General Category => John F. Kennedy 1917 - 1963 => Topic started by: Peter Lemkin on November 18, 2013, 02:56:31 AM
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hqo2c_SxQag (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hqo2c_SxQag)
Broadcast in 1967 in response to a NBC 'hit piece' on his investigation. I dare any MSM to publish the transcript or re-broadcast that for the 50th - they wouldn't dare to. The control mechanisms now are worse than they were in 1963 or 1967 - they are the worst they have ever been....as America, IMO, is well along the path to a totalitarian corporate/oligarchy-run police state in which the Truth is what THEY say it is...not what it really is or was. History is written by the victors....unless WE the PEOPLE fight back and resist the lies - the Fairy Tales - as Garrison calls them in this EXCELLENT half-hour!
-
Peter, I've seen that and it's excellent.
Jim DiEugenio in Destiny Betrayed second edition reveals why Helms and Hoover launched an unprecedented air armada of winged monkeys to destroy Jim Garrison the man and his case against Clay Shaw.
Now in Reclaiming Parkland we see McCloy as a fascist wannabe and Dulles as admiring Goebbels and a nascent Arabist.
Rose Cheramie was a gift from a benevolent God.
The convoy from Miami through New Orleans to Dallas.
And Shaw, besides CIA, had links to OAS and attempts on DeGaulle, and in Permindex/CMC is Gladio which Sibel Edmonds said originated in the mind of Allen Dulles.
And through the hellfire of slimers like Aynesworth and the moles and the press fairies shrieking the mannered Jim Garrison remained focused and compelling, Gregory Peck in To Kill a Mockingbird.
The book and film of Day of the Jackal might be overlaid in light of Shaw-OAS-DeGaulle
Ferrie's prior rants on a crossfire, association with Lee Oswald, death within hours of del Valle
Garrison was closer than the Unspeakable could allow
-
I was impressed when I first saw that, and amazed frankly that he was allowed so much air time. It wouldn't happen today. He would be "interviewed" by Anderson Cooper, who would smirk and call him a conspiracy theorist, and now it's time for this commercial break...
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hqo2c_SxQag (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hqo2c_SxQag)
Broadcast in 1967 in response to a NBC 'hit piece' on his investigation. I dare any MSM to publish the transcript or re-broadcast that for the 50th - they wouldn't dare to. The control mechanisms now are worse than they were in 1963 or 1967 - they are the worst they have ever been....as America, IMO, is well along the path to a totalitarian corporate/oligarchy-run police state in which the Truth is what THEY say it is...not what it really is or was. History is written by the victors....unless WE the PEOPLE fight back and resist the lies - the Fairy Tales - as Garrison calls them in this EXCELLENT half-hour!
^ Thank you, Peter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxp_EoNTrbc courtesy of David Von Pein
For all who have not been refreshed by listening to the complete audio of Jim Garrison's appearance with a very primed and adversarial Johnny Carson on The Tonight Show, 31 Jan., 1968, here's Mr. Garrison's summation from the final segment of that program:
"...I am trying to tell you that there is no question, as the result of our investigation, that an element of the Central Intelligence Agency of our country killed John Kennedy, and that the present administration is concealing the fact. There is no question about it at all...I know it, and if you will just wait, you will see that History will support this as fact."
Mr. Garrison is forcefully declaring, unambiguously, in public, on network television, that an element of the CIA killed President Kennedy.
It was late January of 1968.
The fact that this many years later some extremely serious scholars who've labored over an ocean of declassified documents, scrutinized every syllable of congressional testimonies and investigative reports, awaited decades of incremental improvements in scientific methods and technologies, and persevered in an intellectual war against an entrenched authoritarian bureaucracy which is resistant to free inquiry have come to the same conclusion is rather astonishing.
-
Jim Garrison was such a danger in targeting CIA asset Clay Shaw despite the shrieking mockingbirds--he named the beast.
Fidel Castro in his speech the day after the assassination spoke of the CIA as doing such things.
Concerning the Facts and Consequences
of the Tragic Death of
President John F. Kennedy
November 23rd, 1963
by Fidel Castro
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/HWNAU/FC112363.html (http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/HWNAU/FC112363.html)
With Dulles as director overt/covert we have links up, down, horizontal: sponsors, facilitators, mechanics--and call the number on your screen in the next ten minutes and you have the originator of the Gladio strategy of tension.
-
“…our Government is the CIA and the Pentagon, with Congress reduced to a debating society… We won't build Dachaus and Auschwitzes; the clever manipulation of the mass media is creating a concentration camp of the mind that promises to be far more effective in keeping the populace in line … I've learned enough about the machinations of the CIA in the past year to know that this is no longer the dream world America I once believed in … Huey Long once said, “Fascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism.” I'm afraid, based on my own experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security.”
Garrison’s interview given to Playboy magazine in October 1967
-
With the 50th anniversary, and grateful to internet access to obscure data and the work of expert researchers, Kennedy's assassination must now be studied in an international / ideological context. We need to move beyond the myopia of Cuba and Viet Nam and how our government dealt with those hotspots. We need to recognize the threat that Kennedy and others who were equally committed to global democracy posed to international aristocracy and colonial/capitalist expansion. In effect, we Americans need to grow up and get beyond our national narcissism.
Puzzle pieces possibly relevant to Clay Shaw, the OAS, and the attempts on deGaulle (one of at least a dozen attempted assassinations and fulfilled assassinations of the period that should be studied in the context of the murder of John Kennedy and of critical importance, vice versa):
OAS-related Jean Soutre, (Roux, Mertz), expelled from the Dallas/Ft. Worth area immediately after the assassination of Kennedy
OAS vigorously opposed to deGaulle's position on Algeria (Senator John Kennedy's insistence that Algerians deserved independence)
French Intelligence (SDECE) officer Pierre T. deVosjoli's relationship with the CIA's Jesse J. Angleton
deVosjoli's conviction that the deGaulle government had been infiltrated by the Soviets
deVosjoli's friend and confidant Frank "Brandy" Brandstetter since 1959, Havana
Brandstetter's reports to the Pentagon/Kennedy Administration relating to deV's concerns about deGaulle
Kennedy Administration advising Brandstetter to stand down on the issue
Brandstetter's insistence that he did not serve President Kennedy, he served the cause of anti-communism (paraphrasing)
Brandstetter's heritage as descendant of nobleman of the Austro-Hungarian empire
Ferenc Negy, Prime Minster of Hungary and chairman of Permindex
Permindex as it related to Clay Shaw and the Garrison investigation and related to global international trade marts; Kennedy's final destination, The Dallas Trade Mart, developed by Trammell Crow, business partner of Clint Murchison, Angus Wynne (ref. Marina Oswald post assassination).
The Clay Shaw list of lower nobility connected to the United Kingdom and Europe similar to Brandstetter-Hubicki's baronial status, all steeped in the esoteric.
Brandstetter's role with the Pentagon and Jack Crichton's Dallas-based 488th Military Intel unit
Brandstetter's residence in Dallas, ten blocks from the obscure office of Continental Leasing owned by his colleague
Scott Walker, with connections in New Mexico; Walker moved the operation to Shreveport, LA (Maj. Edwin Walker - alleged victim of an assassination attempt by Lee Harvey Oswald - was in Shreveport speaking to a segregationist group on November 22, 1963)
Brandstetter's role with Henry Crown's Hilton International and by implication General Dynamics; Crown and Hilton established the Waldorf Astoria in New York as the NY White House for international powerbrokers; the Waldorf Towers was home to Retired General John D. MacArthur
Frank Pace, CEO of Crown's General Dynamics was former Sec. of Army, board member of CBS, Time, Inc. and DC-based Nationwide Securities with fired CIA Director Allen Dulles and former Joint Chiefs of Staff Nathan Twining
Hilton International's board member Richard Cunningham Patterson who was Ambassador to Guatamala in the lead up to the CIA's overthrow of Arbenz; Patterson was also investor/director in Burrus Mills of Amarillo, home to LANL (Los Alamos National Labs and Paperclip's Walter Dornberger - whose papers were bequeathed to Frank Brandstetter) support operation PanTex and Bell Helicopter as well as Jack Crichton's Dorchester Gas on whose board was school depository building owner, DH Byrd. Crichton was an executive of Empire Trust whose directors included John McCloy's brother in law, LD Douglas (both of whom were related by marriage to post World War II Germany's Konrad Adenaur), and Edgar Bronfman, Seagrams CEO and future employer of Brandy Brandstetter in Mexico
Brandstetter's role with Crown's Havana Hilton, and his/their invitation to Fidel Castro on the eve of the revolution to house the revolutionary regime in the hotel (play all sides when considering exploitative investments); Manuel Ray, engineer for the Hilton, would later be central to counter-revolutionary Cuba; confusion, disruption.
Brandstetter's role in the development of Las Brisas in Acapulco
Brandstetter's role in the foundation of David Atlee Phillips' AFIO (Association of Former Intelligence Officers)
Brandstetter's relationship with the rich and influential, including the diPortanova's of Houston
diPortanova's christening of their Las Brisas mansion, Arabesque, centered on the presence of Henry Kissinger
Ricky diPortanova's grandfather, Roy Cullen, Houston oil man
Jack Porter represented both Roy Cullen and Sid Richardson in oil deals before their deaths prior to 1960
Jack Porter, campaign manager for Ike Eisenhower and the fledgling Republican party in Texas
Republican Party candidate Jack Crichton, future executive with (Douglas, McCloy - United Fruit - Bronfman) Empire Trust whose investments were deep into Cuba via United Fruit
Jack Porter's contact with Robert Ray McKeown regarding an introduction to Fidel Castro
Jack Porter's insistence that McKeown meet him in the Mellon-funded Gulf Oil Building in downtown Houston
Robert Ray McKeown's familiarity with Dallas oil man Clint Murchison, partner with Sid Richardson (ref. Jack Porter's association with Richardson and Cullen) in numerous oil ventures
Robert Ray McKeown's (alleged) interaction with Lee Harvey Oswald relating to the purchase of Savage Arms rifles
Robert Ray McKeown's (alleged) interaction with Jack Ruby
If Jack Ruby and Lee Harvey Oswald knew one another, that is prima facia evidence that there was a conspiracy.
From this point, we should consider Lumumba's assassination, Congo tin, Bolivian tin, Joannides' handler Tilton of the CIA in LaPaz at the time of Guevarra's murder, and from there, all assassinations designed to destabilize democracy in Latin America before or since.
Were any and or all of the above mentioned (only a tip of the ice berg) part of a compartmentalized international milieu surrounding the assassination of Kennedy, whether directly involved in the planning and execution, economically or ideologically invested in the outcome, or responsible for the cover-up of the assassination?
-
Nice line of connected 'dots' Leslie!
-
Thanks, Peter.
I realize that it suggests a wide, highly compartmentalized cabal . . . which makes a lot of Americans very uncomfortable.
-
I was impressed when I first saw that, and amazed frankly that he was allowed so much air time. It wouldn't happen today. He would be "interviewed" by Anderson Cooper, who would smirk and call him a conspiracy theorist, and now it's time for this commercial break...
Isn't that the sad truth! If Garrison was active and speaking today he'd be ignored completely and not allowed any rebuttal - less so one of an entire half-hour! The grip of the Unspeakable on the MSM now is all but complete. It was strong when this was broadcast, but still had some flexibility...which is now gone.
Garrison pulled NO punches! I strongly suggest, if you have not, to read Garrison's books on his Sisyphusian efforts to bring to justice some of the small fry involved in the JFK Assassination. Those who thwarted his investigation using a variety of dirty tricks were not small fry.....but that's another story....
-
I admire Garrison, but he was a very flawed hero. Sylvia Meagher never thought much of his case against Shaw, and tried to dissuade Harold Weisberg from going to New Orleans to get involved in the investigation. Weisberg did anyway, and later turned against it: "In the course of my investigation I did develop 'new' evidence that also bears on whether or not there had been a conspiracy. I turned some of these leads over to Garrison. They did not involve Clay Shaw, so Garrison was not interested in them...."Garrison had a blackboard. He drew a map of the United States on it and gave a geographical dissertation on the 'seats of the conspiracy.' Up in the Pacific Northwest, he had a mark for the Boeing Co. Then there was Dallas for H.L. Hunt. In New Orleans, there was the Michoud plant [Chrysler Aerospace.] Then there was Marietta, Georgia, for Lockheed."
Sylvia Meagher wrote that "as the Garrison investigation continued to unfold, it gave cause for increasingly serious misgivings about the validity of his evidence, the credibility of his witnesses, and the scrupulousness of his methods. The fact that many critics of the Warren Report have remained passionate advocates of the Garrison investigation, even condoning tactics which they might not condone on the part of others, is a matter of regret and disappointment."
-
I admire Garrison, but he was a very flawed hero. Sylvia Meagher never thought much of his case against Shaw, and tried to dissuade Harold Weisberg from going to New Orleans to get involved in the investigation. Weisberg did anyway, and later turned against it: "In the course of my investigation I did develop 'new' evidence that also bears on whether or not there had been a conspiracy. I turned some of these leads over to Garrison. They did not involve Clay Shaw, so Garrison was not interested in them...."Garrison had a blackboard. He drew a map of the United States on it and gave a geographical dissertation on the 'seats of the conspiracy.' Up in the Pacific Northwest, he had a mark for the Boeing Co. Then there was Dallas for H.L. Hunt. In New Orleans, there was the Michoud plant [Chrysler Aerospace.] Then there was Marietta, Georgia, for Lockheed."
Sylvia Meagher wrote that "as the Garrison investigation continued to unfold, it gave cause for increasingly serious misgivings about the validity of his evidence, the credibility of his witnesses, and the scrupulousness of his methods. The fact that many critics of the Warren Report have remained passionate advocates of the Garrison investigation, even condoning tactics which they might not condone on the part of others, is a matter of regret and disappointment."
Sorry, I don't see him as a flawed hero. Yes, he got somethings wrong and he couldn't see the full picture we have the benefit of another 40 years of research to see now. But, he was spied upon, fed false information, had his investigation thwarted, was denied witnesses by unnatural deaths and be refusals to extradite, was denied subpoenaed documents, lied to by Government Agencies and attacked personally and professionally. I think, considering, he did a great job. The Jury was convinced there was a conspiracy - as there was! He had, IMO, a fairly good view of the big picture - f not all the details that it consisted of; however, he was limited to pursuing those in his jurisdiction, primarily. Shaw was CIA and was, IMO, at least involved in setting up Oswald; the others such as Bannister and his friends maybe were not Big Fish, but certainly knew about the plot beforehand and were also involved in setting up Oswald and others. That he got somethings wrong, given the constraints and gauntlet he was running is not surprising. Perhaps some of the first generation of researchers could have done a better job if they had been D.A.s, but they were not. His 'case' and 'prosecution' may have had some flaws, but I personally find few in the man, Garrison, myself. As the only D.A. in the land to even try, he deserves full credit. Meager was, IMO, unnecessarily critical of him. His focus might not have been full 'on target' as to those primarily involved; but he was certainly looking in the right dark corners...even if there were others he had not yet discovered.....I'm sure he would have had he been allowed to proceed with his investigation without the formal, if secret, blockage and subterfuge by the CIA and others.
-
My thoughts,
After 50 years, we are coming full circle on the "who sponsored" and "why question".
Sherry has provided evidence as to where from.
Much rathered have seen a special on Sherrys evidence than another round of "the SS agent shot JFK in the head" BS.
Have not really been looking at more than 5 minutes of anything on TV, same ole same Old.
Wonder what the next generation will believe happened.
-
We're all flawed, Peter. I am, you are, JFK was. Personally, I don't think Garrison ever proved that Shaw was part of a plot to kill JFK. The most we can say is that he may have been one of Oswald's handlers (like De Mohrenschildt and the Paines). Most likely none of them were aware (because of the compartmentalized nature of the operation) what Oswald would eventually be used for.
-
The messenger is not necessarily the issue, is it? John Kennedy was a messenger of the ideal of democracy, and yet he and his family were highly flawed. Garrison too was attempting to share a message, that the Kennedy assassination did not unfold the way that the Warren Commission reported. He was flawed as a messenger, but that shouldn't (and in fact hasn't) taint the salient points of his message.
If the cover-up was as powerful as some of us now suspect, it is reasonable to surmise that Garrison was shadow boxing during most of his investigation, not unlike Kennedy in the early years of his first term. The same can be said of Oliver Stone and "JFK." Do we require our messengers to be perfect, or can we be at peace with them being faithful?
-
No, I don't require them to be perfect, Leslie, but I think Garrison made a fatal mistake charging Shaw with being part of the plot to kill JFK. No one made him do that. I'm sure he would have preferred Dave Ferrie or Guy Banister, but they were dead. He should have just continued his investigation and not made any charges he couldn't prove. He also made a lot of reckless and unfounded statements in early press interviews.
Feb 24 1967: Garrison announced to the press, "I have positively solved the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. My staff and I solved the case weeks ago. I wouldn't say this if I didn't have evidence beyond the shadow of a doubt. We know the key individuals, the cities involved and how it was done. There were several plots, but that's more than I wanted to say. Ferrie might not be the last suicide in the case. The only way they are going to get away from us is to kill themselves....The key to the whole case is through the looking glass. Black is white and white is black. I don't want to be cryptic, but that's the way it is....There will be arrests, charges and convictions. This is no Mickey Mouse investigation."
Maybe this was just an enormous bluff designed to rattle the entire government. But it looks reckless to me. He veered back and forth between making very perceptive and smart comments, and then making wild charges that he couldn't support.
May 21 1967 In an interview on WWL-TV, New Orleans, Garrison claimed that the CIA knew the names of the other assassins, but "we can't find out [their names] with the CIA keeping its vaults locked...If the director of the CIA and the top officials of the CIA were in the jurisdiction of Louisiana, I would charge them without hesitation." That day he also stated that the CIA knew "the name of every man involved and the name of the individuals who pulled the triggers" (NY Times 5/23)
May 28 1967 On "Issues and Answers," (ABC-TV) Garrison said, "Of course the Central Intelligence Agency had no role in the planning or intending the assassination of President Kennedy. I think that would be a ridiculous position for anyone to take." :o
Sep 24 1967 Garrison charged that RFK was "without any question of a doubt...interferring with the investigation of the murder of his brother" and was making "a real effort to stop it." ("Page One," WABC-TV, New York)
Jan 26 1968 Paul Rothermel, a former FBI agent hired by H.L. Hunt as an investigator, wrote a memo to Hunt: "The source of the information reports that Garrison is convinced that the assassination was carried out by Gen. Edwin Walker with the financial support and backing of Herman and George Brown of Houston and H.L. Hunt of Dallas. He said that Garrison is a heavy drinker and lives extravagantly...We have extended our cooperation to Garrison in his probe hoping to help guide his investigation. I think everyone would like the assassination solved, and certainly there is no member of the Hunt family or organization who has the least thing to hide. In spite of the above, there have been persistent stories to the effect that Garrison either suspects or is antagonistic toward the Hunts. We have no proof that this is the case. It is reported that Garrison is a most vindictive left winger, that he is bisexual and a clever blackmailer. Garrison understands public opinion, and can without introducing evidence of proof, harass, intimidate, and smear whomever he wishes."
-
Hi TLR, I probably should have prefaced my remark with "on a purely philosophical plain." I was meaning to point out that an individual's flaws do not necessarily mean that the message he or she reveals is flawed. Your highlights of Garrison's tactics seem to indicate that you believe that his message might have been flawed as well.
I choose to view Garrison's effort from the perspective of, 'what if he had not pursued Shaw, et al;' would the investigation into the assassination have slowly died? We know that the House Select Committee most likely would not have been convened. And would the material that Garrison had accumulated have made it to the screen for consideration by a wide audience via Stone's risky expose of the contradictions in the official story had Garrison not persevered?
I had not remembered that Garrison suggested that Robert K. had interfered to that degree. I think all families want to protect their secrets, and the Kennedys would not have been the exception.
All I can say is that in the early days, suspicion was running rampant, and Garrison most likely fell victim to disinformation and obfuscation of facts, and he would have been vulnerable to manipulation. That's not a defense, but it does balance any suggestion that he himself had an agenda other than getting to the truth. New Orleans was central to Oswald's history, and was home to a very shadowy element of bankers, oil interests, Minutemen, ties to European (France in particular) aristocracy, and, as a significant sea port for intrigue, a base for political machinations in Central and South America. I'm fascinated that few have zeroed in on a man named Stephen Lehmann, NO attorney with deep ties to the Whitney family was named as the CIA's paymaster in New Orleans. (Lehmann's nephew went on to head Columbia School of Journalism). Garrison took his job very seriously in my opinion.
Because I know first hand about the H.L. Hunt family, having worked for them for a number of years, I can say that 'they' (for lack of a better term) are wired differently when it comes to democracy and politics in general. I know for certain that their operations tolerated extremists, including post-WWII Eastern European born hoteliers who celebrated Hitler's birthday in limited regalia in front of their staff, unimpeded. Rothermel's memo to H.L. reeks of the corporate indoctrination, and reading between the lines, I hear precisely the ethos of their operations - tell the boss what he wants to hear.
-
I choose to view Garrison's effort from the perspective of, 'what if he had not pursued Shaw, et al;' would the investigation into the assassination have slowly died? We know that the House Select Committee most likely would not have been convened. And would the material that Garrison had accumulated have made it to the screen for consideration by a wide audience via Stone's risky expose of the contradictions in the official story had Garrison not persevered?
Actually, after the acquittal of Shaw, the JFK case dried up for the next few years and very few books were published until 1974-75, when Watergate, the CIA/FBI scandals, the Rockefeller Commission, Church Committee, etc reawakened interest in the subject. When it came out that Howard Hunt had discussed assassinating Jack Anderson, and the Tramp photos emerged, people wondered whether the old tramp was Hunt.
-
Post Script: H. L. Hunt was aligned with the same individuals connected to the ideology of General Edwin Walker, who on the day of Kennedy's assassination flew to Shreveport, LA to speak to a segregationist organization. Personally, I think that Walker was a mere pawn, and completely in the dark when it came to the shooting outside his home in April of 1963. I also believe that had the shooter wanted to kill Walker, Walker would have been dead that evening.
Repeating 'old news' here ... HL Hunt funded the distribution of First Baptist Church/William Criswell's anti-Kennedy sermon; Hunt was a major contributer to the Navy League; Hunt was spirited out of Dallas on November 22nd/23rd of 1963 to hole up in a Washington DC hotel; Hunt founded Western Goals, one of the new breed of right wing think tanks in the '70's (Ref. Larry McDonald); Charlie Wilson used Rosewood's Mansion on Turtle Creek during his Afghan operation; Ricky and Sandra diPortanova - allies of Henry Kissinger and Brandy Brandstetter - were frequent flyers at The Mansion in Dallas; Sandra was a high school buddy of Joanna Herring, Charlie Wilson's warrior muse.
But on a more contemporary note, Ruth Collins Altshuler, (daughter of the founder of one of Dallas' premier insurance companies) Chairperson of the 50th Anniversary commemoration was interviewed at length regarding the challenges confronting Dallas from her frequent hang-out, the club on the top floor of The Crescent Court owned by Rosewood Hotels, a division of Hunt family investments. (the incident will be viewed as purely coincidental unless one understands Dallas power structures.)
The following may be considered as irresponsible speculation, but my file on the subject supports this brief and risky dot-connecting and may in fact over time, prove the length of the arm of Dallas and Texas wealth in alliance with national and international corporate and military interests in furthering Imperialism: "Craft International" is (at least in the Spring of 2013) housed in a Hunt/Rosewood/Crescent-related office building adjacent to the Crescent Court; Craft private militia members are alleged to have been present at the time of the Boston bombing. If one were to study the trajectory of US semi-private policies spanning the last 50 years, this is a good place to start.
-
TLR, I'll take your word for the timing of renewed interest in the JFK assassination post the Shaw trial of 1969. However, I do think that researchers like Peter Dale Scott were plugging away in the interim. My approach is purely unscientific, and would not stand up in a court of law, nor would I want it to. I'm wedded to "innocent until proven guilty," even for the bad guys. However, I do think that if you elevate yourself onto a perch observing 1969 (Shaw trial), 1973/4 (Watergate), 197whatever (the family jewels, the Church Committee and HSCA) you will see a number of the same and/or related players. I'm interested in that aspect because I search for a grand unifying theory relating to the assassination of John Kennedy. I have difficulty accepting that the photo of the tramps, regardless of who they were, was a seminal moment. I began questioning the Warren Report when my mother read it and questioned it, sometime in the late 1960's.
A tiny factoid: The inspector General of the CIA was related to the office mate (Drew Pearson) of Jack Anderson. This was rarefied air, and if only those family members who hold vast reservoirs of information would speak out.
-
Yes, Scott and Weisberg and others were still plugging away, but if you look at the bibliography of books and articles published between 1969 and 1974, it really dried up. Very little new evidence came out. The 10th anniversary got little attention because the country was in the throes of Watergate. The film Executive Action (1973) was barely screened in theaters before it disappeared.
The Rockefeller Commission actually investigated the Tramp photos to debunk them. It was a big deal at the time. I'm an agnostic about them, personally.
I totally agree that JFK, MLK, RFK, Watergate, Iran-Contra and other events are connected by the same players, groups, networks, etc. Thanks for all the information you posted about the Hunts and related Dallas matters.
-
TLR, likewise, thank you for the feed back.
It's always healthy to have one's feet held to the fire. Full disclosure: I have deliberately been selective with what I read in the anthology of the assassination; early on I found that relying on others' research slanted my private perspective. I'm guessing that a number of researchers and authors experienced the same. ... don't build on anything that you don't believe intuitively. Having said that, as I have also frequently state, my assumptions about the assassination rest on the shoulders of giants. It's not black and white.
You triggered several hot buttons: Watergate AND the 10th Anniversary. At some point into my personal research (1990's), I decided that Watergate wasn't what it appeared. I was studying the Grolier Society because I had acted as a tour guide for them in the mid-1970's on a tour of Texas culminating in the hand-over of an original copy of the Guttenberg Bible by the Pforzheimer family at the University of Texas at Austin. I'm fairly convinced that Walter Pforzheimer was present during that tour, and I think that John McCloy (another Grolier member) may have been present as well; the tour was handled by my employer, Nieman Marcus Travel of Dallas. Former OSS guy, Walter P. was the historian for the CIA, and purely coincidentally, he lived in the Watergate Complex in DC at the time of the break-in. I read that he had installed a walk-in safe in his apartment at the Watergate, and I imagined (true to any conspiracists' line of thinking) that the break-in had something to do with his safe. I moved past that, but ended up encountering people close hand who were on the periphery of the Watergate story, and I for one determined that the entire incident was similar to the Kennedy assassination; it was designed to bring down the presidency during that particular term, not the person (Nixon) holding the job. And one can examine the undermining of every presidency since. Kennedy was unique; he represented a dynasty.
The other hot button: Executive Action. No one watching that movie (we checked it out last night to watch it for my 7th time) missed the implications of a Southern/Texan as archetype of the plot against Kennedy. You're right, the movie was buried.
-
I watched and enjoyed this video and I thought it would fit in well in this discussion and thread , I hope everyone enjoys it no matter what their views are on garrison . its jfk media cover up : jim garrison the lost tapes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1HoWYPzzsI
-
That's very interesting, Piopat. Thanks for posting. There's no doubt that Garrison, despite his flaws, was threatening a lot of important people.