempt to frame the CIA.

Soviet and Cuban "fingerprints" were all over the murder of JFK.

The far left attempts to perpetuate the LAUGHABLE MYTH that JFK was "going to pull us out of Viet Nam"---which is quite simply a BRAZEN LIE. JFK did more than any president in history up to that time, to ESCALATE our involvement in Viet Nam.

According to Soviet documents released since Perestroika and the fall of the Berlin Wall, it is now believed that the SOVIET AGENT Oswald was the one who provided the flight coordinates to the Soviets of Francis Gary Power's U2 spy plane, which was shot down in 1960.

After the Bay of Pigs invasion, and Kennedy causing Khruschev and the Soviets international embarrassment and loss of face after backing them down during the Cuban Missile Crisis---it was decided at the highest levels of the Kremlin and the KGB, that Kennedy MUST GO.

Not to mention that JFK was sending record levels of military and civilian advisors to Viet Nam, in an effort to counteract Soviet influence there.

There's also the hard fact that JFK and the Kennedy family had a long-time friendship with none other than Senator Joseph Raymond McCarthy---whom virtually every communist, communist asset, socialist, leftist and liberal on the planet had a fanatical hatred for.

Bay of Pigs plus Cuban Missile Crisis, plus escalation of U.S. military/civilian presence in Viet Nam, plus personal friendship with Joe McCarthy----EQUALS KENNEDY MUST BE ELIMINATED. Which is PRECISELY what the KGB and Cuban DGI did.
 
When it comes to pretentiously declaring Profundity, I'm easy. Yet, this phrase of James W. Douglass, "accountable only to their own shadows" is a profound one for us today:


In the fall of 1963, as the president ordered a U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam, he was being eased out
of control, by friends and foes alike, for the sake of an overriding sision of war. They all thought they
knew better than he did what needed to be done to win the war in Vietnam, and elsewhere across the
globe against an evil enemy. Kennedy's horror of the nuclear was he had skirted during the missile
crisis, his concern for American toppos in Vietnam, andhis tun toward peace with Nikita Khrushchev
and Fidel Castro, had in his critics' eyes, made him soft on Communism.

For our covert action specialists in the shadows, accoutable only to their own shadows, what Kennedy's
apparent defeatism meant was clear. The absolute end of victory over the evil of Communism justified
any means necessary, including the assassination of the president. The failed plot in Chicago had to be
followed by a successful one in Dallas. (p. 218, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters)


Someone said something once about the effect of power, going unchecked for years on end. That is just what
has happened with our National Security State, the foundations of which were laid between 1947 and 1951.

Rarely do I find much speculation or analysis of the CUMMULATIVE EFFECT of this all this absence of checks and
balances. How did a lie told to the American people, say in 1950, involving, say, the CIA intervening to block the
investigation of a protected drug-runner by the FBN (see Douglass Valentine's excellent history of the FBN, The
Stregnth of the Wolf if you think this is pure speculation) have repercussions years later in 1965, and then again in
the 1980's?

Coverups by intelligence agencies have later consequences that are rarely spelled out for the reader of the daily papers. Sixty years of these many many coverups--even if some were done by people with good intentions while
uttering the ecumenical corporate mantra of National Security-- together with their later offspring could produce one very snarled fishing line!

What is the CUMMULATIVE EFFECT of sixty years of the citizen being protected from knowing what the intelligence agencies are doing?

If you block off the basement of our democratic government, and say "you cant look here but everywhere else is open for inspection"... well, just how much of the good stuff you gonna find in the livingroom sixty years later?
This is a question that those charged with the legislative oversite of the CIA and NSA have a democratic duty to mull over speak cleary about with the citizens.

Sometimes I think it's not upermost on the minds of Harmon Harmon and Hoyer, those supple subtle gardners of our Virginia Hothouse, where the weird plants grow. What Would Jefferson--he of the out of doors gardens-- Do upon first finding "the shadows accountable only to their own shadows"
 
Your post contains many statements I strongly disagree with:

"The far left attempts to perpetuate the LAUGHABLE MYTH that JFK was "going to pull us out of Viet Nam"---which is quite simply a BRAZEN LIE. JFK did more than any president in history up to that time, to ESCALATE our involvement in Viet Nam."

Since the time that Newswek and Time ridiculed the idea that JFK was going to pull out of Vietnam there have been several major works published on this question.

All of them have found that he was going to pull out of Vietnam

University of Alabalma Historian Howard Jones in Death of a Generation,(oxford University PRess) even claims in his into. that he intended to write a book showing that it was a a ridiculous myth, but was forced to change his mind when he looked at the evidence.

The evidence in JFK and the Unspeakable is so abudant that is it is now beyond dispute. Of course that wont stop Newspeak and controlled left gatekeepers like Chomsky and Cockburn.

You could not be more wrong on the left and Kennedy. Virtually all the SO CALLED left (again see Encounter Magazine for the CIA sponsorship of fake left magazines for ideological control purposes) including Comsky The Nation magazine are virulently anti JFK . They are doing their job in getting the left not to look into 1960-1963, the elbow of the cold war.
 
INTERESTING COMMENT BY FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMAN PUBLISHED DECEMBER 22 1963.

Also interesting that we rarely hear of this comment. The first I heard of it was as quoted here in James W. Douglass' incredible book JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters.
--------------
On December 22, 1963, one month to the day after JFK's assassintion,
Former President Truman published a very carefully worded article in the
Washington Post warning the American people about the danger of the CIA
taking over the government. He wrote:


"I think it has become necessary to take another look at the purpose and
operations of our Central Intelligence Agency--CIA...for some time I
have been disturbed by the way the CIA has been diverted from its original
assignment. It has become an operational and at time a policy-making
arm of the Government. This has led to trouble and may have
compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas. We have grown up
as a nation, respected for our free institutions and for our ability to
maintain a free and open society. THere is something about the CIA
has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historica position
and I feel that we need to correct it" (note 678, Chapter 6)

Trumans's warning, with its ominous post-assassination timing, was greeted
by total silence (note 679) Had it been noticed and heeded the , the
contraversial ex-president might have been accused more justly this time
of trying to abolish the CIA, since he did indeed want to abolish its covert
activities. Ptesident Harry Truman had himself established the CIA in
1947, but not he thought, to do what he saw it doing in the fall of 1963.

He restated his radical critique of the CIA in a letter writeen six months
later (note 680, Chapter 6). The managing editor of Look magazine had
sent Truman the latest Look featuring a piece on the CIA. Truman wrote
back:

"Thank you for the copy of Look with the article on the Central Intelligence
Agency. It is, I regret to say, not true to the facts in many respects. The
CIA was set up by me for the sole purposse of getting all the available
information to the president. It was not inteneded to operate as an
international agency engaged in strange activities" (note 681, Chapter 6)
(pp.332-333, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters)
------------
"It has become an operational and at times a policy-making
arm of the Government. " Well Douglass book is full of examples of this
generalization by Truman.
 
One EXCELLENT book on the CIA's connections with JFK's assassination is Plausible Denial by Mark Lane. Lane was the author of the firstly published criticism of the Warren Commission, A Rush To Judgment way back in 64 or 65.

His books are full of historical citations and he does an great job tying things together. Highly recommended.
 
The COMMUNISTS Murdered JFK

You could not be more wrong on the left and Kennedy. Virtually all the SO CALLED left (again see Encounter Magazine for the CIA sponsorship of fake left magazines for ideological control purposes) including Comsky The Nation magazine are virulently anti JFK . They are doing their job in getting the left not to look into 1960-1963, the elbow of the cold war.

I'll take the word of the highest ranking Soviet bloc defector in history over your inane ramblings ANY day!

Your leftwing propaganda sources are meaningless.

The Bay of Pigs + Cuban Missile Crisis + Spy planes over the Soviet Union + Escalation of the Viet Nam war + Friendship with Joe McCarthy = The COMMUNISTS MURDERED JFK.

The CIA LOVED Kennedy. They had no reason to kill him. And it's pure HOGWASH that Kennedy was allegedly going to pull us out of Viet Nam. He did MORE than any president in history up to that time to ESCALATE our presence in Viet Nam.

Not to mention that both Oswald and Ruby were KGB OPERATIVES, and strong evidence points to the fact that they knew each other BEFORE the Kennedy murder.

Oswald provided the flight coordinates of Gary Power's U2 spy plane to his KGB handlers, which allowed the Soviets to shoot it down. Ruby was running guns to Castro for the KGB/DGI, well before the murder of Kennedy.

The bloody red handprint of the KGB/DGI was all over the murder of Kennedy.


.
 
Last edited:
I'll take the deathbed testimony of E Howard Hunt (confessing he was the supervising CIA operative in Dallas on 11/22/63 coordinating the hit on JFK) over that of a darling of the necon/Frontpage pseudoright. The case for JFK trying to end the Vietnam War in 1963 is highly documented as others have posted, and also backed up by by researchers on both the left and right (Jim Marrs, et al). The prior Ruby-Oswald relationship speaks more to both of them being CIA assets, especially in light of government documents showing mobsters Ruby was connected with like Roselli, Trafficante et al were all CIA operatives as well.

The likelihood that Oswald passed secrets to the Soviets is not at issue, the salient point is, how does a doggone 20 year old get himself into the Soviet Union, and out of the Soviet Union DURING THE HEIGHT OF THE COLD WAR, with no de-briefing, investigation or prosecution by the U.S. government, unless he's a U.S. intelligence asset? The bloody handprint is on Oswald precisely because he was meant to be IDed as a communist tool. The fact that there's evidence of similarly set-up patsies who were lying in wait for JFK in Miami and other stops along his travel tour (should the attempt at Dallas had failed) indicates the 'patsy plot' transcends Oswald alone.
 
The CIA LOVED Kennedy. They had no reason to kill him.

Bologna, this thread alone has more than disproven what you're saying. I've read and seen plenty to know that Kennedy was a rogue President.


The bloody red handprint of the KGB/DGI was all over the murder of Kennedy.

.

Of course it was, that was the whole point. I wouldn't expect anything less from a CIA operation.
 
Back
Top